Log in

View Full Version : Ripple effect of "Too Big To Fail" - TARP revisited


bandycpa
01-31-2010, 10:45
SIGTARP Neil Barofsky hits it on the head. Once the band-aid falls off, the wound will remain.


Bandy

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/31/watchdog-bailouts-created-risk/

- FOXNews.com

- January 31, 2010
Watchdog: Bank Bailouts Created More Risk in System

The problems that led to the last financial crisis have not yet been addressed, and in some cases have grown worse, says Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the trouble asset relief program, or TARP. The quarterly report to Congress was released Sunday.

The government's bailout of financial institutions deemed "too big to fail" has created a risk that the United States could face a worse fiscal meltdown in the future, an independent watchdog assigned to review the program told Congress on Sunday.

The Troubled Assets Relief Program, known as TARP, has not addressed the problems that led to the last crisis and in some case those problems have festered and are a bigger threat than before, warned Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general at the Treasury Department.

"Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car," Barofsky wrote.

Barofsky wrote the $700 billion financial bailout has encouraged more risk-taking because bank executives, who are still receiving massive bonuses, figure the government will come to the rescue the next time they steer their ships nearly aground.

"The market mentality now seems fixed that the U.S. government will continue to step in and bail out giant financial institutions," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. "The IG's findings confirm my decision to oppose releasing $350 billion in TARP funds last year and my recent vote to terminate the program altogether."

"The SIGTARP's report is just another reminder of how Congress and the administration have ignored the role that politics and government played in causing the housing crisis and the economic collapse while pursing other regulatory reforms will not fix the underlying problem," said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the ranking member on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The inspector general's report details stonewalling by the Treasury Department over a recommendation that walls be built between managers of the public-private investment program, which uses taxpayer cash to buy bad assets, and employees of the fund management companies which sell the toxic assets.

Barofsky's report outlined 77 cases of possible criminal and civil fraud, including crimes of tax evasion, insider trading, mortgage lending and payment collection, false statements and public corruption.

One case concerns apparent self-dealing by one of the private fund managers Treasury picked to buy bad assets from banks at discounted prices. A portfolio manager at the firm apparently sold a bond out of a private fund, then repurchased it at a higher price for a government-backed fund.

A rating agency had just downgraded the bond, so it likely was worth less, not more, when the government fund bought it. The company is not being named pending the outcome of Barofsky's investigation.

Treasury said it welcomed Barofsky's oversight but resisted the call to erect new barriers against conflicts of interest. The new rules "would be detrimental to the program," Treasury spokeswoman Meg Reilly said in a statement. The existing compliance rules "are a rigorous and effective method of protecting taxpayers," she said.

"As the report says, 'for various reasons, Treasury has decided that requiring such walls 'is simply not practical in the context of PPIP,' and has refused to adopt this recommendation. It is disappointing but not unsurprising that the Treasury Department under the leadership of Secretary (Tim) Geithner is once again stonewalling transparency," Issa said.

"Frankly, just because it may be inconvenient is not a good enough excuse to justify leaving taxpayer dollars vulnerable to manipulation and fraud," he continued.

Much of Barofsky's report focused on the government's growing role in the housing market, which he said has increased the risk of another housing bubble.

Over the past year, the federal government has spent hundreds of billions propping up the housing market. About 90 percent of home loans are backed by government controlled entities, mainly Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration.

The Federal Reserve is spending $1.25 trillion to hold down mortgage rates, and millions of homeowners have refinanced at lower rates.

"The government has stepped in where the private players have gone away," Barofsky said in an interview. "If we take government resources and replace that market without addressing the serious (underlying) concerns, there really is a risk of" artificially pushing up home prices in the coming years.

The report warned that these supports mean the government "has done more than simply support the mortgage market, in many ways it has become the mortgage market, with the taxpayer shouldering the risk that had once been borne by the private investor."

Barofsky's report echoed concerns raised by housing experts in recent months, as home sales and prices rebounded. They warn that the primary reason for the turnaround last year has been billions of dollars in federal spending to lower mortgage rates and prop up demand.

Once that spigot of cash is turned off, they caution, the market will be vulnerable to a dramatic turn for the worse. Daniel Alpert, managing partner of investment bank Westwood Capital, wrote in a report that national home prices are bound to fall 8 to 10 percent below the lows of last spring.

"The lion's share of the remaining decline will occur in markets that saw sizable bubbles but have not yet retrenched," he wrote.

Officials from the Obama administration counter that massive federal intervention has helped the housing market stabilize and prevented more dire consequences.

Barofsky's report also disclosed that, while the Obama administration has pledged to spend $75 billion to prevent foreclosures, only a tiny fraction -- just over $15 million -- has been spent so far. Under the Making Home Affordable program, only about 66,500 borrowers, or 7 percent of those who signed up, had completed the process as of December.

He said the key to preventing future crises is to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, create and improve loan underwriting and supervision of banks. He stopped short of endorsing specific proposals for overhauling financial regulation, but said many of the proposals would go far to improving the system.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

nmap
01-31-2010, 11:46
Nice article - thank you.

I begin to think Europe - particularly Greece - will introduce the next act in this ongoing tragicomic play.

bandycpa
01-31-2010, 12:39
nmap,

What do you see as Europe / Greece's reaction to this?



Bandy

nmap
01-31-2010, 15:16
nmap,

What do you see as Europe / Greece's reaction to this?
Bandy

It's not so much their reaction as it is the consequences of the world's reaction to the way Europe is handling the Greek sovereign debt issue.

First, here's a chart of the U.S. Dollar. Look how strong it has been of late. USD Link (http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$USD&p=D&b=5&g=0&id=p36586152006&a=177858873)

So - why is the dollar strong? Here's an excerpt from the WSJ:

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--The dollar recovered most of its earlier losses against the euro early Thursday in New York amid renewed concerns over sovereign debt in the euro zone

A surge in the cost of insuring Greek bonds against default caused the euro to miss out on a rally in other higher-yielding currencies, which had gained overnight as global equities traded higher after the Federal Reserve's rate-setting meeting. The shift in investor mood pushed the euro lower from overnight levels, dipping to $1.3930, the lowest since July 14, just before trading in New York got underway.

"There's still an awful lot of concern about sovereign debt," said Michael Hewson, a currency analyst at CMC Markets in London. "At the moment the focus is on Greece, but (the market) is also looking at the German and the Portuguese spreads now."

WSJ Link (http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100128-710153.html?mod=rss_Currencies)

My interpretation is that investors everywhere are getting more and more concerned (fearful) about the safety of their money. To repeat an ancient cliché, they are more worried about the return of their money than the return on their money.

This suggests to me that the U.S. policy of building debt in order to bail out corporations - as well as state and local governments, the job market, and so forth - risks a loss of confidence.

Now, keep in mind that since Clinton, U.S. policy has been to keep the maturity of our own debt short and to roll the debt into new T-Bill issues. That's great as long as confidence is sustained - because it keeps interest rates low. On a debt of $14 trillion, 1% interest represents $140 billion. Unfortunately, should that confidence I mentioned earlier ever fail, the consequences are rapid and profound.

How bad? In Mauldin's newsletter, available HERE (http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/pdf/mwo012910.pdf), he discusses a new book - This Time is Different, by Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. (I have it on order from the library).

From the book, via the newsletter, a quote:

"Perhaps more than anything else, failure to recognize the precariousness and fickleness of confidence-especially in cases in which large short-term debts need to be rolled over continuously-is the key factor that gives rise to the this-time-is-different syndrome. Highly indebted governments, banks, or corporations can seem to be merrily rolling along for an extended period, when bang!-confidence collapses, lenders disappear, and a crisis hits.

Keep in mind, if we cannot roll the debt, we must either cut spending in every category - including Social Security, Medicare, and the military budget, raise taxes to cover the difference, or some combination thereof. By how much? About 40%. To get this number, I went to table 1-3 on page 8 of "THE BUDGET AND ECONOMIC OUTLOOK: FISCAL YEARS 2010 TO 2020", available HERE (http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/01-26-Outlook.pdf) as a PDF from the Congressional Budget Office.

In all fairness, they project that economic growth will cut the annual deficit, such that we would only need to cut spending by 15% or so. I question their conclusion.

Boiling this down, I think that debt problems in Greece and Europe could draw attention to our own problem and lead to a crisis for the U.S. MOO, YMMV.

bandycpa
01-31-2010, 16:39
Thanks for the response, and the links. Very interesting (and eye-opening) reading.

I did a little more reading on the Greek debt problem (here's a link to an article from the Telegraph that I drew my response information from...http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/6630117/Greece-tests-the-limit-of-sovereign-debt-as-it-grinds-towards-slump.html). I thought it was just a paper problem (kind of like how I see ours being right now...spending more than you have and then accumulating debt that most are not aware of in our day-to-day life). However, it has resulted in workers clashing with the police and government workers revolting over pay freezes. Very real physical consequences are occurring, and will only get worse unless the EU transfers more money to Greece. Of course, the EU is not as confident as they once were about extending more money.

And, it also looks like Greece didn't do what they said they would originally do with the money from the EU. Rather than pay down their deficit, they kept or increased their deficit during the time they were borrowing money from the EU. Greek politicians ran on the promises of increasing spending rather than reducing it. The Greek banks insist their liquidity is sure, and that they are in great shape. In the meantime, Greece's deficit as it relates to GDP is about 5 percent (very similar to where we are now). The more I look at this, the more we have in common with their situation. I'm a lot more worried now than I was when I started this thread.

All in all, it looks like Greece is on the same road we are. They are just a few mile markers closer to some very lean times than we are right now.

As always nmap, thanks for the brain food, and for the enlightenment.


Bandy

bandycpa
01-31-2010, 17:53
Talk about timely. The projected deficit for year ended Sep 30, 2010 is $1.6 trillion dollars...which is projected to be about 5 percent of GDP. And China is getting more nervous about our Treasuries.


Bandy

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60U1PZ20100131

White House to paint grim fiscal picture
6:36pm EST

By Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House will predict a record budget deficit in the current fiscal year and more big shortfalls for the next decade in its upcoming budget proposal, a congressional source told Reuters on Sunday.

In its budget proposal to be released on Monday, the White House predicts a record $1.6 trillion budget deficit for the fiscal year that ends September 30, the Capitol Hill source said.

According to the estimate, deficits will narrow to $700 billion by fiscal 2013 before gradually rising back to $1.0 trillion by the end of the decade, the source said.

President Barack Obama will seek to strike a balance between reducing the deficit over the long term and stimulating the economy in the short term to ease the pain of double-digit unemployment.

Criticized by Republicans as a big spender, Obama used his State of the Union address last week to tell Americans he would dig the country out of a "massive fiscal hole."

That hole is even deeper than previously believed, according to the estimate by the White House's Office of Management and Budget.

The estimate for the current fiscal year is significantly higher than the $1.35 trillion figure forecast by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office last week.

Despite the difference, both estimates indicate that the deficit will continue to hover at a level not seen since World War Two, when measured as a percentage of the economy. Last year the government posted a $1.4 trillion deficit.

THREE-YEAR FREEZE WON'T BE ENOUGH

In his budget, Obama will propose a three-year freeze on some domestic programs to save $20 billion next year and $250 billion over the coming decade.

But that will not be enough to get deficits down permanently to the 3 percent of gross domestic product that most economists consider sustainable.

Deficits are projected to fall as the economy recovers, but they will still average roughly 4.5 percent of GDP over the coming decade, according to the estimate.

Deficits are expected to rise again toward the end of the decade due to the increasing cost of retirement and healthcare programs as the "baby boom" generation retires.

Obama has warned that the burgeoning U.S. debt could unnerve U.S. financial markets, driving up borrowing costs and putting future economic growth at risk.

China, the biggest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries, has urged the United States to get its fiscal house in order.

The grim forecast could help build support for a bipartisan commission proposed by the White House that would recommend ways to address long-term budget problems.

Obama and his fellow Democrats face a growing voter backlash for the aggressive spending measures they have taken to stimulate the economy.

But Democrats point out that most of the fiscal mess has been inherited from the previous administration of Republican George W. Bush, who cut taxes and created an expensive prescription drug-benefit while pursuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The recession, which began in December 2007 and ended last year, also worsened the fiscal picture by depressing government revenues while forcing up spending on unemployment benefits and other safety-net programs.

incarcerated
01-31-2010, 22:01
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House will predict a record budget deficit in the current fiscal year and more big shortfalls for the next decade in its upcoming budget proposal, a congressional source told Reuters on Sunday.



Will Rahm Emanuel see this as an achievement?


(No, no pink text.)


"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."
--Rahm Emanuel
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/rahmemanue409199.html

bandycpa
02-04-2010, 07:56
Will Rahm Emanuel see this as an achievement?


(No, no pink text.)


"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."
--Rahm Emanuel
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/rahmemanue409199.html

He may point to it and say "look where we came from, and what we did to fix it".

Of course, after seeing the Reuters "Backdoor Taxes To Hit Middle Class" article that was pulled earlier in the week, we got a glimpse of how they're going to pay for it. If President Obama has his way, the tax code is going to go back to pre-2001 rates when Congress allows the 2001 provisions set to expire at the end of this year to do just that. If that happens, the top rate goes back to 39.6%, the 10% tax bracket disappears, long-term capital gain rates will go from 15% to 20%, and the AMT patches will disappear (not to mention other deductions that will either go back to prior year limits or disappear altogether).


Bandy