TARP - Part 2 info

[Dredly]

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/mar...anking-crisis/

Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Treasury Unveils Massive New Financial Stability Plan


Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Tuesday announced a new Financial Stability Plan designed to help revive the ailing economy through massive investments in a number of areas, such as aid to small businesses and consumers, as well as more help for the financial sector.

The FSP “is designed to attack our credit crisis on all fronts with our full arsenal of financial tools,” Treasury said in a press release. “To be successful, we must address the uncertainty, troubled assets and capital constraints of our financial institutions as well as the frozen secondary markets that have been the source of around half of our lending for everything from small business loans to auto loans.”

* READ Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's Speech
* READ the Treasury's Fact Sheet on the Financial Stability Plan

Government officials told FOX Business's Peter Barnes that they have "sufficient" funding to launch the programs, but noted that "if it looks like we're going to need more capital, we're going to work with Congress."

Stocks sold off after the announcement of the plan, which traders attributed at least partially to “buy on the rumor, sell on the news” action -- but there was some real disappointment from investors, as well.

“It seems that the market is disappointed in the lack of details in the Geithner plan,” said Peter Boockvar of Miller Tabak.

“The only element of certainty is that of surging government borrowing that could lead to prolonged imbalances and a slowing economy before any bottom is reached,” said Ashraf Laidi, chief market strategist at CMC Markets.

Many of the details of Treasury’s plan were previously reported by FOX Business, and the new plans will be available at a Web site, FinancialStability.gov.

Here are the main points of the plan:

Consumer & Business Lending

The Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, or TALF, is being expanded to up to $1 trillion in an effort to unfreeze the credit markets in a joint program between Treasury and the Federal Reserve.

The FSP will use $100 billion to leverage up to $1 trillion “and kick start lending by focusing on new loans,” the Treasury said. Previously, Treasury could use $20 billion to leverage $200 billion of lending.

The purchases will be limited to newly packaged AAA-rated loans “to best protect against taxpayer losses.” In the past, many ratings have been criticized as overly generous, with some less-than-perfect securities rated AAA, so that could be one point of debate.

The Consumer & Business Lending Initiative will also be expanded to include commercial mortgage-backed securities, and may grow further to include asset classes such as non-Agency residential mortgage-backed securities and assets collateralized by corporate debt.

Housing Support/Foreclosure Prevention

Treasury and the Fed “remain committed” to “help drive down mortgage rates” by continuing to purchase mortgage-backed securities and debt from government-sponsored entities Fannie Mae (FNM: 0.586, -0.055, -8.58%) and Freddie Mac (FRE: 0.5963, -0.0437, -6.83%).

Treasury also is committing $50 billion to prevent “avoidable foreclosures,” and is requiring all FSP participants to participate in foreclosure-mitigation plans.

Small Business and Community Lending

Over the next several days, Treasury said, it and the Small Business Administration will announce a lending initiative to “arrest the precipitous decline in SBA lending,” which was down 57% in the fourth quarter from the same period in the prior year.

Treasury said AAA-rated SBA loans will be purchased to unfreeze secondary credit markets for small-business loans and will seek to pass legislation boosting the guarantee of SBA loans “from as low as 75% to as high as 90%,” as well as reduce fees and provide funds for faster processing of loans applications.

Strengthening Financial Institutions

The FSP will include a stress test program to assess the health of banks that will involve increased transparency and disclosure, though Treasury said there would be no need “to adopt an overly conservative posture or take steps that could inappropriately constrain lending.”

Treasury said that all banks with assets over $100 billion will be required to participate in the supervisory review process and stress test.

Financial institutions that have gone through the stress test will have access to a “capital buffer” to help absorb losses, Treasury said, which would involve Treasury purchasing preferred securities in the company. Any investments under that plan will be placed in a separate entity, which Treasury is calling the “Financial Stability Trust.”

Public/Private Investment Fund

Treasury said it will start a “public/private investment fund” to allow firms to cleanse their balance sheets of “legacy assets.” This is akin to the “bad bank” plan that had been floated earlier.

The plan “could involve putting public or private capital side-by-side and using public financing to leverage private capital on an initial scale of up to $500 billion, with the potential to expand up to $1 trillion,” Treasury said.

The program would allow private-sector buyers “to determine the price for current troubled assets and previously illiquid assets,” Treasury said.

This, in particular, was met with skepticism by the markets.

“I believe the reason for the lack of details is he doesn't yet know what the private sector response will be in participating in the TALF program and the ability of private buyers and bank sellers of bad assets to meet on price for these assets,” oockvar of Miller Tabak said. “Right now the 'Geithner Plan' is 'if you build a framework for private sector involvement, they will come.' Let's hope so.”

Transparency and Accountability

Treasury said it would demand new levels of transparency, oversight and accountability for the money being doled out. It will require firms in line for bailout money to show how assistance would expand lending, force them to do foreclosure-mitigation programs, restrict dividends, stock repurchases and acquisitions, and limit executive compensation and lobbying efforts.

It said contracts and investment information from the FSP would be posted on the Internet within five to 10 business days of completion, as well as make public the value of the investment.

I missed seeing him speak about it but I guess those were the highlights

[Dredly]

Can one of you economist guru's explain this to me? I'm hoping that I don't understand it... but I'm afraid I do

Public/Private Investment Fund

Treasury said it will start a “public/private investment fund” to allow firms to cleanse their balance sheets of “legacy assets.” This is akin to the “bad bank” plan that had been floated earlier.

The plan “could involve putting public or private capital side-by-side and using public financing to leverage private capital on an initial scale of up to $500 billion, with the potential to expand up to $1 trillion,” Treasury said.

The program would allow private-sector buyers “to determine the price for current troubled assets and previously illiquid assets,” Treasury said.

This, in particular, was met with skepticism by the markets.

“I believe the reason for the lack of details is he doesn't yet know what the private sector response will be in participating in the TALF program and the ability of private buyers and bank sellers of bad assets to meet on price for these assets,” oockvar of Miller Tabak said. “Right now the 'Geithner Plan' is 'if you build a framework for private sector involvement, they will come.' Let's hope so.”

[dc dalton]

Can one of you economist guru's explain this to me? I'm hoping that I don't understand it... but I'm afraid I do

Plain and simple, that is the 'bad bank' I have been talking about for a while now .. banks get rid of their toxic assets and dump them, basically on us

[Dredly]

Plain and simple, that is the 'bad bank' I have been talking about for a while now .. banks get rid of their toxic assets and dump them, basically on us

yeah thats what I was worried about... basically they get to write down all their loses and all that money just vanishes into thin air right?

[Caeser2001]

we foot the bill for people that bought houses they couldn't afford.

[dc dalton]

we foot the bill for people that bought houses they couldn't afford.

No no no no NO ... the amount of bad real estate assets is tiny compared to derivatives and I do mean tiny.

[Dredly]

No no no no NO ... the amount of bad real estate assets is tiny compared to derivatives and I do mean tiny.

basically we fit the bill because the amount of bullshit that banks bought was actually nothing but a big bag full of air and now that its been discovered that there was really nothing in the big and all that money is gone we get to pay for what was "supposed" to be in the bag but wasn't.

right?

[dc dalton]

basically we fit the bill because the amount of bullshit that banks bought was actually nothing but a big bag full of air and now that its been discovered that there was really nothing in the big and all that money is gone we get to pay for what was "supposed" to be in the bag but wasn't.

right?

You REALLY need to take the time to study and understand credit default swaps (aka derivatives)

Basically imagine Las Vegas meets Wall Street ... here's the (very simplified) scenario

Bank A 'bets' that bank B is going to have some major issues down the road so they buy these 'swaps' against the other bank ... now here's the fun part, they are basically 'no money down' (sound familiar) and the can be leveraged as high as 50/1, meaning for every dollar you 'bet' against the other bank you potentially get $50 back.

Now as with any other investment there HAS to be two sides to the coin, if someone is betting against bank B someone else is betting with them. The other side can also buy them 'no money down' and also at leverage as high as 50/1

So there is NO MONEY on either side, not a stinking cent BUT when one side goes bad the swap is 'called in' and yes it is a legally binding contract ... so even though there has been no money 'added to the kitty' and there was NO regulation that reserves are required to cover the 'bets' someone has to pay up.

This is EXACTLY how Lehman Brother went down and is exactly what many other banks are struggling with 'toxic assets'

And again, this is a VERY simplified version of the mess. There are approximately 500 - 600 TRILLION of these default swaps out there right now ... and every one of them as toxic as the next. Also remember these 'assets' dwarf the U.S. GDP big time.

As 'anti government' and as anti 'regulation' as I am OUR government fucked up BIG time by allowing these derivatives to be unregulated ... they were nothing more than high rollers making outrageous bets against each other when in fact these high rollers had nothing to back up there bets with

[Guns4Fun]

You REALLY need to take the time to study and understand credit default swaps (aka derivatives)

Basically imagine Las Vegas meets Wall Street ... here's the (very simplified) scenario

Bank A 'bets' that bank B is going to have some major issues down the road so they buy these 'swaps' against the other bank ... now here's the fun part, they are basically 'no money down' (sound familiar) and the can be leveraged as high as 50/1, meaning for every dollar you 'bet' against the other bank you potentially get $50 back.

Now as with any other investment there HAS to be two sides to the coin, if someone is betting against bank B someone else is betting with them. The other side can also buy them 'no money down' and also at leverage as high as 50/1

So there is NO MONEY on either side, not a stinking cent BUT when one side goes bad the swap is 'called in' and yes it is a legally binding contract ... so even though there has been no money 'added to the kitty' and there was NO regulation that reserves are required to cover the 'bets' someone has to pay up.

This is EXACTLY how Lehman Brother went down and is exactly what many other banks are struggling with 'toxic assets'

And again, this is a VERY simplified version of the mess. There are approximately 500 - 600 TRILLION of these default swaps out there right now ... and every one of them as toxic as the next. Also remember these 'assets' dwarf the U.S. GDP big time.

As 'anti government' and as anti 'regulation' as I am OUR government fucked up BIG time by allowing these derivatives to be unregulated ... they were nothing more than high rollers making outrageous bets against each other when in fact these high rollers had nothing to back up there bets with

So, basically what you are sayin is that i can fly out to Vegas this weekend, bet big, if i win, i keep the money and if i loose, i can get a bail out?

Sounds good---who else wants to come along?

[Dredly]

You REALLY need to take the time to study and understand credit default swaps (aka derivatives)

Basically imagine Las Vegas meets Wall Street ... here's the (very simplified) scenario

Bank A 'bets' that bank B is going to have some major issues down the road so they buy these 'swaps' against the other bank ... now here's the fun part, they are basically 'no money down' (sound familiar) and the can be leveraged as high as 50/1, meaning for every dollar you 'bet' against the other bank you potentially get $50 back.

Now as with any other investment there HAS to be two sides to the coin, if someone is betting against bank B someone else is betting with them. The other side can also buy them 'no money down' and also at leverage as high as 50/1

So there is NO MONEY on either side, not a stinking cent BUT when one side goes bad the swap is 'called in' and yes it is a legally binding contract ... so even though there has been no money 'added to the kitty' and there was NO regulation that reserves are required to cover the 'bets' someone has to pay up.

This is EXACTLY how Lehman Brother went down and is exactly what many other banks are struggling with 'toxic assets'

And again, this is a VERY simplified version of the mess. There are approximately 500 - 600 TRILLION of these default swaps out there right now ... and every one of them as toxic as the next. Also remember these 'assets' dwarf the U.S. GDP big time.

As 'anti government' and as anti 'regulation' as I am OUR government fucked up BIG time by allowing these derivatives to be unregulated ... they were nothing more than high rollers making outrageous bets against each other when in fact these high rollers had nothing to back up there bets with

Do you have any reading material or websites on that stuff? The more I learn about the "banking" industry the more it scares me... good thing I'm poor :P