LyrArc Article Gist
Two realities are affecting exchanges. One is that trading commodities and derivatives is a $600 trillion business worldwide and is more profitable than trading in corporate shares. This shows in the value of ICE and NYSE in the stock market. In April 2011 ICE was valued at $1.5 billion less than NYSE, in Dec 2012 ICE was valued at $4 billion more that NYSE as it makes its bid to merge with NYSE. The other is that the Dodd-Frank financial system overhaul in the U.S. after the 2008 financial crisis has created a new model for derivatives trading providing advantages to regulated electronic exchanges and clearinghouses that handle derivatives trades with transparency. Jeffrey Sprecher, CEO of ICE, the IntercontinentalExchange, which handles derivatives trading through its clearinghouse operations, says: "For the past decade, our solutions made our markets increasingly electronic and increasingly clear. Today, financial reform is imposing that vision on many markets through a rule-making process." Bart Chilton, a member of the CFTC which regulates derivatives trading says Dodd-Frank legislation supports the business model of derivatives exchanges. This is especially true for Mr Sprecher and ICE. Sprecher has a good relationship with regulators with whom he talks directly, and is supportive of CFTC efforts to close loopholes as he is confident he can make money as long as the rules are clear. His confidence stems from his model which is technology based from day one, with its own clearinghouse and technology based transparency of the ICE data vault, information it shares with regulators. Sprecher stumbled upon this opportunity. He is an executive in the power industry. Working on developing power plants Sprecher found it was difficult for power firms to hedge investments in energy with financial contracts because there was no well organized, clear and transparent market for such contracts. This he set out to do by buying a little know exchange in Atlanta for buying and selling electricity, later getting the the backing of BP, and investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, to form ICE in 2000. Banks liked the idea of a having an organized clear place to buy and sell derivatives in oil and other commodities, and having an alternative to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange in futures trading. Swaps trading under Dodd Frank supervision is converting to old style futures contracts where there is less competition for ICE's futures trading creating new opportunity. ICE setup its own clearinghouse, and acquired the Clearing Corporation, which was the base for a derivative called credit-default swap. To make derivatives trading transparent and reduce systemic risk Dodd-Frank legislation required exchanges to provide information to data warehouses which would then share the information with regulators. ICE setup its own data warehouse to do this called ICE Trade Vault. Dood-Frank rules envisioned the formation of clearinghouses and exchange such a ICE to provide a clear process, transparency and reduce systemic risk in derivatives trading. ICE under Sprecher by making this vision its own and using technology has created new opportunity. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The FDIC had $19 billion in its fund that insures consumer's deposits at the end of 2008. A bill in Congress by Christopher Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, gives the FDIC access to $500 billion till the end of 2010 if the Fed, the President and Treasury secretary support that, and $100 billion without that approval. The FDIC proposed raising the fees banks pay into the deposit insurance fund to buildup the fund, that has been depleted by bank bailouts like the one at IndyMac which cost $10 billion. But banks protested because it comes at a time when bank's are already in a bad condition. Under a 1991 law the FDIC can borrow from the Treasury amaximum of $30 billion. The access to $500 billion is meant to let the FDIC act as another source of funds to address systemic risks that arise in the future, in addition to the $700 billion already approved by Congress for that purpose. In an interview Sheila Bair, head of the FDIC, said that a change in the law would "ease the mechanics of how seamlessly we can access our lines of" funding. I'm the kind of person who likes to be prepared for all contingencies."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair releases her new book in Sept 2012 on the financial crisis of 2008-2009 and the efforts to introduce financial reforms for a safer financial system: "Bull By the Horns: Fighting to Save Main Street from Wall Street and Wall Street from Itself." She is particularly critical of U.S. Treasury Secretary, and former head of the New York Federal Reserve, Timothy Geithner, as protecting the interests of Citigroup and Wall Street in his position as Treasury Secretary of the U.S. government. She describes in detail the situations in which Geithner tried to water down essential reforms to the financial system to make it safer, including the Volcker Rule. Of particular concern is the revolving door by which banking regulators or government officials join banks after service in the government which leads to weakening of regulatory and government oversight and systemic risks as in 2008-2009. Sheila Bair is widely respected for her efforts during the financial crisis from 2008 to 2011, when she headed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the FDIC. Her active involvement in defending reforms and setting up the system by which financially failing banks could be taken over and unwound without risks to the U.S. financial system are lasting contributions. She also succeeded as a manager by setting up an experienced and effective successor in Martin Gruenberg as head of the FDIC, to continue this work. A former Congresswoman, she describes herself as a Republican populist from Kansas. Her current role is as senior advisor to the Pew Charitable Trusts, which itself is a rare phenomenon today for a senior government official leaving government....

LyrArc Article Gist
Hubbard at Columbia, Scott at Harvard, and Zingales at University of Chicago, go over the options. Bad bank option has the drawback that you have assets that are written down and you put them in a bad bank, but what about all those assets that deteriorate as the economy deteriorates, would'nt they have to be be put in the bad bank too? Banks hold $6 trillion of mortgages and mortgage securities, with mortgage securities of $1.3 trillion. Option two, guaranteeing bad assets has been tried for Citigroup, where taking asset pool of $306 billion which was created, Citigroup absorbed the first $29 billion losses, Treasury and FDIC jointly fund next $15 billion, and Fed holds 90% of remaining losses. The government getting $7 billion in preferred stock with 8% yield. This Citigroup option according to a conservative estimate would cost the government $60 billion after stock warrants received. This would cost for all the banks something like the $700 billion of the TARP, and if bad assets deteriorate further as is likely, could end up costing the government trillions. So this isnt a great option. Hubbard, Scott, and Zogales, say that the option of encouraging banks to spin off toxic assets into separate affiliated bad banks would be a reasonable one. But the government should't guarantee the assets of that bad bank if it poses systemic risk. And banks with negative capital or close to negative capital should be taken over by the government, nationalized, through already established FDIC procedures, such as bridge loans. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Treasury and Fed's handling of the financial markets crisis on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday as it unfolded Sept 17, 18, 19 and 20, the worst since the 1930's. With the credit markets battered, the collapse of Lehman Brothers investment bank and the rescue of AIG right on the heels of the rescue of Fannie and Freddie the previous week, and all these moves barely improving the general loss of confidence and increasing fragility of the financial markets worldwide. Steps like the ban on short selling by the SEC to stem two 400 point declines in the last few days, and the Fed setting aside $50 billion to shore up money market funds by making them whole where needed, and providing about $200 billion through the European Central Bank and the central banks of Japan, Britain, Canada and Switzerland, were tactical moves so Paulson and Bernanke had to address the real problem of removing the highly illiquid assets of risky mortgages from the financial markets. This would require working with Congress to put together the necessary legislation which is what Congress, Treasury, the Fed, and others will work on this weekend of September 21, 22, so that the legislation could be drawn up the following week and passes into law creaing some Federal agency that will buy up the illliquid mortgage assets owned by banks, investment banks, and other financial institutions before there is another series of collapses in the financial markets necessitating rescues by the Fed. Meantime Treasury has raised another $200 billion last week through sale of Treasurys and provided this money to the Fed to use as needed. The result of the most recent chaos in the financial markets has resulted finally in agreement among all parties about the need for committing taxpayer money in hundreds of billions of dollars to be used to buy up the risky illiquid mortgage assets at steep discounts to be resold later to bargain seeking companies so that the banking sector can repair their balance sheets and recover, as being much safer and less costly route than the cost of rescuing financial firms with systemic risk on an individual basis after a run on these firms or their imminent collapse. Which is why people like Laurence Meyer of Macroeconomic Advisors himself a former senior Fed official believe that this is the first serious effort to tackle the crisis by getting to the root cause of the problem and removing the illiquid mortgage assets and the Government an taxpayers spending the hundreds of billions of dollars but at the same time finally seriously tackling the crisis in a manner that will restore confidence to the markets and to the industrial economy of the USA. His comment, "the markets voted and they liked the proposal", as the Dow Jones went up 610 points at one point and ended up the day Thursday September 19 at 410 points gain for the day....

LyrArc Article Gist
Five rules the editors of the WSJ say should be followed when working on cleaning up the banking system. A clear no, as Krugman and other experts point out is for the government to make the rather imprudent move to take on all the debts of the banks as in Ireland. A second rule is not to underestimate the size of the problem and delay action till the problem gets much worse, when its harder to deal with. ECB president, Mario Draghi, pointed out the problem at Spain's handling of Bankia bank as a clear example, telling the European parliament recently: "There is a first assessment, then a second, a third, a fourth. This is the worst possible wayof doing things. Everyone ends up doing the right thing, but at the highest cost." A third rule is to set clear rules about banks, who gets rescued and who gets closed and why- so that its not left upto the discretion of officials. On this rule Spain's outgoing Zapatero administration gets good marks from WSJ for settting clear rules to the cajas svings banks. A fourth rule applicable to Europe is to first setup the expertise and conditions for a European banking regulator before setting up a banking union and direct injection of funds by the EFSF into banks of individual countries. A fifth rule is to avoid creating even larger mega banks by consolidating failing banks with large banks, and continuing the government's implicit guarantee of the bank because it is "too big to fail" and creates systemic risk- this is the situation after action by the U.S. Federal Reserve, regulators and the U.S. Treasury....

LyrArc Article Gist
New risks are emerging in the shadow banking system as regulators work to make the banks safer. Banks as deposit backed financial firms are different from mutual funds, private equity and other firms that are doing more of the financing for business and home loans in the U.S. financial system. As banks deleverage responding to tighter regulation by increasing capital buffers and reducing assets, it makes the financial system safer, yet creates new risks in the shadow banking system not subject to regulation and not supported by bank deposits the way banks are. A IMF report put out in April 2015 underlines these new risks in the U.S. and European financial system. Mutual funds and exchange-traded funds now rival banks in providing financing to companies with high debt. Total bond holdings worldwide in 2014 were $9.6 trillion, increasing 25% over 2008, and the mutual funds leveraged loans increased 60% to $151 billion in the U.S., 223% in the eurozone to $126 billion, according to the IMF. The IMF points out that these mutual funds and exchange traded funds favor emerging market and corporate junk bonds, and operate in a way where they mimic each others in their investments, creating contagion. With hard to sell securities and the rapid decline in these types of funds in a panic, the effect could be to create contagion across the funds. In the mortgage lending field a similiar process of deleveraging is happening. U.S. banks share of federally guaranteed mortgages from big banks down from 61% in late 2012 to 33% in 2015, other smaller finance companies taking up 51% increasing from 24%, according to an American Enterprise Institute report. Paul Tucker, former deputy governor of the Bank of England, points out the dangers. He says policy makers and regulators are playing catchup with firms in the financial services industry who are constantly looking for gaps in the rules, a game that policymakers and regulators are likely to lose at some point....

LyrArc Article Gist
A detailed account on how Corzine ran MF Global, the motivation behind his decisions, and how his plan unraveled. The initial motivation for his decision to invest heavily in European sovereign bonds was to generate profits quickly to preserve MF Global's credit ratings. During his days as a bond trader at Goldman in the 1980's and 1990's Corzine was known to make risky bets to generate large profits. The same strategy failed to work in the highly volatile environment of 2011, when even the U.S. sovereign bond credit rating was downgraded.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fed Governor Daniel Rarullo emphasizes the need for transparency and release to the public of stress test information. The goal he says is to release "this kind of standardized comparable information on a regular basis so that it's not a momentous event."

LyrArc Article Gist
Anat Admati, is a professor of finance and economics at Stanford University School of Business. He says banks should depend on generating 30% of their assets from equity, something the banking industry of today in the U.S. and Europe considers heretical. More of the bank's assets should come from equity and much less from borrowed funds. Outside of banking healthy corporations in the U.S. carry debt at about 70% of assets and there is no reason banks should not do the same. In 2013 says Admati, the situation is not much different from that after the 2008 global financial crisis- large banks carry liabilities and debt at over 90% of their assets. The $2.2 trillion in debt at JP Morgan Chase bank is about 91% of assets of $2.4 trillion. Basel III regulations allow banks to borrow upto 95% of assets, and proposed banking regulations in the U.S. put this at 95%, with the way this is measured still being debated. At such high levels of debt the margin of error is small, and systemic risk which is high in a globally interconnected banking system means the whole banking system can freeze from one large bank going into failure such as Lehman Brothers. This happened in 2008 and the margin of error is still small, which is why global banking is such a high wire act with the U.S. Federal Reserve, the ECB and other central banks issuing regular warnings and regulators faced with the task of keeping the banking system in check through vigilance and investigations of banks violating laws. How much difference has Dodd-Frank legislation in the U.S. made after 2008? Jason from Atlanta says in response to Admati's article, that the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was 37 pages and the banking system did not freeze up in the way it did in 2008 for the rest of the twentieth century until its repeal. The 879 page Dodd-Frank legislation of 2011 is overly voluminous and still leaves 243 rules to be written by regulators in consultation with the financial industry. Banks are larger now than they were in 2008 and have an outsized influence in shaping the rules, leaving the U.S. Federal Reserve's supervisory committee and Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo with the job of somehow keeping banks out of trouble. JP Morgan Chase, Admati reminds readers, has $2.4 trillion in assets as of June 30, 2013, and debts of $2.2 trillion, with $1.2 trillon in deposits and $ 1 trillion in other debt owed to money market funds, other banks, bondholders and the like. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The high cost of fines is likely to affect recapitalization of UK banks. Fines for Libor-rigging and compensations for customers on Payment Protection Insurance may cost the UK banking industry about 20 billion pounds, says Nixon. Other fines such as the $1.9 billion fine for money laundering activities of HSBC have to be added to this. This means less money for meeting stronger capital requirements and for lending to business and households. Higher compliance costs will mean higher costs in future years. HSBC estimates of the anti money laundering systems are about $990 million a year. The Bank of England has raised concerns about the need for additional capital to safeguard British banks.

LyrArc Article Gist
The mysterious disappearance of $1.2 billion from customer accounts at MF Global. Jan Corzine, CEO of MF Global, former governor of New Jersey, former senior executive at Goldman Sachs, tell the U.S. Congress he has no idea what happened to the money.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Vickers commission, has been appointed by the Cameron government to look into the British banking system and the largest banks. Ringfencing to protect retail deposits from the bank's other investment activities has been suggested. The focus is on increasing capital requirements as critical to protecting British taxpayers and the banking system. This means going beyond the Basel 3 requirements to build an extra safety buffer for the types of situations the British government was faced with in HBOS, where losses were even greater than average. Determining this should be coordinated with EU and Basel regulators.

LyrArc Article Gist
Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer says Britain plans to introduce laws by 2015 to separate investment banking from retail banking. As proposed by the Independent Commission on Banking, led by John Vickers, the investment banking and retail banking would be separate legal entities and would be financed separately.