Archive for March 2009

  • 20 Mar 2009 at 11:32 AM

Those Tricky Merrill Losses

The Financial Times reminds us today that those last minute Merrill losses almost derailed the Bank of America deal, and wonders how deeply our favorite exec was involved.

Bank of America was directly involved in markdowns that contributed to Merrill Lynch’s $15.3bn loss in the last quarter of 2008, its final reporting period before the Wall Street bank was acquired by BofA, sources familiar with the matter say.
Mounting losses at Merrill during December almost derailed the acquisition. Ken Lewis, BofA’s chief executive, threatened to walk away from the deal unless the US government provided $20bn in extra capital. The deal closed on January 1 after federal officials pledged their support.

And on those shifty credit default swaps?

Mr Cotty also gave his blessing to a $1bn writedown of credit default swaps involving investment grade companies. The markdown of a position on the “high vol 4″ index transformed a gain of $100m into a loss of $900m, said a source familiar with the matter.

Ouch.
BofA linked to Merrill writedowns [The Financial Times]

  • 20 Mar 2009 at 11:21 AM

Placing The Blame

Michael Lewis, usually a Wall Street cynic, takes a surprisingly anti-populist tone, wondering on Bloomberg why the role of the predatory borrower hasn’t been examined with a bit more scrutiny. Lewis also takes issue with the outrage the fluid AIG bonus situation has fanned.

But now that taxpayer money is on the line the story has changed: innocent taxpayers are now being exploited by horrible Wall Street financiers. The guy who defaulted on mortgages on his six spec houses in the Nevada desert has turned himself into the citizen enraged by the bonuses paid to the AIG employees trying to sort out the mess caused by his defaults.

The piece strikes me as unlike Lewis, which makes it worth the read.
Mass Hysteria Over AIG Obscures Simple Truths [Bloomberg]


“When I was there, nobody had a contract with the company, including me. If you didn’t do the job, you didn’t deserve to be there. We had a bonus plan based on performance.”

doitgetangry.jpgAre you homeless? Are you about to be homeless? Bet you’re probably pretty upset about that. No? Not angry? Not bitter? Not in the mood to to kill a man? Well try this on for size. Ya see that absolutely gorgeous Tudor? 8 bedrooms, 6.5 baths, recently remodeled kitchen? You can’t have it. Know who can? AIG employees. Is your blood boiling yet? I bet it is. What? No, no unscheduled stops. I told you to use the rest stop on the highway. I don’t care if it’s backed up.

The Connecticut Working Families party, which has support from organized labor, is planning a bus tour of A.I.G. executives’ homes on Saturday, with a stop at the company’s Wilton office.
“We’re going to be peaceful and lawful in everything we do,” Jon Green, the director of Connecticut Working Families, told The Times. “I know there’s a lot of anger and a lot of rage about what’s happened. We’re not looking to foment that unnecessarily, but what we want to do is give folks in Bridgeport and Hartford and other parts of Connecticut who are struggling and losing their homes and their jobs and their health insurance an opportunity to see what kinds of lifestyle billions of dollars in credit-default swaps can buy.”

Full itinerary:

Continue reading »

  • 20 Mar 2009 at 9:59 AM

Secondary Effects

Active interest this morning in Credit Default Swaps on New York Munis. Not surprising given that New York is going to take it on the chin if the recent slew of bonus-bans takes hold. To the extent taxes are a municipality’s lifeblood, New York is about to get exsanguinated.

Picture 945.pngListen, nobody pays their taxes anymore, except for suckers, so this really isn’t that big a deal. Some Senator’s going to come out today or over the weekend and say he had a hand in telling at least 13 companies that received TARP money that they should just sign on the dotted line of the contract stating they had no unpaid taxes, even if they did, to, you know, expedite things. Then Treasury Secretary Geithner’s going to say, “No, no, Senator [take your pick], I’m not going to let you take the fall on this one, I was behind it,” and obviously no one will argue with that, and we’ll get on, business as us-u-al. Ship shape.
13 firms receiving federal bailout owe back taxes [AP]

That oughta show ‘em Congress means business!

The House Financial Services Committee will consider legislation to prohibit any bonus payments by companies who have received government bailout funds, until investments are repaid in full, chairman Barney Frank said on Thursday.
The measure, to be considered next Tuesday, would prohibit any compensation arrangements that are unreasonable or excessive for these companies, the panel said in a statement.
The bill would also bar bailed-out companies from paying any bonus to any employee, regardless of when any bonus was agreed to, the statement said.

House panel to consider prohibition on bonus payment [Reuters]

  • 20 Mar 2009 at 8:15 AM

Opening Bell: 03.20.09

Picture 936.png
Full interview
Q Well, here’s something that kind of scared me. Today they passed this thing that says we’re going to tax 90 percent of these bonuses. And the part that scares me is, I mean, you’re a good guy — if the government decides they don’t like a guy, all of a sudden, hey, we’re going to tax you and then, boom, and it passes. I mean, that seems a little scary as a taxpayer, they can just decide — you want to take a break and answer that when we come back? Okay, hold that answer.
THE PRESIDENT: I will. I’ve got a good answer, too. (Applause.)
* * * * *
Q Welcome back. We are talking with President Barack Obama.
Before the break I mentioned that they had just passed this new bill which will tax them 90 percent — and I said it was frightening to me as an American that Congress, whoever, could decide, I don’t like that group, let’s pass a law and tax them at 90 percent.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, I understand Congress’ frustrations, and they’re responding to, I think, everybody’s anger. But I think that the best way to handle this is to make sure that you’ve closed the door before the horse gets out of the barn. And what happened here was the money has already gone out and people are scrambling to try to find ways to get back at them.
The change I’d like to see in terms of tax policy is that we have a system, going back to where we were back in the 1990s, where you and I who are doing pretty well pay a little bit more to pay for health care, to pay for energy, to make sure that kids can go to college who aren’t as fortunate as our — as my kids might be. Those are the kinds of measured steps that we can take. But the important thing over the next several months is making sure that we don’t lurch from thing to thing, but we try to make steady progress, build a foundation for long-term economic growth. That’s what I think the American people expect. (Applause.)
Full transcript here.
Citi’s CFO Shifts to New Role; Kelly to Succeed Him (WSJ)
“Citigroup said Chief Financial Officer Gary Crittenden will become chairman of the entity created for non-core assets, with global banking chief Edward Kelly succeeding him as CFO.
The change, the latest for the struggling financial-services company, come as Citigroup looks at shedding those assets while focusing on its core investment bank, credit-card division and regional banking operations.”
Chavez Nationalizes Banks, Inspired By American Example (FT)
After seeing the stunning success of Citi and BAC, Chavez has decided to move forward with his nationalization of Santander – we wish you luck, Mr. Chavez.
“”We are not retreating. Today we have returned to the subject, I announce the nationalisation of Banco de Venezuela to strengthen the national public banking system,” Mr Chávez said during a televised meeting with ministers.
Grupo Santander owns Banco de Venezuela, one of the largest banks in the Opec nation’s financial system.”
Oh Ye Of Little Faith: CNBC Calls Bottom (CNBC)
Clem, from ADVFN, has the feeling this could lead to a good rally – only time will tell, Clem, only time will tell.
Euro Falls Against Dollar (Bloomberg)
“The euro slid from near a two-month high against the U.S. currency after European Commission President Jose Barroso said leaders may agree today to boost the amount of cash for struggling countries to 50 billion euros ($68 billion) from 25 billion. The dollar rose as some traders bet the slump this week stoked by the Federal Reserve’s announcement it start buying Treasuries was overdone given the outlook for the U.S. economy.”
Raters See Windfall in Bailout Program (WSJ)
What’s funny is people think giving the AIG people bonuses was bad, and this is passing (pretty much) under the radar.
“The new rescue effort, run by the Federal Reserve, kicked off Thursday with bond deals totaling more than $7 billion. Each bond issue will need to be blessed by at least two of the three big rating firms: Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services and Fitch Ratings.
[...]
Rating services typically charge $40,000 to $120,000 for every $100 million in so-called structured-finance securities they rate. For the initial $200 billion portion of TALF, that translates to $80 million to $240 million. If the program is extended to $1 trillion as the government plans, those fees could skyrocket to anywhere between $400 million and $1.2 billion.”

Continue reading »

  • 19 Mar 2009 at 5:50 PM

Write-Offs: 03.19.09

$$$ Ari Kiev: “Success is all in your head” [Reuters]
$$$ An Insider’s Perspective On White Collar Crime [zero hedge]
$$$ House GOP Report Details Countrywide’s Efforts to Benefit VIPs [Washington Post]
$$$ More Press Than Protesters Show Up At Goldman HQ. Security precautions apparently for naught. [clusterstock]
$$$ BofA Tries to Stem Merrill Defections in London [CNBC]
$$$ Maria Bartiromo Slips Into Lou Dobbs Territory [Cityfile]
$$$ A history of expensive offices at Citigroup [The Deal]
$$$ Contrarian View: HR 1586 (T.A.R.P. Surtax Bill) will Create Millionaires [DJT]

A Dealbreaker commenter points out: “The bill that just passed is saying that anyone working for those firms with a combined family income of $250k or more will have the bank employee’s bonus taxed at 90%.”
The reason for this, which I hinted at yesterday, is that its difficult to get such a directed tax bill to pass constitutional muster without widening the people it impacts. If you think it is an accident that the bill has been set up this way after executive comp failed badly on the first two go-arounds, then you just don’t understand the meaning of “never let a crisis go to waste.”
I expect that anyone who watches carefully for the inevitable “But we had to expand the reach of the bill to make it legal,” will be rewarded with almost exactly this line from proponents of the newly expansive bill. This is both because the legislature can’t simply target a subset of individuals with punitive intent, even if its a tax, and because the goal was always an expansive executive comp cap.
The “bill of attainder” test keys off these two prongs:
Is it targeted at specific individuals?
Is it of punitive intent?
So what’s punitive intent? The Fifth Circuit’s SBC Communications v. FCC ruling is about the most direct on this as the Supreme Court hasn’t touched the issue in decades. In short:
Does the legislation fall into the historical meaning of legislative punishment,
Can the statute “reasonably be said to further nonpunitive legislative purposes,” and;
Does the record show “a congressional intent to punish?”
We leave it to you to decide where these prongs fall on the “punish-o-meter.”
What is the specificity prong? No one really has any clue as the Fifth Circuit (which effectively invented it) declined to address it in SBC.
All this overlooks the fact that Bill of Attainder jurisprudence is in quite a bit of disarray and this would make for a very juicy (and time-consuming) case if it went to the Supreme Court. The legislature, and the New York Attorney General, is hardly helping itself with the level of punitive sounding rhetoric that daily issues forth from those offices to clog the public record. Neither would it serve the legislation if anyone bothers to recognize that AIG was basically given the green light by the very people now up in arms over the “outrage” of these bonuses, and that they have been “approved” since 2008.
So, instead it looks like, in order to avoid that particular courtroom morass, we will get a wide-ranging executive compensation cap of the sort that was violently resisted not a few months ago. And no one dares vote it down now. Hurray for our side!

From Housing Wire’s Teri Buhl:

After finding itself dragged into court by hedge fund manager Bruce Rose of Greenwich-based Carrington Capital, Irving, Tex.-based mortgage servicer American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. fired its own volley back at both Rose and Carrington on Thursday, suing for alleged acts of racketeering and a scheme to profit illegally from holding REO hostage at the servicing firm. American Home is owned by legendary investor Wilbur Ross’ WL Ross & Co., and is the nation’s largest independent residential mortgage servicer.
The allegations made in the complaint by AHMSI against Rose and Carrington show just how complex relations between servicers and investors can be, amid increasing pressure from lawmakers and regulators to find solutions to the nation’s housing mess.

Continue reading »