so at this point, we're not contemplating the receivership and i don't really see the advantage of receivershipersus conservatorship. >> is the taxpayer on the hook for the $5.3 trillion or not? >> the taxpayer is on the hook for the senior preferred facility that the treasury department negotiated and that's $200 billion to fanny and freddie and $200 billion to each of them. >> but the $5.3, the federal governor is owner. >> the fraederal oh foe you're shareholder you're not responsibility for the debts of the company. >> it's a very unique shareholder at the moment. it seems to me that port of the problem that was created was the whole implicit versus explicit guarantee. and we know that one of the reasons that fanny and freddie is seemingly the only gam in town and their market share of new mortgages roughly doubled, is because of that guarantee. is there any scenario where you would recommend that the full faith and credit of the u.s. be behind all $5.3 trillion of mbs? >> the implicit guarantee was a problem. we talked about it in this room many times and other places that there was no mar

and this is what happens and does happen through the course of state based receiverships of insurance companies. the state based system would have been able to handle it and it would have been again, a, a protected the consumers, the policyholders first. >> appreciate your testimony. what has been done to address the gaps that exit in the current system to protect policyholders and again it is those who oppose legislation to move towards a national charter who suggest that there be any wa weakening of consumer protections and the $13 billion of savings to the industry to get passed onto the 50 state system. thank you and i yield back. >> thank you very much, mrs. bean. now the gentleman from illinois. >> thank you. i find it interesting that some of you there think that you could ask the federal government for so much and then in your own wisdom stop it and then you would be in a position later on where you're complaining that the federal government went too far. and i think mr. royce in his own questio questions went beyond his own bill in setting up insurance information and then hi

occurred for decades in the insurance industry as soon as we learn of them, we place the company into receivership and the policyholders are protected because the capital requirements we impose on companies are so significant, the shortfall at the end of day for the guarantee system is relatively nominal and we -- and that guarantee system is also intended to protect the consumers. >> thank you very much. >> my good friend, mr. skinner, do you believe that the united states companies will have adequate access to the european markets after solvency is in effect and do you believe whether your companies have adequate access to the u.s. markets? >> that'n@@@@@#h' business inside the european union and there are a few of them who do this very well, they will have to make sure that their regulators in the u.s. are people that can talk to the european union about matching up these credentials. of course, if they don't get matched up it will be down to each individual member states as has been said, whether it's memorandum around the standings to impose their requirements upon the companies and i don't t