LyrArc Article Gist
The Europeans led by France and Germany demand stricter regulation and a financial regulatory system that oversees the entire financial system, and oversees all the larger countries. The US in contrast wants to see a lighter regulatory system, and lighter regulation of parts of the financial system like hedge funds. For the USA where the crisis originated, the emphasis is on larger stimulus spending. For the Europeans which have a larger safety net that they would like to see considered as part of their stimulus- and their social arrangement such as reduced hours in Germany to avoid layoffs, and the presence of a large public sector in France that is about 52% of GDP- the situation as they see it does not require breaking the EU's committment to control large deficits. The cultural and historical roots are also different. Germany was hit by hyperinflation in the period between the two wars, and there is thought there that this helped the rise of demagogic leaders and the collapse of democracy there. At that time the issue was war reparations that Germany found difficult to absorb in an economy devastated by the first war, which strained German finances. France and Germany also have no foreclosure crisis, and car sales and consumer spending are not in the deep decline that is seen in the USA. In fact car sales have increased in the two countries with the refunds for scrapping old vehicles, with no such plan in place in the USA. Making there is a credible position on the European side. Germany does see itself hit by the collapse in international trade. Germany and France face the prospect of helping their banking systems deal with the large bad loan situation facing them in Eastern Europe. At the same time Germany and France want to save some firepower for coming to the aid of key parts of the European community like Spain, Greece, and Ireland, which are facing a worsening crisis. In short both sides have credible positions, and some form of accomodation as events unfold may be a better desired outcome than some unified outcome. And little has been said of the position of the other countries in the G20, the emerging countries like Brazil, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, Argentina and others, and the position of the World Bank speaking for the poorest countries. These countries may favor stronger stimulus, and would favor the stricter regulation and supervision of global financial systems favored by the Europeans. This is because they may rightly feel that the messups in the global financial system have stolen their chance, at just the point where they were turning the corner in their efforts at bringing better standards of living to their peoples....

LyrArc Article Gist
China's domestic debt has surged to levels that precede a crisis, to 216% of GDP and heading for 271% by 2017 according to Fitch Ratings. As a result president Jinping has taken over control of economic policy and controlling debt, especially local government debt, is now a top priority for 2014. Jinping will head the "leading group" for overall top down reforms, reflecting the new urgency. Local government debt went up 67% from 10.7 trillion yuan to 17.9 trillion yuan ($2.95 trillion) in just 3 years from 2010 to 2013, according to the National Audit Office. About half of this debt is due by the end of 2014, according to Standard Chartered Bank economist Stephen Green. Another risk is that shadow banking with interest rates of 10% are now about 11% of new lending. The option adopted by the government to use central government funds and regulation to restrict lending could make local governments turn increasingly to the shadow bank lenders (trust companies, and informal lenders) making things worse. The other option of tackling it aggressively by letting some companies default has the risk of other lenders raising rates on loans and bonds. This makes solutions tricky and prone to problems of increasing severity. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The maximum that can be paid out to executives in upfront cash for bonuses is 20% under the rules set by the European Union starting in 2011. And the amount of time that at least 40% of an EU banker's bonus must be deferred is 3-5 years. The US has not set up similiar rules restricting up front cash bonuses to prevent executives from taking excessive risks. During the 2008 financial many banking executives collected huge bonuses by taking excessive risks, even though the banks suffered huge losses after the departure of the executives. Now the SEC, the Federal Reserve and other government agencies in the US are reviewing the rules. Projected pace of Wall Street profits in 2010 are 28.7 billion for 2010, and the fear is for a repeat of the situation in 2008 as the US has no rules similiar to the EU. Britain's Financial Services Authority passed similar restrictions recently. The Dodd-Frank legislation for financial reforms requires the pay related regulations to be set by April 2011. That legislation specifically prohibits any bonus plan that "encourages inappropriate risks" at financial firms with more than $1 billion in assets. The view of the European Union's financial services commissioner, Michael Barnier, is that not enough has ben done in this area in the US, and doing nothing is to ignore the right lessons from the financial crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points to a second hit from bad debt in the post 2008 stimulus binge of spending in China. This is after an earlier hit, that was absorbed as a result of high growth rates and high savings. About $420 billion was injected into 5 state owned banks since 1998, according to one estimate, as a result of the first hit to China's banks from bad debt. In this second round of bad debt, covered in more detail by David Barboza in the New York Times, and merely alluded to here, many bad loans to infrastructure projects were rushed through by local governments. The Economist considers this one of the successes of the state directed banking system, that loans were quickly made and projects started in the post 2008 crisis period; and expresses the view that this hit will be absorbed just like the last hit. However the more detailed account by David Barboza and in Business Week, points to the working of a system of incentives gone astray in a capitalist system without the necessary controls or regulation. Local governments used investment companies to take on loans, which were then used to prepare properties to be auctioned off at a profit and speculative prices to state owned companies in different industrial sectors. This is part of rampant speculation in China in real estate markets. Can China with its high savings and growth absorb a second hit? This depends on the magnitude of the hit and the size of the bad debt, which depends on how long this speculative market continues to operate, and how bad debt is hidden in the books. The difference this time is that large state owned companies in different industrial sectors are engaged in this speculation. The other difference is that the high growth rates in China depend on continued large trade deficits with the USA and Western Europe, something which is not likely to continue for long, as consumers in Europe and the USA with high debt are becoming cautious spenders. This suggests that China, like the US with the mortgage crisis, faces the same effects of unregulated or uncontrolled speculative behaviours, that can endanger the banking system....

LyrArc Article Gist
An indepth look at Mexico, its assets, its huge potential and what is holding Mexico back. It ranks much higher than Brazil in many respects- higher investment as a fraction of its GDP, technical education, an easier place to do business, less regulation, better management talent, more industrialized. In 2010 Mexico had $400 billion of business with the U.S. With rising Chinese wages Mexico is an attractive place for foreign investment, with a hardworking and educated workforce. Mexico suffered badly during the 2008 recession in the U.S. It is trying to reduce its dependence on exports to the U.S in key areas such as the automotive industry. Exports to the U.S. by the automotive industry are now 65% of the total, and the auto industry association in Mexico is working to bring this figure to 50% by exporting to Latin America and Europe. Economic growth was 5.4% in 2010, and expected to be 4-5% in 2011. Drug violence may have reduced the growth by one percentage point according to some estimates. The think tank, Mexican Institute for Competitiveness, estimates that economic growth would be 2.5% percentage points higher if labor market and competition laws are changed, and the oil industry is opened up to foreign investment as happened in Brazil. A study by OECD and the Federal Competition Commission (CFC) of Mexico has shown that 31% of Mexican household spending goes to products operating in high price monopolistic or oligopolistic markets. The bottom ten percent spend even higher proportion of incomes, around 38%, for products supplied in such markets. This includes pharmaceuticals, airline travel, banking, and electricity. Taking on these cartels is a difficult task. The CFC is beginning to take the first steps in this direction, in what will be a long road to fair prices for Mexican consumers. Banking was opened to Wal-Mart. The collapse of Mexicana was an opportunity to auction landing slots to other airlines. An auction system has been developed by CFC for drugs. A new competition law sets penalties for collusion in pricing, with upto 10 years in jail. And Carlos Slim's telephone monopoly was fined $1 billion for its telecom monopoly practices. In 2009 the Calderon government shut down Luz y Fuerza, a state electricity company costing the governmment $3 billion in subsidies for an highly inefficient operation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Paulson's plan for reforming the regulatory system. The number of regulators has remained flat over the last decade (about 6000 regulatory personnel) even as US commercial bankig assets have doubled to $11 trillion and have grown in complexity. A patchwork of regulation exists and it was designed for an earlier period.

LyrArc Article Gist
Dilution of the Volcker Rule by defining "hedging" as covering bank risk on a "portfolio basis," "including aggregate risk of one or more trading desks." The new wording is in a 174 page draft proposal for the rule released by regulatory agencies. The Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the CFTC, the SEC, and the Treasury Department are putting together the final wording. This opens the door for banks to engage in proprietary trading on their own account. Experts say this makes it possible for financial firms to make all kinds of bets on the market, by defining the risk of its portfolio broadly, such as a U.S. recession. Additional changes are the deleting of the requirement that chief executives pledge their firms are not engaging in proprietary trading. Another change that is being debated is whether to require banks to report all trading to a single repository so that regulators can see if there is systemic risk. The result of this would be a watering down of the original Volcker Rule provision in the Dodd-Frank legislation, that banned proprietary trading after the 2008 financial collapse on Wall Street....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bloomberg View says it is important for the living wills for U.S. banks that are "too big to fail" to be ready by the end of August 2011. This is required under the Dodd-Frank legislation. The living wills are designed to provide the government and the FDIC with an orderly pathway for winding down the business of a bank. On August 8, 2011, when the Dow Jones Averages dropped by 634 points, shares of Bank of America and Citigroup led the decline. Bloomberg points out that investors think Bank of America's net worth is only one third of what the bank claims, and for Citigroup this is less than half. Investors view the stocks of these banks as risky because they are likely to need to raise fresh capital and this would dilute the value of existing shares.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Basel 3 Rules and the extra capital cushions required by 2019, will double the amount of core equity a big bank holds as a proportion of assets. This is happening earlier because markets are making banks increase their capital cushions. But more needs to be done to make "too big to fail" banks in the U.S. and Europe safer, says the Economist in a May 2011 special report on international banking. An independent commission in Britain has suggested an additional equity buffer of 3%. The Economist says the Basel committee should consider similiar rules for the largest banks. Another proposal is being considered by Swiss regulators who want to see their banks holding the equivalent of 9% of their risk weighted assets in convertible capital. This kind of buffer is considered essential to prevent the kind of sudden collapse of the global financial system that was seen in late 2008.

LyrArc Article Gist
Would smaller companies lose out in competition with larger companies that are designated by the government as companies of systemic risk, implying government backing of these companies. Some in Congress are advocating this, and its been endorsed by the Group of Thirty (private sector regulation specialists) including its subcommitte headed by Paul Volcker. Would this be designating some companies as winners asks Peter Wallison.

LyrArc Article Gist
Volcker says that even with all the fuss about the length of the Volcker Rule, its important to remember that the regulation itself is only 35 pages. And he says that lawyers for the banks are not honest when it comes to this, because they spent a lot of time finding holes in the rule and were working to add complications to it, and now they are turning around and saying that the Volcker Rule is too complicated. Asked about Dodd-Frank, Volcker says that it does make the U.S safer in a financial crisis because of the crisis resolution process set up under Dodd-Frank legislation. A bank fails and the resolution is clearly laid out- the government takes over and liquidates it, or merges it or sells it. Stockholders don't get a bail out, management is fired, and creditors have to take losses. A lot still depends on having vigorous and alert regulators. He sees two large problems, the Euro crisis and the U.S. deficit, which need strong action. Volcker remains perplexed by why the situation of huge disparities in income growth has not been expressed to a greater extent- on one side the lack of growth in income for the average family in 10-15 years and the other side having the huge increase in incomes at the top end. He does not know of any years when this was as big as it is now- except 1928, 1929....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Large Institution Supervision Coordination Committee (LISCC) was setup by Fed chairman Bernanke and Fed governor Tarullo, in 2010. The Fed's 200 PhD's, bank examiners and other experts at headquarters are now tapped for the the task of looking at adverse scenarios, checking on assumptions made by the banks in their analysis, requesting data from large banks on their loan and securities portfolios, and asking banks to consider adverse scenarios. Such adverse scenarios include a decline in the U.S. economic growth of 1.5% in 2011, and decline in housing. The Fed checks the banks estimate of its financial position aginst the Fed's own standard and prods the banks to consider new risks. Before the 2008 crisis the Fed's 12 Reserve Banks did the day to day supervision and reported back to Board of Governors, a system that led to a diffusion of responsibility and did not work. Former Fed vice chairman, Alan Blinder, says the bank boards did not exercize responsibility, and "blew it, big time," during the financial crisis. This approach has the effect of acting as a early warning for the banks for things that could go wrong. J.P. Morgan Chase CFO Braunstein made a Feb 15 presentation to show that Chase's stress scenario was more stringent than the Fed's. The current review says Tarullo includes asking banks to do a check before issuing dividends to shareholders, and consider what would happen if the economy is in trouble in the next 9 quarters. According to Fed guidelines issued in November if the bank's plan does not show enough capital to handle economic, regulatory and lending risks, the Fed can challenge the bank's decision....

LyrArc Article Gist
Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, is coming under increasing criticism for supporting the Conservative-Liberal coalition government's austerity plan, and for lack of efforts to fight inflationary pressures. On a major issue on which King has taken a clear stand- that the largest British banks should increase capital levels exceeding the international standards- not much has happened. Consumer prices in Britain were up at a 3.7% annual rate in December, and the government's austerity policies will also cause pain. In a recent speech King said that the Bank of England had limited ability to fight the higher unemployment and increased inflation. It was an admission of the limits of central bankers in the current situation. King said "a squeeze in living standards is the inevitable price to pay for the financial crisis and the subsequent rebalancing of the UK and world economies.