Are Traders Demanding US Credit Default Swaps Payable in Gold?

If another author had said this I might not pay it so much attention. Lately some have been given over to a tabloid approach to overstatement and sensational headlines to attract attention. This is a strong temptation as the blogosphere expands, similar to the development and evolution of newspapers as a popular medium in Victorian London for example.

But as you know, I have a great deal of respect and admiration for Janet Tavakoli and her knowledge in this area. If she is seeing a new demand for Credit Default Swaps on the US payable in gold I would credit it since this is her area of expertise and industry connections, but would ask for some particulars, which I have done. This would match up with some things I have heard from other sources, and desire to continue to put the puzzle pieces together without traveling false trails. For now it remains all opaque, speculation, and rumour.

It does make sense, of course, to price a US default in something other than dollars. The question that comes to mind though, is not the suggested method of payment, but the nature and quality of the counter-party who could stand reliably behind such a claim without it being a fraudulent contract by its very nature.

If the US should default, what major financial institutions will be in a position to have written and then uphold the terms of these CDS, payable in anything at all? Surely only a sovereign bank like the US Fed, the Treasury, or the IMF, or some other central bank could be so capable. But what possible motivation could a non-profit-seeking official institution have in writing CDS on a US sovereign default? Perhaps more likely a private bank or GSE, with the buyers thinking it has some sovereign guarantees that would be upheld in extremis.

Truly, remember AIG? It was insolvent when payment was demanded, and acted improperly in paying collateral to Goldman ahead of its inevitable insolvency, and then receiving the support of the Treasury to pay obligations in full, above all others. It ought to have been placed in a receivership and its assets allocated with the previously disposed collateral clawed back. This kind of private arrangement between parties involving the sovereign wealth of nations may be indicative of things to come. The recent example of Iceland comes to mind.

I agree with her that credit default swaps should be curtailed. Indeed, I would tend to severely limit the trading of most if not all naked derivatives and stock sales by requiring capital requirements near 100 percent and secured by good collateral.

But I think the gold aspect of this may be overdone. The US has more gold than any other individual country, and still values it cheaply at a sub-fifty dollar historical price on its books. If a counterparty fails, it will fail, and a settlement will be arranged. The issue of course, is if some encumbrance of the gold in the US has already been accomplished through unfortunate leases to bullion banks who will not be able to return it.

Indeed this horse may already be 'out of the barn' as some evidence indicates that a few banks like JPM are already short more gold and silver than they can possibly deliver under the conditions of the contract without selective default to paper if demanded by their counter-parties.

If there is any sort of government guarantee, it will be payable in dollars, unless some private arrangement is made for the benefit of the recipient. For example, if a bullion bank is caught short of gold, and requires it to avoid a default and 'systemic risk.' The rationale will be to pay the debt in full so as to avoid a collapse, even though there was no guarantee involved. If we did not have such a recent historical example of AIG I would say that such an abuse of the Treasury for the benefit of a few for placing the system at risk was not possible. And yet here we are.

There is another possibility, based only on speculation as far as I can determine, that a major purchaser of US debt is now demanding it be backstopped against ratings downgrades in gold payable CDS. Until now I have given this little credibility. How can such a thing be arranged in secrecy and maintained as such? How could a private bank, even a money center, write such a swap in good faith?

You see, to my knowledge no private corporation has the right to engage in contracts that encumber the US gold reserves, not the Fed nor the Banks, and not even the President or Treasury alone. Only the Congress, with the knowledge of the people, may allocate and distribute such a sovereign asset. If swaps and contracts and leases are being made on the US gold reserves, the people then are the subjects of a monumental theft and fraud. And if the US is writing or guaranteeing CDS in gold, then most likely it is doing so as a means of rescuing those who have already gone hopelessly short the gold market, and need to arrange a 'back-door' bailout.

So the rule at hand would be the epigram of the famous trader, Daniel Drew:

"He who sells what isn't his'n
Must buy it back, or go to prison."

Unless they have good friends at the Fed or the Treasury, or in positions of power in the exchanges perhaps. But does anyone believe that the American people would stand again for another bailout of the very same banks that it has bailed out previously? I would hope that there would not be a Reykjavík on the Potomac in my lifetime.

In short, if the existence of CDS on the default or downgrade of US sovereign debt payable in gold bullion be true, who would be in a position to stand behind these Credit Default Swaps with any reliability, and what buyer would be in a position to make such a demand of a credible source?

The US most likely will resist the banning of credit derivatives because it is in the hands of the Banks, and such derivatives are the source of enormous profits. Further, such a ban might cause the existing bulk of derivatives to fall in value, destabilizing the financial system. Nothing could be more obvious, at least for now. So this situation will continue most likely until it falters, and the entire system is once again placed at risk. But these markets are so opaque, and the intentions of government in them even less apparent, that one can only watch and wonder.

At some point the Banks may seek to make the people yet another offer they cannot refuse. And America will choose. But first I think, the UK will reach this point.

Huffington Post
Washington Must Ban U.S. Credit Derivatives as Traders Demand Gold
By Janet Tavakoli
March 8, 2010

...Remember AIG? When prices moved against AIG on its credit default swap contracts, AIG owed cash (collateral) to its trading partners. AIG paid billions of dollars and owed billions more when U.S. taxpayers bailed it out in September 2008.

U.S. credit default swaps currently trade in euros. After all, if the U.S. defaults, who will want payment in devalued U.S. dollars? The euro recently weakened relative to the dollar, and market participants are calling for contracts that require payment in gold. If they get their way, speculators on the winning side of a price move will demand collateral paid in gold.

The market can create an unlimited number of these contracts very rapidly. The U.S. wouldn't have to ever default to trigger a major disruption in the gold market. Spreads (or prices) on the credit default swaps could simply move based on "news," and demand for gold would soar.

If this speculation drives up the price of gold, and the available gold supply becomes limited, are you willing to post your children as collateral? I am pushing the point so that we put a stop to this before it is too late."

Net Asset Value of Certain Precious Metal Funds and Trusts

US Dollar Charts Still Technically Strong

The US Dollar Daily Chart is showing a continuation pattern, indicating the likelihood that its rally has more room to the upside. This implies more troubles for the Euro, the Pound, and the Yen if in fact the dollar can break out from this formation. There is some probability of failure, but not so great as continuation of the trend higher.

There is also the matter of the 3, 10, and 30 year Treasury auctions this week. The dollar is often dressed up for the occasion. If not with the fundamentals, then by weakening the 'competition' to make it look prettier than them.

If the US stock market cannot move up or hold its ground while the Treasury conducts even modestly successful Treasury auctions, then this is a cautionary indication that Wall Street and the Fed are moving capital in a circle of manipulation to attempt to maintain the illusion of growth, in the manner of a Ponzi scheme.



The Dollar rally is obviously consolidating its recent overbought condition, and has more room to the upside if the trend continues. Keep in mind that the fundamentals work slowly and on the long trends. In the shorter timeframes the price is just a trade, more subject to emotions and fluctuations. Do not try and fight the ticker if you are a trader. If you are a long term investor, then you can ignore what at the end of the day will turn out to be noise. But there are some imperative requirements to do so regarding your cash levels and leverage.

Iceland Voters Reject Bank Bailouts in Crushing Electoral Defeat; Neo-Liberalism In Context

"Voters rejected the bill because ordinary people, farmers and fishermen, taxpayers, doctors, nurses, teachers, are being asked to shoulder through their taxes a burden that was created by irresponsible greedy bankers."

"Is there any reason why the American people should be taxed to guarantee the debts of banks, any more than they should be taxed to guarantee the debts of other institutions, including merchants, the industries, and the mills of the country?" Senator Carter Glass (D-Va), author of the Banking Act of 1933 and of Glass-Steagall

It is interesting that the government of Iceland had already declared the vote of the people as 'obsolete.' One has to wonder when the voters will declare their current government and their representatives as obsolete. One would give the government credit for at least allowing a vote on a referendum, but to then disregard and circumvent it through political devices is seems like a base hypocrisy.

Iceland is a victim of the neo-liberal economic deregulation of the 1990's, in which a few bankers can buy the government, and rack up enormous profits for themselves in Ponzi like leverage, and then attempt to socialize the debt back to the people when their schemes collapse.

Neo-Liberalism is a system of economic thought embracing the efficient markets hypothesis, the inherent good of deregulation and the natural impediment of government regulation, the necessity of free trade and globalization, the supremacy of the corporation over the individual person in the social economy, and supply side economics. It most likely favors a one world currency and consolidation of production into large corporate combinations or 'trusts' under the principle of laissez-faire.

Neo-liberalism may degenerate into crony capitalism, or even corporatism, as its theoretical idealism of perfect rationalism and virtue falters against the reality of human behaviour. In times of financial crisis, for example, neo-liberalism ironically turns to centralized economic planning by allegedly private banks which appropriate public funds and the power of the monetary license to socialize private debts, and, in a strikingly Orwellian twist, eviscerate the discipline of the markets and the individual to preserve their freedom, and the well being of the private corporations. Although now largely repudiated, neo-liberalism has strong roots in the public consciousness, and its adherents hold considerable power in Western governments and among the 'freshwater school' of American economics.

What makes neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism 'neo' or new is their attitude towards the relationship of the individual to the state. Both tend to denigrate and diminish the condition and rights of the inividual as compared to the consideration of the corporate system or the centralized command state.

In the States, the Congress and the President have just ignored the massive protests against their own bank bailouts. The US was able to cloak its own debt assumptions through accounting frauds, claiming that the bailouts were repaid by the banks. The bailouts are wrapped in AIG, Fannie and Freddie, and the Federal Reserve. This is the advantage of owning the currency, the IMF and ratings agencies. And of course your media.

Although Europeans and the markets are looking at the 'PIGS' for the next serious default as the economic hitmen are moving from Iceland to Greece, the real test of globalization in financial markets and the dominant control of the private banks will come in the UK, a sovereign people too proud and strong to go down into feudal servitude and the rule of tyrants easily. Or at least one would hope.

The Relationship of the Condition and Rights of the Individual to the Organized State




Bloomberg
Iceland Rejects Icesave Depositors Bill in Referendum
By Omar R. Valdimarsso

March 7 (Bloomberg) -- Icelanders rejected by a massive majority a bill that would saddle each citizen with $16,400 of debt in protest at U.K. and Dutch demands that they cover losses triggered by the failure of a private bank.

Ninety-three percent voted against the so-called Icesave bill, according to preliminary results on national broadcaster RUV. Final results will be published today.

The bill would have obliged the island to take on $5.3 billion, or 45 percent of last year’s economic output, in loans from the U.K. and the Netherlands to compensate the two countries for depositor losses stemming from the collapse of Landsbanki Islands hf more than a year ago. The island’s political leaders say they’ve already moved on to talks over a new accord.

“The government’s survival doesn’t rest with this Icesave vote,” Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir told RUV after the preliminary count was announced. “The government coalition remains solid,” Finance Minister Steingrimur Sigfusson told RUV.

Failure to reach an agreement on the bill has left Iceland’s International Monetary Fund-led loan in limbo and prompted Fitch Ratings to cut its credit grade to junk. Moody’s Investors Service and Standard & Poor’s have signaled they may follow suit if no settlement is reached.

‘Obsolete’

Iceland’s leaders are trying to negotiate a new deal with the U.K. and the Dutch that focuses on the interest rate payable on the loan, making the bill in yesterday’s vote “obsolete,” Sigurdardottir said on March 4.

Dutch Finance Minister Jan Kees de Jager in a statement posted on the Internet last night said he is “disappointed” the agreement hasn’t yet come into effect. The U.K. was “obviously disappointed,” while “not surprised,” said a Treasury official who declined to be identified in line with departmental policy.

Iceland’s government pointed to “steady progress toward a settlement” in the past three weeks in a statement.

“The British and Dutch Governments have indicated a willingness to accept a solution that will entail a significantly lower cost for Iceland than that envisaged in the prior agreement,” the statement said.

The U.K. and Netherlands have offered an interest rate of the London Interbank Offered Rate plus 2.75 percentage points, according to the U.K. Treasury official. That’s the same as the rate for the loan from the Nordic countries that the Icelandic Government accepted in July 2009. The new offer also gave relief on the first two years of interest for the loan, amounting to 450 million euros.

‘Ordinary People’

The three governments have declared their intention to continue the talks, the Iceland statement said.

Voters rejected the bill because “ordinary people, farmers and fishermen, taxpayers, doctors, nurses, teachers, are being asked to shoulder through their taxes a burden that was created by irresponsible greedy bankers,” said President Olafur R. Grimsson, whose rejection of the bill resulted in the plebiscite, in a Bloomberg Television interview on March 5.

The Icesave deal passed through parliament with a 33 to 30 vote majority. Grimsson blocked it after receiving a petition from a quarter of the population urging him to do so. The government has said it’s determined any new deal must have broader political backing to avoid meeting a similar fate.

Icelanders used the referendum to express their outrage at being asked to take on the obligations of bankers who allowed the island’s financial system to create a debt burden more than 10 times the size of the economy.

Protests

The nation’s three biggest banks, which were placed under state control in October 2008, had enjoyed a decade of market freedoms following the government’s privatizations through the end of the 1990s and the beginning of this decade.

Protesters have gathered every week, with regular numbers swelling to about 2,000, according to police estimates. The last time the island saw demonstrations on a similar scale was before the government of former Prime Minister Geir Haarde was toppled.

Icelanders have thrown red paint over house facades and cars of key employees at the failed banks, Kaupthing Bank hf, Landsbanki and Glitnir Bank hf, to vent their anger. The government has appointed a special commission to investigate financial malpractice and has identified more than 20 cases that will result in prosecution.

Economic Impact

The island’s economy shrank an annual 9.1 percent in the fourth quarter of last year, the statistics office said on March 5, and contracted 6.5 percent in 2009 as a whole.

Household debt with major credit institutions has doubled in the past five years and reached about 1.8 trillion kronur ($14 billion) in 2009, compared with the island’s $12 billion gross domestic product, according to the central bank.

Icelanders, the world’s fifth-richest per capita as recently as 2007, ended 2009 18 percent poorer and will see their disposable incomes decline a further 10 percent this year, the central bank estimates.

Grimsson, who has described his decision to put the depositor bill to a referendum as the “pinnacle of democracy,” says he’s not concerned about the economic fallout of his decision.

“The referendum has drawn back the curtain and people see on the stage the matter in a new perspective,” he said in an interview. “That has strengthened our position and our cause.”