Showing posts with label geithner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label geithner. Show all posts

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Treasury Plan is Old Dog Attempting New Tricks, Duke Economist Says

The U.S. Treasury’s financial rescue plan presented today (Monday) does not differ significantly from a previous one announced in September by the Bush administration and shouldn’t be expected to perform much differently, says a Duke University economist.

“This is the same dog that didn’t hunt a few months ago, the last time it was proposed,” said Connel Fullenkamp, a Duke associate professor of the practice in economics.

“It's going to be a cherry-picking exercise for investors with ready cash,” Fullenkamp said. “This won’t really ease the crunch that much, but a lucky few will be able to buy the least-troubled assets at good prices and make a lot of money from them.”

The new plan aims to get private investors to partner with a new federal entity to buy up troubled assets from banks.

“What I'd really like to know from Treasury Secretary Geithner is what has changed in the financial markets that will make firms that were previously unwilling to make a market for these assets suddenly make a market now,” he said.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Consumer Advocates Call on President to Fire Treasury Secretary Geithner

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In a letter issued today, two consumer advocacy groups called on President Obama to obtain Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's resignation.

The letter, from Harvey Rosenfield, the California-based consumer advocate who authored the state's insurance rate rollback Proposition 103, and Jim Donahue of the Washington-based WallStreetWatch.Org, asserts that Geithner has been unable to transcend his earlier role, while Chair of the New York Fed, as an architect of the failed Bush Administration Wall Street bailouts -- including the initial $80 billion AIG bailout.

Moreover, it appears the Treasury Department was aware of the latest round of bonus and retention payments but failed to announce them until after AIG issued $160 million in checks. Pointing out that the President has often called for "an open, honest government that would fight" for people, not special interests, it concludes that "In these grave days of national reckoning, the citizenry deserves better."

"It is clear that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner cannot provide the requisite independence that is required in an environment in which financial institutions and other businesses are demanding trillions of dollars of taxpayer money," the letter to President Obama states. "With respect, we urge you to ask for his resignation."

Two weeks ago, WallStreetWatch.Org issued a 231-page report pinpointing twelve policy decisions by the federal government that led directly to the current financial calamity -- and how those policies were dictated by Wall Street through over $5 billion in campaign and lobbying expenditures between 1998 and 2008 by many of the same firms who are receiving American taxpayer dollars.

The letter calling for Geithner's resignation, and "Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America," are available at: WallStreetWatch.org.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Economic Experts: Will the 2009 Stimulus Act Fizzle?

As a strangled credit market and record-breaking job cuts spur comparisons with the Great Depression of the 1930s, the Obama administration and Congress appear poised to agree on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, an $789 billion broad-based stimulus package designed to kick-start the economy.

But just as a predecessor initiative—the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) pumped money into banks by letting the U.S. Treasury buy equity stakes in financial institutions—appears to have done little to aid the larger economy, the latest taxpayer-funded program may stall out if it doesn’t pump more cash into businesses that can create jobs, say Emory University faculty and other experts.

Washington Tries to Thaw Credit Freeze

The big question, according to Charles F. Goetz, an adjunct professor of organization and management and a distinguished lecturer in entrepreneurship at Emory University's Goizueta Business School, is whether or not the new stimulus bill will truly thaw the capital freeze that is currently blocking business activity.

“Funding, not consumer spending, is the core issue for small businesses,” he says. “Right now lenders are hesitant to extend money to commercial borrowers even when they have a good track record, and in some cases are actually calling in loans that they have already funded.”

He acknowledges that a falloff in revenue is hurting small businesses and notes that the stimulus package could improve that, but says the bill will only fix a very small part of the problem.

“The freeze in funding is hurting small businesses much more than the shortfall in sales is hurting them,” Goetz says. “Without the necessary cash to grease the gears and keep the business going, companies have had no choice but to reduce costs. And that, unfortunately, results in a cutback on capital expenditures and a need to lay off workers. So cash, in the form of loans, is the mechanism that is most important, but the stimulus bill can do little to help in that regard."

So where will that help come from?

"It's going to have to come from the $350 billion still remaining in the TARP; or possibly even more from a future son-of-TARP,” Goetz says. “Whether the TARP is used for a Good Bank/Bad Bank strategy [similar to the Resolution Trust Corp. created after the Savings and Loan failures of the 1980s], or to put direct investment into troubled banks, the only vehicle that has any real chance of freeing up bank lending and truly helping small business is the TARP or some reincarnation of it.”

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner appeared to allude to a similar plan in his February 10 comments calling for a $500 billion, Public-Private Investment Fund “targeted to the legacy loans and assets that are now burdening many financial institutions.”

Meanwhile, says Goetz, “When consumers are worried about keeping their jobs, they spend less and save more, which results in lower sales for companies and exacerbates the whole cycle.”

Small businesses in particular are concerned that the stimulus package misses the boat. Small businesses are defined as companies with fewer than 10 employees, and they account for almost 80 percent of all U.S. companies, according to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) lobbying group. Small businesses are credited with generating about 70 percent of all new jobs.

“By increasing the federally guaranteed portion of Small Business Administration (SBA) loans, and giving more power to the SBA to expedite loan approvals, we believe we can turn around the dramatic decline in SBA lending we have seen in recent months,” said Geithner.

But Goetz was not very impressed, since the package calls for only about $500 million for the Small Business Administration’s loan-guarantee programs, which he says "is a drop in the bucket" compared to the total drop-off in bank loans.

“Banks, particularly through the SBA guaranteed loan programs, have the potential to help both existing and new small businesses to expand and hire more employees,” he says.

In a February 6 message to the membership of NFIB, the organization’s chief executive officer Dan Danner asks, “Have you heard anything about what Congress is providing for small businesses in the current economic stimulus package being debated in Washington? Unfortunately, the answer is ‘No.’"

Did TARP Spring a Leak?

In fact, Goetz says, the remaining $350 billion in the federal TARP program could do a lot to spur business activity, if it is designed differently.

“Maybe TARP has not been used in the most effective way to date,” observes Goetz. “It was passed in a hurry, and apparently there were no direct requirements for banks to actually make more loans. Instead, many institutions have tightened lending standards and used the funds for things like purchasing other banks, instead of making more loans.”

Although the U.S. Treasury has invested about $350 billion into financial institutions under TARP, about 70 percent of U.S. banks reported they tightened standards on loans to small firms, according to the most recent Bank Lending Practices survey taken by the Federal Reserve Board.

“Perhaps the creation of a Good Bank/Bad Bank entity like the Resolution Trust Corp. (RTC) would have been a better use of the funds,” says Goetz, referring to a limited-life federal organization, created in the wake of the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s, which managed and resolved financial institutions placed under conservatorship or receivership from January 1, 1989, through August 9, 1992.

“If my memory is correct, the government actually made money on the RTC and put money back into the banking system that got individuals and business to start spending again,” he says. “And contrary to what most people think, this is actually a good time to start a new business and to expand if you already have a small business. This is because in a recession, competition often shrinks at a pace even faster than demand does.”

Competitors that grew “fat and happy” in an easier time are falling by the wayside as they are unable to adjust in a more difficult environment, Goetz says. “In addition, you can pick up some very good employees that you would not have been able to in a better market. And even if you're not interested in starting a new business, the difficult economic environment means you can often purchase a company that is up and running at a fraction of what it would have cost just six months earlier.”

Some Goizueta faculty members are even more disenchanted with the stimulus proposal.

“In my judgment, this is a very poorly designed package,” says Ray Hill, an adjunct professor of finance. “I believe that only a small portion of the huge debt we will incur will produce any stimulus within any reasonable time frame.”

First, he says, “A big part of the [proposed] package is temporary tax relief directed to individuals. Economic theory and repeated experience—including the tax rebates of the 2008 stimulus package under the Bush administration—tell us that consumers save or pay down debt most of any change in income they perceive to be temporary, including the so-called tax ‘refunds’ to people who don't pay taxes.”

Both versions of the stimulus packages call for billions of dollars to be spent on infrastructure and other “shovel ready” projects that are projected to create jobs. “Although spending on infrastructure is commendable, this spending will take time, even for so-called ‘shovel ready’ projects,” says Hill.

“I believe that the Congressional Budget Office's own projections forecast that most of these funds will be spent in 2010 or later,” he says. By then the economy may already be recovering and the spending will either be inflationary or will take resources from private sector investment.”

Hill also faults proposed investments in alternative energy, noting that “we already have a glut of solar panels so no one is going to start producing a lot more until whole projects are underway, which can take years. Of course, you hear venture capitalists supporting this part of the stimulus package, but that is pure self interest.”

The stimulus package being discussed by Congress may indeed help the economy in some ways, concedes Hill.

“It may provide funds to states and prompt them to maintain spending that would otherwise be cut,” he says. “But it may also have unintended consequences. I have in mind the extension and improvement in unemployment benefits.”

Extending benefits in the weak economy may be good policy, "but we have to recognize that the inevitable result will be a longer duration of high unemployment than would otherwise be the case,” Hill notes.

Some observers argue that permanent tax cuts will provide the most effective and immediate stimulus, Hill notes, adding that “I think experience shows that this probably is the case.”

Car Dealers Suffer as Sales Stall

Automobile dealers, which were hammered by high energy prices and the tight credit market, are one of the economic downturn’s latest casualties.

Based on falling sales, about 5,000 car dealers across the U.S., or nearly 25 percent of the estimated total, would have to close in 2009 to enable average sales per dealer to match 2007's results, according to a study released in January by the accounting firm Grant Thornton LLP.

At least one industry observer who attended a recent National Automobile Dealers Association convention is worried that the stimulus package won’t do much to help those at-risk dealers, many of which are family-owned businesses.

“Banks may be getting TARP financing, but they’re still skittish about providing floor financing [revolving loans that dealers use to finance their inventory],” says Richard Kotzen, a partner in the Dealership Services Group of Crowe Horwath LLP, a Florida-based CPA firm. “Further, some of the TARP money is being diverted to U.S. automobile manufacturers, which encourages them to build more cars and press dealers to take delivery and pay for even more units that may end up sitting on their lots.”

Kotzen says he believes the industry as a whole will eventually recover, but notes that so far, federal stimulus programs have not generated a “trickle down” effect.

“The ‘shovels in the dirt’ approach of the stimulus plan as it stands now will generate jobs down the road, but auto dealers and other retailers need money now,” he says. “Permanent tax relief for consumers and retailers might help. Tax rebates, the ability to depreciate assets faster, and the extension of loss carrybacks [offsetting prior-year profits with current year losses] to five years from the current two, could also help businesses to regain their footing.”

Increased SBA funding in the stimulus package could provide some rapid assistance to small businesses, says Andrea Hershatter, who teaches entrepreneurship and serves as associate dean and director of the BBA program at Goizueta.

“Typically, the propensity for risk taking goes down in a weak economy,” she says. “The typical rounds of early stage financing from friends and family and angel investors depends on excess capital. Reduced wealth means that these usual sources of early venture financing are unavailable to entrepreneurs. Additionally, in the current environment, many banks are not willing or able to provide loans or lines of credit, leaving very few options for entrepreneurs.”

Hershatter points out that the stimulus package must spur the economy on a wide scale basis in order to have a positive long-term impact for entrepreneurs. In the meantime, additional sources of credit for small businesses are needed to help them get off the ground, she adds.

But Hershatter cautions that federal assistance to new and fledgling businesses must employ the same criteria that the private sector would consider, funding only those businesses with the highest likelihood of success.

Additionally, it is crucial to consider the sectors most likely to thrive in the coming years, she says, noting that “funding that flows to businesses whose goals are consistent with the broader ambitions of the federal government have a higher probability of benefitting from the first wave of economic growth.”

The Obama administration “has committed itself to a number of segments, including improvements in healthcare, education and energy efficiency,” says Hershatter. “If economic stimulus funds help to set up or grow businesses that contribute to these agendas, there is good alignment. On the other hand, if the stimulus package simply provides a pool of funds that lend to businesses that are not viable in the long term, it could be a waste of taxpayer money.”

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Treasury Secretary Geithner's Plan Must Stop Wave of Foreclosures

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Michael Calhoun, President of the Center for Responsible Lending, on Geithner's "Financial Stability" Plan:

We will not effectively stabilize the nation's banks and financial system until we stop the wave of foreclosures that continues to drive down the economy and harm millions of families. At least 8 million families risk losing their homes to foreclosure in the next four years. These foreclosures drive down the value of all homes, and in turn prevent a recovery of the housing and financial markets. The financial crisis will not end unless these foreclosures are reduced.

This year alone there will be 2.4 million foreclosures. The 75 million families who happen to live near those properties will see their home values drop an additional $435 billion. That amount could more than triple over the next four years to nearly $1.5 trillion. Declining property values means less tax revenue to support schools, police, and other essential local services. The negative effects from foreclosure losses are cascading through the economy and harming us all.

We understand that Treasury Secretary Geithner will soon outline a plan to help prevent foreclosures. We eagerly await this plan. For it to be effective, it must be ambitious and must include a combination of carrots and sticks to stop preventable foreclosures and keep families in their homes.

Several steps are essential:
-- Homeowners facing foreclosure must be allowed access to the court
system to seek reasonable adjustments on their home loans. This
solution will not cost taxpayers a dime, and, conservatively, would
prevent 800,000 foreclosures.

-- Incentives such as the FDIC's loan guarantee program must be adopted
to give industry an incentive to modify more of the unaffordable loans
it made;

-- The federal government should obtain clarity on accounting rules and
buy delinquent loans from private-label mortgage-backed securities or
take other direct action that will break through the obstacles that
are currently preventing badly needed home loan modifications; and

-- The full $100 billion of TARP funds targeted by Congress for
foreclosure relief must be used to directly help homeowners.

NLPC Blasts Obama/Geithner Big Bank Bailout

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- According to Peter Flaherty, President of the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC):

"The trillion-dollar stimulus plan has not even passed Congress and the administration proposes to throw another trillion at Wall Street on top of the $750 billion already provided without a tangible benefit.

Buying toxic assets was supposed to be the purpose of the first TARP. After Henry Paulson and Timothy Geithner warned that our financial system would collapse if TARP were not passed, they spent the money on something else - bolstering the capital position of banks. Politically well-connected Citigroup has received $45 billion, more than the book value of the company, and it is still in trouble.

The burden is on President Obama and Timothy Geithner to explain why another Wall Street bailout will work when the first one did not. This latest plan would have the taxpayer finance the purchase of troubled assets, opening the door for unregulated, opaque entities like hedge funds to speculate with taxpayer funds.

The White House doesn't get it. To have Countrywide VIP Christopher Dodd introduce tax cheat Timothy Geithner to detail the second stage of an already-unpopular Wall Street bailout shows poor judgment."

NLPC promotes ethics in public life. On January 29, NLPC asked Neil M. Barofsky, the Special Inspector General for TARP, for an investigation of the sponsorship by Citigroup of a junket to the Caribbean by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) and five other members of Congress, a trip that violated House Rules.

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Consumers Union Urges Obama Administration to Let States Take Greater Role in Overseeing Banks

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- States should be able to enforce consumer protections that apply to all banks that operate within their borders, according to Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. The group urged Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to rescind Bush Administration era regulations that have prevented states from protecting consumers from many of the mortgage lending abuses that contributed to the current foreclosure crisis.

"While federal regulators were asleep at the switch, state agencies were blocked from taking more aggressive action to protect consumers," said Mark Savage, Senior Attorney with Consumers Union. "It's clear we need more cops on the beat. The Obama Administration should make sure states aren't prevented from addressing financial industry abuses that threaten American families and ultimately our economy."

In a letter to Geithner, Consumers Union called on the Treasury Secretary to repeal a set of regulations adopted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in 2004 that prevent states from enforcing state laws against national banks and their operating subsidiaries. The role of states in enforcing existing laws applying to national banks is a key issue in the debate over the effective regulation of the financial industry and is at the heart of a case now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In Cuomo v. The Clearing House Association, L.L.C. and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Court will decide if the New York Attorney General has the right to investigate whether several national banks discriminated against African American and Latino borrowers by charging them significantly higher mortgage interest rates. New York was prevented from investigating the banks after the OCC sued the state and cited its preemption regulation to argue that the Attorney General did not have the authority to take such action.

After the Second Circuit Court sided with the OCC, the Attorneys General of all 50 states urged the Supreme Court to take up the case and reverse the appeals court decision. The Supreme Court agreed and, on February 25, the U.S. must file its brief in the case on behalf of the OCC, an agency under the Treasury Department.

For the past four years, the OCC has been championing deregulatory and minimal standards against states that have been trying to enact higher standards for banks and their operating subsidiaries. When states tried to monitor mortgage lending and protect consumers, the OCC invited national banks to contact the agency, which then wrote letters to banks and state banking agencies asserting that states had no authority to do so. The OCC also sided with national banks in the courts, writing amicus briefs arguing that state monitoring and enforcement in a variety of areas did not apply, and that only the OCC could investigate and enforce laws against nationally chartered banks.

This included the case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court last year against Michigan, in which the OCC sided with Wachovia Bank and argued that state mortgage lending laws and oversight could not apply to a national bank's operating subsidiary. Wachovia subsequently found itself on the brink of collapse because of risky mortgages and was forced to sell itself to Wells Fargo. Similarly, the OCC took action to block more aggressive mortgage lending oversight by regulators in California, Georgia, and Ohio - states that have been hit hard by the foreclosure crisis.

"Under the Bush Administration, the OCC repeatedly sided with the banks and against consumers and the states," said Savage. "If states had been allowed to act, consumers would have been better protected from unfair lending practices that led to the mortgage meltdown. Treasury Secretary Geithner should repeal the Bush era regulations and untie the hands of the states so they can protect consumers against financial industry abuses."

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Major Media Excuse Obama Nominee's Failure to Pay Taxes

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Rather than provide a check on the abuses of those in power, Accuracy in Media editor Cliff Kincaid says the media are making excuses for Obama Treasury Secretary nominee Timothy Geithner's failure over the years to pay a variety of taxes and to make sure those he hired as domestic help had legal status in the U.S. The media, Kincaid argues, are functioning as arms of the Obama Transition office. The most popular excuse, first put forward by the Obama office, is that Geithner just made "honest mistakes." This excuse has been picked up by the media, he notes.

In a column on the subject, Kincaid says, "based on the documents that have come out, he [Geithner] is either a tax cheat or a dummy when it comes to his basic personal finances and tax matters. Do we want either one as head of the Treasury Department?"

Kincaid suggests poor coverage of the scandal by NBC News may be related to the fact that Jeffrey Immelt, chairman and chief executive officer of NBC parent company General Electric (GE), is on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, whose president is Timothy Geithner. "It is also interesting to note that a subsidiary of GE, GE Capital, is getting some of the federal bailout money that Geithner, if he is confirmed, will have a role in managing," Kincaid notes. He asks, "Conflict of interest, anyone?"

He adds, "Another member of the board of the New York Fed is Lee C. Bollinger, the president of Columbia University, who serves on the board of the Washington Post Company. This is the media conglomerate whose media properties include the Washington Post newspaper, Newsweek, and Slate."

"Connections like this help explain why Geithner's tax problems won't become a scandal or even much of a controversy for major elements of the media," the AIM editor concludes.