Until about now I have had little opinion of the bonuses banks pay out to the people who make money for them. In fact, with respect to Merrill Lynch, I felt the "retail brokers" should get whatever performance bonuses they deserved as long as the cash was in the bank, if for only the reason they had little to do with the risky undertakings of the firm's high profile traders who gambled with the firms own and borrowed capital and lost miserably.
Now, however, I am inclined to get very pissed off when thinking about not only the bonuses being paid by these financial firms but at the exceptional trading profits being made on the backs of the taxpayer through our direct support of financial firms through TARP and the indirect but just as risky support through the FDIC backed loans (TALF) companies are floating at dramatically subsidized interest rates that taxpayers are ultimate responsible for.
To have had the Fed and Treasury spend and allocate several (one estimate is $12 Trillion) trillion taxpayer dollars to "shore up" what is essentially a pool of financial firms that are technically insolvent and then to see the folks running these firms still with the mindset to rake out as much cash from the system as they can, while they can, is an insult to their profession, shows a complete lack of respect for the trauma they caused not only the global financial system but to the lives of at least a billion people who have been financially crushed by their reckless, unregulated activities over the past 10 years (well the latest 10 years in this case),is a travesty.
If I were in any decision making power, I would gather some economists together and apply "market reality" metrics to each one of these firms. I would invite them to a nice lunch where I would spell out in no uncertain terms, they are insolvent, they are not making any money above the losses still on their books and will not likely to be truly "profitable" for 2-3 years as they work off the dead assets. If they have "profitable" divisions (like Citi owning a trading arm that made a killing) they will make it clear to the folks that work there, they work for a government subsidized failed banking firm and they will not be paid bonuses until the entire firm can show "real" profits overall in the firm.
If this does not work for these folks, then those people should leave the bank or the division split off so those folks can continue to run their little profitable firm with the bank holding a minority stake.
The bottom line is the model of large conglomerate banking enterprise does not work. This was sorted out in 1934 and the reason they do not work is you CANNOT HAVE TAXPAYERS BAILING OUT LARGE UNWIELDY FIRMS JUST BECAUSE ONE COMPONENT OF THE FIRM IS RETAIL BANKING. Retail banking, with its FDIC assurances should NOT be combined with other kinds of investment banking, finance, insurance etc. This is well known.
Just like the Enron disaster, where a few guys get together to take over a large regulated (at the time) firm with stable cash flows they could heavily leverage and turn it into a crazy speculative monster and lead it to bankruptcy, the same folks that run investment banks and other financial gambling oriented firms love to get their hands on retail banks for their stable deposits, fee income and seemingly unlimited access to cheap capital.
This should not be allowed. Period. We need to go back to Glass-Steagall Act and separate the various financial businesses for GOOD!
See latest story on banking bonuses from EU remarks today.
Showing posts with label FDIC backing debt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FDIC backing debt. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Deals Dry Up... No Recovery in Sight
I have done my basic math and based on most of what I have learned all current government attempts to rescue the financial markets will have run their course by around April 2009. The interesting thing about the new Treasury plan is the move from a couple billion dollars of debt market support to a Trillion dollars in debt market support.
Given that in a healthy debt market about $50 billion a month in various consumer debt offerings would be needed, I really don't know how the financial system has avoided complete implosion to this date because this market is virtually non existent at the moment. The caveat in the Trillion dollar debt market plan is this also includes mortgage backed securities leaving much to other areas of consumer debt issuance.
The inquires by various senators holding up loan documents and lines of credit by borrowers in their respective jurisdictions asking banking CEO's why their banks have called loans and refused to extend terms to borrowers who are making payments on time are a clear indication of the stress financial firms are facing to shrink their balance sheets in the face of being unable to gain access to capital.
Interestingly enough this quote from a Marketwatch article shows that of the top 10 debt offerings in 2009 all have been by banks except one.
The article does not go on to show how many of those bank debt offerings were also backed by the FDIC under the Treasury plan announced back in October 2008. Details of this part of the plan are as follows:
As I have mentioned many times before, having the government backing debt virtually unconditionally here for regulated banks they are saying, "We are the government and we have invested directly in banks and we do not want to loose our investment so we are allowing the banks to borrow money from the market with our backing."
This is all good and well if you seriously think the government should become the debt market but think of what has happened. The debt markets have further seized up for any institution not backed by the government. I mean, "investors" are looking out the window and seeing a falling economy and thinking, "If I am going to buy debt, why should I buy anything not backed by the government?"
In fact all this government meddling in the debt markets is getting way out of hand. I believe for all the "good" intentions of the Fed and Treasury to "support" a non existent market, they are creating serious traditional economic imbalances that will delay a recovery in the market, exaggerate the need for additional capital support by financial institutions and make it virtually impossible for non-financial institutions to borrow money on acceptable terms.
As for that $1 Trillion in debt support, it may buy us another 6 months. Will the market recover by then? Time will tell. I said many times early in this crises, the government does NOT have the resources to forestall this crises and frankly the lax regulation and poor oversight of the financial markets since laws created in the 1930's were overturned over the last decade leaves little to no options to stop the bleeding in our economy. The beast had become to large and fat to handle.
Given that in a healthy debt market about $50 billion a month in various consumer debt offerings would be needed, I really don't know how the financial system has avoided complete implosion to this date because this market is virtually non existent at the moment. The caveat in the Trillion dollar debt market plan is this also includes mortgage backed securities leaving much to other areas of consumer debt issuance.
The inquires by various senators holding up loan documents and lines of credit by borrowers in their respective jurisdictions asking banking CEO's why their banks have called loans and refused to extend terms to borrowers who are making payments on time are a clear indication of the stress financial firms are facing to shrink their balance sheets in the face of being unable to gain access to capital.
Interestingly enough this quote from a Marketwatch article shows that of the top 10 debt offerings in 2009 all have been by banks except one.
If banks aren't lending, you can bet that companies will be turning to the bond market. They are, but they're not exactly driving the market's 10% increase so far this year. Of the top 10 debt deals this year only one, a $10 billion offering by General Electric Co. GE, was not issued by a bank, the government or a government-backed entity such as Fannie Mae FNM.
The article does not go on to show how many of those bank debt offerings were also backed by the FDIC under the Treasury plan announced back in October 2008. Details of this part of the plan are as follows:
(Obtained from nice Reuters Treasury plan article Here)
FDIC GUARANTEE PLAN
* The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the government agency which traditionally guarantees deposits at banks, will guarantee senior unsecured debt issued by U.S-regulated banks, thrifts and other depository institutions issued before June 30, 2009, including promissory notes, commercial paper, inter-bank funding and any unsecured portion of secured debt. This must not exceed 125 percent of debt outstanding on Sept. 30, 2008.
* This debt would be full protected in the event that the issuing institution subsequently fails, or its holding company files for bankruptcy. Coverage would be limited until June 30, 2012, even if the debt's maturity exceeds that date.
* The FDIC will guarantee all funds in non-interest-bearing transaction deposit accounts held by FDIC-insured banks until December 31, 2009. These are mainly payment processing accounts, such as payroll accounts used by businesses.
* Fees for these guarantees would not rely on taxpayer funding. They would be paid by participating banks that would pay a 75 basis-point fee to protect their new debt issues and a 10 basis-point surcharge for deposits not otherwise covered by the existing deposit insurance limit of $250,000.
All FDIC-insured institutions will be covered under the program for the first 30 days without any costs. After this initial period, banks not wishing to continue their participation will have to opt out or be assessed for future guarantees.
As I have mentioned many times before, having the government backing debt virtually unconditionally here for regulated banks they are saying, "We are the government and we have invested directly in banks and we do not want to loose our investment so we are allowing the banks to borrow money from the market with our backing."
This is all good and well if you seriously think the government should become the debt market but think of what has happened. The debt markets have further seized up for any institution not backed by the government. I mean, "investors" are looking out the window and seeing a falling economy and thinking, "If I am going to buy debt, why should I buy anything not backed by the government?"
In fact all this government meddling in the debt markets is getting way out of hand. I believe for all the "good" intentions of the Fed and Treasury to "support" a non existent market, they are creating serious traditional economic imbalances that will delay a recovery in the market, exaggerate the need for additional capital support by financial institutions and make it virtually impossible for non-financial institutions to borrow money on acceptable terms.
As for that $1 Trillion in debt support, it may buy us another 6 months. Will the market recover by then? Time will tell. I said many times early in this crises, the government does NOT have the resources to forestall this crises and frankly the lax regulation and poor oversight of the financial markets since laws created in the 1930's were overturned over the last decade leaves little to no options to stop the bleeding in our economy. The beast had become to large and fat to handle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)