Showing posts with label TARP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TARP. Show all posts

12 April 2011

Gangsters of New York: The Real Housewives of Wall Street and Welfare for the Richest


This is tip of the iceberg stuff that might be defended by some as just the sort of thing that happens incidentally when one manages a large program under duress. So sorry. Nothing to see here, so move along.

That is like the defense being offered in the Raj Rajaratnam insider trading trial today that the defendant, Mr. Rajaratnam, is SO smart that he really didn't need all that insider information that people like Rajat Gupta had been giving him. I doubt they will get an acquittal giving all the tape recordings that they have, but they seem to be playing for a settlement, a wristslap and a fine and disgorgement of profits. That is the traditional outcome when some medium sized macher falls into the occasional government investigation of financial corruption.

The point of showing this here is to highlight the need for financial reform, transparency in government and especially at the Fed which handles huge sums of money and disburses them without effective oversight.

What is especially repugnant is not so much the epidemic of graft and corruption that has crippled the country and infested the regulators and the government. What is especially repugnant is the well financed campaign to go after the victims, the taxpayers and defrauded investors, and to force them to bear the brunt of the pain caused by that graft and corruption, by playing on the meanest and lowest impulses in the people.

And this after providing even more tax cuts and subsidies so these looters and white collar criminals could keep even more of their ill gotten gains. Now that takes some arrogant nerve, and some certainty in the service of your bought and paid for servants in the government, and the stupidity of the average person.

Iceland's voters have had the courage to say 'no.' It remains to be be seen what Ireland will do.

But one has to wonder how far this all goes, and why there was such a knee jerk impulse in so many places to bail out the banks and the insiders, and take the broader public to its knees through a calculated campaign of 'austerity' that plays on the impulse to make someone pay, preferably someone who is weak, and unable to effectively fight back, some outsider or scapegoat, some other.

And why do these disclosures keep showing up on the blogosphere and in relatively marginal publications while the mainstream media maintains its silence? I have been waiting for this story to surface, but I did not expect it to come from the sportswriter at Rolling Stone.

There will be some solemn mumblings on the network news, and then some Wall Street nightcrawler will be brought on the Sunday morning discussion programs to explain why these things are an anomaly, an unfortunate isolated incident, and how we have to stay on the bigger picture, handing out pain for everyone but those who caused the problem, and continue to cripple the real economy by distorting it through graft and corruption and the subornation of perjury and abuses of power.

And Dodd-Frank made the Fed the major regulatory body for the financial sector, and the bought and paid servants of big business continue to try and strangle all other competing regulators like Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Protection Agency in the cradle.

Perhaps reform is too difficult, and the issues too complex, for anything to be done but surrender the Constitution to the monied interests and the oligarchs. They seem so powerful, and so clever, and after all, they hold your credit cards, and iPods, and favorite television shows hostage.

I would like to believe, even now, that all the people throughout history, ordinary men and women, who have stood for liberty, sometimes against fearsome odds, and given their pain and even their lives, the last full measure of their devotion, for the idea of a free America, shall not have done so in vain, with their memory shamefully dishonored by their children.  That at some point the people will rouse themselves from their slumber, slow to act, but deliberate and unstoppable once they are stirred.  And then the real work of reform and rebuilding can begin.

The Banks must be restrained, and the financial system reformed, with balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustained recovery.

Rolling Stone
The Real Housewives of Wall Street
By Matt Taibbi
April 12, 2011 9:55 AM ET

America has two national budgets, one official, one unofficial. The official budget is public record and hotly debated: Money comes in as taxes and goes out as jet fighters, DEA agents, wheat subsidies and Medicare, plus pensions and bennies for that great untamed socialist menace called a unionized public-sector workforce that Republicans are always complaining about. According to popular legend, we're broke and in so much debt that 40 years from now our granddaughters will still be hooking on weekends to pay the medical bills of this year's retirees from the IRS, the SEC and the Department of Energy.

Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?

Most Americans know about that budget. What they don't know is that there is another budget of roughly equal heft, traditionally maintained in complete secrecy. After the financial crash of 2008, it grew to monstrous dimensions, as the government attempted to unfreeze the credit markets by handing out trillions to banks and hedge funds. And thanks to a whole galaxy of obscure, acronym-laden bailout programs, it eventually rivaled the "official" budget in size — a huge roaring river of cash flowing out of the Federal Reserve to destinations neither chosen by the president nor reviewed by Congress, but instead handed out by fiat by unelected Fed officials using a seemingly nonsensical and apparently unknowable methodology...

Read the rest of this story here.

Related story Paul Ryan Has Balls by Matt Taibbi

Recently related blog Of the 1% By the 1% and For the 1%

27 May 2010

Guest Post: Slouching Toward Despotism


Posted by Keith Hazelton, Anecdotal Economics

Benjamin Franklin, when asked at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in 1787 what that assembly had created, purportedly responded, “A republic, if you can keep it,” which seems likely given his remarks to Convention members on that September day immediately prior to their vote on the proposed Constitution in its original form.

Often, but on far more occasions in the last three years, we are reminded of a portion of those remarks. Dr. Franklin, given his age (81) and health, asked to have his commentary read to delegates preceding what he hoped would be a unanimous vote in favor of a nonetheless flawed agreement.

“In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, (but) can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.” (Emphasis mine.)
And the question we keep pondering is, “Are we there yet?” Are we merely slouching toward despotism, or have we arrived? Are we already so corrupt so as to need despotic government, what with Vampire Squids and corporate/union-bought elections and Congressional bystanders and regulatory capture and Systemically Important Too Big To Fail and Gulf of Mexico oil well disasters?

(Despotism, by the way, describes a form of government by which a single entity rules with absolute and unlimited power, and may be expressed by an individual as an autocracy or through a group as an oligarchy according to Wikipedia, the world's leading source of made-up information, which is good enough for us.)

In previous posts we have observed the growing and discernible disconnect between several types of government-reported economic data such as Retail Sales and actual state sales tax collections, and the Employment Situation and withholding tax collections. Others also have made solid cases for these disconnects between statistical theory and economic reality and it occurs to me that, far from being isolated or random events, they are evidence of much more disconcerting forces at work.

Fudging on unemployment numbers or "rounding up" retail sales reports may seem like minor infractions, and many of these government data reports have been manipulated for years, maybe half a century, but they represent a pattern of conscious, calculated design of "don't worry, be happy, the government's in charge, nothing to see here, so move along."

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), for example, estimates who is working and who is not, but conveniently excludes millions of people from its composition of the unemployment rate who are not working but neither deeming them “unemployed” because they are “marginally attached” to the workforce or are “discouraged” by a lack of job prospects and no longer are looking for employment (2.3 million as of March 2010 plus another 3.4 million “persons who currently want a job,” who also aren’t counted as unemployed).

Side note: You are well aware, of course, the Social Security Administration probably could tell us monthly almost exactly how many people really are working, not working, working part time, self-employed, and so on based on its receipts of tax withholdings from employers. It is beyond the pale to imagine SSA could not furnish a version of the monthly Employment Situation that would be far more reliable by orders of magnitude than the guesses of the BLS.

As to why government statistical agencies may be reporting "happy" numbers, well, you know the answer to that...government statistics are lying's fifth circle of hell, just a shade better than Campaign Promises.

How about the major changes to the Producer Price Index and the Consumer Price Index which were made in the 1980s and 1990s to greatly reduce reported inflation numbers as a means of containing the cost of living adjustments (COLAs) for Social Security recipients, as John Williams at ShadowStats extensively has reported for years?

Or the March 2010 Monthly Treasury Statement, which understated the true government deficit last month by including a $117 billion collection described as “proprietary receipts from the public” by the Treasury, likely TARP repayments but not defined as such. Or the December 2009 Monthly Treasury Statement in which $45 billion extracted from the nation’s banks as a 13-quarter advance FDIC premium also was shown as a “negative outlay” which creates a significant understatement of the true FY2010 deficit picture (so far, $162 billion this fiscal year, which will understate our true deficit by about 10 percent).

Or the “New” General Motors wasting millions of (tax) dollars for print and television ads to promote a fictitious narrative that it has “repaid” government loans of $8.1 billion (to the U.S and Canada) “plus interest” five years early when in fact SIGTARP, the Special Inspector General of the Troubled Asset Relief Plan Neil Barofsky, told Congress and Fox News that GM did no such thing, that the loan “repayment” did not come the old fashioned way from sales and earnings but from a "cash advance" on another TARP facility which both governments will count as additions to their already significant equity positions. Nothing in those ads mentions the many tens of billions of taxpayer dollars borrowed from China which flowed into General Motors and Chrysler pre-bankruptcy which never will be repaid.

And now the New GM wants to create another automobile financing company, or buy back its former GMAC/Ally unit which itself has received nearly $20 billion of government Too Big To Fail largesse, so it may become even more profitable by returning to sub-prime auto and everything-else lending and have a happy IPO later this year, because as everyone knows, including the New GM's management, there's precious little profit in building cars no one wants and few can afford. "As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his folly," (Proverbs 26:11) as Jesse's Cafe Americain recently observed.

How about the seeming inability to legislate any significant financial reform in the wake of the worst economic crisis in 80 years, a crisis which, mind you, needed fewer than eight years to erupt once the last shred of restraint – Glass-Steagall – was forcibly removed at the end of 1999 by those who, coincidentally (paging Messrs. Rubin and Summers), have profited so handsomely from its demise.

The Banking Act of 1933 – Glass-Steagall – was a wonder of simplicity in a simpler era. It set forth in a mere 37 pages of text the safeguards necessary to separate commercial banking from everything else and to ably prevent for 66 years – two full generations – any meaningful implosion of the nation’s financial system. Any search for cause and effect of The Great Recession must begin here. The useless financial reform act – the Dodd act – weighs in at a lobbyist-induced 1,500+ pages, and will do nothing to prevent another financial crisis, nothing to dismantle Too Big Too Fail, nothing to contain derivatives, nothing to audit the Federal Reserve and nothing to curtail abuses in consumer financial practices.

Yet where are the criminal investigations? Where is the FBI? Where are the Congressional inquiries and panels and special prosecutors? Where are the indictments? Where are the perp walks and the jail sentences? Where is the justice, Mr. Holder and your 50 friends among the states? Aside from two former Bears Stearns hedge fund managers in 2007, and a pretend hedge fund manager - Mr. Madoff - in 2009, a weak SEC civil show-case against Goldman Sachs in 2010 and the mostly voluntary, golden-parachute-enabled "retirements" of a handful of TBTF C-level executives, a number of which, John-Thain-like, merely have revolved around the door a couple of times and landed at another lucrative looting opportunity, nothing has happened. Nothing, nada, zero, zip, dick. Nothing. It's breathtaking in its design and execution.

We now are reliably told the TARP program will cost less than $100 billion when all is said and done. Huh? What about the $2 trillion-plus of added government debt which itself adds tens of billions to the annual interest servicing burden, or the $1.5 trillion-plus willed into existence by the Federal Reserve? Who are they kidding?

Or a Health Care Act which, in 2,500 pages manages to spend about another trillion dollars or so and leaves no health insurance company behind, effectively criminalizing, albeit with monetary penalties far less than the cost of individually paid health insurance plans, anyone not otherwise exempted who fails to purchase health care coverage.

It seems to us, after thinking about this topic for some time now, that we have arrived. We have arrived at that point in our civilization in which our government deems it acceptable to obfuscate about things both small and large on the basis that, Jack-Nicholson/Colonel-Jessup-like, we (the rest of us who aren’t lodged in the political/oligarchical castes) “can’t handle the truth.”

And most of the time it would appear they are right, that we – the rest of us – can’t be bothered with such discrepancies and inconsistencies, falsehoods and half-truths. We're too busy trying to keep the house, make the mortgage and auto loan and credit card and student loan payments. We're too focused on our own financial survival to be concerned with what goes on at a national leadership and direction level. And doesn't it just seem a little too convenient for those who wish to plunder the wealth of the nation to keep the other 90 percent of us so strapped with indebtedness and an outdated personal moral conviction that debts should be repaid regardless of their potential to physically and mentally harm one's well being or, heaven forbid, harm one's all-important credit score, when walking away from debt has been an accepted business practice for centuries?

It only seems to matter on those rare occasions when things blow up, and the average, non-voting, non-taxpaying citizen awakens from his or her media-induced stupor to ponder that when the curtain is drawn away, it reveals only humans and not wizards, or that the outgoing tide reveals who has been swimming naked or when the emperor is shown to be undressed. But interest in such matters wanes quickly, and the thirst for change recedes silently into renewed acceptance of the status quo, as we now discover.

Soon, no doubt, when markets resume their upward trajectory and the Dow returns to and surpasses 14,250 (probably by this summer) and oh-don't-worry-about-those-6.5-million-log-term-unemployed-because-they're-just-lazy, much of this unpleasantness of the last three years will be forgotten by those more interested in only good news and Dancing With the Stars and American Idol, and the continued warnings of the Cassandras will be deemed evidence that these are, once again, merely the musings of disaffected social misfits or bad-news-opportunists who deep down must hate America (right up until the point at which the next crisis erupts, and erupt it will).

In fact, our short attention spans are relied upon by the political class of both parties and by the oligarchical class which controls it, as magnificent wealth transfer schemes blossom anew (talk about green shoots...) and the all-so-brief period which has elapsed between the “days away from financial Armageddon” of September 2008 and the "all clear, business as usual" of May 2010 insures, like the watered-down, useless "financial reform" legislation written by financial industry lobbyists which certainly will pass soon, that the laudable goal of making safe our financial system and returning it to the status of handmaiden to legitimate capital-producing and jobs-creating enterprise, will be discarded in exchange for the pretense of life as we knew it, circa 2006.

Only this time, effectively having destroyed the middle class of Boomers, Gen X-ers, Gen Y-ers, Millennials and Echo Boomers, and having bought the complicit silence of the of a near-majority (47% of Americans paid no income tax whatsoever in 2008) in exchange for bread and circuses, and having largely destroyed the previous primary mechanism by which wealth has been stolen and transferred (credit creation and personal indebtedness), the masters of the universe will have to find a new scam, which, at this writing, appears to be sovereign government debt, currencies and commodities, because turning back the calendar to 2006 alone will never recreate the consumer spending/debt orgy of 1982-2006.

In fact we think the oligarchs realize this, and they are redoubling their efforts to pillage as much as possible before the real collapse occurs, even as its seeds already have been sown in this crisis which now appears, by design and deception, to be ending. That collapse draws nigh, and Roubini and Taleb and Ritholtz and Panzer and Jesse and Tyler and Mish and Yves and Charles Hugh Smith and Joe Bageant and many, many others already see it, yet all are being dismissed - again - as those nattering nabobs of negativism who, broken-clock-being-right-twice-a-day-like, were merely “lucky” in guessing about the immediate past crisis as former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan suggested in a recent television interview.

Tell us Greece is not the "sub-prime" of early 2007; that the US$150 billion "cure" to be soon applied by the EU and IMF is only can-kicking but will allow one and all to congratulate themselves on "containing" an isolated problem and to quickly return to the never-ending cocktail party, that is until the next Greece Fire which spreads to one after another country, including, ultimately, the possibility of the conflagration reaching bond markets in the U.S.

Or that a mere US$1 trillion of bailout/rescue/currency support recently proposed by the Eurozone and the IMF to "shock and awe" financial markets dominated by the recently rescued TBTFs who busily apace bet against the very governments which saved them (except now in Germany), is not merely another stealth rescue of these giant financial institutions which, having been caught with a bit too much Club Med sovereign debt on their books while their own prop traders work hard to destroy its value, now cry out - again - that the risk of their insolvency - again - threatens the global financial and economic systems.

Or that the battling machines of high-frequency trading, which briefly wiped out and then restored a trillion dollars worth of fictitious (paper) wealth in fewer than 15 minutes mid-afternoon May 6th in a dry-run rehearsal of things to come, won't now become even more emboldened and empowered to manipulate financial markets in any manner necessary to insure continued quarters of perfectly profitable trading days.

(May 6th should have been a non-event. We were expressly warned by the Manhattan Assistant US Attorney in a July 2009 court filing, in which it was alleged that a former Goldman Sachs quant trading programmer stole Goldman's "secret proprietary trading code," that "there is a danger that somebody who knew how to use this program could use it to manipulate markets in unfair ways." Well, duh. Doesn't it just seem like someone took this code, or a similar one, out for a test drive earlier this month?)

Soon, perhaps if not already, the wealth transfer will be complete, and a newly impoverished, former middle class will wake up from their recliners to find not only is Dancing With the Stars over, but also is their former debt-fueled way of life as the economy staggers, unemployment escalates, more good jobs are exported and living standards rapidly erode. (Irony alert: Their former U.S. employers, who effectively have downsized and off-shored their way to record profits, will find they have destroyed their own customer base - the former middle class - who no longer can afford their products.)

When 40 million people are receiving food stamps at one end of the economic spectrum (and probably another 20 million eligible according to the Department of Agriculture), and the bulk of financial and real assets have been concentrated into the top 10 percent of the other end of the economic spectrum, nothing good can come of it. So the well-off cohort will remain well-off and will conspire to direct through their agents in government only enough resources to buy the complicity and silence of the bottom 40 percent, like tax breaks, food stamps, health care subsidies and so on, and the soon-to-be-former middle class will be ground into yet lower levels of the economic ladder, such, that when the looting has concluded, we will see a top 10 percent and a bottom 90 percent, much as feudalistic Europe in the centuries of the Dark Ages.

(We strongly recommend two books on the subject, both of which in far more detail and eloquence lay out the symptoms, causes and effects of our slouch toward despotism: Survival +, by Charles Hugh Smith at Of Two Minds, and Deer Hunting With Jesus: Dispatches From America's Class War, by Joe Bageant at Joe Bageant (and whose recent post about the American Hologram Lost on the Fearless Plain also is required reading).

“All lies and jest… Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest,” so said Paul Simon, which rings so true more than four decades later. We hear what we want to hear, and, apparently, what we want to hear is that all is back to normal, that all is good, that the wizards have everything under control, and that nothing bad can ever happen again.

So, are we there yet? Have we not already abdicated our responsibilities as citizens and tacitly embraced the despotism of which Franklin predicted 222 years ago, having become so corrupted (contaminated) as to require the despotic government of an oligarchy dedicated to insuring the truth never gets in the way of a good narrative, an enormous disparate accumulation of wealth and a firm grip on the levers of power to ensure the preservation of that wealth?

A few Tea Party primary victories and incumbent "mandatory retirements" aside, nothing will change in Washington as long as the strings of campaign cash and lobbyist perks are being pulled elsewhere. The "outs" who soon will replace some of the "ins" promptly will forget about their mandates from the voters the day they move into their new D.C. offices and townhomes and realize from moment one their only responsibility is to their own rational self-interest of being re-elected in 2012 and 2014 and 2016. Et tu, Barack?

And if Benjamin Franklin is not prescient enough for you, how about the Teacher, in Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1, v.13-18, from about 2,300 years ago:
What a heavy burden God has laid on men! I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind. What is twisted cannot be straightened; what is lacking cannot be counted. I thought to myself, "Look, I have grown and increased in wisdom more than anyone who has ruled over Jerusalem before me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge." Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind. For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief. (Emphasis added.)
Indeed, with wisdom comes sorrow, and from more knowledge, more grief. Would, sometimes, that we could empty so much of it from the mush of our remaining gray matter and then we wouldn't have to pretend it's all good, when, in fact, it’s anything but good, as soon, perhaps in a matter of a few short years, we shall see.

We first wrote the following paragraphs in June 2006, long before sub-prime lending, a bursted housing bubble, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, CitiGroup, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, GM, Chrysler, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department and The Great Recession began to dominate our lives, when Franklin’s predictions and our inexorable slouch toward despotism first appeared on our radar screen:
The transition from unitary executive to dictator – conservative, benevolent or otherwise – will not happen in the waning months of the current administration, so uniquely manifested by America's First Triumvirate of George Bush, Dick Cheney and, until recently, Karl Rove, but succeeding chief executives may choose overtly to expand further the envelope-pushing and Constitution-trampling of the 43rd President and his neo-conservative command-and-control cabal as the American oligarchy, and the nation, slouches slowly toward despotism.

As such, we will one day awake from our debt-financed, pleasure-induced stupors to find one person or group firmly in charge, answering to no one, especially not Congress, and in complete grasp of the military, the intelligence agencies, the treasury, the Federal Reserve and the financial and judicial systems. It will happen – it is happening – an inch at a time, until the day comes when not only will we, the fun-loving, celebrity-worshipping, civic-duty-abhoring citizens of America, so embrace the notion of despotism, we will think it entirely our own idea.
Are we there yet?

Keith Hazelton is an Adjunct Professor of Finance at Oklahoma City University's Meinders School of Business and an Economic Adviser to the Oklahoma Bankers Association. His opinions are his own.

28 April 2010

NY Fed Cited in Cover-Up By SIGTARP's Barofsky - Possible Criminal Charges


It's never the crime, it's always the cover up.

This is beyond a doubt the story of the week. Neil Barofsky has been a thorn in the side of the Treasury Department and the Fed since he first took office.

I doubt there will be criminal charges filed against Turbo Tim personally, since in his case the clueless CEO defense may obtain some traction. Unless, that is, they have wiretaps and/or emails showing collusion with some of the bailed out banks, in either insider trading or the manipulation of assets for extraordinary gains.

It is a boiling scandal, and emblematic of the hidden corruption that has pervaded financial regulation in Washington for the past ten years at least. It did not start with Obama, but it may still bring down key members of his Administration.

Reform the financial system, audit the Fed.

Bloomberg
Barofsky Says Criminal Charges Possible in Alleged AIG Coverup

By Richard Teitelbaum
28 April 2010

April 28 (Bloomberg) -- ...That tense relationship [between Treasury and Barofsky] has grown out of Barofsky’s mandate to monitor and root out fraud and waste in the management of TARP, the $700 billion program passed in October 2008 to remove toxic debt from the banks. The special inspector general, in a series of reports, interviews and congressional hearings, has heaped criticism on the Treasury Department’s operation of the program.

Barofsky’s most recent broadside came on April 20, when a SIGTARP report labeled a housing-loan modification program funded with $50 billion of TARP money as ineffectual.

...The TARP watchdog has also criticized Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner in reports and in congressional testimony for his handling of the process by which insurance giant American International Group Inc. was saved from insolvency in 2008, when Geithner was head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

The secrecy that enveloped the deal was unwarranted, Barofsky says, adding that his probe of an alleged New York Fed coverup in the AIG case could result in criminal or civil charges.

In Senate Finance Committee testimony on April 20, Barofsky said SIGTARP would investigate seven AIG-linked mortgage-related securities similar to Abacus 2007-AC1, the instrument underwritten by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. that is at the center of a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit filed against the investment
bank on April 16.

...Barofsky and Geithner’s offices have gone toe-to-toe over AIG, alleged lax oversight of TARP funds and even over the question of whom Barofsky reports to.

Barofsky, a former federal prosecutor who was once the target of a kidnapping plot by Colombian drug traffickers, says he’s also looking into possible insider trading connected to TARP. He says his agency would want to know if bankers bought stock in their companies before it was made public that their institutions would get TARP
money, for example.

“There was a time when, if you got that word the stock price would go up, and if you were to trade on that information prior to the public announcement, that would be classic insider trading,” Barofsky says.

A Democrat named by a Republican president, Barofsky says missteps by both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations are to blame for TARP’s failures.

“There’s a reason there are Tea Partiers out there, and when you look at it, anger at the bailout is one of the first things they talk about,” says Barofsky, referring to the anti- Obama political movement. “This Treasury Department and the previous Treasury Department bear some of the responsibility for not being straightforward with the American people.”

Barofsky criticized Geithner’s predecessor, Paulson, in an October 2009 report, saying Paulson publicly described the initial nine TARP bank recipients as healthy when he knew that at least one of them risked failure.

...SIGTARP has more than 40 agents, including former Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation and Internal Revenue Service investigators, who sport blue windbreakers emblazoned with the SIGTARP seal.

They are authorized by Congress to carry guns -- Barofsky does not --make arrests, and subpoena and seize records.

In its late-January report, SIGTARP said that the banks rescued by TARP remained “too big to fail.” They still have an incentive to make risky wagers in order to generate the profits that will reward their executives, the report says.

“The definition of insanity is repeating the same actions over and over again and expecting a different result,” Barofsky says. “If the goal of TARP was to make sure we don’t have another financial collapse, well, obviously it’s made the likelihood of that much, much greater.”

....In a December report, Barofsky showed how insurance giants Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. and Lincoln National Corp. bought tiny thrifts -- one with just $7 million in assets -- to qualify for the TARP Capital Protection Program, which is designed to encourage bank lending. Hartford and Lincoln used the more than $4.3 billion in TARP funds they received almost entirely to finance insurance operations,
according to the report.

“Treasury didn’t have to approve that,” Barofsky says.

Allison wrote SIGTARP that buying troubled assets from insurance companies was part of TARP.

Janet Tavakoli, founder of Chicago-based Tavakoli Structured Finance Inc., says Barofsky hasn’t been aggressive enough. She says SIGTARP should be running criminal probes of the bankers who underwrote and managed the collateralized debt obligations that were at the center of the financial meltdown.

CDOs are bundles of mortgage-backed bonds and other debt sold to investors. Tavakoli says the CDO managers sometimes replaced relatively high-quality securities with new ones that were more likely to default.

“It is securities fraud if you take securities and package them and knowingly pass them off with phony labels,” she says.

Barofsky says investigations related to the underwriting and sale of CDOs are ongoing.

...Barofsky says he’s battling an entrenched culture of secrecy in the Treasury and elsewhere.

One of the important lessons that I hope will be learned from this entire financial crisis is that the reflexive reaction against transparency, that disclosure will bring
terrible things, has not been proven true
,” he says.

He offers the AIG bailout as an example. For more than a year, the New York Fed kept key aspects of the AIG bailout secret, including details of its own involvement and its decision to have AIG pay the insurer’s bank counterparties 100 cents on the dollar on the credit protection they’d bought against about $62 billion in CDOs.

In a November report, SIGTARP criticized Geithner’s failed efforts to obtain discounts from the banks.

After the banks had been
paid in late 2008, a lawyer from the New York Fed sought to have AIG keep the banks’ identities under wraps, as well as data about the CDOs that would have revealed which firms had underwritten the toxic bonds and which ones had managed them.

“There’s a lot of things about AIG that were not disclosed, based on the assumption that the sky would fall,” Barofsky says. “Transparency does a lot more good than bad.”

Barofsky says the question of whether the New York Fed engaged in a coverup will result in some sort of action.

“We’re either going to have criminal or civil charges against
individuals or we’re going to have a report,” Barofsky says. “This is too
important for us not to share our findings
.”

He won’t say whether the investigation is targeting Geithner personally.

In a statement, the New York Fed said: “Allegations that the New York Fed engaged in a coverup of its intervention in AIG are not true. The New York Fed has fully cooperated with the Special Inspector General.”

17 December 2009

Treasury Cancels Plans to Sell Citi Stake After Failed Equity Offering Stings Shareholders


The shareholders of Citigroup should be furious at the greedy and reckless actions of Citi's management in diluting their shares in order to obtain a freer hand in granting themselves fat bonuses.

Tonight's equity offering failed to bring in a sufficient price, serving up a significant 20% discount to existing holders of the stock.

And the de facto largest shareholders of Citigroup, the US taxpaying public and all holders of US Federal Reserve Notes, took quite a paper loss on their holdings because of Tim and Larry's miscalculations regarding the market's willingness to swallow more large chunks of questionable debt riddled equity from the US zombie banks.

Tim decided that because of this failed offering, the Treasury will cancel its plans to unload your 33% of Citi's shares, preferring to consider the quick flip a longer term investment, as failed trades are often wont to become.

And in retrospect, Timmy's decision to convert the government's preferred stock to common stock is looking to be exceptionally.... stupid, or fishy, or all of the above.

Never fear. We are sure that the Obama Administration can reach out to the Working Group on Markets to put a bid under those shares at some future date, perhaps with help from puffed up government estimates of the vitality of the US economy as a wind at its back.

Technically, Citi can pay back the TARP money from the proceeds. Can they have the gall to do that and pay themselves bonuses this year to boot, which is the basis for this exercise in dilution in the first place? This shows the farce that the Obama financial reforms really are. Nothing has changed except that big bank losses were transferred to the public debt, and the excess of the US financial sector continues with government support.

Financial engineering to maintain an imbalanced status quo, even with the mighty Zimbabwe Ben at the helm, is always and everywhere an economic morass, a Vietnam of moral hazard, and a political tarbaby of increasingly distasteful policy decisions. All for the sake of a wealthy few, the rapacious predatory class, an economic elite that traffics in betrayal and the breaking of oaths.

Such is the tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.
Gentlemen, start your presses...

Reuters
U.S. delays its $5 bln Citi sale after weak pricing

By Dan Wilchins and David Lawder

NEW YORK/WASHINGTON, Dec 16 (Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury delayed a plan to sell its $5 billion of Citigroup Inc (C.N) shares after a stock offering by the bank attracted weak demand and priced at a much lower-than-expected $3.15 a share.

The bank sold $20 billion of stock and convertible bonds to repay funds it owes to the government so it can avoid the executive compensation restrictions that came with multiple U.S. bailouts.

But raising that capital came at a steep cost to shareholders, whose shares are worth 20 percent less than their closing level on Friday, before the bank announced its plan for repaying funds to the government.

"It's a terrific deal for Citigroup's managers, who can get paid more, and a terrible deal for shareholders. The company paid a huge price for this capital," said Sean Egan, principal at ratings agency Egan-Jones Ratings.

Citigroup was the third major U.S. bank to launch a multibillion-dollar share sale in December and the multitude of share sales likely dampened demand, analysts said.

"Buyers are in control of the process now," said Blake Howells, director of research at Becker Capital Management in Portland, Oregon.

The share sale price is less than the $3.25 price at which the government bought them earlier this year as part of an emergency rescue of the No. 3 U.S. bank, shrinking the paper value of the government's 7.7 billion shares to $24.2 billion. That stake was originally worth $25 billion and in October was worth nearly $40 billion.

Treasury "is not going to sell at a loss. That's the bottom line," a source familiar with the situation said.

The U.S. decided not to sell any shares at this time, and has agreed not to sell Citi shares for 90 days, the bank and the Treasury said. The government owns about one-third of Citigroup's shares.

The U.S. government still plans to sell its Citigroup shares within the next year, a Treasury spokesman said.

The government's decision not to sell shares was an about-face from Monday, when Citigroup said the government would sell up to $5 billion of shares alongside the bank's offering....


15 December 2009

$38 Billion Tax Break Granted to Citigroup to Help Improve the TARP Results


Maybe it's a mistake. Did Timmy have time to run their return on TurboTax?

Well, at least it will make the results of the TARP program look better on paper if it drives up Citi's stock price by inflating their financial results. That's a plus, right?

I guess raising the credit card rates to 26% and free money from Ben was not enough to push Citi over its capital objectives in time for bonus season. We'll all have to really tighten our belts for this one.

Change you can believe in.

Washington Post
Citigroup gains massive tax break in deal with IRS

By Binyamin Appelbaum
Tuesday, December 15, 2009; 8:05 PM

The federal government quietly agreed to forgo billions of dollars in potential tax payments from Citigroup as part of the deal announced this week to wean the company from the massive taxpayer bailout that helped it survive the financial crisis.

The Internal Revenue Service on Friday issued an exception to longstanding tax rules for the benefit of Citigroup and the few other companies partially owned by the government. As a result, Citigroup will be allowed to retain $38 billion in tax breaks that otherwise would decline in value when the government sells its stake to private investors.

While the Obama administration has said taxpayers likely will profit from the sale of the Citigroup shares, accounting experts said the lost tax revenue could easily outstrip those profits.

The IRS, an arm of the Treasury Department, has changed a number of rules during the financial crisis to reduce the tax burden on financial firms. The rule changed Friday also was altered last fall by the Bush administration to encourage mergers, letting Wells Fargo cut billions from its tax bill by buying the ailing bank Wachovia.

"The government is consciously forfeiting future tax revenues. It's another form of assistance, maybe not as obvious as direct assistance but certainly another form," said Robert Willens, an expert on tax accounting who runs a firm of the same name. "I've been doing taxes for almost 40 years and I've never seen anything like this where the IRS and Treasury acted unilaterally on so many fronts."

Treasury officials said the most recent change was part of a broader decision initially made last year to shelter companies that accepted federal aid under the Troubled Assets Relief Program from the normal consequences of such an investment. Officials also said that the ruling benefited taxpayers because it made shares in Citigroup more valuable and asserted that without the ruling, Citigroup could not have repaid the government at this time. (Thank God. Just in time for prime bonus season - Jesse)

"This guidance is the part of the administration's orderly exit from TARP," said Treasury spokeswoman Nayyera Haq. "The guidance prevents the devaluing of common stock Treasury holds in TARP recipients. As a result, Treasury can receive a higher price for this stock, which will benefit the financial system and taxpayers." (George Orwell would have fun with this one. Let's give them a lot more money, so that when they give some back it will make our government program look better - Jesse)

Congress, concerned that the Treasury was rewriting tax laws, passed legislation earlier this year reversing the ruling that benefited Wells Fargo and restricting the ability of the IRS to make further changes. A Democratic aide to the Senate Finance Committee, which oversees federal tax policy, said the Obama administration had the legal authority to issue the new exception, but Republican aides to the committee said they were reviewing the issue.

A senior Republican staffer also questioned the government's rationale. "You're manipulating tax rules so that the market value of the stock is higher than it would be under current law," said the aide, speaking on condition of anonymity. "It inflates the returns that they're showing from TARP and that looks good for them." (And a nice accomplishment for Timmy's year end performance review - Jesse)

Read the rest here.

05 April 2009

Congressional Watchdog to Drop a Bombshell on the US Financial Industry


"...set to call for shareholders in those institutions to be wiped out. 'It is crucial for these things to happen...'"
How about a stiff haircut for the bondholders and defaults on the credit default swaps held by JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs?

It will be most interesting to see how Tim Geithner and Larry Summers respond to this advice from Congressional oversight.


The Guardian UK
US watchdog calls for bank executives to be sacked
James Doran in New York
The Observer,
Sunday 5 April 2009

Elizabeth Warren, chief watchdog of America's $700bn (£472bn) bank bailout plan, will this week call for the removal of top executives from Citigroup, AIG and other institutions that have received government funds in a damning report that will question the administration's approach to saving the financial system from collapse.

Warren, a Harvard law professor and chair of the congressional oversight committee monitoring the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), is also set to call for shareholders in those institutions to be "wiped out". "It is crucial for these things to happen," she said. "Japan tried to avoid them and just offered subsidy with little or no consequences for management or equity investors, and this is why Japan suffered a lost decade."

She declined to give more detail but confirmed that she would refer to insurance group AIG, which has received $173bn in bailout money, and banking giant Citigroup, which has had $45bn in funds and more than $316bn of loan guarantees.

Warren also believes there are "dangers inherent" in the approach taken by treasury secretary Tim Geithner, who she says has offered "open-ended subsidies" to some of the world's biggest financial institutions without adequately weighing potential pitfalls. "We want to ensure that the treasury gives the public an alternative approach," she said, adding that she was worried that banks would not recover while they were being fed subsidies. "When are they going to say, enough?" she said.

She said she did not want to be too hard on Geithner but that he must address the issues in the report. "The very notion that anyone would infuse money into a financially troubled entity without demanding changes in management is preposterous."

The report will also look at how earlier crises were overcome - the Swedish and Japanese problems of the 1990s, the US savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and the 30s Depression.


"Three things had to happen," Warren said. "Firstly, the banks must have confidence that the valuation of the troubled assets in question is accurate; then the management of the institutions receiving subsidies from the government must be replaced; and thirdly, the equity investors are always wiped out."


16 January 2009

Congressional Budget Offices Estimate TARP Losses at $64 Billion


Congressional Budget Office
Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) Report


CBO is required by law to report semiannually on OMB’s assessment of expenditures under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). Today, CBO released the first of these reports. (For more on the TARP program, this blog post from October includes CBO’s analysis of the financial rescue legislation).

Through December 31, 2008, the Treasury disbursed $247 billion to acquire assets under that program. CBO valued those assets using discounted present-value calculations similar to those generally applied to federal loans and loan guarantees, but adjusting for market risk as specified in the legislation that established the TARP.

On that basis, CBO estimates that the net cost of the TARP’s transactions (broadly speaking, the difference between what the Treasury paid for the investments or lent to the firms and the market value of those transactions) amounts to $64 billion—that is, measured in 2008 dollars, we expect the government to recover about three quarters of its initial investment.

The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) report on the TARP, issued in early December, only addressed the first $115 billion distributed under the program. CBO and OMB do not differ significantly in their assessments of the net cost of those transactions (between $21 billion and $26 billion), but they vary in their judgments as to how the transactions should be reported in the federal budget.

Thus far, the Administration is accounting for capital purchases made under the TARP on a cash basis rather than on such a present-value basis—that is, the Administration is recording the full amount of the cash outlays up front and will record future recoveries in the year in which they occur. That treatment will show more outlays for the TARP this year and then show receipts in future years.


Bank of America to Receive Additional $138 Billion in Government Assistance


The situation must have been rather dire indeed. They did not even wait for the weekend.

Its a nice amount of government aid for a single company. Too bad GM is not a bank.

Some animals are more equal than others.


Bloomberg
U.S. Gives Bank of America $138 Billion Lifeline
By Scott Lanman and Craig Torres

Jan. 16 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government agreed to invest $20 billion more in Bank of America Corp. and backstop $118 billion of its assets to help the lender absorb Merrill Lynch & Co. and prevent the financial crisis from deepening.

The government agreed to the rescue “as part of its commitment to support financial market stability,” the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said today in a e-mailed joint statement.

Hours earlier, the U.S. Senate voted to allow the release of $350 billion in financial rescue funds, the second half of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program enacted Oct. 3 by President George W. Bush.

The U.S. already had injected $15 billion into Bank of America, the country’s biggest lender, and another $10 billion to Merrill to bolster the combined company against the global credit crunch.

Bank of America will absorb the first $10 billion of losses in the pool, of which the “large majority” of assets were assumed by the company in the Merrill purchase, the government said. The Treasury and FDIC will share the next $10 billion of losses.

The Fed will backstop assets with a loan after the government’s first $10 billion in losses, the agencies said.

Future Losses

The asset pool includes cash assets with a current book value of as much as $37 billion and derivatives with maximum potential future losses of as much as $81 billion, according to the term sheet provided by the government.

Separately, the FDIC said it plans to propose changing its bond-guarantee program for banks to cover debt as long as 10 years, from the current three-year maturity. The FDIC will soon propose rule changes to the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, today’s statement said.

“The U.S. government will continue to use all of our resources to preserve the strength of our banking institutions and promote the process of repair and recovery and to manage risks,” the joint statement said.

Shares of Bank of America plunged 18 percent yesterday, sliding to $1.88 to $8.32 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading after hitting $7.35, its lowest level since February 1991.

The bank moved up its fourth-quarter report to today at 7 a.m. New York time.

09 December 2008

Oversight Panel Expected to Release Report Critical of TARP


Sortable List of TARP Recipients to Date

If they televise the Congressional testimony tomorrow it might be interesting to watch, especially if Bernanke becomes Sam-Kinison hysterical and Paulson jack-hammer stammers out a declaration of martial law.


Wall Street Journal
Oversight Panel to Criticize TARP
By DAMIAN PALETTA and DEBORAH SOLOMON
DECEMBER 9, 2008, 5:52 P.M. ET

WASHINGTON -- The panel set up to oversee the Treasury Department $700 billion financial-rescue fund is expected to release a report Wednesday highly critical of the government's handling of the bailout, people familiar with the matter said. It will also press the Bush administration to act more aggressively to prevent foreclosures, these people said.

The report isn't expected to contain any new findings but is expected to raise fresh questions about the program at a time when many lawmakers expect the Bush administration to seek access to the second half of the funds.

The panel's top official, Harvard Law School professor Elizabeth Warren, is scheduled to describe her findings to the House Financial Services Committee Wednesday.

Among other things, a draft of the report posed 10 questions to Treasury, which pressed officials for a clearer strategy, asked whether there is sufficient accountability, and why more hasn't been done to help prevent foreclosures.

The roughly 30-page report is also expected to press Treasury to describe whether the money used to inject capital into the banking sector is a "giveaway" or a "fair deal," according to one person familiar with the report.

A Treasury spokeswoman declined to comment on the report noting that the department has not seen its final findings.

Republicans have privately complained that the panel has taken a partisan bent. It isn't clear if one of its four members, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas), is going to sign the report. Mr. Hensarling is scheduled to testify alongside Ms. Warren at the hearing.

Ms. Warren, who is noted for her longstanding push for tougher rules protecting consumers, is holding a field hearing next week in Nevada, where Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) is considering making remarks, people familiar with the matter said.

The Treasury Department has faced a steady drumbeat of criticism about the way it has handled the first half of the $700 billion fund, which Congress authorized in October to stabilize the financial system.

Government officials initially sold the program to lawmakers and the public as a way of purchasing troubled assets from financial institutions. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson quickly scrapped that plan and has instead decided to use most of the money to buy equity stakes in banks.

Congress could move to block Treasury's access to the second half of the $700 billion fund, a prospect that government officials fear could send financial markets reeling.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) said Monday that Treasury would have to commit to using a large amount of the money to help prevent foreclosures in order to satisfy him. He said it would still be a tough sell with other lawmakers.

"With most of my colleagues, they'll need police protection to even ask for the money," he said. (Go for it Barney. Jerry! Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!)

05 December 2008

The Grapes of Graft


There seems to be a rush to help those who take a shower in the morning before going to work,
and not those who take a shower in the evening after a day's work.



24 November 2008

Federal Reserve and Treasury Offer Half of US GDP to the Wall Street Banks


Our motto used to be "millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."

That has changed to "Trillions for the banks, but a few dollars loaned at interest for the real economy."

Hey there all you big strong men,
Time to serve your Uncle Ben,
Don't give up, you must be bold,
Get out there and short some gold.
The Treasury's stash is almost dry,
Oops, the Buck is going to die.

And its one, two, three who are we working for,
Hey hey we know who to thank,
So give your all to Uncle Hank.
And its five, six, seven, don't you dare be late,
Well, there ain't no time to ask them why,
But the Buck is gonna die.




Fed Pledges Top $7.4 Trillion to Ease Frozen Credit
By Mark Pittman and Bob Ivry

Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government is prepared to lend more than $7.4 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers, or half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, to rescue the financial system since the credit markets seized up 15 months ago. (But there is no money for Social Security, for Medical programs, for real industry, for people - Jesse)

The unprecedented pledge of funds includes $2.8 trillion already tapped by financial institutions in the biggest response to an economic emergency since the New Deal of the 1930s, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The commitment dwarfs the only plan approved by lawmakers, the Treasury Department’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. Federal Reserve lending last week was 1,900 times the weekly average for the three years before the crisis. (This isn't the New Deal, its the Raw Deal for the people and the Sweet Deal for the banks that caused our problems through their reckless greed - Jesse)

When Congress approved the TARP on Oct. 3, Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson acknowledged the need for transparency and oversight. Now, as regulators commit far more money while refusing to disclose loan recipients or reveal the collateral they are taking in return, some Congress members are calling for the Fed to be reined in. (That's nothing compared to what the public is calling to be done to the Fed and the Bush Treasury - Jesse)

“Whether it’s lending or spending, it’s tax dollars that are going out the window and we end up holding collateral we don’t know anything about,” said Congressman Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican who serves on the House Financial Services Committee. “The time has come that we consider what sort of limitations we should be placing on the Fed so that authority returns to elected officials as opposed to appointed ones...”

‘Snookered’

Regulators hope the rescue will contain the damage and keep banks providing the credit that is the lifeblood of the U.S. economy.

Most of the spending programs are run out of the New York Fed, whose president, Timothy Geithner, is said to be President- elect Barack Obama’s choice to be Treasury Secretary.

The money that’s been pledged is equivalent to $24,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. It’s nine times what the U.S. has spent so far on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Congressional Budget Office figures. It could pay off more than half the country’s mortgages.

“It’s unprecedented,” said Bob Eisenbeis, chief monetary economist at Vineland, New Jersey-based Cumberland Advisors Inc. and an economist for the Atlanta Fed for 10 years until January. “The backlash has begun already. Congress is taking a lot of hits from their constituents because they got snookered on the TARP big time. There’s a lot of supposedly smart people who look to be totally incompetent and it’s all going to fall on the taxpayer...”

$4.4 Trillion

Bernanke’s Fed is responsible for $4.4 trillion of pledges, or 60 percent of the total commitment of $7.4 trillion, based on data compiled by Bloomberg concerning U.S. bailout steps started a year ago.

“Too often the public is focused on the wrong piece of that number, the $700 billion that Congress approved,” said J.D. Foster, a former staff member of the Council of Economic Advisers who is now a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington. “The other areas are quite a bit larger.”

The Fed’s rescue attempts began last December with the creation of the Term Auction Facility to allow lending to dealers for collateral. After Bear Stearns’s collapse in March, the central bank started making direct loans to securities firms at the same discount rate it charges commercial banks, which take customer deposits.

In the three years before the crisis, such average weekly borrowing by banks was $48 million, according to the central bank. Last week it was $91.5 billion.

Lehman Failure

The failure of a second securities firm, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., in September, led to the creation of the Commercial Paper Funding Facility and the Money Market Investor Funding Facility, or MMIFF. The two programs, which have pledged $2.3 trillion, are designed to restore calm in the money markets, which deal in certificates of deposit, commercial paper and Treasury bills.

“Money markets seized up after Lehman failed,” said Neal Soss, chief economist at Credit Suisse Group in New York and a former aide to Fed chief Paul Volcker. “Lehman failing made a lot of subsequent actions necessary.”

The FDIC, chaired by Sheila Bair, is contributing 20 percent of total rescue commitments. The FDIC’s $1.4 trillion in guarantees will amount to a bank subsidy of as much as $54 billion over three years, or $18 billion a year, because borrowers will pay a lower interest rate than they would on the open market, according to Raghu Sundurum and Viral Acharya of New York University and the London Business School.

Bank Subsidy

Congress and the Treasury have ponied up $892 billion in TARP and other funding, or 12 percent.

The Federal Housing Administration, overseen by Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Steven Preston, was given the authority to guarantee $300 billion of mortgages, or about 4 percent of the total commitment, with its Hope for Homeowners program, designed to keep distressed borrowers from foreclosure.

Most of the federal guarantees reduce interest rates on loans to banks and securities firms, which would create a subsidy of at least $6.6 billion annually for the financial industry, according to data compiled by Bloomberg comparing rates charged by the Fed against market interest currently paid by banks.

Not included in the calculation of pledged funds is an FDIC proposal to prevent foreclosures by guaranteeing modifications on $444 billion in mortgages at an expected cost of $24.4 billion to be paid from the TARP, according to FDIC spokesman David Barr. The Treasury Department hasn’t approved the program.

Automakers

Bernanke and Paulson, former chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs, have also promised as much as $200 billion to shore up nationalized mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The FDIC arranged for $139 billion in loan guarantees for General Electric Co.’s finance unit.

The tally doesn’t include money to General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC. Obama has said he favors financial assistance to keep them from collapse.

Paulson told the House Financial Services Committee Nov. 18 that the $250 billion already allocated to banks through the TARP is an investment, not an expenditure.

“I think it would be extraordinarily unusual if the government did not get that money back and more,” Paulson said.

‘We Haircut It’

In his Nov. 18 testimony, Bernanke told the House Financial Services Committee that the central bank wouldn’t lose money.

“We take collateral, we haircut it, it is a short-term loan, it is very safe, we have never lost a penny in these various lending programs,” he said.

A haircut refers to the practice of lending less money than the collateral’s current market value.

Requiring the Fed to disclose loan recipients might set off panic, said David Tobin, principal of New York-based loan-sale consultants and investment bank Mission Capital Advisors LLC.

If you mark to market today, the banking system is bankrupt,” Tobin said. “So what do you do? You try to keep it going as best you can.” (Please take note holders of dollars and Treasuries. If the banking system is bankrupt, guess what is next - Jesse)

“Mark to market” means adjusting the value of an asset, such as a mortgage-backed security, to reflect current prices.


18 November 2008

What Happened When They Pulled the TARP Out from Under the Mortgage Asset Markets?


The mortgage markets are imploding.

This is not the sort of action we might have expected given the panic story that Hank and Ben presented to Congress when they originally asked for the emergency $750 Billion to immediately buy troubled assets to 'save the system.' Well, from the looks of these charts those assets have become a lot more 'troubled.'

On the surface it appears as though they have washed their hands of the larger financial system, particularly the mortgage markets, after they supplied a select group of banks with no-strings equity investments.

Paulson and Bernanke need someone with experience in crisis management on their team. At this point the broader market can trust nothing that they say since it is inconsistent, opaque, and without principle to the point of seeming arbitrary. Suspicion of favoritism and insider dealing is clouding all that they do.

Bill Poole Thinks the Fed is Confusing the Markets with a Lack of Transparency and Clarity of Intent




The ABX indices are based on credit default swaps (CDS) for tranches of subprime mortgage-backed securities(MBS).



The CMBX is a Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities credit default index. CMBX is quoted as credit spreads, whereas ABX is quoted as bond prices.