US Financial Markets: A Broader Perspective

Wall Street feeds on a short term mentality, as it herds the crowd from one investment to the next. This is because it makes its steady income on transactions, as well as front running the short term moves and gaming the system in general.

Yesterday some of the Wall Street mouthpieces were urging the rally on because of a potential Republican victory in Massachusetts. Today the market sells off hard on that Republican victory. In the short term, its all a game.

Let's see if the support holds, or if we are finally getting that correction to the intermediate trends. I would like to finally be able to hold a short position for more than a day. 1110 on the SP futures is key support if the trendline at 1126 breaks.

Here is some perspective from the daily charts.

HUD Suspends Anti-Flipping Rule for FHA Loans

"As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his folly." Prov 26:11

"Mortgagees" in this case would be the banks and their subsidiaries that have foreclosed on the home. So all you entrepreneurial flippers need to check the fine print, and perhaps team up for a percentage from the banks, who are in the driver's seat on this HUD exception to the anti-flipping rule passed in 2003.

This does provide yet another opportunity for the banks and their subsidiaries to skin more money from the foreclosure transaction with the help of public subsidy. So if you are the entrepreneurial sort, you'll have to grease the palms of the banks to gain access to the FHA for those quick flips.

The waiver from the HUD Website is here.

HUD No. 10-011
Lemar Wooley
(202) 708-0685 FOR RELEASE
Friday January 15, 2010

HUD TAKES ACTION TO SPEED RESALE OF FORECLOSED PROPERTIES TO NEW OWNERS

Measure to help bring stability to home values and accelerate sale of vacant properties

WASHINGTON - In an effort to stabilize home values and improve conditions in communities where foreclosure activity is high, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan today announced a temporary policy that will expand access to FHA mortgage insurance and allow for the quick resale of foreclosed properties. The announcement is part of the Obama administration commitment to addressing foreclosure. Just yesterday, Secretary Donovan announced $2 billion in Neighborhood Stabilization Program grants to local communities and nonprofit housing developers to combat the effects of vacant and abandoned homes.

"As a result of the tightened credit market, FHA-insured mortgage financing is often the only means of financing available to potential homebuyers," said Donovan. "FHA has an unprecedented opportunity to fulfill its mission by helping many homebuyers find affordable housing while contributing to neighborhood stabilization."

With certain exceptions, FHA currently prohibits insuring a mortgage on a home owned by the seller for less than 90 days. This temporary waiver will give FHA borrowers access to a broader array of recently foreclosed properties.

"This change in policy is temporary and will have very strict conditions and guidelines to assure that predatory practices are not allowed," Donovan said.

In today's market, FHA research finds that acquiring, rehabilitating and the reselling these properties to prospective homeowners often takes less than 90 days. Prohibiting the use of FHA mortgage insurance for a subsequent resale within 90 days of acquisition adversely impacts the willingness of sellers to allow contracts from potential FHA buyers because they must consider holding costs and the risk of vandalism associated with allowing a property to sit vacant over a 90-day period of time.

The policy change will permit buyers to use FHA-insured financing to purchase HUD-owned properties, bank-owned properties, or properties resold through private sales. This will allow homes to resell as quickly as possible, helping to stabilize real estate prices and to revitalize neighborhoods and communities.

"FHA borrowers, because of the restrictions we are now lifting, have often been shut out from buying affordable properties," said FHA Commissioner David H. Stevens. "This action will enable our borrowers, especially first-time buyers, to take advantage of this opportunity."

The waiver will take effect on February 1, 2010 and is effective for one year, unless otherwise extended or withdrawn by the FHA Commissioner. To protect FHA borrowers against predatory practices of "flipping" where properties are quickly resold at inflated prices to unsuspecting borrowers, this waiver is limited to those sales meeting the following general conditions:

•All transactions must be arms-length, with no identity of interest between the buyer and seller or other parties participating in the sales transaction.

•In cases in which the sales price of the property is 20 percent or more above the seller's acquisition cost, the waiver will only apply if the lender meets specific conditions.

•The waiver is limited to forward mortgages, and does not apply to the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) for purchase program.

Specific conditions and other details of this new temporary policy are in the text of the waiver, available on HUD's website.

The Banking Oligarchy Must Be Restrained For a Recovery to Be Sustained

Brilliant article really, in its simplicity.

Despite Obama's recent brave words, the US is lagging the world recognition that because of systemic distortions in the financial system the banks are in fact exercising a tax on the real economy that is impeding global recovery. As recently noted in London's Financial Times regarding the structural imbalances in the financial system:

"...as long as they are not addressed, the banks will make profits – or more accurately, extract rents – out of all proportion to any contribution they make to the wider economy."

The US is going in absolutely the wrong direction, lessening competition and strenghtening the grip of a financial oligarchy through its policy of focusing relief efforts on a small group of Too Big To Fail Banks, at the expense of the broad economy. Despite assurances to the contrary, this is the policy being administered by Washington.

This institutionalization of distortion was easier to understand under the Bush Administration with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson guiding policy, and the Clinton Administration under banking insider Robert Rubin. But why this sort of response from the new reform government? The answer most likely is centered on three men: Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, and Ben Bernanke. None of the three has practical experience in business. All three are creatures of the banking system, and are heavily indebted to the status quo.

The first practical step for Obama would be to dismiss Summers and Geithner, and if he is wise, the person or persons who recommended them. He also should encourage the Congress to investigate the bank bailouts in general, and tie this to Bernanke's reappointment to the Chairmanship and the movement to audit the Fed.

The most recent scandal regarding the collusion between the government and the Fed to mask the backdoor bailouts to a few big banks via AIG should be proof enough that the Fed has no intentions of acting honestly and openly, and is far exceeding its mandates in its aggressive expanding its balance sheet and the selective monetization of private debts.

There are disturbing indications that the US is using a few of its large banks as elements of its policy to achieve certain objectives in the world markets. Such collusion between the corporate and the government sectors is the prelude to fascism.

We should keep in mind that financial crisis was indeed created during both Democratic and Republican administrations, and that simply replacing the Democrats with traditional opponents is unlikely to achieve genuine change.

Change is what is required. But while the foul stench of corruption hangs over the political process in Washington, where Big Money readily buys influence and control over legislation and regulation, there will be no significant changes, and no economic recovery. Recovery will be in appearance only.


Financial Times
How the big banks rigged the market
By Philip Stephens
18 January 2010

When Lloyd Blankfein met politicians in London a little while ago he brushed aside warnings that investment banks faced higher taxes if they ignored the rising public outcry about multibillion-dollar bonus pools. The Goldman chief executive seemed to believe governments would not dare.
That misjudgment – a measure of the breathtaking hubris that, even after all that has happened, continues to separate bankers from just about everyone else – may explain Goldman’s response to the British government’s decision to apply a 50 per cent tax to this year’s payouts

In the description of Whitehall insiders, Goldman executives reacted with anger and aggression. The threat was that the bank would scale back its business in London. For a moment it seemed Gordon Brown’s administration might wobble. In the event, Goldman’s lobbying failed to persuade it to soften the impact of the tax.

Britain, of course, is not alone. France has imposed its own bonus tax. Barack Obama’s administration has just announced a levy to recover an estimated $90bn (£55bn, €63bn) over 10 years. The centre-right government in Sweden has gone further by introducing a permanent “stability levy” to discourage excessive risk-taking.

It is a measure of how far the political debate has shifted against the financial plutocrats that George Osborne, the Tory shadow chancellor, has applauded the Swedish plan. If the Tories win the coming general election, they would support a worldwide levy along similar lines. It is “unacceptable”, Mr Osborne remarked the other day, for the banks to be paying big bonuses rather than building resilience against future crises.

So far, so encouraging. But the process cannot end here. Irritating as it may be to Mr Blankfein, a one-off bonus tax is not going to change anything in the medium to long term. Levies such as that in Sweden mark a recognition that the profits and remuneration policies of the banks are more than a fleeting problem. But forcing bankers to strengthen balance sheets with money they would rather put in their own pockets addresses only part of the problem.

The next stage must be scrutiny of the structural distortions that allow these institutions to rack up such huge profits. Broadly speaking, the leading players in at least three areas of investment banking – wholesale markets, underwriting and mergers and acquisitions – have been operating natural oligopolies.

Their profits have been in significant part a reflection of the absence of robust competition. There are different reasons for this in the different areas of business – what economists call asymmetries in some and market dominance in others. But as long as they are not addressed, the banks will make profits – or more accurately, extract rents – out of all proportion to any contribution they make to the wider economy.

Read the rest of this article here.

Triple Digit Oil and Economic Change

Triple digit oil and the economic change that it would bring is something that intrigues, and will have a cascading impact on the real economy and globalization.

It is not that we will be running out of oil. Rather, we will be running out of cheap oil, light sweet Arabian crude, to be replaced eventually by synthetic oil rendered from tar sands and shale. The implication is $200 per barrel oil and $7.00 per gallon gasoline.

Demand for oil is peaking in developed nations like the US and Canada, and may never exceed the levels of the past few years. But demand growth in the developing nations is increasing, and perhaps dramatically.

World gasoline production has not grown in the past four years.

The oil shock may hit the economy within 12 to 15 months according to Jeff Rubin.

There are several things with which I do not necessarily agree, but his talk his interesting and thought-provoking. We do need to start thinking about how to make sure that peak oil does not translate into peak GDP.

This may require a shift from a global economy to more local economies. And I have been thinking about this for the past five years. It is coming. The only question is when.

Jeff Rubin, former Chief Economist of CIBC World Markets and the author of Why Your World Is About To Get A Whole Lot Smaller

Ron Paul: "Prepare for Revolutionary Changes in the Not-too-distant Future.”

It certainly sounds as though Representative Paul expects some significant developments.

Change is in the wind.

“Could it all be a bad dream, or a nightmare? Is it my imagination, or have we lost our minds? It's surreal; it's just not believable. A grand absurdity; a great deception, a delusion of momentous proportions; based on preposterous notions; and on ideas whose time should never have come; simplicity grossly distorted and complicated; insanity passed off as logic; grandiose schemes built on falsehoods with the morality of Ponzi and Madoff; evil described as virtue; ignorance pawned off as wisdom; destruction and impoverishment in the name of humanitarianism; violence, the tool of change; preventive wars used as the road to peace; tolerance delivered by government guns; reactionary views in the guise of progress; an empire replacing the Republic; slavery sold as liberty; excellence and virtue traded for mediocracy; socialism to save capitalism; a government out of control, unrestrained by the Constitution, the rule of law, or morality; bickering over petty politics as we collapse into chaos; the philosophy that destroys us is not even defined.

We have broken from reality--a psychotic Nation. Ignorance with a pretense of knowledge replacing wisdom. Money does not grow on trees, nor does prosperity come from a government printing press or escalating deficits.

We're now in the midst of unlimited spending of the people's money, exorbitant taxation, deficits of trillions of dollars--spent on a failed welfare/warfare state; an epidemic of cronyism; unlimited supplies of paper money equated with wealth.

A central bank that deliberately destroys the value of the currency in secrecy, without restraint, without nary a whimper. Yet, cheered on by the pseudo-capitalists of Wall Street, the military industrial complex, and Detroit.

We police our world empire with troops on 700 bases and in 130 countries around the world. A dangerous war now spreads throughout the Middle East and Central Asia. Thousands of innocent people being killed, as we become known as the torturers of the 21st century.

We assume that by keeping the already-known torture pictures from the public's eye, we will be remembered only as a generous and good people. If our enemies want to attack us only because we are free and rich, proof of torture would be irrelevant.

The sad part of all this is that we have forgotten what made America great, good, and prosperous. We need to quickly refresh our memories and once again reinvigorate our love, understanding, and confidence in liberty. The status quo cannot be maintained, considering the current conditions. Violence and lost liberty will result without some revolutionary thinking.

We must escape from the madness of crowds now gathering. The good news is the reversal is achievable through peaceful and intellectual means and, fortunately, the number of those who care are growing exponentially.

Of course, it could all be a bad dream, a nightmare, and that I'm seriously mistaken, overreacting, and that my worries are unfounded. I hope so. But just in case, we ought to prepare ourselves for revolutionary changes in the not-too-distant future.”

Prince Alwaleed Needs a Turnaround at Citigroup - Or Else

Prince Alwaleed has given Vikram Pandit one year to shape up or else.

I wonder what sharia has to say about investing like a doofus, throwing more money on a losing position, and then expecting common taxpayers to bail you out.

"Last week, Alwaleed boosted Kingdom Holding’s balance sheet by transferring $600 million worth of his own Citi shares onto its balance sheet. Shares of the investment group -- of which Alwaleed is a 95% owner -- have lost about half their value since 2007 and it’s had capital losses of 65% as of the end of the third quarter. The transfer of Alwaleed’s Citi shares should help secure its borrowing capacity, and it also means that the Citi shares aren't going to be sold anytime soon." Citi and Its Princely Problem

It appears as though the Prince's investment empire is on shaky ground.

No wonder Vikram Pandit has been noticeably absent from such recent, unimportant meetings like those with the President and the Congress.


Business Standard India
Perform or perish, Saudi Prince tells Vikram Pandit
Washington January 16, 2010, 14:05 IST

Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who is a major shareholder in the Citigroup, has told the bank's Indian-American CEO Vikram Pandit that his two-year honeymoon is now over and 2010 is a make or break year for him.

"I don't threaten those CEOs that I meet but I told him (Vikram Pandit) that the market gave you two years' leeway, but I think now it's time to deliver and 2010 for him is really the year to make it or break it and he has to deliver," Alwaleed said in an interview.

Alwaleed had recently met with Pandit and he had told him that he must deliver solid results in 2010.

"It's very important... For the shareholders that have been very patient with Citibank that the honeymoon is over now; two years is enough and I think he will deliver in 2010," Alwaleed said.

At the interview, the Saudi Prince also acknowledged that China is an economic power and eventually, it would translate that into political power.

"China is a rising power. For sure now, China is amassing huge power economically, financially, not yet politically, but I think eventually it is going to ask for this power to be translated to politics — no doubt about that," he said.

On the latest spat between China and the global search engine giant Google, the Saudi Prince sided with China arguing that firms should abide by the rules of a country or leave that nation. (I guess aggressive cyber attacks and human rights violations are just a cost of doing business. At least Steve Ballmer and the Prince see eye to eye on this one. Microsoft doesn't believe in human rights either. No wonder the prince is talking joint ventures with Rupert Murdoch. - Jesse)

"All these have to apply by the rules that are applied in that country. If you cannot play by the rules, then you should leave that country," he said.

Alwaleed also opposed the US President Barack Obama proposal to impose tax on large banks so as to recover the federal money used to fund these institutions during the global financial meltdown. (Abide by a country's rules or leave, Prince. LOL - Jesse)

US Commercial Real Estate a Multi-Trillion Dollar Bloodbath in Progress

Residential Real Estate in the US is in serious trouble, and a drag on the real economy. And yet it is holding up a bit because the Fed is buying over $1 Trillion in mortgage debt, presumably at artficially high prices to support it, and of course the too big to fail Wall Street Banks who were wallowing in the residential real estate bubble.

Commercial Real Estate is much worse, a bloodbath in progress. Down 42% and dropping with store, office and apartment vacancies soaring. And much of that paper is held by regional banks and REITs like Boston Properties (BXP), Vornado Realty Trust (VNO), Brookfield Properties (BPO), and a host of private firms and trusts.

Like the residential market, the pain in commercial real estate is not distributed evenly across geographic regions. So far the public equities have recovered reasonably after a breathtaking plunge, as compared to the SP 500's decline from the top. I am watching them for an indication or at least a confirmation of a double dip, a potential next leg down in the real economy and the financial markets.

I hope Ben is wearing a truss if he tries to put a floor under this one.

At least the rental market will be more economical for the foreclosed homeowners, but its hard to see who will be opening new retail stores and commercial businesses in the near future.

My Budget 360
Commercial Real Estate Is $3.5 Trillion Time Bomb Hitting the Economy

Some of you are probably not aware that the commercial real estate market has crossed a dreaded line in the sand. Commercial real estate (CRE) that includes apartments, industrial, office, and retail space is now performing worse than residential real estate. Not just by a little but by a good amount. While the CRE bust took about a year longer than the residential housing bust, once problems started hitting in this market prices have been steadily collapsing. At the peak, it was estimated that CRE values hit $6.5 trillion in the country. With $3.5 trillion in CRE debt outstanding, this seemed to provide a nice equity buffer. That buffer is now erased.

First we, need to examine the actual decline in CRE values by looking at data gathered by MIT:



Putting together all CRE values we find that the market has fallen by a significant 42 percent. Now assuming this figure, that $6.5 trillion is now “worth” approximately $3.7 trillion giving us an equity cushion of $200 billion for all CRE properties in the U.S. I doubt this figure is even that high. It is safe to say that commercial real estate is now in a negative equity position. The U.S. Treasury has discussed plans on bailing out this industry but not much has been done on this front since all the bailout funds have been concentrated on residential real estate and protecting the too big to fail banks. Many CRE loans are held in the smaller regional banks that are actually small enough to fail. The FDIC will be busy in 2010 given the above data.

Now looking at the residential market, prices fell earlier but have recently stabilized because trillions of dollars have been used to prop up the system:



Read the rest of the story here.

Weekend Highlight: The Bankers Testify to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

High drama.

Wes Craven's remake of It's a Wonderful Life



concept h/t Barry Ritholz

A Brief Bio of the Star of the Proceedings.



"The details of my life are quite inconsequential. My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium with low-grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a 15-year-old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet. My childhood was typical, summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring, we'd make meat helmets. When I was insolent, I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds. Pretty standard, really."

Up Next: A Pop on the Long End of the Yield Curve



Weapons of Mass Distraction
Fox Business News

Guest Post: An Analysis of JPM's Credit Card Business

2009 Credit Card Segment Results: JPMorgan Chase
By Keith Hazelton, The Anecdotal Economist

Credit Card Fee and Interest Income Soar as Nation's Largest Credit Card Company Hammers the Customers Who Bailed It Out in 2008

While we are waiting for the December Federal Reserve G.19 Consumer Credit report due February 5th, which will confirm 2009's complete collapse of Revolving Consumer Credit resulting from millions of the insolvent and near-insolvent 60 percent or so of Americans who carry credit card balances month-to-month but who desperately are trying to reduce the hideous debt-shadow which has remained long after the afterglow has faded from years of restaurant meals, trips to Disney World, flat-screen televisions, college tuitions and entrepreneurial forays, inquiring minds may care to put JPM Morgan Chase's full-year card services results under the microscope.

In JPM's January 15, 2010 earnings release, on pages 18-20 of its Earnings Release Financial Supplement, the nation's largest credit card company by cards and balances details the sorry state of what in better years was its most profitable segment.

JPM's 2009 Card Services segment results are summarized in the table above, which highlights some of the lowlights:

• End of year balances, both held and securitized (so-called Managed Card Assets), fell 14.1 percent in 2009 to $163.4 billion. The number of cards issued (not detailed above) also fell 14.0 percent to 145.3 million from 168.7 million at the end of 2008.


• Notwithstanding a $26.9 billion decline from 2008, JPM's credit card fee income (late fees, overlimit fees, telephone payment fees, balance transfer fees, annual card fees) soared 30.5 percent to $3.6 billion, and net card interest income jumped 26.4 percent to $17.4 billion as the bank clearly scrambled to raise interest rates on as many cardholders as possible ahead of 2010 rule changes.


• Reflecting those abominable fee income and interest income grabs from the very taxpayers who enabled their own misery by allowing JPMorgan Chase to be bailed out in 2008 along with the rest of the "too big to fails," the bank's credit card net revenue as a percentage of average balances grew 15.7 percent in 2009.


• JPM's 2009 total charge volume fell 11.0 percent to $328.3 billion, reflecting the nation's newfound preference for debit cards and cash.


• 2009 charge offs nearly doubled to $16.1 billion (Managed Card basis), representing 9.33 percent of average card balances.

So, JPM Chase in 2009 oversaw the charge-off of $16.1 billion of its own and securitized credit card balances, and its still-solvent card debt-slave customers paid down (or transferred, however unlikely) another $10.8 billion, which equals the $26.9 billion decline in EOY balances.

So far, according to the Fed, 2009 revolving consumer credit balances have plunged more than $100 billion through November, and it looks like JPM Chase, which held a 22 percent card market share in 2008, is accounting for slightly more of the decline than its market share would warrant.

Bank of America, the nation's number two credit card company, which reports 4Q and 2009 results January 20th, has been writing off its managed card balances at an annual rate of more than 13 percent, and we will look forward to seeing its grim full-year results, as well as those of the other dozen or so financial institutions which now control nearly 90 percent of the racket industry.

The nation's big banks in the 1990s and early 2000s wanted to consolidate the then-immensely profitable credit card industry in the worst way, and, as 2009 results will prove, they got it - in the worst way.

And to remind readers where we think revolving consumer credit balances are headed (to $300 billion - $500 billion from the nearly $900 billion last month) over the coming decade, here's a repost of a chart we first published in December.