Hurricane Irene Cuts Power to Over 1 Million; U.S. Airlines Scrub 9,500 Flights; World Trade Center Construction at Risk

Here is a quick roundup of stories related to Hurricane Irene.



AccuWeather reports Irene Cuts Power to a Million Plus; Eyeing the Northeast

Aug 27, 2011; 7:50 PM ET

"As of Saturday evening, over a million customers were without power in Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland and Delaware."



Hurricane Irene made landfall on Cape Lookout in eastern North Carolina as a Category 1 hurricane and will continue track to the north with conditions deteriorating for millions across the mid-Atlantic through tonight.



8:30 p.m. EDT Saturday, Aug. 27: The eye of Hurricane Irene has emerged back over water about 35 miles east of Norfolk, Va. Wind gusts to hurricane force (74 mph or greater) will continue to be experienced near and to the north of the center, along with a damaging storm surge. Doppler radar estimates over 17.50 inches of rain has fallen in parts of North Carolina and extreme southeastern Virginia with confirmed reports between 10.00 and 14.00 inches.



Suffolk, Va., has received nearly 10.50 inches of rain thus far and was indicating widespread flooding in the city. Rainfall was increasing rapidly in Delaware and southern New Jersey with multiple locations now over 3.00 inches.



Power outages have had an impact on data collection in North Carolina and southeastern Virginia. Over 3/4 of the Dominion Power customers in the Richmond Metro area are without power at the present time.



Irene threatens to bring the worst effects from a hurricane in 50 years in a large part of the I-95 Northeast in terms of flooding and power outages.

There are lots of videos in that Weather Channel Link.



U.S. Airlines Scrub 9,500 Flights



Bloomberg reports U.S. Airlines Scrub 9,500 Flights as Irene Threatens N.Y.

U.S. carriers including United Continental Holdings Inc. (UAL) and Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL) scrubbed more than 9,500 flights as Hurricane Irene churned up the East Coast and shuttered airports in New York, the nation’s busiest travel market.



American Airlines halted New York City-area flights as of 10 a.m. local time, while United and Delta earlier scrubbed their full schedules. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey closed John F. Kennedy and LaGuardia airports and three smaller facilities to arriving flights as of noon local time as the city awaited heavy rain and wind.



“We need to make sure that we give our customers and our employees ample time to get home” before mass transit systems are closed, said Andrea Huguely, an American spokeswoman.



Philadelphia’s airport remains open, although airlines have reduced arrivals and departures throughout the day and none are scheduled for tomorrow, said Victoria Lupica, an airport spokeswoman. The airport terminals will remain open for passengers who may be stuck at the facility.



The six biggest U.S. airlines canceled at least 9,570 flights today through Aug. 29 because of the storm. Another 334 were scrubbed earlier in the week as the hurricane approached. New York officials suspended train, bus and subway service at noon today, making it harder for workers and passengers to reach airports. More than 370,000 people were ordered to evacuate low- lying areas.

World Trade Center Construction at Risk



AccuWeather reports World Trade Center Construction at Risk from Irene's Winds

Construction at the site of the World Trade Center memorial, Reflecting Absence, has been halted due to Hurricane Irene.



The Mayor Michael Bloomberg suspended construction on Friday and crews disassembled the cranes that were on site, according to Latimes.com. This was done to prevent the cranes from coming apart in high winds, crashing to the ground and causing major damage to anything or anyone below.



Despite dismantling the cranes and securing building supplies, there is still a risk of damage to the building itself. Winds are expected to be sustained at 50-60 mph with gusts to 65-75 mph as Irene impacts New York Sunday morning, according to AccuWeather meteorologists.



Wind can be funneled between tall buildings increasing wind speed.



Glass windows have already been placed toward the center of the building. The wind could dislodge the windows. The windows become dangerous as they fall and break or could even be blown into other buildings and cause more damage.



This is an issue not only for the construction site of the World Trade Center, but for any construction sites along the path of the storm.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Capital Flight Proves Confidence in European Interbank System has Collapsed

Capital flight from European banks has now reached such a state that for one undisclosed bank needed emergency funding last week for a mere $5 million. Previously, the ECB stepped in to provide $500 million in emergency liquidity measures to non-disclosed banks.



As money flees Europe, it lands in US banks that do not know what to do with it. Capital flight has led to negative interest rates in the US.

Duration	U.S.	Japan	Germany	UK
3-Month	-.01	0.10	0.97	0.51
6-Month	0.02	0.11	0.56	0.59
12-Month	0.08	0.12	0.59	0.53
2-Year	0.19	0.14	063	0.59
3-Year	0.32	0.17	0.67	0.75
5-Year	0.93	0.34	1.20	1.36
7-Year	1.52	0.59	1.63	1.84
10-Year	2.18	1.04	2.14	2.49
30-Year	3.55	2.01	2.98	3.75

Swelling US Deposits as Money Flees Europe



For a look at European Bank funding needs please see 8 Trillion Euros in Borrow-Short Lend-Long Madness at European Banks; Circuit-Breaker Silliness; Dash for Cash Sends Short-Term Rates Negative Again



"Lehman-Like" Credit Crunch Hits EU



For discussion of the European credit crunch and $500 million in emergency liquidity measures to undisclosed banks, please see "Lehman-Like" Credit Crunch Hits EU; ECB Will Not Disclose Affected Banks; Euro-Style Anxiety Spreads to U.S.



$5 Million in Emergency Funding



$5 million is a trivial amount. That a bank would need it is not.



Jean-Pierre Chevallier writing on Business économiste monétariste behavioriste discusses the stetup in his latest post ECB: no more bets! More…

The situation is out of control in the euro zone, as I have been writing it for a while…



The interbank market does not work because euro-zone banks managers have lost confidence in other banks. So they keep their cash in US$ rather than lending it to other banks that need it as they would in normal times: ECB had loaned $5 million to a bank on August, 25.



ECB had previously loaned $500 million (USD) on August 17. This caused a flash-crash in U.S. markets.



The problem is serious.

Chevallier notes that the paltry amount of money involved "shows that the interbank system is completely blocked".



Trust in European banks is shot, and by hiding the banks needing emergency liquidity funding, distrust spreads to all banks in the system. Then again, why shouldn't distrust spread?



The entire global financial system is bankrupt. Loans have been made that cannot and will not be paid back.



Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Obama Seeks Holy Grail of Housing, Proverbial Free Lunch, Gain With No Pain; It's Another Bank Bailout in Disguise

President Obama is in Fantasyland or in some alternate universe. He wants to strengthen the housing market provided

• The plan helps a broad swath of homeowner
• The plan stimulates the economy
• The plan costs next to nothing

So says the New York Times in U.S. May Back Refinance Plan for Mortgages

The Obama administration is considering further actions to strengthen the housing market, but the bar is high: plans must help a broad swath of homeowners, stimulate the economy and cost next to nothing.



One proposal would allow millions of homeowners with government-backed mortgages to refinance them at today’s lower interest rates, about 4 percent, according to two people briefed on the administration’s discussions who asked not to be identified because they were not allowed to talk about the information.



A wave of refinancing could be a strong stimulus to the economy, because it would lower consumers’ mortgage bills right away and allow them to spend elsewhere. But such a sweeping change could face opposition from the regulator who oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and from investors in government-backed mortgage bonds.



Investors may suspect a plan is in the works. Fannie and Freddie mortgage bonds had been trading well above their face value because so few people were refinancing, keeping returns on the bonds high. But those bond prices dropped sharply this week.

Uninspiring Nonsense



Frank E. Nothaft, the chief economist at Freddie Mac, said the federal action could instill confidence.



"It almost seems to me you want to have some type of announcement or policy, program or something from the federal government that provides that clear signal that we are here supporting the housing market and this is indeed a good time to really consider buying," Mr. Nothaft said.



Quite frankly that is idiotic as one of my readers noted in an email. That government needs to step in and artificially support housing prices is not inspirational.



Moreover, two tax credits that blew up just proved it.



The idea that you can do something at no cost to fix the housing market is pure lunacy. I am not sure which of the following terms applies best

1. Holy Grail of Housing
   
   
2. Free Lunch
3. Perpetual Motion Device
4. Fountain of Youth
5. Pain with No Gain

I like number 1 best, but 1, 2, and 5 are solid choices.



The Keynesian clowns are of course very supportive of the general idea, led this time by Treasury Secretary Geithner and Christopher J. Mayer, an economist at the Columbia Business School.



Mayer says "This is the best stimulus out there because it doesn’t increase the deficit, it accomplishes monetary policy, and it reduces defaults in housing"



Mayer is obviously another believer in various free lunch ideas that cost nothing but will save housing.



Tom Lawler (on Calculated Risk's site) slammed some of these ideas back in July in Lawler: “Slam-Dunk” Stimulus? MS = Missing Something!!!!



The last few paragraphs of the article are rather interesting.

The government has already encouraged some refinancing through the Federal Housing Administration and through Fannie and Freddie, but participation is limited. For example, the Home Affordable Refinance Program excludes homeowners who owe more than 125 percent of the value of their house. To spur more refinancing, the government may decide to encourage Fannie and Freddie to lift such restrictions.



But government officials cautioned that Fannie and Freddie do not do the administration’s bidding, even though they are essentially owned by taxpayers.



A broader criticism of a refinancing expansion is that it would not do enough to address the two main drivers of foreclosures: homes worth less than their mortgages, and a sudden loss of income, like unemployment. American homeowners currently owe some $700 billion more than their homes are worth.

Got That?



Fannie and Freddie are owned by US taxpayers. The Obama administration wants to dump all of these proposals on the backs of taxpayers, perhaps without addressing the problem that "American homeowners currently owe some $700 billion more than their homes are worth."



Supposedly this can be done at "little to no cost".



Obama is either too dumb to see what's going on or he simply does not care what it costs to buy votes. I believe both.



Bank Bailout in Disguise



Depending on precisely how the proposal is implemented, the effect may be to take poor performing loans off the balance sheets of banks and hedge funds and dump the risks squarely on the backs of taxpayers via Fannie and Freddie.



It's no wonder Geithner supports it.



Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

8 Trillion Euros in Borrow-Short Lend-Long Madness at European Banks; Circuit-Breaker Silliness; Dash for Cash Sends Short-Term Rates Negative Again

The Financial Times reports US funds show true state of eurozone banks

Morgan Stanley, calculates that of the €8,000bn funding that is currently in place for the largest 91 eurozone banks, some 58 per cent needs to be rolled over in the next two years. More startling still, some 47 per cent of this funding is less than a year in duration. Much of that is in euros.



However, as the saga of the money market funds shows, eurozone banks have been raising short-term dollar funds too, either to finance their portfolios of dollar assets, or to provide a cheap form of funding (which is then swapped back into euros.) The scale of this reliance is – thankfully – not nearly as large as it was in, say, 2007; back then eurozone banks had a vast network of dollar-funded mortgage vehicles, creating a funding mismatch that was about $800bn, according to the Bank for International Settlements. Nevertheless, some element of this mismatch remains; hence the current crunch.



Is there any solution? In the long term, some eurozone banks probably need to rethink some of their funding profile. In the short term, however, Huw van Steenis, an analyst at Morgan Stanley, has recently been promoting another interesting idea: eurozone authorities should offer joint guarantees for debt issued by banks, as a form of “circuit breaker” to counteract panic.

Circuit-Breaker Silliness



The idea that banks can guarantee each others' debt is complete silliness. I have a better idea. How about banks not borrow-short and lend-long?



All banks have to do is not lend money for longer than they have access to it. If they did that, they would not be constantly rolling loans. If banks want to lend for 5 years they should secure money for 5 years.



It really is that simple.



Might this kill 30-year mortgages? Yes, so what?



Lending money for longer than you have ownership of it (secured right-to-use) should be illegal.



Swelling Deposits From Europe



Please consider U.S. Banks Seek Relief on Swelling Deposits

U.S. regulators have asked some banks to take more deposits from large investors even if it’s unprofitable, and lenders in return are seeking relief on insurance premiums and leverage ratios, according to six people with knowledge of the talks.



Deposits are flooding into the biggest U.S. banks as customers seek shelter from Europe’s debt crisis and falling stock prices. That forces lenders to raise capital for a growing balance sheet and saddles them with the higher deposit insurance payments. With short-term interest rates so low, it’s hard for financial firms to reinvest the new money profitably.



Regulators have asked banks to take the deposits anyway, three people said, with one lender accepting $100 billion. The regulators want lenders to take the deposits because it improves the stability of the financial system, according to one of the people, who said U.S. banks are viewed as places of strength.



Cash Cache



Cash held by domestically chartered U.S. banks, which includes Federal Reserve balances, rose to a record $1.02 trillion earlier this month, up 27 percent from the end of July last year. Deposits held by the 25 largest lenders expanded to $4.69 trillion in the week ended Aug. 10, up 8.5 percent from the end of May. The Fed’s balances advanced to $1.61 trillion as of Aug. 24, from $1.05 trillion a year earlier.



The extra deposits are problematic because they’re subject to withdrawal, so banks have to park the money in low-yielding short-term investments, Litan said. With few other choices available, banks have stashed their excess deposits at the Fed, which means the cash gets counted as assets.



Charging Depositors



At least one firm, Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BK), tried to recoup some of the costs by charging depositors 13 basis points, or 0.13 percent, for holding unusually high balances.



FDIC insurance fees for large banks typically average more than 0.1 percent, three of the people said. In addition, large banks also may apply an internal capital charge of at least 0.1 percent to such reserves, one bank executive estimated.



Most of JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM)’s almost $53 billion in new deposits in the second quarter were tied to Europe, according to Pri de Silva, a New York-based analyst at CreditSights Inc.



“If you are a bank you don’t want to use excess capital for these hot-money deposits,” de Silva said.

Yield Curve Table

Duration	U.S.	Japan	Germany	UK
3-Month	-.01	0.10	0.97	0.51
6-Month	0.02	0.11	0.56	0.59
12-Month	0.08	0.12	0.59	0.53
2-Year	0.19	0.14	063	0.59
3-Year	0.32	0.17	0.67	0.75
5-Year	0.93	0.34	1.20	1.36
7-Year	1.52	0.59	1.63	1.84
10-Year	2.18	1.04	2.14	2.49
30-Year	3.55	2.01	2.98	3.75

Dash for Cash Sends Short-Term Rates Negative Again



Note that 3-month T-Bills are yielding a negative .01% as demand for safety has shoved aside any concern to make a profit. However banks pay .10% for FDIC insurance.



Thus banks are losing .11% unless they charge fees. BNY Mellon has done just that, charging .13% for large deposits.



That large deposits keep flowing in from Europe says stress in European banks continues to simmer under the surface.



Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Bernanke's Invisible Bazooka Ploy

Bernanke is out of tools that make any sense even to him.



Seriously, what can he do he has not already done? Given that $1.6 trillion in excess reserves did not do a damn thing to spur lending or job creation, what possible good can another $1 trillion do?



The answer is none.



Yet Monetarist fools want more QE. Monetarist fools are also hoping for "Operation Twist", technically not QE but an attempt to drive down long-term rates by buying the long end of the curve and selling the short end.



Yield Curve Table

Duration	U.S.	Japan	Germany	UK
3-Month	-.01	0.10	0.97	0.51
6-Month	0.02	0.11	0.56	0.59
12-Month	0.08	0.12	0.59	0.53
2-Year	0.19	0.14	063	0.59
3-Year	0.32	0.17	0.67	0.75
5-Year	0.93	0.34	1.20	1.36
7-Year	1.52	0.59	1.63	1.84
10-Year	2.18	1.04	2.14	2.49
30-Year	3.55	2.01	2.98	3.75

Seriously, what possible good can come from say, driving down 10-year yields to say 1.75% or even 1.5% from here. Mortgage rates are at record low yields, yet new home sales are at the 1963 levels.



Clearly something other than the yield curve is holding down sales.



So what else can Bernanke do? Monetize more debt? How about .....



The Invisible Bazooka Ploy



Bloomberg reports Bernanke Says Fed Still Has Stimulus Tools, Doesn’t Signal He’ll Use Them

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said the central bank still has tools to stimulate the economy without providing details or signaling when or whether policy makers might deploy them.



“In addition to refining our forward guidance, the Federal Reserve has a range of tools that could be used to provide additional monetary stimulus,” Bernanke said in a speech today to central bankers and economists gathered at an annual forum in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. He said a second day has been added to the next policy meeting in September to “allow a fuller discussion” of the economy and the Fed’s possible response.

Translation: "I've got an invisible bazooka in my pocket and I will use it when I have to."



Bernanke is out of tools and he knows it. So does Kansas City Fed member Thomas Hoenig who says "Fed Can't Do It All, No Reason for Operation Twist to Work", Focus Should Shift to Fixing U.S. Fiscal Woes



Of course Bernanke cannot come out and say "I am out of tools".



When it gets serious you have to lie. This is serious, and his statement is a lie.



What else can he do but bluff?



He sounds like a 6-year old bragging about the size of his dog that will protect him against all evils, when the kid does not have a dog at all.



That does not mean Bernankle will not try something. Rest assured he will. I am not sure what, but it will likely be given a creative name hoping to dazzle us with the same misguided Fed policies that got us into this mess in the first place.



Bluff Working?



As of 10:00 Central the market is modestly higher. The S&P is up .8% and the Nasdaq double that. Is the bluff working?



Not really. I do not know a single person who thought today would be anything other than a sell the news event. Perhaps there is a sigh of relief that Bernanke is not doing anything, perhaps too many were looking for "down" and were already positioned that way.



Regardless, down will resume, just give it time.



Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Can Bank of America Buy Credibility? Global Bank Liquidity Issue or Solvency Issue?

I am somewhat in awe (in a negative sense) of the silliness of analysts and executives who think banks in the US and Europe are being hit with liquidity issues, not solvency issues.



Here is a case in point, from a Telegraph article: Market crash 'could hit within weeks', warn bankers.

Insurance on the debt of several major European banks has now hit historic levels, higher even than those recorded during financial crisis caused by the US financial group's implosion nearly three years ago.



Credit default swaps on the bonds of Royal Bank of Scotland, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo, among others, flashed warning signals on Wednesday. Credit default swaps (CDS) on RBS were trading at 343.54 basis points, meaning the annual cost to insure £10m of the state-backed lender's bonds against default is now £343,540.



The cost of insuring RBS bonds is now higher than before the taxpayer was forced to step in and rescue the bank in October 2008, and shows the recent dramatic downturn in sentiment among credit investors towards banks.



"The problem is a shortage of liquidity – that is what is causing the problems with the banks. It feels exactly as it felt in 2008," said one senior London-based bank executive.

Not a Liquidity Issue



Did you catch the silly quote? If not here it is: "The problem is a shortage of liquidity – that is what is causing the problems with the banks. It feels exactly as it felt in 2008," said one senior London-based bank executive.



This is not a liquidity issue. Banks are undercapitalized. I am not sure who that bank executive is, but he sounds like Rochdale Securities' analyst, Dick Bove.



I recently commented on Dick Bove, Bank of America, and undercapitalization in Hello Richard Bove, Repeating Nonsense Does Not Make It True; Bank of America Will Not Survive in One Piece.



On the chance you need a second opinion about Dick Bove, please consider Dick Bove – Open Mouth Insert Foot on the Big Picture blog, from April 17, 2010.

At 9:43 AM ET on CNBC, Dick Bove (Rochdale Securities) said Goldman would pay a fine and this will pass (3:00). He also called the stock an aggressive buy at $171 (4:45). At 6:00 minutes Mark Haines begged him to reconsider his position arguing that fraud is a big deal. Bove was undeterred and reiterated his buy recommendation stating a second time this was a short-term issue (7:00).

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1470603264&play=1

Then at 6:35 PM ET with the stock at $160.70 ($11 below his aggressive buy recommendation this morning) …

Bloomberg.com – Goldman Sachs Executives Should Resign, Bove Says

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein and finance chief David Viniar should resign over fraud allegations, according to Dick Bove, an analyst at Rochdale Securities. “Will Lloyd Blankfein, CEO, and David Viniar, CFO, maintain their positions in the company? I do not think so,” Bove wrote in a note to clients today. “Someone must ‘fall on their swords’ for the devastating decline in this company’s persona and they may be forced to do so for public relations reasons.”

Just six months ago Bove stuck his foot in his mouth by offering instant analysis on Wells Fargo by exciting giving a positive instant reaction to their earnings only to change his opinion to a sell for clients six hours later.

As a result of this embarrassment, Bove told Dow Jones newswires:

“I’m not going to do it anymore. I’m going to have to see the numbers before I go on air,” Bove told Dow Jones Newswires Thursday. “It creates an untenable situation.”

Dick, maybe you should expand your self-imposed gag order beyond numbers and not offer an opinion on a SEC complaint until you actually read it, or at least the three paragraph summary.

Goldman Sachs Weekly







The very best someone could have done on that recommendation is get out break even, after a substantial initial loss. Those who held on are in far worse shape. Perhaps in a couple years they too can get back to even.



Dick Bove: Bank Of America Shares Could Rocket To $32



Flashback December 16, 2010: Dick Bove: Bank Of America Shares Could Rocket To $32

Bank of America(BAC) will likely hit $32 per share, according to the latest bullish forecast by Rochdale Securities analyst Richard Bove.



Bove has been touting bank stocks for several months now, and in May he argued Citigroup(C) and Bank of America would sextuple by 2015.



Bove said in a voice message left with TheStreet that he estimates it will take roughly three years for Bank of America to reach $32.

Can Bank of America Buy Credibility?



Bloomberg reports Bank of America ‘Buying Credibility’ With Buffett’s $5 Billion Investment

The Bank of America cash injection may have little impact on capital and doesn’t resolve mounting legal claims linked to mortgages, many of which stem from the 2008 acquisition of Countrywide Financial Corp. Shares of the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank pared their initial gains today, rising 9.4 percent to $7.65 in regular New York trading.



“He’s buying credibility,” Richard Bove, an analyst at Rochdale Securities LLC in Lutz, Florida, said of Moynihan.



Still, Moynihan cut a “bad deal for Bank of America shareholders,” Bove said.



“It’s an excessive price to pay if, in fact, he didn’t need capital,” he said. “There’s no way in hell that he can make 6 percent after tax on any investment he can make.”

I do not believe one can buy credibility. However, let's assume you can. Can you still buy credibility if you

1. "Pay an excessive price"
2. "Cut a bad deal"
3. "Raise capital when you do not need to"

Bove makes all those statements. I want to know how a company can make three major mistake and still "buy credibility".



Bank of America Needed to Raise Capital



Actions speak louder than words.



Regardless, of what anyone says, Bank of America needed to raise capital or they would not have done this deal on extremely onerous terms. Bank of America has problems somewhere, perhaps multiple problems.



Statements to the contrary by Moynihan are meaningless. They remind me of statements by Bear Stearns, Lehman, and Morgan Stanley, lies, lies, and more lies by all three companies.



Dick Bove An Embarrassment to Rochdale Securities



In general, do not care about bad calls. Everyone who makes predictions is going to have a number of them. I certainly have made a number of them over the years. It is extremely difficult to get both timing and direction correct every time you say something. Indeed, it's impossible.



What's important are thought processes, sheer recklessness, and a repeated history of horrendously inept calls with few good ones.



In this case, it's crystal clear Dick Bove is an embarrassment to Rochdale Securities, and if Rochdale had any common sense they would fire Bove immediately, if not sooner. That they have not done so, just may say something about Rochdale Securities.



Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Schwab Sues Bank of America, Citigroup for Manipulating LIBOR Rates; IMF Notes that LIBOR Underpins $400 Trillion in Financial Derivatives

Investment News reports Schwab sues banks for manipulating Libor rates.

Charles Schwab Corp., the largest independent brokerage by client assets, sued Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc. and other banks claiming they manipulated the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, starting in 2007 in violation of U.S. antitrust law.



The banks conspired to depress Libor rates by understating their borrowing costs, thereby lowering their interest expenses on products tied to the rates, according to the lawsuit filed Aug. 23 in federal court in San Francisco, where Schwab is based.



The banks “reaped hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in ill-gotten gains,” Schwab wrote.



In separate suits in April, three European asset-management firms and the Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia sued the banks claiming they manipulated Libor. U.S. and U.K. officials are cooperating in a probe of possible Libor manipulation, a person close to the investigation said in March.



The Schwab suit seeks unspecified damages, which may be tripled under antitrust law. It also includes claims for racketeering and securities fraud.

Did the banks manipulate LIBOR? Of course they did. Proving it may be difficult.



LIBOR stands for London Interbank Offered Rate. It is the rate at which banks would lend to each other.



LIBOR is a rate at which banks say they would lend. However, it can easily be manipulated because it does not represent real transactions.



Previous LIBOR Manipulation Charges



Wikipedia describes previous LIBOR Allegations nicely.

On Thursday, 29 May 2008 the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) released a controversial study suggesting that banks may have understated borrowing costs they reported for LIBOR during the 2008 credit crunch. Such underreporting could have created an impression that banks could borrow from other banks more cheaply than they could in reality. It could also have made the banking system or specific contributing bank appear healthier than it was during the 2008 credit crunch.

For example, the study found that rates at which one major bank "said it could borrow dollars for three months were about 0.87 percentage point lower than the rate calculated using default-insurance data."

To further bring this case to light, the Wall Street Journal released another article dealing with this matter titled "U.S. Probe Presents Dilemma over Libor" on Friday, March 18 2011. The article stated that regulators are focusing on Bank of America Corp., Citi-group Inc. and UBS AG. Making a case would be very difficult because determining the LIBOR rate does not occur on an open exchange. According to people familiar with the situation, subpoenas have been issued to the three banks.

In October 2008 the International Monetary Fund published its regular Global Financial Stability Review which also found that "Although the integrity of the U.S. dollar LIBOR-fixing process has been questioned by some market participants and the financial press, it appears that U.S. dollar LIBOR remains an accurate measure of a typical creditworthy bank’s marginal cost of unsecured U.S. dollar term funding."

LIBOR Underpins $400 Trillion in Financial Derivatives



The IMF Global Financial Stability Review states "LIBOR rates are estimated to underpin some $400 trillion of financial derivatives contracts".



That is a direct quote on PDF page 16 if the IMF review. It clearly shows why banks have a huge incentive to lie.



Am I the only one who thinks $400 trillion tied to a made up number is insane? Hells bells, $400 Trillion riding on LIBOR would be insane even if the number was real. Heck, $400 Billion would still be insane.



Here is an interesting snip from PDF page 93 (report page 74) "given the huge outstanding amounts of derivative contracts and other financial instruments linked to term LIBOR and Euribor, these benchmark rates need to be maintained. Although the survey methodologies have been effective at eliminating most biases at the individual contribution level, proposals by the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) to increase the number of sampled banks and introduce more aggressive scrutiny of individual bank contributions are welcome."



It is staggering that there can be $400 trillion in derivatives based on LIBOR but there you have it. The number sounds impossible but the Bank of International Settlements shows there were $601 trillion in derivatives as of December 2010.



Of that number $465 trillion was interest rate contracts. For comparison purposes, a mere $65 billion is bet on gold.



Total Over-the-Counter Derivatives







click on table for sharper image



Bear in mind that $465 trillion on interest rate contracts is a "notional" amount. The actual market value of interest rate bets is a mere $14 trillion, and total derivatives a mere $21 trillion.



What a relief!



From the IMF Report ....

Box 2.2. Is the LIBOR Fix Broken?



Market observers have been expressing concerns that some LIBOR contributors submit rates that are too low, particularly when they are facing liquidity constraints (Mollenkamp and Whitehouse, 2008). This is said to be driven by the requirement of the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) that all rate submissions be published, and by the fact that banks facing liquidity strains may not want to reveal the higher market rates they are actually being offered.







Box 2.3. The Federal Reserve’s Term Auction Facility



In December 2007, the Federal Reserve announced a temporary Term Auction Facility (TAF) that enabled U.S. banks to borrow for four weeks against the wider range of collateral permissible at the discount window.



Conclusions



Short-term funding markets in mature economies have been under stress for an extended period despite extraordinary policy interventions by central banks to widen the availability of secured liquidity. Although interbank lending is no longer the principal source of bank term funding, wide spreads are not simply arising from the method for calculating interbank rates and are principally driven by concerns about banks being in significant distress, with U.S. dollar liquidity strains also representing a significant factor in the euro money market.



Further, evidence of disruptions to bank and near-bank financing markets indicates that the transmission of policy interest rate changes are less certain and reliable. Policy interventions to further broaden access to emergency liquidity may continue to contain systemic risks but are unlikely to resolve the crisis until broader policy measures are implemented.

The paragraphs I highlighted do not exactly match the one sentence Wikipedia found buried in the middle of the report: "It appears that U.S. dollar LIBOR remains an accurate measure of a typical creditworthy bank’s marginal cost of unsecured U.S. dollar term funding".



Second Lawsuit in Six Weeks



This is the second LIBOR Lawsuit in the last six weeks. Last month Eldorado Trading Group LLC filed a lawsuit accusing a group of banks of conspiracy. See Trading Firm Accuses Bank of America, JPMorgan, UBS, and Citigroup of Conspiracy to Manipulate LIBOR



I do not think there is collusion here, rather they all lied because it was in their best interest to lie. Did they lie? Of course. Good luck proving it.



Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List