10 March 2010

Investors Who Lost In Madoff and Stanford Schemes Want Government to "Make Them Whole"


These are, by and large, relatively well-to-do people who were considered 'qualified investors,' or ought to have been. They were able to place large sums of money in obviously risky investments seeking abnormally high rates of return, which they did receive for many years.

The notion that the government should retroactively cover their losses, even indirectly, by taxing the public is obviously repugnant.

What about the many who have lost, on a percentage basis, equally if not more devastating amounts of their retirement savings in the tech, housing and credit bubbles? Their only fault is that they lack the political connections and high powered lawyers to make the case for them to the Congress, and the influence to get their way from pliable Congressmen.

I feel mightily sorry for anyone who has lost money in these fraudulent markets. I spend quite a bit of my personal time trying to warn people about the snares and pitfalls that are allowed to continue in the US financial markets even today. And there are many of them. Consumer Protection is not a priority in Washington.

A better case might be made to sue the Wall Street exchanges, the private self-regulators, and the auditors and ratings agencies for gross negligence in allowing these frauds to continue for so many years. Prosecutions for fraud and corruption across a much wider circle of enablers is generally what is done. It was done in the 1930's and it was done after the Savings and Loan Scandal.

But that will not happen. The financial sector is contributing far too much to the politicians in Washington, and too many powerful politicians are beholden to them, despite what smooth words that might pass their lips in public.

To take the losses of wealthier investors from hedge funds and other high risk investments having no productive benefit or socially redeeming value, and socialize them to the many is almost unbelievable.

And the backing of Senators Richard Shelby and Bob Corker for this is just another sign of the disgraceful corruption and patronage to a select few that infests the Finance Committee in the Senate. These are the Senators on the Finance Committe, among others, who are blocking and weakening financial reform. What hypocrites!

"These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert to fleece the people, and now that they have got into a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel." Abraham Lincoln, speech to Illinois legislature, Jan. 1837

BusinessWeek
Madoff Victims Join Stanford Investors to Lobby for Payback
By Robert Schmidt and Jesse Westbrook
March 10, 2010, 12:16 AM EST

March 10 (Bloomberg) -- Victims of Bernard Madoff and accused Ponzi schemer R. Allen Stanford are banding together to lobby Congress for a law that could require Wall Street firms to pay billions of dollars to cover some of the losses they suffered.

As the groups’ leaders walked the Capitol halls separately over the past several months, they learned how to find the Senate’s Dirksen Office Building and to call their proposal “revenue neutral,” meaning no cost to taxpayers.

They also gleaned another lesson: The broader the geographic base of support, the better the chance of legislative success. The result is a coalition of the Democratic-backed, East Coast, and mostly Jewish investors defrauded by Madoff, with the Republican-backed, largely Christian, Sunbelt residents victimized by Stanford. The disparate groups now find themselves bound by a common notion: They’ve been cheated, and they want the government to make them whole....

The lobbying initiative “gives new meaning to the word chutzpah,” said James Cox, a professor at Duke University School of Law. “This is just a tax increase. It’s levied on banks but customers end up paying.” Until recently, the two groups were going at it alone, and not winning much support except from lawmakers in their regions.

Shaw’s Stanford group had backing from Richard Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, and other panel Republicans like Bob Corker of Tennessee, David Vitter of Louisiana and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, said Shaw, who also works part-time as a spokeswoman at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

“These are very Christian” people, Shaw said, referring to the Stanford victims. A lot of members were marketed the Stanford securities “at church...”

And Here Come Those Treasury Auctions


The US equity markets are holding on to the rumour-inspired gains from yesterday, as commodities are hit and the longer end of the bonds slump a bit.

"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." US Dollar Charts Still Technically Strong March 8, 2010

CNN Money
Treasurys dip ahead of auction

By Annalyn Censky
March 10, 2010: 12:12 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Treasurys traded lower Wednesday morning ahead of a government auction of $21 billion in 10-year notes.

What prices are doing: In mid-day trading, the benchmark 10-year note fell 10/32 to 99-3/32 and its yield rose to 3.741%. Bond prices and yields move in opposite directions.

What's moving the market: After strong demand in the government's $40 billion auction of 3-year notes Tuesday, analysts expect Wednesday's auction of 10-year notes to be well received, but with slightly less demand. Longer term debt like the 10-year note and 30-year bond traditionally see slightly lower demand in auctions, because of their inherent greater risk.

The auctions include a $13 billion offering in 30-year bonds on Thursday...

Propaganda Campaign Attempts to Mask the Economic Risks and Reality


The propaganda campaign by the US government is trying to mask the fact that the economic recovery plan is failing and that America is rapidly losing confidence in Team Obama.

You cannot have a sustained recovery without changing the underlying conditions that caused the failure in the first place.

In addition to the media blitz dissected by Yves Smith in the essay excerpted below, I have never seen such a load of rubbish being put forward with regard to the markets in US financial assets and commodities, and I have seen quite a bit in the last twenty years. In particular, the campaigns against gold and silver in particular are heavy-handed, obvious, and reaching the point of hysteria.

The shorts are trapped, hopelessly trapped, and unable to deliver on their massive short positions. They are only able to manipulate the price in short term bursts, and continue to dig themselves deeper as the world demand continues to drain them.

Whoever heard of a bubble in which the major money center banks are so perilously short it? A bubble requires a broad participation and belief, and the encouragement of the market makers. And now a statement from an "SEC official" that there is a gold bubble. This, from the very people who allegedly could not see the tech, housing and credit bubbles until they fell on top of them.

And of course there are the funds and the wealthy, who mouth the same party line while lining their portfolios with huge positions and personal holdings.

Various exigencies can compel the big players to make statements swearing gold and silver are no good, no store of value against all the evidence of history. But the fact remains that the US dollar reserve currency regime is falling apart, tumbling like the humpty-dumpty construct that it is. And the status quo is shitting their collective pants about it, and the likely backlash from the public when their deceptions are exposed.

Don't expect the Ancien Régime fiancier to fall easily, quietly, or quickly. But it will change; change is the only inevitability. And we all suspect what will remain standing when the dust settles. All this noise seems more like haggling over a larger quantity for a better price, and a clearer path to the exit.

Naked Capitalism
The Empire Continues to Strike Back: Team Obama Propaganda Campaign Reaches a Fever Pitch

By Yves Smith

I’ve seldom seen so much rubbish written by people who ought to know better in a single day. Many able people have heaped the scorn and incredulity on three articles, one a piece on Rahm Emanuel slotted to run in the Sunday New York Times Magazine, another an artfully packed laudatory piece on Timothy Geithner by John Cassidy in the New Yorker and a more even handed looking one (I stress “looking”) in the Atlantic.

Ed Harrison has skillfully shredded parsed the Geithner pieces . Simon Johnson thrashed the New Yorker story. A key paragraph below:

"The main feature of the plan, of course, was – following the stress tests – to communicate effectively that there was a government guarantee behind every major bank or quasi-bank in the United States. Of course this works in the short-term – investors like such guarantees. But there’s a good reason we usually don’t guarantee all financial institutions – or act happy when other countries do the same. Unconditional bailouts lead to trouble, encouraging reckless risk-taking and undermining responsible governance. You can’t run any form of reasonable market system when some big players hold “get out of bankruptcy free” cards."
Banking expert Chris Whalen was so disturbed by the numerous distortions in the New Yorker piece that he had already fired off a long letter to the editor by the time I pinged him, with these starting paragraphs:
"Jack Cassidy tells us that “Timothy Geithner’s financial plan is working—and making him very unpopular.” Unfortunately this is completely wrong. Cassidy’s comment just illustrates why the New Yorker has fallen into such obscurity, namely because it is more Vanity Fair than its vivacious sibling and unable to perform critical journalism.

In fact, the banking system is continuing to sink under bad loans and even worse securities losses. Telling the public that the banks are “fixed” is irresponsible. Unfortunately this false perception is widespread, including among major media such as CNBC and also with a number of my clients in the hedge fund world."
...Yves here. The reason that people who can discern clearly what is afoot are so deeply disturbed is simple, and all the comments touch on it. The campaign to defend Geithner and Emanuel, both architects of the administration’s finance friendly policies has gone beyond what most people would see as spin into such an aggressive effort to manipulate popular perceptions that it is not a stretch to call it propaganda.

This strategy, of relying on propaganda to mask their true intent, has become inevitable, given the strategic corner the Obama Adminstration has painted itself in. And this campaign has become increasingly desperate as the inconsistency between the Adminsitration’s “product positioning” and observable reality become increasingly evident...

Read the rest of this thoughtful and informative piece and its many associated links and references can be read here.

Lord have mercy on us, for what we have done, and what we ought to have done but did not,
and from what we may yet deserve to reap from our misuse and debasement of your bounty.




09 March 2010

Wall Street Excluded from European Government Bond Sales


The Ugly American is a novel that was published in 1958, and was later made into a movie starring Marlon Brando. It tells the story how America was losing the hearts and minds of the people in Asia after its heroic performance in the Second World War by the predatory business practices and exploitation of US multinationals. The book was a bit of a scandal, coming on the heels of Nixon's visit to South America where he was spat upon by angry mobs.

At the time people talked about the way in which US corporations were alienating the developing world (we called it 'third world' then), and how it would create a generation of political difficulties for the US around the world. This was an initial wake up call to the American public, which was lost and forgotten in the fervor of the Go-Go Sixties. What was good for General Bullmoose was good for the USA. Or so we all thought.

Regrettably, once again US corporations, the Wall Street banks, are busy alienating the world against America's interests through their unethical and shockingly predatory business practices. It will be interesting if Asia and South America pick up this theme of banning the Wall Street banks on ethical considerations from doing certain types of business in their regions.

It would be even more significant if US financial assets were to no longer find a place with foreign investors, based on a perception of their somewhat fraudulent taint from the CDO ratings scandals. Little or no reform has yet occurred. Who will then expect anything to have changed?

The imbalances, flaws and conflicts of interest in the US financial markets are a genuine shame, and may yet cripple the economy once again. And the unwillingness of the reform President to do anything about it is even more shocking still. What is he thinking?

Congressman Alan Grayson (D-Fla) recently said , "There is a growing feeling on the part of Democrats that the president is getting bad advice from people who have sold out to Wall Street."

I think far too many people would agree whole-heartedly with him.


Guardian UK
Europe bars Wall Street banks from government bond sales
By Elena Moya
Monday 8 March 2010 21.36 GMT

European countries are blocking Wall Street banks from lucrative deals to sell government debt worth hundreds of billions of euros in retaliation for their role in the credit crunch.

For the first time in five years, no big US investment bank appears among the top nine sovereign bond bookrunners in Europe, according to Dealogic data compiled for the Guardian. Only Morgan Stanley ranks at number 10.

Goldman Sachs doesn't make the table. Goldman made it to number five last year and in 2006, and number eight in 2007, the data shows. JP Morgan was in the top ten last year and in 2007 and 2006 but doesn't appear this year.

"Governments do not have the confidence that the excessive risk-taking culture of the big Wall Street banks has changed and they still cannot be trusted to put the stability of the financial system before profit," said Arlene McCarthy, vice chair of the European parliament's economic and monetary affairs committee. "It is no surprise therefore that governments are reluctant to do business with banks that have failed to learn the lesson of the crisis. The banks need to acknowledge the mistakes that were made and behave in an ethical way to regain the trust and confidence of governments."

European sovereign bond league tables are now dominated by European banks such as Barclays Capital, Deutsche Bank, and Société Générale, the Dealogic table shows. Their business model is usually seen as more relationship-based, while US investment banks have traditionally been focused on immediate deal-making. (A euphemism for customer face-ripping - Jesse)

Being left out of government bond sales means missing out on one of the top fee-earning opportunities this year, given the relative drought in mergers and acquisitions and stock market flotations. Western European governments need to raise an estimated half a trillion dollars this year to refinance debts and pay for bank bailouts and rising unemployment....

Investment banks insist their business areas are separated by confidentiality walls, but countries have been furious about some of their trades appearing to conflict – either on their own books, or on behalf of clients.

Goldman Sachs said its overall position in the European sovereign bond market had improved this quarter once US dollar denominated deals were included. It said its own data showed it ranked fourth in European sovereign bond sales this year...

"The power of big investment banks was a factor in the banking crisis, and it's up to regulators and customers to stand up to them, and not picking them is one of the ways," Augar said...

The EU is also trying to curb US financial power by creating its own monetary fund – a replica of the Washington-based IMF. The need of a European fund has emerged during the Greek crisis, as European politicians have insisted financial troubles should be resolved at home.

US Equities Showing Signs of an "Exhaustion Top" Amidst Rumours, Hype, and Shenanigans


The US stock market seems to be getting rather tired after what can only be described as a remarkable rally on light volumes and program trading.

The market is trying to rise here, with announcements like the Cisco backbone router for carriers and the AIG unit sales being hyped incessantly on financial media. The hype over the Cisco backbone router today is almost embarrassing. The anchors on Bloomberg keep saying that the router can download entire movies in 4 seconds, which is a lot faster than the 10 minutes it takes today. To anyone who knows anything about how networks are provisioned this is a howler of the first order, to say the least. For the consumer, the network is only as fast as the last mile.

It has also been reported by Adam Johnson on Bloomberg television that J.P. Morgan, a major broker dealer, stopped lending shares in AIG and Citi today "on rumours that the US government might ban short selling in stocks in which it has a financial interest." This squeezed the shorts and helped give an artificial boost to financial stocks over all. The company has since stopped this self-imposed ban on loaning shares and stocks are falling off their highs.

Needless to say, the SEC is unlikely to investigate this, or advise market makers not to start arbitrarily constraining the supply of stock based on market rumours, especially when they might be trading these same stocks for their own proprietary portfolios. They ought not be able to institute ad hoc bans on buying or selling by manipulating the supply.

Perhaps another leg up, after some consolidation, but this market is now very vulnerable to a reversal. The volumes are light on the rallies, and tend to increase quite a bit on the declines. Today the volume was a little better, in a consolidation perhaps, or a simple distribution. .

As we reported last week, the cash levels in the mutual funds are near record lows. Stocks do not typically rally unless there is large scale buying. All well and good, but until selling volumes show up, the market can continue to drift higher, especially with the support of the monetary magicians and the Wall Street wiseguys.



Don't get in front, wait for it. But start getting defensive if you have not done so already.

The Ides of March are on the 15th.

08 March 2010

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.


07 March 2010

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.”