Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Feds bend rules for largest banks

  1. #1
    Featured Member Vamp's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,111
    Thanks
    271
    Thanked 757 Times in 289 Posts

    Default Feds bend rules for largest banks

    I found this article very disturbing .....
    http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/24/maga...ion=2007082417
    Fed bends rules to help two big banks

    If the Federal Reserve is waiving a fundamental principle in banking regulation, the credit crunch must still be sapping the strength of America's biggest banks. Fortune's Peter Eavis documents an unusual Fed move.


    By Peter Eavis, Fortune writer
    August 24 2007: 5:09 PM EDT
    NEW YORK (Fortune) -- In a clear sign that the credit crunch is still affecting the nation's largest financial institutions, the Federal Reserve agreed this week to bend key banking regulations to help out Citigroup (Charts, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (Charts, Fortune 500), according to documents posted Friday on the Fed's web site.

    The Aug. 20 letters from the Fed to Citigroup and Bank of America state that the Fed, which regulates large parts of the U.S. financial system, has agreed to exempt both banks from rules that effectively limit the amount of lending that their federally-insured banks can do with their brokerage affiliates. The exemption, which is temporary, means, for example, that Citigroup's Citibank entity can substantially increase funding to Citigroup Global Markets, its brokerage subsidiary. Citigroup and Bank of America requested the exemptions, according to the letters, to provide liquidity to those holding mortgage loans, mortgage-backed securities, and other securities.

    This unusual move by the Fed shows that the largest Wall Street firms are continuing to have problems funding operations during the current market difficulties, according to banking industry skeptics. The Fed's move appears to support the view that even the biggest brokerages have been caught off guard by the credit crunch and don't have financing to deal with the resulting dislocation in the markets.

    The opposing, less negative view is that the Fed has taken this step merely to increase the speed with which the funds recently borrowed at the Fed's discount window can flow through to the bond markets, where the mortgage mess has caused a drying up of liquidity.

    On Wednesday, Citibank and Bank of America said that they and two other banks accessed $500 million in 30-day financing at the discount window. A Citigroup spokesperson declined to comment. Bank of America dismissed the notion that Banc of America Securities is not well positioned to fund operations without help from the federally insured bank. "This is just a technicality to allow us to use our regular channels of business with funds from the Fed's discount window," says Bob Stickler, spokesperson for Bank of America. "We have no current plans to use the discount window beyond the $500 million announced earlier this week."

    There is a good chance that other large banks, like J.P. Morgan (Charts, Fortune 500), have been granted similar exemptions. The Federal Reserve and J.P. Morgan didn't immediately comment.

    The regulations in question effectively limit a bank's funding exposure to an affiliate to 10% of the bank's capital. But the Fed has allowed Citibank and Bank of America to blow through that level. Citigroup and Bank of America are able to lend up to $25 billion apiece under this exemption, according to the Fed. If Citibank used the full amount, "that represents about 30% of Citibank's total regulatory capital, which is no small exemption," says Charlie Peabody, banks analyst at Portales Partners.

    The Fed says that it made the exemption in the public interest, because it allows Citibank to get liquidity to the brokerage in "the most rapid and cost-effective manner possible."

    So, how serious is this rule-bending? Very. One of the central tenets of banking regulation is that banks with federally insured deposits should never be over-exposed to brokerage subsidiaries; indeed, for decades financial institutions were legally required to keep the two units completely separate. This move by the Fed eats away at the principle.

    Sure, the temporary nature of the move makes it look slightly less serious, but the Fed didn't give a date in the letter for when this exemption will end. In addition, the sheer size of the potential lending capacity at Citigroup and Bank of America - $25 billion each - is a cause for unease.

    Indeed, this move to exempt Citigroup casts a whole new light on the discount window borrowing that was revealed earlier this week. At the time, the gloss put on the discount window advances was that they were orderly and almost symbolic in nature. But if that were the case, why the need to use these exemptions to rush the funds to the brokerages?

    Expect the discount window borrowings to become a key part of the Fed's recovery strategy for the financial system. The Fed's exemption will almost certainly force its regulatory arm to sharpen its oversight of banks' balance sheets, which means banks will almost certainly have to mark down asset values to appropriate levels a lot faster now. That's because there is no way that the Fed is going to allow easier funding to lead to a further propping up of asset prices.

    Don't forget: The Federal Reserve is in crisis management at the moment. However, it doesn't want to show any signs of panic. That means no rushed cuts in interest rates. It also means that it wants banks to quickly take the big charges that will inevitably come from holding toxic debt securities. And it will do all it can behind the scenes to work with the banks to help them get through this upheaval. But waiving one of the most important banking regulations can only add nervousness to the market. And that's what the Fed did Monday in these disturbing letters to the nation's two largest banks.
    Nature knows no indecencies; man invents them. ~ Mark Twain


  2. #2
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Feds bend rules for largest banks

    already posted about in ... but the author of my linked story was a bit more candid about the Fed 'temporary' rule change

    (snip)"That is.... if we do not step off the cliff into financial ARMAGEDDON first.

    Yes, I mean it. This is why:

    "The Aug. 20 letters from the Fed to Citigroup and Bank of America state that the Fed, which regulates large parts of the U.S. financial system, has agreed to exempt both banks from rules that effectively limit the amount of lending that their federally-insured banks can do with their brokerage affiliates. The exemption, which is temporary, means, for example, that Citigroup's Citibank entity can substantially increase funding to Citigroup Global Markets, its brokerage subsidiary. Citigroup and Bank of America requested the exemptions, according to the letter."

    This is un-fucking believeable.

    Ok, let me be more blunt. This goes DIRECTLY to the safety and soundness of our FUCKING BANKING SYSTEM. The raw FUCKING STUPIDITY of this act is BEYOND WORDS. This is THREE TIMES the normal limit allowed for these institutions!

    IF these brokerage affiliates are unable to meet liquidity demands, they need to be identified and either merged into other liquid organizations or fucking shut down!

    Do you folks understand what happens if THIRTY PERCENT of one of these banks' regulatory capital goes to one of these "affiliated brokerages" AND THEN THEY IMPLODE?

    The bank that was involved becomes insolvent under Tier Capital rules and is seized. IMMEDIATELY.

    Financial ARMAGEDDON ensues as this is VERY likely to start a cascade failure in the banking system, as all the derivatives that this institution holds become QUESTIONABLE AT BEST."(snip)


    To put this in perspective, during the 1930's depression the US Congress passed the Glass-Steagall act, which separated the businesses of investment banking versus commercial banking for the specific purpose of stopping problems in one segment from affecting the other segment thus causing system-wide credit / liquidity / bankruptcy problems.

    The Glass-Steagall act was watered down on several occasions, and was finally repealed altogether by Bill Clinton signing into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act in 1999, which allowed the mergers of investment banking with commercial banking and insurance underwriting businesses.

    (snip)"On Oct. 21, with the House-Senate conference committee deadlocked after marathon negotiations, the main sticking point is partisan bickering over the bill's effect on the Community Reinvestment Act, which sets rules for lending to poor communities. Sandy Weill calls President Clinton in the evening to try to break the deadlock after Senator Phil Gramm, chairman of the Banking Committee, warned Citigroup lobbyist Roger Levy that Weill has to get White House moving on the bill or he would shut down the House-Senate conference. Serious negotiations resume, and a deal is announced at 2:45 a.m. on Oct. 22."(snip) from

    Therefore, arguably the separation of commercial banking from investment banking and insurance underwriting was officially thrown in the dumper in order to further Clinton's program to provide increased home ownership for minorities via encouraging mortgage lending in poor communities ... the same program which gave birth to high volumes of subprime mortgage loans being made to people who didn't have the credit / income to pay them back. Thus, arguably, the Fed's latest exemption to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act was made under duress to address the huge problem created by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act in the first place !

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 08-28-2007 at 01:49 PM.

  3. #3
    Featured Member Vamp's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,111
    Thanks
    271
    Thanked 757 Times in 289 Posts

    Default Re: Feds bend rules for largest banks

    oops sorry Melonie I didnt realize it was already posted.
    Nature knows no indecencies; man invents them. ~ Mark Twain


  4. #4
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Feds bend rules for largest banks

    ^^^ no problemo. This issue is potentially serious enough to warrant 2 threads !!!

  5. #5
    God/dess britneyireland's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    2,568
    Thanks
    283
    Thanked 602 Times in 340 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    My Mood
    Inspired

    Default Re: Feds bend rules for largest banks

    Just another reason to get comfortable going short!
    Rebecca Avalon







  6. #6
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Feds bend rules for largest banks

    ^^^ ... get your crash puts ready !!!! Oops, a million other people beat you to it today !!!

    --> scroll down to the 130 to 140 puts. People who bought their puts before today have already earned 50% on their investment !!!

    and my old friend SDS keeps on gaining ...


Similar Threads

  1. One of 100 largest banks, Amtrust goes belly up
    By Deogol in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-07-2009, 09:01 AM
  2. Bend OR
    By CKXXX in forum Club Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-01-2008, 08:37 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-02-2008, 03:38 PM
  4. bend oregon
    By otheia in forum Club Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-12-2007, 11:58 AM
  5. CON ED-Bend Over
    By whirlerz in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-09-2006, 09:17 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •