With a sleight of hand, the Financial Accounting Standards Board gave banks a way of hiding their losses, at least for the time being. What was this sleight of hand? With powerful lobbying by 16 industry association groups who call themselves the Fair Value Coalition, a proposal to use "mark to market" to price the value of distressed assets was killed. Congress, it seems, bowed to the lobbyists and complained that the existing "mark to market" standards worsened the financial crisis. So what is the new rule? Who knows? Its hard to figure out exactly what standard banks are using to price distressed assets.
Meanwhile banks have been showing nice profits over the past month. And we've seen glowing comments from bank executives telling us how their profit picture has improved.The problem is that they don't reflect the true financial condition of the banks. Martin Weiss of Weiss Research Inc. said: "the big banks' profit were actually bogus." Weiss goes on to say: "Citigroup's $1.6 billion in first quarter profit would vanish if accounting were more stringent." At Citigroup (NYSE: C), which received $346 billion in fresh capital and asset guarantees from the government, about 25% of its quarterly net income came from debt securities rule changes. At Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE: WFC), the new standards boosted its capital by $2.8 billion dollars and augmented its income by $334 million. This won't last because Wells Fargo faces large loan losses from increasing home mortgage defaults.
According to Tavakoli, 40% of subprime mortgages are already 30 days or more overdue and defaults may go as high as 55%
So when will the banks' next time bomb explode? It could come in 2010 when regulators force banks to put distressed assets "on the books." So far banks are keeping billions and even trillions of dollars "off the books." Who knows what kind of losses are hidden among them. As we speak the lobbyists are marshaling their forces along with the Fair Value Coalition and are descending upon Congress to kill this new rule, just like they did "mark to market."
I don't know what's wrong with regulators or Congress that they don't see that unless banks put all of their "off the books" securities "on the books" that we will have another financial crisis. What is the greatest mystery of this century is why banks are not forced to do business like everyone else. They are the backbone of our economy. Sooner or later they will have to "bite the bullet" and let the chips fall where they may.
Do you believe that banks should put all of their "off the books" assets "on the books?"











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-05-2009 @ 6:47PM
Joe said...
Misleading article. The 'mark-to-market' matter involves revoking
certain rules that were recently initiated (with a few years). This
is a matter concerning market liquidity and not so much 'off the
books' issues. Seems to me the main 'off the book' problem we've seen
is reflected in the risky bets made by AIG while the market was still
liquid. 'Mark-to-market' and 'off the books' are wrongly entangled in
this piece.
Am I wrong?
-J
6-05-2009 @ 7:07PM
william lindblad said...
I don't think that any of these institutions need Federal approval for the old adage of "cooking the books". Most have expertise in this area. In the present case the Feds need ways of making "bad look good" as they have this little problem called "confidence". We can all expect a good deal of a "look the other way" policy until "job creation" starts to overpower "job loss".
All of the "Quick fix" policy that has been administered in the form of bank bail out to create lending and this lending is pushed into the real estate market by more of the same speculators that are part of the square one problem, solves little. In short, we may be going back for another round - another that will be much worse.
I don't buy into fairy tales - this is not as good as it looks. In truth it looks like the beginnings of another bubble - and God help all if this one breaks.
6-06-2009 @ 8:13AM
al coholic said...
It seems to me that lost in all this is the simple fact that these assets are not worth zero as the media would have us believe. The fact that the market to value them has evaporated and now they cannot be valued helped create this hysteria.
I'm sure a better way could have been created to handle this whole mess (similar to the one when many South American countries defaulted a few years ago) without emptying out the entire supply of paper to print all these trillions our kids will now have to pay higher taxes for.
And the sad truth is that the only thing we really saved were the asses of the gamblers who really caused it.