Global banks
are bankrupt. They are like zombies, a living dead, that are allowed
to continue to walk the Earth only because of the process of "extend
and pretend", as central banks have stuffed them full of liquidity.
Some of them are more zombified than others. The US banks had a lot
of their debts written down in 2008, as US property prices crashed,
but the US financial system still has over $1 trillion of student
debt, much of which is probably not going to be repayable. It has an
equal amount of credit card debt and so on. But, the most obvious
zombification is in Europe, the latest manifestation is in Italy,
where, reports today indicate that the Italian government is meeting
with banks to set up an Italian “bad bank” to take bad debts off
the hands of Italian banks, and to provide €5 billion of financing.
The global
financial meltdown of 2008/9 took until the beginning of 2010, before
it manifest itself in the Eurozone Debt Crisis. That took the form
of the sharp rise in interest rates on the sovereign debt of a series
of European peripheral economies, whose debts were unlikely to get
repaid. Those sovereign debts were often largely held by the
commercial banks in each of those peripheral economies, and because
the global financial system is so inter-related, as 2008
demonstrated, those banks themselves borrowed in global financial
markets, so that if they collapsed, it meant that the other European
and global banks that had loaned them money, also would not get paid.
A lot of this borrowing and financing is done via an ever growing
series of derivative products, that bundle up financial assets,
which are then sold as commodities on global financial markets. Its
why its impossible to know the full extent of the level of debt and
third party risk. But, we do know that Deutsche Bank in Germany is reported to have exposure to around $75 trillion of such derivatives!
The question
of the insolvency of commercial banks, and the insolvency of states
in Europe, has then been inseparable. But, for the commercial banks,
the further issue has been not only that they had exposed themselves
to vast amounts of debt to governments, but they had exposed
themselves to vast amounts of debts to private households. In the US
the extent of that in relation to Student Debt and Credit card debt
has been mentioned, the same is true in the UK. But in the UK and
across Europe a large part of this household debt is in the form of
mortgages on astronomically over priced houses. That was indicated
in Greece, Spain and Ireland when property prices crashed there from
their previously bubbled up levels. It began to occur in the UK in
2008, before the Bank of England slashed official interest rates,
started the programme of QE, and the government began a series of
measures to prop up the property bubble, and prevent it from
bursting.
British
banks have loans outstanding worth about 160% of UK GDP. But 35% of
these loans went to other financial institutions, 42.7% went to
households for mortgages and another 10.1% went to commercial real
estate and construction. Manufacturing received just 1.4% of the
total! UK banking’s main activity is just leveraging up existing
property assets.
In Ireland,
when the property bubble burst and prices fell by around 50-60, the
Irish Banks collapsed, and the Irish State was conned into bailing
them out. The cost of that was that the Irish State then imposed
huge levels of austerity on the real economy, sending it into
recession just to maintain the fiction of paper asset prices. In
Greece, vast amounts of liquidity has been pumped into the economy,
nearly all of which has simply gone to enable existing debts by
Greece to be repaid to other European lenders, whilst again massive
levels of austerity have cratered the real Greek economy, which
continues to suffer from an inadequate amount of capital.
The same
process then played out in Portugal, and in Cyprus. In Spain and
Italy, something similar was about to play out, when the ECB
eventually stepped in to say that it was going to be providing large
amounts of liquidity so that European commercial banks could continue
to function. It did so via several instalments of LTRO's (Long Term
Refinancing Operations), whereby it lent money for 3-4 years to banks
at low rates of interest. It has then added to that by starting
large amounts of QE, whereby it provides liquidity to the banks, in
exchange for the largely worthless sovereign and mortgage bonds those
banks have on their balance sheet. Rather than using the liquidity
to lend to European businesses, as the data above indicates in
relation to UK banks, the banks used this liquidity to simply
speculate further in the purchase of sovereign bonds that were
underwritten by the ECB. That is why the prices of those bonds has
been forced higher, whilst other borrowers face high levels of
interest.
But, the
underlying problem is that the banks are insolvent, and the basic
fact is that the banks have massive debts, whilst the banks' assets, in
the shape of the property against which mortgages have been given,
and of the bonds and other financial assets given as collateral, are
worth only a small fraction of the book value at which they are
listed, if they are worth anything at all.
In this
latest bail-out, the Italian government is proposing to throw in €5
billion of funding to establish a bad bank for Italian bank assets.
But, the fact is that looking at just the property loans on the books
of the Italian banks, it probably requires more like €100 billion
to cover the gap between the book value and the actual market value
of those assets. If past experience is anything to go by, the figure
could be twice that amount.
What the
banks have tried to do via “extend and pretend” is to keep these
worthless properties on their books, rather than sell them in large
quantities. They were able to do that, because of the cheap loans
that central banks have provided to them. The loans and other forms
of liquidity that the banks have received has provided them with the
cash flow to be able to continue to function. What it has not done
is to change the fact that they are bust, and they are bust because
the real value of the assets on their balance sheets is still only a
fraction of what it appears to be.
This is the
nature of zombified businesses in general. It means that they have
just enough liquidity to be able to cover their current running
costs, and maybe to cover the interest payments on their own
borrowings, but they do not have enough earnings to be able to pay
down their large levels of debt. For thirty years that was seen as
unimportant for businesses, including banks, and for households,
because it was assumed that the nominal value of financial assets,
and of property would continue to rise at phenomenal levels so that
it would quickly become a multiple of the capital that was borrowed.
But, it was, of course, a mirage, because the rise in nominal asset
prices was based on nothing other than a bubble that sooner or late
bursts, exposing the real value of the assets, and the extent to
which the debt still exceeds it.
If we take
the Italian banks now their capital, like that of every bank
comprises a number of elements. Firstly, it is made up of the money
that shareholders provide to the bank, and in return for which they
get shares, and so the entitlement to interest, in the shape of
dividends, on the money they have loaned to the bank. A similar
situation exists with bonds issued by the bank. Another element of
the bank capital is the cash it receives from depositors. All of
this money received by the bank forms part of its assets. It is money
it can use to make loans. At the same time, this money it receives
also creates liabilities. The shareholders are entitled to try to
recover the money they have loaned to the bank, in the event it is
wound up. The same applies with bondholders. People who deposit
money with the bank, as savings, are entitled to take that money out
of the bank.
The other
element of bank capital is the collateral it receives in exchange for
the loans it makes. When a bank lends someone £100,000 as a
mortgage to buy a house, the bank itself takes possession of the
deeds for the house, giving it the ability to sell the house, and
thereby recover its capital, should the borrower fail to pay up. All
of this capital, provides the basis for the bank to make loans, and
it is on this basis that the bank makes its trading profits, by being
able to charge a higher rate of interest to borrowers than it pays
itself to borrow money.
If the
bank's capital shrinks, its ability to lend money declines, and so
its ability to make profits also declines.
If we then
consider the Italian Banks, if the real value of the property it has
on its books, against which it has advanced mortgages and other loans
is actually €100 billion less than it appears in those banks books,
then those banks real capital is lower by that amount. But, banks do
not just lend money equal to their capital. They lend far more than
that. On the back of €100 billion of capital, the banks would be
likely to lend around €1 trillion. If Italian banks were to reduce
their lending by €1 trillion the economic effects can be easily
imagined.
On CNBC,
this morning, anchor Steve Sedgwick, pointed out the reality of the
banks situation that they have vast amounts of this property on their
books, the debts against which are not likely to get repaid. The
answer, he said, quite rightly, is that the banks should just put all
this property on the market and sell it, for whatever they can get
for it, and thereby clear the decks. The Italian pundit he was
interviewing, however, recognised why this hasn't happened, and was not
likely to happen voluntarily. If the banks put all this property on
the market, there would be a fire-sale. The property prices would
crash, and that would probably mean that lots of other people would
find that the houses they thought were worth €100,000 were only
worth €20,000.
The banks
capital would be reduced massively, and unless that capital was
replenished by other means, it would mean the banks could lend much
less money. The supply of loanable money-capital would be reduced
significantly, so that global interest rates would rise sharply,
slashing the prices of other financial assets such as bonds and
shares. But, replenishing the banks' capital to make up for this drop
of €100 billion in the actual value of property on its books, would
require the issuing of huge numbers of new shares, or bonds, and that
would mean not only that large amounts of money-capital would be
required to buy those bonds and shares, but this increased supply of
those bonds and shares, would cause share and bond prices to fall
sharply. It would cause a new financial crash, because these effects
in Italy would quickly spread to other European banks, and from their
into the global financial system. That is before this same process
plays out with the banks in the UK and the rest of the EU.
That is why
the authorities are doing all they can to keep the property bubble
inflated, to only allow a certain number of properties on to the
market at any one time, so as to stop a fire sale of property prices.
But, the drop in European bank shares over recent months, the
ridiculous amounts of liquidity being pumped into circulation, the
implementation of negative interest rates and so on, shows that they
are looking more and more like King Canute trying to hold back an
ever advancing tide.
No comments:
Post a Comment