
A Rational And Affordable Process To Solve The Nation’s Banking Crisis
by Marc Pascal
Today all economic and financial experts are essentially baffled on how to proceed in cleaning up the remnants of the Gambling Casino that was once the U.S. banking and financial system. We have zombie banks (BoA, Citigroup, etc.) and a U.S.-owned insurance giant (AIG) that have turned into black holes for taxpayer bailouts. Hundreds of billions of dollars have disappeared in less than a year and we are no better off than when we started.
Some experts claim that having allowed Lehman Brothers to fail last year was a mistake and was a major unsettling event in the interlocking global financial system. However, it was simply the first house of cards to be fully exposed. Letting it fail was merely a wake-up call that many other financial institutions were essentially bankrupt as well. The Lehman debacle is not a valid rationale to continue pouring billions of dollars into the other basket cases. We have been rewarding gross incompetent, intentional fraud and greedy management for massive failures with no corresponding benefits inuring to the general public.
The Swedish model is cited as a good option as a way out of this morass. It consisted of a quick public takeover (nationalization) of failed national banks that ultimately worked as they re-privatized in good financial shape. That model involved much smaller financial institutions that were no where the size or the global reach of our zombie banks. The U.S. has a reasonable aversion to doing anything “socialistic” unless every other viable capitalistic option is exhausted. The public just doesn’t want to be left holding the bag for this mess.
The Canadian model is also cited. Fortunately its national regulations of a handful of nationwide banks have kept those financial institutions relatively unscathed while the banking systems around the world are drowning. The Canadian banks do have various investment arms but the central government long ago limited leverage and the ability to fully partake in the orgy of mortgage-backed securities, credit default swaps and other risky misadventures that consumed much of the globe. However the U.S. system is much larger and more decentralized than its Canadian counterpart. It may be a system that the U.S. may wish to emulate after we clean up our mess but it is not a recipe for solving our current crisis.
The Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and others have warned of dire consequences if we do not keep our zombie banks afloat, no matter the massive cost. They claim that the ripple effect of failure would have global repercussions. However, looking at the facts, the ripple effects of this severe recession has already gone global. Our past and current efforts to spend gobs of money propping up entities merely add to the recession. They simply have no credibility and engender no trust among the public to be worthy of further public support.
The billions spent on bank bailouts could be put towards stimulus spending on infrastructure, education, energy and healthcare, and even some temporary tax cuts, or at least cutting the federal deficit. Instead, these bailouts only exacerbate our estimated deficits as far as the eye can see. If and when recapitalization might be accomplished, we would have sunk trillions of dollars into worthless paper when it could have gone toward tangible things that actually provide long-term benefits to the American people and our private enterprise system.
A banking and financial system exists to provide credit and financial services to businesses, households and individuals. It must be trustworthy, well-managed, transparent, ethical, and sufficiently flush with cash to operate and play its important role in any national or global economy. All the tax cuts and spending programs will not end any recession if the financial and banking system is still a mess.
The “stress test” proposed by the new Treasury Secretary is merely a cover to eventually liquidate or nationalize these institutions. It is not even sufficiently objective, rigorous, or publicly transparent to provide any meaningful information. At least before moving in this direction, they can have their Claude Raines wonderfully sarcastic Casablanca moment. “I’m shocked…shocked to find that there is gambling going on in here.”
There is one major underlying problem with assessing the many toxic assets based upon bundled mortgages and other types of loans.
Much of the underlying paperwork is missing. Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s finally admitted to having the same problem several years ago when trying to rate those derivative securities. The analysts were told by top executives in the financial sector they were rating and by their own managers to ignore that glaring omission. Not only subprime loans are failing, but due to mounting unemployment, standard and prime mortgages, car and student loans, and many credit cards, may also default. (If you think our financial system is under stress now, just wait another 6 months.)
So what is a viable and comprehensive national alternative? Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result. With regards to our banking and financial sector, we are flailing about and acting insanely. Now it is time for a reasonably sane proposal based on sound business principles.
The Federal Government has to fill this massive banking void and temporarily provide this country with a viable, independent, trustworthy, and parallel banking and financial entity. It would be principally managed by the private sector, but rationally and fairly regulated for the benefit of all Americans and U.S. private enterprises. There may be some small regional banks that have largely been unscathed by the current financial crisis, but they cannot be the sole means to restore the entire national financial system.
Two things must be pursued simultaneously. One is novel for today but actually based on our past history and supported by Alexander Hamilton. The other is simply inevitable.
The Federal Government should charter a new national bank, initially owned by the Federal Government but scheduled within 2 years to be privatized. The Federal Reserve would initially loan it about $150 billion to establish its initial cash reserves. This would be a bargain compared to our efforts for AIG where we’ve already dumped $130 billion into a black hole.
The balance sheet of the new national bank would be pristine and completely free of any toxic assets or bad debts. It would open branches in every American city and be accessible on the Internet. There are plenty of empty bank buildings and many highly qualified unemployed people with extensive financial and banking experience who can quickly get this entity up and running with the proper private-sector mindset yet dedicated to serving the public at large.
The new national bank would accept deposits from businesses, individuals, governments and institutions from anywhere in U.S. and the world, all fully insured up to $250,000 as would any other banking institution. Within this bank, there would be several separate operating divisions: (1) Commercial financial services including business loans and commercial paper, (2) student loans, (3) home mortgages, loan purchase, refinancing and consolidation services, and (4) management for tax-deferred retirement accounts. It would not have any investment banking or brokerage divisions. It would not issue any credit cards but debit cards would be attached to all checking accounts. Its loan standards and account policies would serve as national models on how to treat the general public.
Within a year from its original charter, 40% of its ownership would be distributed to those with established savings accounts based on a formula that would issue a certain number of common stock for specified amounts held in long-term deposits. Within a year after that initial partial privatization, another 50% of its common stock would be offered to the general public in a standard public offering. The Federal Government would retain a 10% interest in the bank for at least another 3 to 7 years until the bank proves itself to be fully competent to protect shareholders, depositors, employees and the general public.
Initially the 7-member board of directors would consist of individuals with no conflicting interests in any other U.S. financial institutions. They would be appointed by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, The Treasury Secretary, The Commerce Secretary, The Chairman of the SEC, and the President of the U.S. Two permanent board positions would be required to protect the general public. One would be appointed by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the other would be elected by all non-executive employees of the bank. As the bank moves towards private ownership, the other 5 members would naturally be elected by the shareholders, using cumulative voting rules to protect the interests of minority shareholders.
Some would say that the new federal bank would draw away a significant amount of money from the old zombie banks and other financial institutions. Exactly true because businesses, individuals and investors need a trustworthy place to put their money. This bank’s future lending capacity would be dictated by how much is deposited by the private sector, and by new strict leverage regulations imposed by the federal government. By ensuring a wide public ownership, this national bank would remain a major national and international financial institution for decades. In these very uncertain economic times, people need a place where they can safely conduct their financial affairs. This new federal bank would be an excellent place to start our recovery from this deep recession.
At the same time the new federal bank is being created, the federal government should create a special liquidation and bankruptcy court, setting up an entity to hold all toxic assets and bad debts called the “Amalgamated Trust.” Then the zombie banks and other financial institutions that are essentially bankrupt will put thru this special reorganization and liquidation process.
All of the mortgages and loans that are in foreclosure or default, will likely default, or are based upon real estate worth less than their face values, would be sold to other viable banks, private investors, and the new national bank at a discount rate determined by the Amalgamated Trust. Only when fixed prices are set for all the bad loans can a bottom be determined and the endless bleeding stopped with respect to these financial institutions.
Yes, under this plan bank shareholders would be wiped out but that is normal and just in any capitalist system. Many of the investors who are linked to various toxic assets held by the zombie banks will also suffer. But they should have bothered to assess the overall risks better. There would be a global ripple effect, but there already is a huge one now. We have to let the capitalist system do its normal dirty work in order to restore confidence in that same capitalist system. We cannot cover up its failings by using public funds or nationalizing those debts to the public’s detriment.
Overall the situation can’t get any worse, and if it does, then it would be only temporary. By fixing a date to end the pointless bailouts and set objective values on the toxic assets, we will prevent the necessary and eventual banking reorganization process from dragging out for years, bringing our global economy down with it. The sooner these huge bankrupt financial institutions are liquidated, the sooner we can move towards a viable economic recovery.
One major benefit would be that under current law, the special liquidation and bankruptcy court could look back 6 years and try to recoup all those questionable salaries, bonuses and commissions paid to executives and employees before and while those entities were losing billions of dollars. This would be the best way to establish a minimal level of accountability, responsibility and financial punishment that would be deemed fair and appropriate by the general public.
Some may argue that the federal government would be unfairly competing with the private sector. The only response to such a claim is that today we have no viable and trustworthy private banking system. A good part of what’s left should be liquidated.
A new National Infrastructure Bank for investing in public roads, schools, highways, bridges, airports, seaports, mass transit, high speed and conventional rail, and new energy sources and technologies, would also be another key component of our national recovery. The sale of its tax-exempt government-insured bonds would be a great new investment vehicle for the general public and global investors. It certainly would provide greater long-term public benefits and provide safe, steady returns based upon building tangible assets. It would not exist to trade in worthless paper and overpriced assets as our prior bubble investments did during the past few decades.
Finally, a new trust fund of about $10 billion should be established and distributed to qualified venture capital firms and local SBA development centers. It would provide seed capital to start-up private companies and existing small enterprises that would eventually expand across the country and around the globe. The driving engines of our capitalist system are new businesses that employ people in providing viable new products and services. This was an unfortunate spending omission from the recent stimulus package, missed by both Republicans and Democrats.
Despite their responsibility in causing their own downfalls and our current recession, and facing complete liquidation, many bank executives and shareholders might wail “But you can’t.” On behalf of the American people, Congress and the Administration should simply respond “Yes we can.”
Our only choice may be to create a viable, trustworthy and parallel new financial system and contemporaneously liquidate the old. We cannot afford the insanely expensive alternatives we are pursuing today. The entire transition process should be accomplished promptly and with the best interests of the American people in mind.
Marc Pascal obtained his J.D. and M.B.A. degrees more than 15 years ago. He worked for several years as an in-house legal counsel for two different corporations. He also started 4 new business ventures with friends. Since 2006, he has been an independent management and business consultant serving various private enterprises in the Phoenix area. He also posts weekly on TMV.
Cartoon by Taylor Jones, Hoover Digest. This cartoon is licensed to appear on TMV. All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited.
Well if this is what you wrote in response to me taking your other idea, it's a good thing i did! I agree with the concept almost completely and have long pointed out we could have made several parallel systems by now, but haven't thought about the details to the same extent.
A few comments:
I don't think $150 billion is nearly enough. Even if it's leveraged 10x (and it should probably only be leveraged 6x-8x) that's still only $1.5 trillion, which isn't anywhere close to offsetting the amount of destroyed credit capacity. They are talking about $1.5-$2 trillion in losses, which means about $15-$20 trillion in credit destruction moving forward. While I don't think it can all be replaced (for obvious reasons) I do think more like $600-$800 billion will have to be spent to capitalize a new system. In this vein, I think credit card issuance is a must. The credit lines can be much smaller and standards tighter, but there are very important uses for them.
If the government went this route, shouldn't it try to foster the creation of a new banking system? To me it seems that they should create several competing banks under this model. There could be 3-4 national ones and half a dozen regional ones or something. That would prevent any one bank from getting too large and foster competition.
In the bankruptcy court bondholders would get a huge hit. This would really hurt a lot of existing banks, pension funds and international clients. It's something that shouldn't be discounted.
Now even though I support something like this, I don't think it's enough to prevent a depression (defined as 10% GDP contraction) because credit is being destroyed so quickly and we're already in such bad shape…not to mention tons of forced liquidation would drive prices down on everything and cause further deflation. I do think that it would greatly reduce the effects of the depression though and help stop the spiral once things get down to a more sustainable level. To me it'd not necessarily be about preventing harsh times, but maintaining stability once key ratios are met; we still have a long way to go until housing and credit leverage ratios are at historically supported norms. This would have to be accounted for in selling it or the plan would derail.
Overall interesting stuff though.
This is a concise, well thought out plan that provides a clear path to getting the US out of the current dilemma.
The only question for me remains the global market effects. We can dispose of the Poison assets held in the US and the current Zombie stakeholders largely take the hit for their bad choices.
The European ripple effect could well be devastating. Foreign banks holding these dead American assets would sooner or later come to us for loans. Would there be any concern that the new bank would be re-infected by European zombies?
Regardless, an excellent plan indeed.
Thanks for the encouraging comments and adding some good points. This is the author responding (MP). The point was to get private capital to assist in rebuilding the banking sector. Right now it is being pulled out of zombie and most banks because there is no trust and a good idea that they are all bankrupt. But it now is sitting on the sidelines as the stock market indicates. I fully anticipate that private capital would flow into the new national bank more than tripling its cash reserves initially. They don't want to recapitalize zombie banks with toxic assets but this is giving them a great new option. Of course, if you wanted to increase the federal contribution, even a couple hundred billion more is dwarfed by what we are dumping into other black holes. With respect to foreign countries, they probably should do the same setup of parallel new and clean banks. Of course the U.S. could set up 4 to 12 regional offices, following Federal Reserve Bank territories, but the Canadian system argues for having a few good banks than a lot of small shaky ones. There should be no reinfection into the new bank, which would only buy assets from zombie banks at a severe discount, not unlike what the former executives at Countrywide are doing, and then they can offer new mortgages to home owners based upon much lower principle amounts. Generally the debts and toxic assets will become wallpaper after a complete liquidation, belonging only to those investors who failed to properly assess risk when they bought them. The public cannot afford to give these investors a windfall so we end up holding worthless paper. Everybody (the public and U.S. businesses) wins and the capitalist system does most of the work together with a coherent and comprehensive plan lead by the federal government. I don't see why the public has to nationalize debts, toxic assets and failure when instead it could be given the opportunity to put their money, both as depositors and as investors into 1 to 3 new national banks. I look forward to other readers adding more good ideas to this basic structure. Thanks, Marc Pascal.
Profession Roubini recently wrote in Forbes that the U.S. banking/financial system is essentially broke. I rest my case: http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/04/global-recessi…. So now what would any sane government do with it? I suggest liquidate it and start over with a new system as soon as possible. Posting again, Marc Pascal
I agree. But once again I believe that would usher in a depression very quickly and they have decided that a depression should be avoided at all costs. Now based on the numbers I've looked at I think it's impossible to avoid one, but people will always default to trying anything to avoid a bad situation even as they are pulled inexorably towards it than to embrace it and be blamed. I just think it'll be a lot worse because of spending all our time, money and emotions into avoidance.
It is stories like this that make me shake my head in disbelief and sadness, and it's just going to get worse. With all the focus on getting back to normal, those that have already been pushed off will be ignored.
Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length — and average job loss — of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up — unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.
So why arent we actually starting to come out of this instead of deepening.
It is simple. What used to be 2 year finanacing is now 7 years. Credit card debt takes 30 years to pay off at minimum payments. Credit indeed is a problem and America has become the land of luxury, borrowing to pay for what we ultimately cannot afford. The governments solution…………..BORROW and guarantee even less savings in the future.
Hard choices. Obama says. What he means is that the only way out of this mess is a communist take over of the financial sector. Good luck to us all.
I am an economic expert and Im not baffled.
Devalue all currency overnight and this will add about 40 percent to the valuations of these toxic assets thus drastically increasing the bottom line of the banks balance sheets.
It took years and years for the countries during the great depression to realize that the way out of their morass was to devalue their currency. They spent and spent and spent and nothing worked. Then as each country devalued its currency they recovered rather quickly.
Today we have a global economy. It will require all the heads of governments to work in conjunction to devalue overnight. Doing this will the be equivalent of injecting 80 trillion dollars into the world economy. A rather hefty stimulus. The downside is Inflation and debt will remain a constant.
Once we have stimulated the economies to recovery then we can address the bottom lines of debt. Meaning a restructuring of interest rates. Its very easy. The credit card company sends out a letter that says your new interest rate is now. 6.9 percent instead of 32 percent.
Mortgages send out letters saying your new interest rate is now 5 percent instead of 7.9 or 8.5 or even 7 percent. This alone would stimulate the economy with so much more money to spend.
The fundamentals of our economy are f***ed up. Until we address the fundamentals and resolve the underlying issues of credit…….which at the moment is years and years of debt payoffs then we are bound to end up in a long and protracted recession that will take a decade to fix.