The Treasury responded to reports that the New York Fed asked AIG to suppress and delay facts about the bailout. Meg Reilly, a Treasury spokesperson claimed: "In the transaction at the heart of this dispute...the FRBNY [Federal Reserve Bank of New York] made a loan of $25 billion which is on track to be paid back in full with interest." She claims the loan is currently "above water."
In the first place, that loan is not the heart of the dispute. Nonetheless, the FRBNY should immediately release the details of all of the Maiden Lane III assets backing that loan and show the current prices BlackRock has placed on them. Based on the current market, it is extremely likely that the loan is underwater.
The assets backing the loan are so-called super senior and AAA rated collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Similar CDOs trade for under ten cents on the dollar, not close to the average price of 35 cents for the loan's assets shown in a recent Fed report. The Fed claims prices climbed 4.5%. Yet in the secondary market, prices have dropped.
The Fed awarded no-bid contracts to BlackRock to manage and price these assets (among other things). Given BlackRock's track record as a CDO manager*, I have no reason to believe its prices are reliable. As I mention above, I have reason to question the prices.
If the Treasury wants to publicly claim the loan is not underwater, now is the time to prove it, even though this particular loan is not the key issue.
As Representative Darrell Issa explained in his letter to the Fed, at the heart of this dispute is my assertion that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, in his former role as President of the FRBNY, paid 100 cents on the dollar to settle AIG's credit default swap contracts, and he wildly overpaid. Other bond insurers including Ambac, MBIA, and FGIC have settled similar contracts for as little as ten cents on the dollar.
The general public was kept unaware of several politically explosive facts. Risky subprime loans partly backed CDOs that AIG insured. Goldman Sachs played a key role in AIG's distress with both credit default swap transactions and CDOs that Goldman underwrote. The identities of the banks--including some foreign banks--that received payments were not revealed until five months after the bailout. The November 2009 TARP Inspector General's report failed to mention that Goldman originated or bought protection from AIG on about $33 billion of the problematic $80 billion of U.S. mortgage assets that AIG "insured" with credit derivatives, about twice as much as the next two largest banks involved.
The TARP report also failed to highlight the character of the synthetic CDOs underwritten by Goldman Sachs that remain on AIG's books. There is nothing wrong with hedging or taking the opposite view to one's customers. There is nothing wrong with using credit derivatives to accomplish this goal. But there are serious questions about whether residential mortgage backed securities and downstream CDOs were value-destroying and misrated.
Wall Street was chiefly responsible for the "financial innovation" that did massive damage to the U.S. economy. I assert there should be fraud audits of Wall Street's securitization activities.
Given the extraordinary circumstances surrounding AIGs trades, the global financial crisis, and the AIG bailout, it is time to reopen this issue. AIG's counterparties can repurchase the approximately $62 billion CDOs from Maiden Lane III at full price**. If the Fed really believes they are worth 35 cents on the dollar, then these counterparties will be getting a windfall versus ten cents on the dollar. As for Goldman Sachs's approximately $8.2 billion in CDOs (including synthetic CDOs) that are still on AIG's books, they can be settled at ten cents on the dollar, and excess collateral currently held by Goldman can be returned. This is the value at which other bond insurers have settled similar deals. The return of payments to AIG can be used to pay down its public debt, before banks pay tax-payer subsidized bonuses to their employees.
* BlackRock managed Pacific Pinnacle CDO ($1 billion; closed 1/1/07; event of default 2/4/08); Pinnacle Point Funding ($2B closed 6/7/07; acceleration 12/13/07); Tenorite CDO I ($1 B closed 5/11/07; liquidation 2/7/08); and Tourmaline CDO III ($1.5 billion closed 4/5/07; event of default 3/31/08). (Earlier I wrote a post that included a 2005 Tourmaline deal managed by BlackRock that ended up being part of a CDO bailed out by the Fed.) I highlight BlackRock's 2007 CDOs similar to those in it now manages for the Fed, because in 2007 mainstream media was already reporting on the potential for these CDOs of this type to blow up. I wrote an article for the precursor to Risk Professional in early 2007 warning about the type of value-destroying CDOs that AIG insured. I had also issued earlier warnings on other types of value-destroying CDOs.
**The price can be adjusted for interim principal and interest payments, as applicable.
Eliot Spitzer, William K. Black and Frank Partnoy: Tip of the Iceberg
The AIG emails are the 'black box' of the financial crisis. If we understand the failure of AIG, we will more fully understand the crisis -- what caused it and how to prevent it from happening again.
Let there be full investigation.
Let there be no statute of limitation on the prosecution of any fraud perpetrated on the American People.
Let those who profited from the AIG bailout cough up their profits and invest in the instruments that caused the mess...at 30 cents on the dollar.
If Timothy Geithner is proved to be guilty of selling out to these counterparties, ... let justice prevail.
Further Geithner Points To Ponder:
*This is a link to a Bloomberg article in which Special Inspector General for the TARP Program, Neil Barofsky, explains that the actual amount of the ongoing bailouts of the Banking and Financial System will actually be close to 23.7 TRILLION! Not the incredibly misleading amount often quoted by Tim Geithner and numerous others of only 700 Billion.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aY0tX8UysIaM
Matt Taibbi's "Obama's Big Sellout" form Rolling Stone:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/obamas_big_sellout/print
*A critical article for a deeper understanding of current economic policy and the harmful role played by some who surround and advise the president.
Outstanding PBS Frontline Documentary that further touches on Allan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, Larry Summers and Tim Geithner's substantial roles in the financial meltdown:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/
ThomastonPaine.com
Geithner symbolizes what is causing the American people to sour on the Obama presidency.
I have never worked harder in my life, as I did during the build up to the last presidential campaign/election. We sat night and day researching the Republican bag of tricks, and quickly passing on the anti-dotes to a very well coordinated network of online entities, so that we could together send waves of timely calibrated counter attacks cascading through online and offline media outlets, discussion boards and watering holes for news junkies.
We pulled up our bootstraps after McCain reached deep into his bag of tricks and pulled out a Sarah Palin on us. While she had the entire nation swooning to her 'pitbull lipstick', we called folks in Anchorage and dug deeper to find that forget about keeping an eye on Putin's bathroom from her backyard, she had many bridges hidden in her closet. And we sent out well researched comments about the real Sarah Palin even as the media was swooning to her!
A year into Obama's presidency, we feel let down. Several among who fought spiritedly for Obama have been unable to modify their mortgages. Many lost their jobs. A single mother who has no source of income anymore received notice from Bank Of America that she has to move out, and the bank's representatives have the right to make random visits to the house anytime to ensure 'its well being' as it is headed to foreclosure.
I personally feel cheated, and violated, especially as it becomes increasingly clear by every single passing day, that Obama and his blue eyed boys - Geithner in particular - have sacrificed Main street to protect, shield, and support Wall Street.
I invited our group to a cup of coffee last weekend, and I asked them in passing about sparing time and effort for the next elections. The sense of hurt was clearly evident, especially among the women in the group. Even though some of them tried to evade the topic, there is considerable 'buyers' remorse' in our group. Ironically, after Sarah Palin was given the 'wild card' entry into the ticket, and many among us found ourselves on the backfoot momentarily, it were the women in our group - these now dispirited women that I mentioned - who got us to focus on Sarah Palin's hypocrisy and McCain's lack of judgment in foisting her on the ticket, and in doing so got us to counter attack against the Palin-McCain ticket.
Sadly, now that Obama is in the White house, and Geithner has replaced Paulson as the same old Goldman Sachs brew in a new bottle, there is no one to fight for Obama's unseen foot soldiers like us.
I lost my job last week. I shall be able to make one more mortgage payment. My wife and I had worked very very very hard to get that place. Within that house are a lot of memories...of my wife's feisty struggle against disability. Of how together we kept our spirits high even as she lost use of her limbs one after another, eventually becoming bed-ridden. A one time staunch republican from New England, she had become a very passionate Obama supporter. she often told me how proud she is to have lived long enough to see an Afro American person become the President. She took much mirth in calling some of her older relatives after Obama's victory, many of who were not as enamored of an Afro American person becoming the President!
She died a few months ago. She remained jovial and positive to the very end, often lifting my spirits and consoling me. She told me not to worry if I lost the home. That the moments we had spent there, the bank can not take away.
She is in a little square box, as I have not yet come to terms with spreading her ashes in the ocean as she wanted me to. But I will before they take the house. Despite everything, we fought to ensure that we had the house, and it remained ours till she breathed her last.
I dont want her feeling homeless after she is gone.
She is also saying that the Goldman Abacus deals that remain on AIG's books should be setteled for ten cents on the dollar and the excess collateral should be returned and used to pay down debt.
You obviously don't agree, but Tavakoli is making an argument about the public interest, and the point that these were very special circumstances and the underlying assets themselves are ripe for an investigation.
Have you read the SIGTARP audit of the counter party payments? For some strange reason the supposedly "explosive new information" just released by Issa is widely discussed in the now month's-old SIGTARP audit, which refers to even more ancient congressional hearings were the "explosive new information" was discussed.
HuffPo readers, please know that Janet is one of the few that really understands this area and it is clearly complicated.
The bottom line as we know is that the Fed and Treasury are using American wealth to give to the banks (it is giving, not a "loan" when assets worth say, 50 cents on the dollar are purchased by the Fed for 100 cents on the dollar. ) As usual, Treasury answers the charges by deflecting the real issue and addressing the TARP loan. As Janet said in her opening remarks, the TARP loan is NOT the issue here.
I hope to see you more often on Zero Hedge Janet.
Please keep up your persistence. Thank you.
I can prove it once Congress authorizes an audit of the Fed, balance sheet and cash flows.
oh, wait, the Fed isn't part of that whole American political concept of checks and balances....
In this earlier HuffPo article Tavakoli uncovered things that weren't even in the TARP report. Her web site has an even earlier more detailed article. There is a link to a list of deal names, and there is a link in this HuffPo article that names most of the deals: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janet-tavakoli/goldman-sachs-nearly-bank_b_361342.html
If you detailed each CDO with each portfolio and each underwriter, plus the amount of P&I paid back and what was liquidated (Tavakoli notes above prices have to be adjusted), one could check. Tavakoli has given more detail than the Fed. It's reasonable to ask about the asset prices, although she also said that this loan and the asset prices aren't the key issue.
I'm sure that a list of the multi sector CDO's is floating around there somewhere. I have seen the list with the details redacted. However, I can't believe that there isn't a list floating around somewhere.
Meanwhile, Some of the details are listed in the 12/31/2009 auditor's report.
Commercial Real Estate CDO:
MAX 2007-1 A1 Principal Amount: 2,096,537 Fair Value: 931,701 Percentage of Total Investments: 3.5%
Commercial Real Estate CDO:
MAX 2008-1 A1 Principal Amount: 5,403,463 Fair Value: 2,401,299 Percentage of Total Investments: 9.0%
High Grade ABS CDO:
TRIAX 2006-2A A1B2 1,499,850
TRIAX 2006-2A A1B1 981,181
TRIAX 2006-2A A1A1 732,934
http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/BSTMaidenLaneIIIfinstmt20072008.pdf
This is 15 to 20% of the portfolio. I imagine that they will update the report at the same level of detail @ 12/31/2009.
If they do, then we could get a sense regarding how accurately these are valued.
Meanwhile, here is a link to a detailed report explaining the rationale for the so called 100 cents on the dollar transactions.
http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports/audit/2009/Factors_Affecting_Efforts_to_Limit_Payments_to_AIG_Counterparties.pdf
SInce the sec lending losses are of similar size as the CDO guarantee losses and the MLIII program is being scrutinized and debated , it seems we should revisit benficiaries of the MLII program as well.
I believe GS got paid out for some of the TRIAX sec lending transactions , which leads me to question whether they had any role in the original structuring (See Capital Vandalism's link for more info on the holdings/counterparties) Was GS packaging crap CDOs, selling them to AIG, then providing repo financeing to the AIG insurance units via AIGFP?.
As a result, China has continued to buy Treasuries to support their currency peg (e.g. export markets) keeping the US$ artificially strong even as we print dollars like their is no tomorrow. So, for $175 Billion or so, we get to print a few trillion+ with little downside to the value of the US$.
This has allowed the FED to keep interest rates near 0%, funding a massive carry trade (borrowing $US at 0%, investing in safe foreign bonds at 3.5 to 6%). This plus trillions of off-balance sheet carry trade loans and hiding the toxic waste with the new mark-to-fantasy rules and presto - banks are paying back their loans to us and getting richer than ever. A scam to be sure.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/JI18Cb02.html
The flaw is the concept of making money with money using compounding interest. Allows rich people to sit back and watch their money magically grow but this only happens because of ever increasing indebtedness from the bottom 80 to 90% of people and inflation of asset prices.
Now this is no longer occurring, debt destruction and deflation (depression) are the only way out, made slower and immediately less painful only by govt spending, the debtor of last resort.
Since we own Freddie and Fannie, why not write the American Dream into law and cut everyone's mortgage in half?
How? By absorbing the private Fed into the public Treasury (public money creation, as the constitution stipulates) and giving Americans what banks now get - direct access to the discount window for mortgage (re)finance. Use interest free money for all public debts as well.
Cut the bankers out of the middle.
Very well said.
Fanned.
Derivatives are an egregious example of financial services trying to create something out of nothing and even using multiple more times leverage than anybody else would ever be considered receiving. Though it was all about the packaging and marking-to-management (myth) that gave an illusion that there was more money.