More

Credit Default Swaps: SEC Asks Congress To Regulate Trades Happening 'In The Dark'

Credit Default Swaps Sec

MARCY GORDON   03/11/10 08:31 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — The government's top securities regulator called Thursday for Congress to impose new oversight on financial derivatives, warning that allowing risky instruments like credit default swaps to continue unfettered could bring further economic damage.

The chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Mary Schapiro, said banks that deal in the swaps must be subject to rigorous requirements for holding capital. They must also conduct their business in accordance with rules and their price information must be transparent, she said.

Schapiro made the statement as credit default swaps, a form of insurance against loan defaults, have come under heightened scrutiny in the U.S. and Europe.

The leaders of France, Germany and Greece have called for a clampdown on trading in the swaps, which they blame for worsening Greece's debt crisis and undermining the European currency in recent weeks. A nationwide strike in Greece to protest the cash-strapped government's austerity measures – the second strike in a week – brought the country to a virtual standstill Thursday.

Another U.S. regulator, Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler, said Wall Street banks are seeking exemptions to the proposed new regulations for derivatives that could shield more than half the trades that should be subject to disclosure. Gensler criticized Wall Street's stance on proposed oversight for the shadowy $600 trillion market for derivatives – blamed for hastening the 2008 financial crisis.

Credit default swaps account for an estimated $60 trillion of the worldwide derivatives market.

Gensler told a financial industry gathering in Florida that Wall Street has not been "enthusiastic" about the proposed new regulations now before Congress.

Schapiro didn't specifically address the Greek situation or the call by European leaders for restraints on swaps trading, in her response to a question from The Associated Press. On Tuesday, the European Commission threatened to ban speculative trading of credit default swaps by investors who don't actually own a country's underlying debt – known as "naked" trades.

Referring to credit default swaps generally, Schapiro said in the statement: "If we continue to allow these risky financial products to operate in the dark we should not be surprised at the damage we find when the lights come on. That's why it is so important for Congress to bring ... derivatives under the regulatory umbrella."

In addition to capital requirements that are needed for dealers in the swaps, regulators and market players "must have access to information to know what is being traded, at what price and in what volume," Schapiro said. "And regulators must have the tools to police the markets, including monitoring trends and writing rules to address abuses."

The collapse of credit default swaps nearly toppled American International Group Inc. in the fall of 2008, prompting the government to support the insurance conglomerate with about $180 billion in aid.

Gensler, in several speeches in recent days, has been renewing his call for new regulation aimed at bringing transparency to, and prevent manipulation in, the sprawling global derivatives market. At his address Thursday to the meeting of the Futures Industry Association in Boca Raton, Fla., he also got in some mild barbs at Wall Street.

Billions in trading profits for the big investment banks could be threatened by new rules for derivatives, which passed the House in December as part of the overhaul of financial regulation and is now before the Senate. Many in the financial industry have indicated support for requiring derivatives trades to go through clearinghouses, "that is, as long as it only applies sometimes," Gensler said.

While more than 1,000 U.S. banks trade derivatives, five big Wall Street institutions – JPMorgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc. and Wells Fargo & Co. – account for about 97 percent of the total reported to be held by U.S. banks.

"Wall Street appears to be aligning themselves with corporate end users in an effort to exempt customer transactions from central clearing," Gensler said. "Wall Street seems to be making the case" that banks using derivatives to hedge against risk should be exempt from having to use clearinghouses in the same way as derivatives trades involving companies, he said.

Only about 9 percent of derivatives trades involve companies using them as a hedge, which Gensler and other regulators consider a legitimate exception from the clearing requirements.

The exception the banks are seeking, he warned, could leave hidden 60 percent of the derivatives trades that rightfully should go through clearinghouses because they aren't customized transactions designed for companies.

"Let there be no mistake: Wall Street has not been enthusiastic about this reform," Gensler said in the text of his speech. "After the worst crisis in 80 years, though, we need real reform that protects the American public."

The value of derivatives hinges on an underlying investment or commodity – such as currency rates, oil futures or interest rates. The derivative is designed to reduce the risk of loss from the underlying asset.

Companies of all kinds use derivatives to hedge against risks – airlines ensuring against spikes in fuel prices, for example. A potent coalition of nearly 200 companies that use derivatives – including Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Ford Motor Co., General Electric Co. and Shell Oil Co. – has lobbied Congress to make the case that legislative proposals to regulate derivatives could severely increase costs for corporate America.

Financial institutions that deal in derivatives are opposed to mandatory clearing for corporate customers because banks say it would have the effect of discouraging companies from using swaps to manage risks, Cory Strupp, managing director for government affairs of Wall Street's biggest lobbying group, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, said Thursday.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
WASHINGTON — The government's top securities regulator called Thursday for Congress to impose new oversight on financial derivatives, warning that allowing risky instruments like credit default ...
WASHINGTON — The government's top securities regulator called Thursday for Congress to impose new oversight on financial derivatives, warning that allowing risky instruments like credit default ...
Filed by Ryan McCarthy  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 185
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
01:46 PM on 03/29/2010
Excellent posts to all.
It is unfortunate that the SEC cannot implement the financial solutions offered herein.
When the likes of Dodd, Rangold and the other Congressional miscreants hamstring the efforts of responsible financial experts, we are doomed to repeat past mistakes, and risk further economic downturns.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:41 PM on 03/16/2010
Require margin and preferably a clearing house for CDS.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cogs
02:09 AM on 03/16/2010
The corporations has stated that any regulation will increase costs. They're in charge here. We kept busy with lurid stories about Tiger Woods and John Edwards. Wedge issues have us fighting among ourselves while the robber barons slice up the pie.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ostrom808
Moral Contrarian
08:35 PM on 03/15/2010
Regulate CDS'?

What needs to happen is for all of them to be voided, post-haste. They're nothing but a bet for failure.

Think of it as the average citizen being able to buy life insurance on an 89 year old man, paying chump change for a premium, and then paying off in the millions on his death.

CDS', if taken out by the corporation whose instruments are being insured, would be legitimate. HOWEVER, most are not. In reality, they are bets against other businesses. They create an incentive to sabotage the business who owns the instruments.

The owners of these CDS' would only be out the premiums on the CDS'. A pittance compared to the payout, on investments in which the holders carry no stake.

Again. Regulate? NO. ELIMINATE!
04:11 PM on 03/15/2010
The SEC is often hamstrung, and prevented from doing its task by interference from congress and the executive. I remember reading somewhere about how congressman Michael Oxley, co-author of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (re: corporate accounting after Enron, Worldcom, etc.) wrote a letter to then SEC chairman William Donaldson threatening to cut funding to the SEC unless they gave in to corporate demands. I googled it and see references to this letter, but don't have access to Lexis Nexis, etc.
Here, however is a link to an oldie-but-goodie episode from Bill Moyer's show in 2007, outlining some of the issues involved in the current financial debacle:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10122007/profile.html

There's another good interview with John C. Bogle, and a wonderful one with HP's own Simon Johnson (economist) with legal scholar Michael Perino.
03:08 PM on 03/15/2010
Credit Default swaps need to banned unless the buyer as holds the underlying security.

The fact that this hasn't been done nearly 18 months after these things nearly brought the world to its knees, is testiment that Washington truly is controlled by Wall Street and puts its needs before the people of the US.

Sad. And Shameful.
08:33 AM on 03/15/2010
Time to BAN CDS and regulate all harmful speculation!

The George Washington's Blog has a good article today on fixing the economy and preventing the next financial crash, here's the Neo-Keynsian perspective:

"Steve Keen is an Associate Professor in economics and finance at the University of Western Sydney. He identifies as post-Keynesian, criticizing both modern neoclassical economics and (some of) Marxian economics as inconsistent, unscientific and empirically unsupported. The major influences on Keen's thinking about economics include Hyman Minsky, Piero Sraffa and Joseph Alois Schumpeter. His recent work mostly concentrates on mathematical modeling and simulation of financial instability. Keen writes at DebtDeflation.com/blogs
08:33 AM on 03/15/2010
Keen responds:

I obviously see the need to reform the financial system, but my analysis of how credit is created (see my “Roving Cavaliers of Credit” post: http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/) makes me sceptical that any new system will “hold” so long as financiers can make money by financing asset-price speculation. I believe the experience of history should tell us that every system we’ve tried to far has finally succumbed to a debt-financed asset-price bubble, whose bursting has brought in at best a recession and at worst a Depression.

I have therefore developed proposals to tackle the root problem from the other side of the ledger: if financiers can always be expected to exploit the desire of borrowers to speculate on rising asset prices, then we have to remove that desire in the first place.

The most effective way to do this would be to redesign assets in a manner that still encouraged individual ownership and enterprise, but made the prospects of leveraged gains on asset speculation much less likely.

My two proposals are: to modify shares so that once they are on the secondary market they expire after a predefined period (say 25 years); and to limit the maximum leverage that can be secured against a property to some multiple (say 10) of the property’s annual rental income.

Explaining these in more detail:
08:32 AM on 03/15/2010
Shares

Shares purchased in an initial public offering or float would last indefinitely while held by the original purchaser. But once these shares were sold, they would have a defined life of (say) 25 years.

This would have several benefits over our current system:

(1) Purchasers of shares on the secondary market would be forced to do what the Capital Assets Pricing Model (the delusional neoclassical theory that dominated academic finance prior to the GFC) pretended they do now: to value shares on a sensible valuation of expected future dividend earnings. You would only buy a share under this system if you expected a reasonably good stream of dividends from it, because in 25 years it would expire; and

(2) It would encourage the act of providing finance to new ventures. At present, the share market does a very poor job of providing new finance, with over 99% of the transactions being secondary market sales in search of capital gains. With my change, the only way to secure an indefinite stream of revenue from a new venture would be to provide it with some of its initial capital. This proposal would drastically shift the balance in favour of raising initial capital, which is the only truly socially beneficial role of the stock market.
08:32 AM on 03/15/2010
Property

The great danger with the current system is that there is a positive feedback loop between property prices and leverage. An increase in leverage allows a purchaser to bid a higher price for a property, which encourages other purchasers to come in with higher leverage again with the intention of profiting from selling on a rising market. This is the basic mechanism that led to the Subprime Crisis.

If instead there were a maximum allowed level of leverage based on the income-earning potential of the property being purchased, then an increase in price would cause a reduction in leverage: if a purchaser truly wanted a given property and was willing to pay more than ten times the annual rental income to secure it, then he/she would necessarily have to use unleveraged funds to do so, and the increase in price would cause a reduction in leverage.
08:31 AM on 03/15/2010
Stability

The real problem with other proposals–such as government-created credit, etc.–is that without reform to the way we define capital assets, this money can still be used to speculate on asset prices. This can lead to asset bubbles, and those who are successful in them will gain money and the power that comes with it. They will then be in a position to lobby for the unwinding of the reforms that were enacted during the crisis–as we have seen in our own lifetimes with the abolition of almost all the Great Depression era legislation in the leadup to the GFC.

This proposal would limit that prospect by preventing the formation of the class of Ponzi Financiers in the first instance. This to me is the real lesson of financial history: every crisis is caused by debt, the debt is taken on by Ponzi Financiers who then accumulate the economic and political power to reshape the system to suit themselves, leading to its inevitable collapse. We have to stop the Ponzis at the source, and the source is the potential for leveraged gain on asset prices."

That was long! Thanks for reading!
:) BAN CDS!!
09:19 AM on 03/15/2010
good stuff. you rock. ban all CDS. 12.5% down on mortgages. bank keeps half of all mortgages, 100% of the ones with less than 12.5 down.

4-1 leverage MAX on any other investments, funds, etc. This will encourage savings, and discourage mal-investment. No stacking of leverage. commodity futures markets only 2x the size of avail goods.

Some things in the world are simple. Want to go on a diet? eat half. Want to be healthier? Don't crap where you eat and tke a walk once a day. Banking and investment regulation should be simple also, as obviously we have proved that more complex rules are subject to ab/use and fr/aud.
08:24 AM on 03/15/2010
This is like a joke - clearly nothing is going to happen
07:54 PM on 03/14/2010
The paid off senators will not go for this... it will interfere with thier fundraiser checks

www.thePeoplesLink.com
05:43 PM on 03/14/2010
Finally...the SEC says something useful!
03:14 PM on 03/14/2010
Pull your 401 and buy silver or gold. You really think your 401 or pension is safe? The charade can't last forever. When one considers the numbers the derivatives market (globally) is bloated many times the value of everything on earth. The SEC may be posturing itself for the correction that is coming. First we are bailing out banks, then companies,then Fannie and Freddie, and now countries. The race to the top, serving as an illusion to the race to the bottom. Our debt based structure will eat itself alive. California on the verge of bankruptcy with a debt three or four times that of Greece. Think it through. The writing is on the wall. The tipping point may be closer than we realize, like within twelve to eighteen months, or even two weeks. Lots of variables. However, one does not have to be employed in the world of finances to prepare for things to get interesting without wearing a tinfoil hat. Just prioritizing and using a little common sense can be helpful. Unless of course you think an epiphany is coming. Then by all means, party like it's 1999!