A Trillion-Dollar Overhaul: Oksenholt's Audacious Plan to Unleash Fannie and Freddie

SCOTTSDALE, AZ – August 25, 2026 – A bold, private-sector blueprint to fundamentally reshape the pillars of American housing finance landed today, proposing a path to end the 18-year government conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In a white paper titled “One Company, Two Charters,” Oksenholt Capital Management LLC has detailed a plan to create a new public holding company, U.S. Financial Technology and Mortgage Corporation (USFTMC), designed to sit above the two mortgage giants and unlock a valuation that could approach $1 trillion.

The proposal, spearheaded by investor Jon Oksenholt, attempts to thread a needle that has confounded Washington policymakers for nearly two decades: how to return the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) to private hands without dismantling a system that underpins half of the nation's mortgage market. The plan's central thesis is that immense value can be surfaced not by breaking the GSEs apart, but by uniting them under a single, publicly-traded entity focused on commercializing their vast technological and data assets.

"I believe this structure would create more value without dismantling what already works," stated Jon Oksenholt of Oksenholt Capital Management in the announcement. "Fannie and Freddie keep their charters, their capital and their competitive roles. U.S. FinTech gets room to become a much more valuable commercial business, and investors get one security that reflects the value of the whole platform."

The FinTech-Fueled Blueprint

At the heart of Oksenholt's proposal is a deceptively simple structure with profound implications. The Texas-based USFTMC would become the public face for investors, while Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would continue to operate as separate, competing entities, retaining their individual federal charters. This “One Company, Two Charters” model is a deliberate attempt to preserve the operational core of the GSEs, which collectively guarantee approximately $6.6 trillion in mortgage-backed securities.

The true innovation spotlighted in the plan, however, is the proposed commercialization of U.S. Financial Technology LLC. This jointly-owned entity, created by the GSEs to manage their mortgage securities and develop technology, is envisioned as a major profit center. Oksenholt’s model argues that this platform’s deep reservoir of data, sophisticated analytics, and risk management tools could be packaged and sold to other financial institutions, creating a powerful new revenue stream.

An accompanying financial model illustrates a path from a mid-$500 billion upfront equity value toward the $1 trillion mark. This growth is predicated on a combination of factors: higher normalized earnings from the core mortgage business, operational and tech synergies achieved under the holding company, a significant contribution from the newly commercialized FinTech arm, and ultimately, a higher valuation multiple from the market for the consolidated, more dynamic enterprise. The firm, a vocal advocate for GSE privatization with over one million shares of GSE securities in its affiliated investment vehicles, is putting its analysis where its money is.

Navigating the Washington Labyrinth

While the financial logic may be compelling to investors, the proposal faces a political and regulatory landscape littered with the remains of past reform efforts. Since being placed into conservatorship in September 2008, Fannie and Freddie have been under the tight control of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), a state of limbo that was never intended to be permanent.

The largest single obstacle is the U.S. Department of the Treasury's formidable stake. As part of the 2008 bailout, Treasury received senior preferred stock and warrants for 79.9% of the GSEs' common stock. The liquidation preference on this stake stands at a staggering $400 billion as of early 2026, a sum that must be addressed in any privatization plan. Oksenholt's white paper acknowledges this and other critical issues, including regulatory capital and antitrust concerns, but the path to a negotiated settlement with Treasury is fraught with complexity.

Furthermore, the GSEs are still working to meet the robust capital requirements established by the FHFA in 2020. Despite retaining earnings since 2019 and building a combined net worth of $179 billion, this figure remains well short of the $328 billion regulatory minimum. Any new structure would need to present a credible plan to close this capital gap, likely through a massive public offering that would test investor appetite.

History provides a sobering backdrop. Legislative efforts like the Johnson-Crapo and Corker-Warner bills of the last decade, which proposed winding down the GSEs and replacing them with new entities, ultimately failed to gain traction in a deeply divided Congress. Oksenholt’s approach of preserving the charters is a key differentiator, but as one policy analyst noted, “Any plan that even hints at altering the government’s role in housing finance faces an uphill battle. The political will for comprehensive reform has been absent for years, and the risk of disrupting the mortgage market is a powerful deterrent to action.”

Reshaping the Mortgage Market

The timing of the proposal is noteworthy, arriving amidst a period of flux for the GSEs. Recent days have seen a significant executive shake-up at Fannie Mae, raising questions about its strategic direction, particularly in the critical multifamily housing sector. Meanwhile, market dynamics have been shifting, with Freddie Mac gaining competitive ground on its larger sibling, as reflected in the FHFA's 2026 deemed-issuance ratio.

For Oksenholt Capital, this is the culmination of long-term advocacy. The firm has previously engaged in public debate over GSE valuations, arguing that the market undervalues their earnings potential and competitive strength. This white paper moves beyond valuation arguments to propose a tangible mechanism for unlocking that value.

The ultimate question is what this would mean for the broader U.S. housing market. Proponents argue that a recapitalized, more efficient, and technologically advanced GSE system under USFTMC would provide a stronger, more stable foundation for mortgage finance. A successful transition could inject new private capital and innovation into the market. However, critics will inevitably raise concerns that a fully private entity, even with its public charters, might prioritize shareholder returns over the public mission of ensuring mortgage affordability and availability, potentially altering the delicate balance that has defined American housing for generations. Oksenholt's blueprint provides a detailed map, but the journey to exit conservatorship remains a trek through uncharted and treacherous territory.