Tag Archives: William K. Black

Systemically Dangerous Institutions

The Obama administration is continuing the Bush administration policy of refusing to comply with the Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) law (see here and here). Both administrations twisted a deeply flawed doctrine – “too big to fail” – into a policy enshrining crony capitalism.

Historically, “too big to fail” was a misnomer – large, insolvent banks and S&Ls were placed in receivership and their “risk capital” (shareholders and subordinated debtholders) received nothing. That treatment is fair, minimizes the costs to the taxpayers, and minimizes “moral hazard.” “Too big to fail” meant only that they were not placed in liquidating receiverships (akin to a Chapter 7 “liquidating” bankruptcy). In this crisis, however, regulators have twisted the term into immunity. Massive insolvent banks are not placed in receivership, their senior managers are left in place, and the taxpayers secretly subsidize their risk capital. This policy is indefensible. It is also unlawful. It violates the Prompt Corrective Action law. If it is continued it will cause future crises and recurrent scandals.


On October 16, 2006, Chairman Bernanke delivered a speech explaining why regulators must not allow banks with inadequate capital to remain open.

Capital regulation is the cornerstone of bank regulators’ efforts to maintain asafe and sound banking system, a critical element of overall financial stability. For example, supervisory policies regarding prompt corrective action are linked to a bank’s leverage and risk-based capital ratios. Moreover, a strong capital base significantly reduces the moral hazard risks associated with the extension of the federal safety net.

The Treasury has fundamentally mischaracterized the nature of institutions it deems “too big to fail.” These institutions are not massive because greater size brings efficiency. They are massive because size brings market and political power. Their size makes them inefficient and dangerous.

Under the current regulatory system banks that are too big to fail pose a clear and present danger to the economy. They are not national assets. A bank that is too big to fail is too big to operate safely and too big to regulate. It poses a systemic risk. These banks are not “systemically important”, they are “systemically dangerous.” They are ticking time bombs – except that many of them have already exploded.

We need to comply with the Prompt Corrective Action law. Any institution that the administration deems “too big to fail” should be placed on a public list of “systemically dangerous institutions” (SDIs). SDIs should be subject to regulatory and tax incentives to shrink to a size where they are no longer too big to fail, manage, and regulate. No single financial entity should be permitted to become, or remain, so large that it poses a systemic risk.

SDIs should:

1. Not be permitted to acquire other firms

2. Not be permitted to grow

3. Be subject to a premium federal corporate income tax rate that increases with asset size

4. Be subject to comprehensive federal and state regulation, including:

a. Annual, full-scope examinations by their primary federal regulator
b. Annual examination by the systemic risk regulator
c. Annual tax audits by the IRS
d. An annual forensic (anti-fraud) audit by a firm chosen by their primary federal regulator
e. An annual audit by a firm chosen by their primary federal regulator
f. SEC review of every securities filing

5. A prohibition on any stock buy-backs

6. Limits on dividends

7. A requirement to follow “best practices” on executive compensation as specified by their primary federal regulator

8. A prohibition against growth and a requirement for phased shrinkage

9. A ban (which becomes effective in 18 months) on having an equity interest in any affiliate that is headquartered in or doing business in any tax haven (designated by the IRS) or engaging in any transaction with an entity located in any tax haven

10. A ban on lobbying any governmental entity

11. Consolidation of all affiliates, including SIVs, so that the SDI could not evade leverage or capital requirements

12. Leverage limits

13. Increased capital requirements

14. A ban on the purchase, sale, or guarantee of any new OTC financial derivative

15. A ban on all new speculative investments

16. A ban on so-called “dynamic hedging”

17. A requirement to file criminal referrals meeting the standards set by the FBI

18. A requirement to establish “hot lines” encouraging whistleblowing

19. The appointment of public interest directors on the BPSR’s board of directors

20. The appointment by the primary federal regulator of an ombudsman as a senior officer of the SDI with the mission to function like an Inspector General

The Point of No Return

Our own Bill Black on bank’s equity and nonperforming loans. Black argued on the Bloomberg article that

“While 5 percent can be “fatal” for home lenders, commercial real estate lenders may be able to withstand higher rates…Commercial loans carry higher interest rates because they’re riskier.”

“At the 5 percent range, you’re probably hurting,” said Black, an associate professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. “Once it gets around 10 percent, you’re likely toast.”


Click here to read the whole article.

The Great American Bank Robbery

http://p.castfire.com/8Fi1I/video/129363/129363_2009-07-22-233157.flv

(From UCLA’s Hammer Forum) — William K. Black, the former litigation director of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board who investigated the Savings and Loan disaster of the 1980s, discusses the latest scandal in which a single bank, IndyMac, lost more money than was lost during the entire Savings and Loan crisis. He will examine the political failure behind this economic disaster, in which not only massive fraud has taken place, but a vast transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class continues as the federal government bails out the seemingly reckless, if not the criminal. Black teaches economics and law at the University of Missouri, Kansas City and is the author of The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One. (Run Time: 1 hour, 38 min.)

A thorough investigation of the financial collapse

The original Pecora investigation documented the causes of the economic collapse that led to the Great Depression. It was named after Ferdinand Pecora, lead counsel for the Senate Banking and Currency Committee investigation, whose inquiries established that conflicts of interest and fraud were common among elite finance and government officials.

The Pecora investigations provided the factual basis that produced a consensus that the financial system and political allies were corrupt. They did not divide the nation or divert its response to the economic crisis. The investigations discredited the elites that benefited from that system and were blocking reform. By identifying the most acute problems, Pecora provided the basis for Congress to draft specific legislation that restored public confidence in the financial markets and helped honest bankers. This staved off future crises in the U.S. for 45 years until the protections were removed by deregulation and desupervision.

The Pecora investigation teaches us how to create a successful investigation that can provide the basis for the fundamental reforms necessary to protect the nation from future economic collapses. Pecora was a prosecutor in New York that had brought cases against “bucket shops” (fraudulent sellers of securities) and corrupt politicians (primarily Democrats). He was not a financial specialist. These are the key factors that made Pecora successful and that need to replicated today:

Leadership and accountability

Pecora lead the investigation and conducted the questioning. There was no “bipartisan” fiction or friction: Pecora was in charge. A professional with expertise in investigations must conduct the questioning, as members of Congress cannot do so effectively. Pecora picked his aides, not Congress.
Pecora was non-partisan and known to be non-partisan.
Pecora was fearless.
Pecora was relentless and confrontational.
President Roosevelt personally and strongly supported Pecora.

Power

The broadest subpoena authority is essential.
No one, and no subject, is off limits to the investigation.
No special treatment for elites. Everyone testifies under oath.
No time limits that will encourage the subjects of the investigation and their political allies to stall. Pick a top investigator that wants to get the work done effectively and promptly but is willing to commit to stay as long as at takes to conduct a thorough investigation.
Conduct hearings that do not permit interference by witnesses’ counsel. Counsel can obstruct an investigative hearing if they are not limited to their proper role in such a setting (where evidentiary rules are not at issue). Witness counsel’s function at such a hearing is to advise their client as to whether they should assert their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Their function is not to make statements, ask purportedly clarifying questions, or assert objections. The Committee members must back up the new Pecora (and, of course, avoid similar interventions of their own that would disrupt the questioning). In this era, this will require tremendous, non-partisan self-restraint by Committee members.

Resources

Ample budget appropriated for multiple years. This must be done so that opponents of the investigation cannot impede it through the appropriations process


No political limits on how that budget can be used. No limits on the number of staff that can be hired.