« Goodbye to the Sole True Hero (Sol Trujillo goes back to San Diego) | John Hempton's Blog | A question about appropriate ethical standards for lawyers »

Do you or did you ever have friends in the FDIC?


"Here in my hand is a list of 205 communists in the blogosphere and the mainstream media."

Well – no actually – but I have a long list of people who – on the record – supported the confiscation of Washington Mutual.

Washington Mutual – by far the biggest bank confiscation in US history – happened during the AIG/Lehman week.  It was confiscated despite being liquid and adequately capitalised at the time.  Sheila Bair – the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp (FDIC) did the deed – and in my opinion it was not her finest hour.  

Washington Mutual was given to JP Morgan who did not need to honour all of WaMu’s debts.  Debt holders – who would normally have expected to recover most or all of their investment were wiped out. 

After this – and until very recently – no major US bank could raise any debt without a government guarantee.  After all – if the government could wipe you out why would you ever invest in low risk margin debt?

The confiscation of Washington Mutual thus forced the entire system onto the government guarantee tit.  The cost to taxpayers is thus potentially enormous.

Now at the time the confiscation looked justified to many because they assumed that Washington Mutual was insolvent no matter what their accounts said.  JP Morgan – the acquirer – obliged this view by writing down the value of WaMu’s assets by about 20 billion.  This write-down also justified the action by Sheila Bair.  I said at the time that Sheila Bair was acting improperly despite this – and I said later that JPM was lying. 

However if JPM was telling the truth – and Sheila Bair had a decent basis for believing them – then this was not arbitrary confiscation – though it was confiscation without appeal.  It would be costly for the system – and it might have been justified. 

Alas the facts have a neat way of outing the incompetence of Sheila Bair.   JPMorgan is now confessing that almost all of the charges taken when Washington Mutual was confiscated will be reversed through their P&L.  Washington Mutual was never insolvent and should never have been confiscated.  [Hat tip – Felix Salmon.]

Sheila Bair – a Republican appointee no less – confiscated without compensation and without right of appeal valuable private property.  I have argued repeatedly that she should resign – but now my basic thesis is proven her position is totally untenable.

A huge number of people supported her at the time.  These are people who supported the confiscation of private property without appeal.  Usually such people are called communists.  The alternative explanation is that these people are just dopes.

Actually I know a lot of these people and they are not dopes.  [Using McCarthyist logic therefore they must be communists.]

But they are not Communists either.  Instead they were dopes on this occasion.  Panics – be them financial or political do that.  They turn thinking – even iconoclastic people like high profile bloggers – into dopes.

Now Washington Mutual was in fact very easy to add up.  It was obviously solvent if you ran the numbers properly – but people find it quite difficult to run the numbers on banks.  This applies to senior government officials too.  And that explains why financial crises happen.  People thought there was no risk in financial assets that were obviously risky during 2005 and 2006 and even into 2007.  Thereafter they thought that financial assets that were most likely safe were (near) worthless.  Government officials seemingly arbitrarily confiscating assets into the height of the crisis just added to that fear.  A preferred stock is worthless if the government steals the underlying collateral (as I found out to my cost in the WaMu case). 

After the confiscation of WaMu we needed not only to judge the solvency of banks (something which I think I am capable of doing) but also to judge the behaviour of individual officials in crisis (which I am not capable of doing).

The irrational fear in markets was not unlike the irrational fear that other manias (eg Joe McCarthy) engendered.  That doesn’t make the fear less real or less destructive.

I thought at the time that Sheila Bair’s resignation would heal that wound– and would be the single best thing that the government could do to ease the financial crisis.  Her resignation would break the nexus between fear in the market and the fear of seemingly arbitrary confiscation by government officials.

That nexus is broken now through repeated and consistent subsidy at huge potential cost to the taxpayers.  The government – through repeated capital injections and guarantees – has managed to convince most people that American banks are safe.

It would have been cheaper for Sheila Bair just to resign.

However – the immediate and pressing need for Sheila Bair to resign as a matter of policy has past.  The market is no longer outright afraid of arbitrary government confiscation of financial assets though they might have some fear about government intervening in Detroit’s bankruptcy. 

But whilst the time for Sheila Bair’s resignation as a matter of national priority is past, the time for her resignation for proven incompetence has just begun.

 

 

 

John

 

Read more at John Hempton's Weblog


10 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

I was hoping for some meat in your post. Where's the beef?

Why aren't you calling for criminal charges against JPM?

user-pic

I don't have the evidence for criminal charges against JPM. There is a risk that that evidence pops up under discovery at the various civil suits - but there is not a chance that the government would ever file those criminal charges.

Moreover the criminal charges would destabilise the financial system which is not likely to be in the public interest.

J

user-pic

If JPM committed fraud to acquire WaMu, trying that case doesn't "destabilise the financial system", does it?

And I still don't see the beef on Bair. I was hoping the latter part of your post would develop something specific.

user-pic

"It was confiscated despite being liquid and adequately capitalised at the time."

The article on JP Morgan and WaMu today @ Calculated Risk would seem to cast doubt on this assertion, Felix Salmon notwithstanding.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/05/revisiting-jpmorgan-wamu-acquisition.html

user-pic

9/07 FHFA takes over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
9/14 Merrill Lynch taken over by BOA
9/15 Lehman bankruptcy
9/16 AIG crashes
9/16 Reserve Primary breaks buck
9/20 Hank Paulson's three-page bailout plan published, all hell breaks loose.
9/25 WaMu seized after 10 day bank run

Now that you've explained it, I can see how if Shelia Bair had just left WaMu alone, everything would have been fine. /snark


user-pic

Sorry John on your lost investments. I suspect that Wa Mu was in no worse trouble than BofA and Citi. It must be frustrating to see that government decided to bail out those insolvent banks and throw your bank under the bus.

The basic fact is that about $10 trillion in outstanding mortgages are backed with about $6 trillion in collatoral. Someone is going to have to take those losses. Just because the taxpayer is absorbing the biggest banks losses does not mean that Wa Mu was solvent.

user-pic

No - but ex-post JPM has admitted that WaMu was solvent.

The test is ex-post here.

---

And it was a small loss - but a REALLY BAD decision.

It took the crisis from the wholesale banks (Bear, Lehman, AIG FP) to the retail banks (WaMu, Wachovia).

In other words it moved the crisis from Wall Street to Main Street.

Bad move Sheila.

J

user-pic

The crises started on mainstreet. WaMu had gone into the same schlock mortgage lending business that Golden West, Countrywide, and IndyMac had pioneered.

Golden West was the poison that killed Wachovia.

Countrywide severely sickened Bank of America.

FDIC couldn't find a buyer for IndyMac and took a huge hit.

Of course, this was all compounded by the mark-to-market idiocy. With mark-to-market, WaMu was insolvent.

Having marked down the assets to market, JPMC got them for what they were worth at the time. As they mature and are mostly paid off, JPMC will make a handsome profit. JPMC is just playing the game according to the stupid rules and regulations set up by the government.

user-pic

Name me one powerful regulator in this mess that hasn't made a bad move that cost billions?

Take as much time as you need.

user-pic

WAMU has been my bank for years, but I have no intention of leaving any of my accounts with JPM Chase. I am not interested in dealing with a NY bank. I suspect that they will end up losing a lot of the west coast former WAMU customers.

Leave a comment

John Hempton

user-pic

Following: 0
Followers: 10

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address