Whoops!
The drama of the Spanish banking sector is getting worse.
The government has asked the (savings) bank sector to increase loss provisions
from 54 bn EUR to 166 bn EUR to cover potential losses on loans to construction
companies and developers: It would not be that bad, if it also covered
potential losses from loans given to property buyers. Some estimate that making
reasonable provisions for such loans would mean that the banks would have to
make provisions of 270 bn EUR. That would effectively kill the sector.
Spain is rapidly approaching an Irish situation, with one
important difference: the Spanish government has not been silly enough to
guarantee anything. The problem is quickly beginning to look like a situation
where it will be impossible for the government to bail out the banks by
injecting capital. I am afraid that at some point in time it will be impossible
for the government not to explore the “Swedish model”, of nationalisation
without any compensation to shareholders, flotation of huge chunks of bad
loans, and a later re-privatisation of healthy banks.
The good news is that EU is now clear in offering Spain an
extension of the time limit to reduce government deficit to below 3% of GDP. In
return Spain has to accept an “audit” of the plan to rescue the banking sector.
I am not entirely sure that such a plan really exists.
Spain is a living testament to the complete misunderstanding
that this crisis is about government debt. It is not it is about total leverage
of the economy, public AND private. Spain and Ireland (and Denmark) had healthy
government finances but a hugely leveraged private household sector as the
crisis began. Healthy government finances proved to be no help.
More Whoops!
JP Morgan-Chase admitted to have lost some loose change, USD
2bn and counting, on their Prop Trade activities, i.e. speculation for the
bank’s own books. Of course that old devil, mark-to-market, was to blame
(together with poor risk management and failing organisational oversight). If
only JPM had been allowed to book the positions at prices that suited the bank
better insted of being mercilessly forced to book the positions at market
prices, things would not have run out of hand.
To me it sounds as if the arrogance of the pre-2007 period
is coming back with a vengeance. As they say in French “Chasser le naturel, il
revient au gallop”.
The good news is that such a loss is a major setback for
Wall Street’s lobbying activities, aimed at weakening the legislative efforts
to curb Prop Trade, the so-called Volcker rule.
Helicopter Ben gets company
Fed Chief Ben Bernanke got the nickname early in his career
because he advocated QE programmes to stave off financial crises. Now Citi’s
chief economist Willem Buiter joins Ben in the helicopter. Buiter recommends
even more radical easing of the monetary policy than seen so far. Buiter is not
just any bank economist. He was a highly respected academic economist and a
member of Bank of Englands Monetary Policy Council before taking the jump to
the big paycheque in Citi. It is just six weeks ago that Buiter claimed that
Spain was heading for a debt restructuring. The reason: the government is not
strong enough to recapitalise the savings bank system.
Now Buiter sees that the monetary initiatives by the world’s
central banks are becoming increasingly ineffective when combined with a
banking system in full deleveraging mode. Add the death-by-austerity fiscal
policies in Europe. Buiter suggests Central Banks to lend money directly to the
private sector, circumventing the banking system.
And some good news
The Euro has been weakening recently (no, it is not really
the dollar that has gained, if you measure on a trade-weighted basis), and the
usual chorus of anti-EU megaphones have trumpeted that as a sign of the
Euro-zone’s imminent collapse.
For those who remember my writings last year in the autumn,
I am strongly in favour of a weaker currency. I am even in favour of parity
with the USD. It should not happen too quickly and disorderly, though. But for
sure it would help on Europe’s economic situation. As long as Europeans still
find it cheap to shop in the US, there is something wrong with the terms of
trade.
No comments:
Post a Comment