Treasury's 2012 change to the Fannie and Freddie senior preferred stock terms was a unilateral amendment, not a negotiated resolution with the companies.

The test is how the August 2012 Third Amendment to the Treasury Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements came about. The 'bad faith' wording is opinion and is not tested. TRUE: the record shows Treasury and FHFA (as conservator) set the new terms without any bargaining by Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's own boards or management. Suitable records include court findings, the amendment documents, congressional or Inspector General records, and discovery documents from litigation. MOSTLY TRUE: the same, except that company management had some minor or advisory contact with no real influence over the terms. MIXED: the amendment was formally an agreement between Treasury and FHFA signing on the companies' behalf, and the evidence is evenly split on whether the companies' own representatives took any real part in shaping it. MOSTLY FALSE: company management or boards took real part in talks over the terms, though under heavy pressure from Treasury or FHFA. FALSE: the evidence shows the companies, through their own representatives, negotiated the terms with Treasury and agreed to them.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 Grand Theft Treasury Hoover Institution (hoover.org) · 16 July 2013

   “The Boards of Directors of Fannie and Freddie were shut out of the deliberations that took place exclusively between branches of the federal government.”

2. E2 Former White House Officials Involved in GSE Scandal - The Big Picture The Big Picture (Barry Ritholtz blog), commentary by Josh Rosner · 24 May 2016

   “Another internal e-mail from Mario Ugoletti (former Senior Advisor to the Director at FHFA, and previously a senior official at Treasury), clearly shows that Treasury – not FHFA – was clearly calling the shots:”

3. E3 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 9/30/2014. (tg, ) U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judge Royce C. Lamberth), via Justia dockets · 30 September 2014

   “On August 17, 2012, Treasury and the GSEs, through FHFA, agreed to the Third Amendment to the PSPA, which is the focus of this litigation.”

4. E4 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 9/30/2014. (tg, ) U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judge Royce C. Lamberth), via Justia dockets · 30 September 2014

   “the question for this Court is whether the plaintiffs sufficiently plead that FHFA acted beyond the scope of its statutory “powers or functions . . . as a conservator” when the agency executed the Third Amendment to the PSPAs with Treasury.”

E1, an independent Hoover Institution analysis, states that the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac boards "were shut out of the deliberations that took place exclusively between branches of the federal government." The D.C. District Court opinion (E3, E4) says the Third Amendment was agreed by Treasury and the GSEs "through FHFA," and frames the dispute as one over FHFA executing the amendment with Treasury. Neither source mentions any bargaining by the companies' own boards or management. The evidence therefore fits the TRUE criterion: Treasury and FHFA, acting as conservator, set the terms. The part of the claim describing the amendment's motive is opinion and was not tested.