Euro news


[Skip to the end]

(an email exchange)

   
>   On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Karim wrote:
>   
>   BN 11:02 Lenihan Says Irish Economy to Contract Next Year by 0.75%
>   
>   BN 11:02 Ireland’s 1% Levy will apply to all incomes
>   
>   BN 11:01 Ireland’s 2% Income Levy will apply over 100,000 Euros
>   
>   Ireland raising income taxes to pay for bank bailouts; also
>   raising VAT and fuel taxes.
>   
>   If others do same, will pressure ECB to cut rates further to offset economic impact.
>   

Yes, but rate cuts won’t offset fiscal drag.

Instead, the budget deficit will rise due to falling revenues and rising transfer payments, and Ireland’s own credit rating and guarantee of bank deposits will lose credibility.


[top]

Re: Fed to lend to CBs in unlimited quantities


[Skip to the end]

(email exchange)

>   
>   On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Craig wrote:
>   
>   Since nobody understand the local currency / foreign currency distinction and
>   since these obligations are part of the normal financial commerce of these
>   countries, is it possible that these loans will allow the markets to normalize,
>   

Yes.

>   
>   Allow the various governmental bodies to remove the guarantees/lending and
>   never realize this risk existed?
>   

Probably not.

>   
>   Everybody was perfectly happy with these private sector risks before the
>   credit markets seized up. Other than the sudden realization of everything
>   you’ve pointed out, what factors will put this over the edge?
>   
>   All this boils down to this question: Does this necessarily have to end badly?
>   

Looks that way to me.

>   
>   Or can the participants use this as a life rope to deleverage successfully,
>   ending the need for the life rope?
>   

I think the incentives are now in place for massive fraud.

Eurozone banks will find it hard to resist the demand for USD loans to their ‘friends’ in finance and industry, that will be based on inflated appraisals, inflated income statements, etc.

Just like the subprime issue was here.

It’s open season and my guess is the Fed is about to be in shock at the size of the first auction.


[top]

Germany to insure all bank deposits?


[Skip to the end]

(an email exchange)

Right,

If everyone in Germany tries to take their funds out of the banks they won’t get it, with or without the backing of the German government.

German government insurance can buy them some time, maybe even enough time to make it through if aggregate demand wasn’t falling off so fast.

In the U.S., U.K., Japan and any nation with its own currency and fiscal authority behind the deposit insurance you can get all the funds you want on demand.


>   Finally, the Germans seem to get it. This might be the best news of the
>   weekend. But they need to take the final step. Problem is there
>   is no EU treasury or debt union to back up the single currency.
>   The ECB is not allowed to launch bail-outs by EU law.

>   Each country must save its own skin, yet none has full control of
>   the policy instruments. How do they change this in a hurry?

With great difficulty!

Germany draws up contingency plans for state rescue of banks

By Bertrand Benoit

The German government was last night drawing up a multi-billion euro contingency plan to shore up its banking system, which could see the state guarantee interbank lending in the country and inject capital in its largest banks.

The contingency draft, closely modelled on the British initiative announced this week, marks a dramatic political U-turn for Europe’s largest economy after Angela Merkel, chancellor, and Peer Steinbrück, finance minister, both ruled out a sector-wide state rescue for banks this week.

A senior government official said Ms Merkel and Mr Steinbrück would decide on Sunday which of the measures to implement after consultation with their European partners. Once a political decision was made, he said, the plan could be implemented in the following days.

“We are considering all the options at present to the exception of a massive state acquisition of toxic assets,” the official said. “Whatever we do will be done in close co-operation with our G7 and European partners.”

France announced last night that it was planning an emergency European Union summit tomorrow.

Speaking in Washington ahead of a meeting of Group of Seven finance ministers, Mr Steinbrück said the time had now come for “a systemic solution . . . I am convinced that case-by-case solutions are no longer helping. They are now exhausted.”

The official said Ms Merkel was in daily contact with Nicolas Sarkozy, French president, suggesting that the plan, if approved, could be launched as a joint initiative.

Ulrich Wilhelm, the government spokesman, said: “It is the duty of the federal government to be prepared and to review all options . . . As of now, no political decision has been made.”

Under the draft, Germany could issue a state guarantee for interbank lending worth more than €100bn and provide direct lending to the banking sector. Berlin is also contemplating offering several dozen billion euros of capital to the banks in exchange for equity and may take entire ownership of some institutions.

As an additional option, the government is considering extending the blanket guarantee it issued last Sunday for account deposits to money market funds, which have experienced a steep outflow of savings lately. Fund managers have had to divest considerable quantities of assets to cover the withdrawals.

Bankers said the interbank lending market in Germany had reached near-gridlock.


[top]

Re: FDIC Emergency Idea

(email exchange)

Yes!

“There is a way to get money flowing through the banking system and financial markets almost instantaneously. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has the authority to declare an emergency in the financial markets if the secretary of the treasury requests it. If an emergency is declared, the FDIC could announce that until the crisis abates, all depositors and other general creditors will be protected if an FDIC-insured bank fails.”

This presumably can include Fed deposits at member banks, which opens the door for Fed unsecured lending which is currently illegal.

Now the trick is to get the word to the right people at Treasury!

Along with, of course, a payroll tax holiday to sustain aggregate demand.

Warren

>   
>   On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jeff wrote:
>   

We need to get it right

by William M. Isaac

Political leaders told us last week that if the Wall Street bailout bill did not pass, the stock market would drop by 1,000 points and millions of people would lose their homes, jobs and credit cards.

Congress passed the bill, yet the markets have gotten worse.

I believe the problem is that the bailout package does not deal with any of the four fundamental issues that must be addressed immediately: fear, bank capital, fiscal stimulus and help for homeowners.

Fear: The financial markets are frozen throughout the world. Banks will not lend to other banks and, to the extent they do, the cost is exorbitant. There is a lot of liquidity but it is being hoarded.

Which banks will fail and how will their creditors be treated? Will the government protect just the insured depositors or will it protect the uninsured depositors, bond holders, and other general creditors? The government has handled these claims in different ways in the failures to date, so there is considerable anxiety in the markets.

There is a way to get money flowing through the banking system and financial markets almost instantaneously. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has the authority to declare an emergency in the financial markets if the secretary of the treasury requests it. If an emergency is declared, the FDIC could announce that until the crisis abates, all depositors and other general creditors will be protected if an FDIC-insured bank fails.
What would this cost taxpayers? In my view, nothing — indeed, it should save taxpayers a lot. It will get the financial markets working, help put the economy back on track and reduce the bank failure rate.

We already have an implicit guarantee in place for the largest banks, which control the bulk of our banking assets. Making the guarantee official during this crisis and extending it to the rest of the banks is essential and reasonable.

As I write this article, Ireland has guaranteed its banking system and Denmark and several other European countries appear headed in that direction. If enough follow, the U.S. will have no choice but to act.

Bank capital: The Securities and Exchange Commission adopted fair value accounting in the 1990s. This rule required financial institutions to mark their securities to market. I have argued against fair value accounting for more than two decades because I know that we could not have contained the severe banking problems of the 1980s if we had to deal with fair value accounting rules.

A bad idea became highly destructive when the SEC decided to continue fair value accounting after the market for mortgage securities evaporated last year. In the absence of a market, the SEC forced banks to mark these assets to an arbitrary index.

Mortgage securities were marked to a fraction of their true economic value, which destroyed $500 billion of capital in our financial system. Since banks lend about $10 for each dollar of capital, the SEC’s rule diminished bank lending capacity by $5 trillion. Is it any wonder we have a severe credit contraction?

Even now, the SEC continues to fiddle while the financial system and the economy burn. The SEC needs to suspend fair value accounting — act now, study it later. This will begin the process of restoring bank capital so banks can start lending again. Instead of the Treasury and Federal Reserve taking over our lending markets, we need to help our private banks do the job.

Another readily available tool to restore bank capital is one that the FDIC used in the banking crisis of the 1980s to give capital-short, but otherwise viable, banks injections of capital to help them get through difficult economic times. The program was a big help in the FDIC’s resolution of the $100 billion market insolvency in the savings bank industry at a total cost of less than $2 billion. A precursor of the 1980s program was the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, created to provide capital to banks during Great Depression.

The FDIC should resurrect this program immediately. It will limit the failures of community banks and put them back into the lending business more quickly.

Fiscal stimulus and help for homeowners: The bailout bill will not solve our banking crisis because it is not attacking the right problems. Instead, we should direct a good portion of the bailout money to providing permanent stimulus to the economy and to helping families who are in danger of losing their homes.

I believe Congress should get off the campaign trail and get back to Washington to get the bill right this time. The world is looking to us for leadership.

Re: NZ gets your payroll tax holiday…

(email exchange)

Yes, looks like they are on the right track with what looks like a substantial fiscal package.

>   
>   On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Steve wrote:
>   
>   W
>   
>   Not quite the same wording. But the same idea. (skip to
>   highlighted line.
>   
>   Steve
>   

Report outlines plan to save NZ economy

October 10, 2008 – 7:46AM

The current global financial crisis is one of the most serious events the New Zealand economy has faced for decades, according to a new report.

The draft report, released Friday by the New Zealand Institute and NZX, said New Zealand’s response to the crisis needed to be “deliberate, serious and proportionate”.

“The response must be about more than battering down the hatches … We should see this as an opportunity to position the economy for the longer term, as well as manage the risks.”

The report suggested provisional tax payments be deferred for 24 months, capital investment be “prioritised and incentivised”, a two-year income cap tax at 20 per cent for New Zealanders returning home, firms be attracted to New Zealand with two years of no company tax and the Research and Development tax credit be retained.

In the longer term the report said a company should be created to manage commercial state owned enterprises, a taxpayer savings vehicle be created to manage financial assets, KiwiSaver be made compulsory and the biases in the tax code that promotes housing speculation be removed.

New Zealand’s response to past crises were the “insular” policies of Think Big and protectionism, the report said.

“Our lack of appropriate response then led us to the economic brink a decade later. We now face the same risk.

“We believe there is little we can do about Northern Hemisphere banks, there is a lot we can do to determine how well the New Zealand economy copes with permanent changes to global credit markets and a global economic slowdown.”

Time to go unconventional?


[Skip to the end]

1. Fed needs to lend unsecured to any member bank in unlimited quantities and set term as well as ff borrowing rates.

This will normalize bank liquidity, and should have been done as soon as we went off the gold standard domestically in 1934(?).

To keep solvency accounting with FDIC the FDIC can insure all fed deposits at member banks.

This does not ‘create money’ or ‘inflation’ or have any macro economic effect beyond normalizing liquidity.

2. Congress needs to declare a ‘payroll tax holiday’ and drop the regressive social security and medicare deduction rates to 0% to restore demand from the bottom up.

This increases take home pay and cuts costs for business some, allowing both the means to make their payments to the financial sector and support it via reduced delinquency and rising credit quality.

It will also support growth and employment as the higher wages are also spent on real goods and services.

As this happens banks will very quickly resume lending to corps either directly or via commercial paper.

If people want to work and produce and not spend their income (for any reason) the government can either ‘spend it for them’ or increase their income via tax cuts until they spend sufficiently.

And don’t forget the need for an energy policy to prevent any recovery from merely driving up gasoline prices.

>   
>   
>   On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Davidson, Paul
>    wrote:
>   
>   Good comment — but what is the most unconventional thing
>   the FED can do? I think by now the FED can only prevent
>   things from getting exceedingly bad– but bad it will get–
>   What we need now is fast fiscal policy– but until a new
>   administration comes in, I do not see that happening.
>   
>   Anyone got something in there head that can save the world?
>   
>   By the way did you see Bill Black’s wonderful performance in
>   the Obama Keating 5 video released yesterday?

>   
>   Sent: Tue 10/7/2008 12:10 AM
>   
>   The U.S. economic data began to show signs of an outright
>   cumulative contraction before the September/October credit
>   crisis.
>   
>   The September/October events are a massive shock to the
>   system. The only thing I can compare it to is the combination
>   of a 20% Fed funds rate and a call for curbs on credit card use
>   in late winter 1980. In the months that followed aggregate
>   demand fell faster than at any time in the post war period.
>   
>   I believe the Fed realizes all of this.
>   
>   Bernanke realizes that if income falls the financial crisis, already
>   almost unimaginably severe, will also get much worse.
>   Fed Chairman Bernanke went before Congress and said that if
>   the Paulson Bailout Bill was not passed and the stock market
>   fell, there would be economic Armageddon. The Bailout bill has
>   passed. The stock market has fallen. Credit spreads have
>   widened. Based on Bernanke’s own public statements, he
>   should be thinking we are entering economic Armageddon. I
>   believe there is a raging hedge fund crisis, knowledge of which
>   is being suppressed. There are other unrecognized crises. I
>   think the Fed is aware of all of this.
>   
>   Meanwhile, the Fed has not changed its policy rate. But in
>   fact, Fed funds have been trading below the policy rate

>   target. Also, the Fed is expanding its balance sheet in a
>   spectacular way, and it has announced this morning that it will
>   expand it much further with newer, larger auctions.
>   
>   It would seem that Rome is burning and the Fed is fiddling. It
>   is my assessment that the Fed sees more of the burning than
>   we do. It realizes that all the conventional policy responses do
>   not fit the current monstrous circumstances. It is being held
>   back because it must come up with a more dramatic policy
>   response that we can conjure out of the precedents from the
>   past.
>   
>   Forget coordinated rate cuts. If it happens it will be cosmetic.
>   Japan has almost no interest rate to cut. The ECB will, but
>   Europe will prefer to resort to government guarantees of bank
>   deposits and will not hesitate to quasi nationalize banks.
>   
>   The Fed has no more time to stay its hand. Something will have
>   to be done very shortly.
>   
>   Based on Bernanke’s writings of the past several years, I would
>   expect a shocking policy change from the Fed which will
>   probably result in an almost unimaginable increase in its balance
>   sheet.


[top]

Payrolls


[Skip to the end]

From Karim:

Broad-based weakness.

  • Payrolls -159k, net revisions +4k.
  • Unemployment rate rises from 6.055% to 6.125%.
  • Avg hourly earnings up 0.2%.
  • The shocker was hours worked down 0.5% and down 2% at annualized rate in Q3.
  • Labor income = payrolls X average hourly earnings X hours worked.
  • Hours data implies negative GDP in Q3 and very weak handoff to Q4, where some forecasts are already in -2% to -3% area for real GDP.
  • Diffusion Index down from 44.7 to 38.1.
  • Manufacturing -51k
  • Retail -40k
  • Construction -35k
  • Finance -17k
  • Temp Services -24k
  • Education +25k
  • Government +9k

BLS stated weather did not have ‘substantial’ effect on number.


[top]

Ominous warnings from Trichet


[Skip to the end]

(email exchange)

He gets it!

>   
>   On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Karim wrote:
>   
>   Trichet says solvency is an issue
>   for governments.

>   

Yes!

>   
>   Trichet: West passing through
>   most serious time since WWII.

>   

The largest systemic risk is in the eurozone.

>   
>   Trichet: We must do everything
>   to preserve unity in Europe.

>   

Good luck to them!


[top]

Unicredito


[Skip to the end]

(email exchange)

Anyone hearing about issues at Unibank in Italy?

>   
>   On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Kevin wrote:
>   
>   If you mean Unicredito (UCG IM), yesterday there was talk they were to call an
>   EGM, with a rumor that the CEO Profumo was to resign and talk the bank was
>   suffering from liquidity issues. They subsequently announced some real estate
>   sales improving their tier 1 capital ratio. At the same time Italy suspended
>   short sales. Today I see they are looking to raise euro 2.3bn, through the
>   sales senior bonds, aimed at retail investors.
>   
>   Having been regarded as one of Europes strongest banks, market has been
>   concerned that Profumo has persistently claimed they have no balance sheet
>   problems, despite worsening financial environment.
>   
>   Senior cds is trading at 140bp (5yr), it was 80/90 on sept 25th.
>   
>   Kevin

Thanks, heard they are very big and having issues.

US market action seems to be spreading to the eurozone where it can do a lot more damage than it’s doing here.


[top]

Re: Mosler plan, short version


[Skip to the end]

>   
>   Warren,
>   I like adding the tax holiday.
>   

Thanks, we were all pushing that as a better alternative than the Bush tax cut plan 5 or so years ago.

While not as constructive as, for example, an infrastructure project, and likely to drive up energy consumption, it will get immediate results, ‘cure’ the financial crisis (people will better afford their mortgage payments) and the ‘recession,’ and is far better than what they are proposing which does little or nothing.

>   
>   Why do you want the Fed to establish 1 month, 2 month, and 3 month rates?
>   

To eliminate interbank markets domestically at least out that far. Six months would be even better, and 30 years even better, but at some point it gets beyond political understanding, and most of the benefit comes from the very front of the curve where most of the interbank lending takes place, or tries to!


[top]