Posts filed under “Taxes and Policy”

Weekend Bailouts and Subsequent Market Reactions

Another weekend, another bailout, another market reaction:

How many Sunday press releases is it going to take to save the financial system from ruin? If you’re are keeping score at home, this is now the sixth Sunday night/Monday morning press release
in 14 months aimed at saving the financial system. Consider the recent history of these weekend rescues:

• August 2007, when the credit crunch was officially recognized by the Fed, when they cut the discount rate.

• December 2007, with the announcement of the TAF and other credit facilities;

• January 2008 Soc Gen panic, and a 75 bps emergency cut;

• March 2008 with the Bear Stearns bailout.

• July 2008 the first Fannie/Freddie rescue attempt

• September 2008 the actual Bailout of Fannie/Freddie

Five observations/questions/takeaways from the past of weekend rescues history:

1. A strong rally lasts for a while, but it eventually fades and makes a new lower low;

2. Each "rescue rally" has been shorter in duration and weaker in intensity than the immediately prior one;

3. Friday’s close becomes your new line in the sand; If and when that is breached, look out below.

4. The pre-Asian open news pattern reveals the Asset price focus is a large part of these issues; It also speaks to our overseas creditors/Overlords;

5. What form of free markets have we evolved into?  It is not Capitalism, it is not Socialism, it is not intelligent regulation. WTF is this?!?

Lastly, who wants to bet me that this will be the very last bailout? Any takers? Any?

Category: Bailouts, Markets, Psychology, Taxes and Policy

Treasury Takeover of GSEs: 10 Key Points

Category: Bailouts, Credit, Real Estate, Taxes and Policy

Treasury Announcements on Fannie/Freddie

Here are the official statements on the Fannie & Freddie bailouts:

Statement by Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. on Treasury and Federal
Housing Finance Agency Action to Protect Financial Markets and Taxpayers:

Good morning. I’m joined here by Jim Lockhart, Director of the new independent regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, FHFA.

In July, Congress granted the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and FHFA new authorities with respect to the GSEs, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Since that time, we have closely monitored financial market and business conditions and have analyzed in great detail the current financial condition of the GSEs – including the ability of the GSEs to weather a variety of market conditions going forward. As a result of this work, we have determined that it is necessary to take action. (continued after jump)

-Treasury Department, September 7, 2008
http://treasury.gov/press/releases/hp1129.htm

Treasury Department Reports:

FHFA Director Lockhart Remarks on Housing GSE Actions
Fact Sheet: FHFA Conservatorship
Fact Sheet: Treasury Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement
Fact Sheet: Treasury MBS Purchase Program
Fact Sheet: Treasury GSE Credit Facility

Read More

Category: Bailouts, Credit, Federal Reserve, Real Estate, Taxes and Policy

Ackman: Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Restructuring

September 5, 2008

The Honorable Henry M. Paulson, Jr.
Secretary United States Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20220

Re:  Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Restructuring

Dear Secretary Paulson:

We understand that a Treasury plan for Fannie/Freddie ("the GSEs") may be announced this weekend. We thought you might find useful some further thoughts on potential GSE solutions.

As you are likely aware, we had previously distributed a proposed restructuring plan for the GSEs. In that plan, under a prepackaged conservatorship, equity interests would be extinguished, subordinated debt would be exchanged for warrants, and senior debt would be exchanged for new senior debt and common equity in the newly recapitalized entities. The government would write a put to the new common equity holders which would expire in three years.

It appears, however, that the GSEs may need help more quickly, and conservatorship may not be triggered until the GSEs are formally determined to be undercapitalized. As such, in the event the government needs to inject capital immediately, we suggest you consider the following transaction ("the Transaction").


Read More

Category: Credit, Real Estate, Taxes and Policy

Treasury: Bailout Details Sunday 11 AM

Category: Bailouts, Credit, Real Estate, Taxes and Policy

Roundup: Fannie & Freddie Bailout

0906bizfannieweb_2
Last evening, we asked what are the costs and consequences, as well as the market reaction to, the imminent bailout of Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE). Your responses were inspired and informative.  (For a brief history of the GSEs, see this earlier commentary).

This morning, its page one news. Here’s what the major papers are suggesting is the likely outcome:

Conservatorship: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be brought under government control; The assumption is this is a temporary measure (12-24 months);

Management: will be kicked out, starting with Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd as well as Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron.  (No word if Charlie Gasparino is defending the two on CNBC). The current Board of Directors would also be fired;no word on other senior management;

Shareholders: Speculation is that most (but not all) of the common stock would be diluted but not wiped
out; Company debt and
preferred shares are likely to be protected according to the Washington Post. A variation comes The New York Times, which stated that both the common and the
$36 billion of outstanding preferreds "would be reduced to little or nothing."

In a typical recapitalization, preferreds, which are equity, receive little if anything.

Mortgages: held by FNM/FRE would be guaranteed by taxpayers. This is approximately $5+ trillion dollars, the vast majority of which are sound. (Remember, Fannie was not allowed to buy subn-prime). If 3% of these go bad — a historically high estimate — that would amount to ~$150 billion dollars;

Legislation: President Bush signed the law that gave the government the authority to inject billions of dollars into the companies through investments or loans. At the time, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said there were no plans to actually use the money, it was to help the firms raise capital.

Foreign Holders: NYT: "With foreign governments increasingly skittish about holding billions of dollars in securities issued by the companies, no sign that their losses will abate any time soon, and the inability of the companies to raise new capital" forced the government’s hand;

Foreign central banks are key investors in Fannie and Freddie paper, and they have been losing confidence in the GSEs. Barron’s reports that "Fed data offer circumstantial evidence of, if not of a run, then of a steady walking away from Fannie and Freddie securities."   

Financial sector: With losses of about $500 Billion, and quite a few billion more to go, the hope is that the relief to FNM/FRE eventually finds its way to the entire sector.

Note that the Preferreds of both companies are primarily banks, many of which already are already suffering from the
effects of the credit crunch and mortgage debacle. A bailout of the Preferreds would amount to a $36 billion bailout of the entire financial
sector.

Politics: With both conventions now over (were the GSEs even mentioned?) the Presidential election starts to heat up. The closer we came to November 4th, the greater the risk of political complications.  Hence, the bailout sooner rather than later;

Timing: Any Decision is likely to be announced Sunday, before Asian markets open. Some are speculating that this is an attempt to get out in front, rather than waiting for a "financial tipping point, as happened with Bear Stearns;" Delaying a rescue might also increase the "risks and costs."

Insolvency: Armando Falcon Jr., who from 1999 to 2005 headed
the agency that oversaw the companies’ financial stability, believes the GSEs are already insolvent.
"I would force the more accurate accounting of
their assets and liabilities, and that would show them to be
insolvent,"
Falcon said in an interview. He added that
additional delay to receivership "only digs taxpayers into a deeper hole."

One more note: Anytime the government obtains authority to do
something — go to war, spend money on bailouts — it is identical to
actually authorizing the act. Meaning that yes, it will eventually occur. Claiming you are merely granting authority only serves to make the act more politically palatable, but don’t ever kid yourself — it is no different than the actual act.

In practice, the act of authorizing a fill in the blank (war, bailout, whatever) is the same as declaring  (war, bailout). The two are identical.

More on the bailout to come . . .

~~~

As you add sources and links in comments, I will cull key data points and add above.

 

>

Full source list after the jump . . .


Read More

Category: Bailouts, Credit, Derivatives, Federal Reserve, Real Estate, Taxes and Policy

Pete Peterson Interview, Charlie Rose, 2004

We showed a Charlie Rose interview with Pete Peterson, co-founder of the Blackstone Group, sometime ago.

Here is a prior interview in 2004 on entitlements and the need to end preferential tax breaks for the wealthy.

Category: Economy, Taxes and Policy, Video

Can the Fed Save the (Financial) World?

Category: Bailouts, Corporate Management, Credit, Derivatives, Federal Reserve, Taxes and Policy

SEC Proposal: Abandon US Accounting Rules

What this country really needs is less tranparency in earnings reports, and more wiggle room for corporate reporting:

click for video
Cox_sucker

>

We are governed by utter idiots . . .


Similarities and Differences: A comparison of IFRS and US GAAP
Click for PDF

Ifrs_and_us_gaap

WSJ:

"The Securities and Exchange
Commission signaled the demise of U.S. accounting standards, kicking
off a process Wednesday that could ultimately require all publicly
listed American companies to follow an international model instead.

Introduced
in two steps, the shift could eventually cut costs for companies and
smooth cross-border investing. At the same time, investors worry it
will create confusion, especially during the transition. Other critics
worry that the international system offers too much wiggle room for
companies, compared with the more precise rules enshrined in U.S.
standards.

The SEC’s proposal would allow some large
multinational companies to report earnings according to international
accounting beginning in 2010. The SEC estimates at least 110 U.S.
companies would qualify based on their market capitalization, among
other factors. The agency also laid out a road map by which all U.S.
companies would switch to International Financial Reporting Standards,
or IFRS, beginning in 2014, at the expense of U.S. Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles, the guiding light of accountants for decades.

The proposals will be open for public comment for 60 days and could be finalized later this year."

Anything that artificially boosts earnings is great for America . . .

>

Sources:
SEC Moves to Pull Plug On U.S. Accounting Standards
KARA SCANNELL and JOANNA SLATER
WSJ, August 28, 2008; Page A1
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121985665095476825.html

SEC May Let Companies Abandon U.S. Accounting Rules
Jesse Westbrook
Bloomberg, Aug. 27 2008
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=azXvW6B6aINg

Download SandD_07.pdf

Category: Corporate Management, Earnings, Taxes and Policy, Valuation, Video

In Defense of Short Selling

Category: Markets, Short Selling, Taxes and Policy