Reuters blog archive
from The Great Debate:
The massive $16-billion mortgage fraud settlement agreement just reached by Bank of America and federal authorities -- only the latest in a string of such settlements -- makes it easy to lose sight of what good shape banks are in.
Banks are now far better capitalized, with tighter credit processes and better risk accounting. The bigger Wall Street houses have also jettisoned many of their most volatile trading operations. Yet most have still managed to turn in decent earnings. That is a tribute to the steady and generally thoughtful imposition of the new Dodd-Frank and Basel III regulations, the rules on “stress-testing” balance sheets and the controversial Volcker Rule that limits speculative proprietary trading operations.
And the feds are keeping on the pressure, as demonstrated by their rejection of almost all the “living will” plans submitted by the major banks, which are supposed to prevent the kind of disorderly collapse that Lehman Brothers went through in 2008. These living will impositions are designed either to reduce the riskiness of bank holdings or to make the financial institutions post more capital and reserves to cushion against reverses.
While these reforms were badly needed after the virtual wholesale deregulation of the 1990s, they almost all raise costs and limit flexibility. But that is far from the worst problem facing the banks. The regulatory impact on revenues and profits is likely to be dwarfed by the pain banks will experience after the inevitable removal of their current federal life-support systems.
The euro zone is not deflating, it's just at risk of a too-prolonged period of low inflation, says European Central Bank President Mario Draghi.
Judging by recent evidence, it might be very prolonged, which is bad news for an economy struggling to shift out of low gear.
By Ann Saphir
Federal Reserve policymakers are expected next week to trim their monthly purchases of bonds by another $10 billion, putting them on track to end the massive program by October or December. So – which will it be, October or December? Some Fed officials are pushing for an answer, and soon.
“I am bothered by the fact that I don’t really know what we are going to do on that,” Narayana Kocherlakota, the dovish chief of the Minneapolis Fed, told reporters last month. “It’s another signal that we are not being as clear about our policy choices as we should be.”
The European Central Bank cut rates as low as they will go on Thursday and announced another round of cheap cash for banks, hoping the euro, which has helped knock down inflation in the fragile euro zone economy, will fall.
from Anatole Kaletsky:
At last, the European Central Bank seems ready to inject some adrenalin into the moribund euro zone economy. After last week’s news conference, when European Central Bank President Mario Draghi strongly hinted that action would take place after the June 5 council meeting, there have been a host of interviews and leaks specifically describing the new ideas the bank has in mind.
The biggest measure, now almost a foregone conclusion, will be a cut in the interest rate the ECB pays on bank deposits from zero to negative 0.1 or 0.2 percent. Bank officials have also hinted at several additional stimulus measures: extension of loans to commercial banks at low fixed rates for three years or even five years; ECB purchases of bank loans to small and medium enterprises, packaged into asset-backed securities; and concessional lending to European banks on condition they pass on these funds to small and medium businesses.
from Lawrence Summers:
The world’s finance ministers and central bank governors will gather in Washington this week for the twice yearly meetings of the International Monetary Fund. Though there will not be the sense of alarm that dominated these meetings after the financial crisis, the unfortunate reality is that the global economy’s medium-term prospects have not been so cloudy for a long time.
The IMF in its current World Economic Outlook essentially endorses the secular stagnation hypothesis -- noting that the real interest rate necessary to bring about enough demand for full employment has declined significantly and is likely to remain depressed for a substantial period. This is evident because inflation is well below target throughout the industrial world and is likely to decline further this year.
from Global Investing:
Is it all over? Is the emerging market turmoil no longer a concern among investors, economists and academics? Measured at least in the last week, the market is recovering some lost ground. Maybe January's sell-off was enough and in the last week all boats seem to be rising once again. After all, there's a new Fed Chair in Janet Yellen who has now officially taken over and the likelihood of easy monetary policy, tapering of asset purchases notwithstanding, isn't expected to change.
MSCI's emerging market benchmark stock index has rebounded 3.5 percent from a Feb. 4 low. The U.S. benchmark S&P 500 stock index has risen slightly more over the same period.
Unemployment in the euro zone is stuck at 12 percent, an already high rate that masks eye-popping rates in many of its struggling member economies.
But in a press conference lasting one hour, European Central Bank President Mario Draghi mentioned the problem of high unemployment only a few times – satisfied with the central bank’s usual stance of imploring euro zone governments to implement structural reforms to their labour markets, on a case by case basis.
from Anatole Kaletsky:
Thanks goodness it’s over. Financial market behavior ahead of last night’s announcement by Ben Bernanke on a gradual reduction in U.S. monetary stimulus has been tedious and irritating, rather like listening to whining children in the back of the car on a long journey: “Daddy, are we there yet?” In fact, impatient whining about when the Fed might start to “taper” has spoiled for many investors what should have been one of the most enjoyable financial journeys of all time, scaling previously unexplored market peaks and passing through unprecedented monetary vistas.
Imagine if everyone had simply taken Ben Bernanke at his word when he said in May that the Fed would continue buying bonds at the rate of $85 billion every month until it was absolutely confident that unemployment was on the way to 6.5 percent and that the scale of these purchases would only be increased or diminished if and when a change was clearly warranted by economic statistics. Investors would then have concluded, as I suggested at the time, that no significant changes in U.S. monetary policy were likely until the end of 2013.