No banks are safe (bail ins, FDIC limits, systemic risks)

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Please have a look around and if you like what you see, please consider registering an account and joining the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

"U.S. banks could be grappling with at least $650 billion of unrealized losses"

Is that all? What a f'ing disappointment. I was hopin' for at least double that.
.....but with just a bit of good luck, they'll have to realize those loses.
 
It's probably MUCH bigger than that. BofA had $135 Billion alone. And none of that would included their Derivatives or off balance sheet items.
 
It's probably MUCH bigger than that. BofA had $135 Billion alone. And none of that would included their Derivatives or off balance sheet items.

The quote did specify "in their securities portfolios". They could have more unrealized losses in other areas too.
 
"U.S. banks could be grappling with at least $650 billion of unrealized losses"

Is that all? What a f'ing disappointment. I was hopin' for at least double that.
.....but with just a bit of good luck, they'll have to realize those loses.
I share your distaste.

...BUT. Bad as banks are, they're not as bad as our Three-Mega-Bank future, or our bankless future with Fedcoin accounts at the Central, and only, bank.

There are two kinds of banks, now. Those who are Too-Big-To-Fail; and those who are gonna be culled out.

Already they've gone through the community banks with solid portfolios. They've failed the "Stress Test" or have been punished out of existence for not loaning according to skin-color chip.

Now it's the sacrificial medium-sized banks.

Who will be left standing? Jamie Dimon, and whoever his compatriots are at BofA and Wells Fargo.

Eventually, I expect, in the coming crisis - which is inevitable but which they'll try to control for maximum advantage - Dimon will be offered something tasty so as to bring JPMC into the Fed; and the other two...maybe they'll be bought, or maybe they'll be taken out back and shot. I don't know, at this point.

I have no love for bankers or banking, 21st Century style...but I don't want to see competition erased.
 
fascinating interview

Conversations With Dr. Fadi Lama.​

29m
 
America’s commercial property collapse is becoming a danger to the financial system.
...
“Lenders are starting to capitulate, realising that they need to mark down loans. This is going to pick up momentum as we go into 2024.
...
Prof Van Nieuwerburgh said vulnerable banks are being squeezed from all sides. They are having to lift interest rates drastically to stop deposit flight to money market funds or Treasury notes. Their bond portfolios are trading at a large paper loss, which become real losses if they are forced to crystallise them, the fate that befell SVB. Revenues are flat on good real estate loans. Developers are throwing in the keys on bad loans.

“There are a lot of skeletons in the closet and I wouldn’t be surprised if another 200 small banks topple over. In fact, I fully expect another bank to fail at any time,” said Prof Van Nieuwerburgh.
...

 
Multiple financial institutions affected. Why does this seem like a list of the worst of the worst? Bank of America, Truist, US Bank, Wells Fargo and Chase

 
So, if you want to :snidely: you could imagine the ACH problems as engineered to get banks on board with using Fednow. / :snidely:
 
I don't think Jamie Dimon needs arm-twisting to get onboard.

He, and JPMChase, are creations of the Federal government. Never before has there been such a massive nationwide bank, with such power; and it could have been halted many mergers previous. Dimon was just an executive with Banc One, with no real hope of any more than a regional power-base.

So if the Treasury wants him onboard with FedNow...he may dislike it and he may voice objections, but he'll do as he's told.
 
Say you are a small regional bank. You need to clear some transactions with Chase. ACH is down. Chase says, we could do this with FedNow, how about you?
 
Well, looks like the sixth bank this year has gone tits up.

Citizens Bank has just been closed by regulators. CB is beyond broke.
 
In other banking related news....

The New York Times

Why Banks Are Suddenly Closing Down Customer Accounts​

The reasons vary, but the scene that plays out is almost always the same.

Bank customers get a letter in the mail saying their institution is closing all of their checking and savings accounts. Their debit and credit cards are shuttered, too. The explanation, if there is one, usually lacks any useful detail.

Or maybe the customers don’t see the letter, or never get one at all. Instead, they discover that their accounts no longer work while they’re at the grocery store, rental car counter or ATM. When they call their bank, frantic, representatives show concern at first. “Oh, no, so sorry,” they say. “We’ll do whatever we can to fix this.”

But then comes the telltale pause and shift in tone. “Per your account agreement, we can close your account for any reason at any time,” the script often goes.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-banks-suddenly-closing-down-155511987.html
 
Financial surveillance scores target accounts for debanking. With CBDCs, this scenario completely cuts folks out of the economy.
 
Financial surveillance scores target accounts for debanking. With CBDCs, this scenario completely cuts folks out of the economy.
Yup.

And that's where Social Credit Scores come in.

The only way this nation is going to survive Davos and the Central Bankers...is, ready to form a More Perfect Union.

Not with CBDCs - with arms. And resolute determination.
 
In other banking related news....

The New York Times

Why Banks Are Suddenly Closing Down Customer Accounts​

The reasons vary, but the scene that plays out is almost always the same.

Bank customers get a letter in the mail saying their institution is closing all of their checking and savings accounts. Their debit and credit cards are shuttered, too. The explanation, if there is one, usually lacks any useful detail.

Or maybe the customers don’t see the letter, or never get one at all. Instead, they discover that their accounts no longer work while they’re at the grocery store, rental car counter or ATM. When they call their bank, frantic, representatives show concern at first. “Oh, no, so sorry,” they say. “We’ll do whatever we can to fix this.”

But then comes the telltale pause and shift in tone. “Per your account agreement, we can close your account for any reason at any time,” the script often goes.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-banks-suddenly-closing-down-155511987.html
That's great news!

Now we need all those people to say f' the banks and to start using cash for all transactions.
 
That's great news!

Now we need all those people to say f' the banks and to start using cash for all transactions.
The kinds of people those moves are aimed at...are SSI pensioners...RRRetirement or other Federally-protected or managed pensioners...persons on SNAP or other benefits cards.

Someone, say, upper-middle-class, with a nice bank balance, positive assets-to-debts, income...the banksters aren't going to lock them out. They're the DESIRED customers.

I'll be honest. I have a stack, and I have alternatives; but my day-to-day money comes from my Federally-managed railroad pension. Lock me out of my bank accounts, and I'll have grief.

FWIW, I've taken steps to mitigate it. I told Jamie Dimon's minions to pack sand, seven years ago (I was a longtime Bank One customer before it was bought up, when I was in Ohio). I have two accounts, at top-rated credit unions.

Still, nothing is certain, in this Liberal Age.
 
Cross posting from the commodities thread:
...
Citizens Bank of Sac City, Iowa, has failed, and it appears that its exposure to commercial trucking is the cause.
...
Because Citizens Bank was a state-chartered bank and not a member of FDIC, the bank’s estimated losses of $14.8 million will be the responsibility of the Iowa Department of Insurance and Financial Services.

Bad trucking industry loans?

The superintendent of the Iowa Division of Banking (IDOB), which is part of the department, also issued a statement, according to the blog, saying that in the course of a joint FDIC/IDOB examination, “examiners identified significant loan losses that had not previously been identified by the bank.”

In addition, the superintendent’s statement included information that Citizens Bank’s loan portfolio was concentrated in “out-of-territory and out-of-state loans to one industry.” The blog noted that “some of those loans had incurred heavy losses.” In the statement, the industry in question was not identified.

However, prior to the failure of Citizens Bank, the FDIC and IDOB entered into a consent order with it in August, the blog reported.

As part of the consent order, according to Bank Reg Blog, Citizens Bank was required to engage an “independent third-party loan consultant” with “requisite knowledge, skills, ability and workout experience.”

Additionally, the consent order focused on one loan portfolio, the blog reported. The consultant had “full authority and discretion to administer and service the Bank’s commercial trucking loan portfolio.”

Sac City’s population is just over 2,000 people; the population of Iowa is only about 3.2 million people. Citizen Bank’s assets were only $66 million.

Prices for new Class 8 trucks in 2023 vary by brand, as well as by the number and type of features and equipment. However, they are expensive; prices range between $150,000 for basic models to over $220,000 for models with custom features.

How or why a small state-chartered bank in the very small town of Sac City, Iowa, was making loans on expensive trucks is unknown, but doing so seems highly speculative.
...


If that is correct, Citizens Bank didn't fail due to mismanaging assets as the Fed raised rates like it's most recent predecessors. At least - not directly. It could be that loans were failing due (in part) to the impact of rate hikes on the trucking industry.
 
When Citigroup CEO Jane Fraser announced in September that her sweeping corporate overhaul would result in an undisclosed number of layoffs, a jolt of fear ran through many of the bank's 240,000 souls.
...
Employees' concerns are justified. Managers and consultants working on Fraser's reorganization — known internally by its code name, "Project Bora Bora" — have discussed job cuts of at least 10% in several major businesses, according to people with knowledge of the process. The talks are early and numbers may shift in coming weeks.

Fraser is under mounting pressure to fix Citigroup, a global bank so difficult to manage that its challenges consumed three predecessors dating back to 2007. ...

"The only thing she can do at this point is a really substantial headcount reduction," James Shanahan, an Edward Jones analyst, said in an interview. "She needs to do something big, and I think there's a good chance it'll be bigger and more painful for Citi employees than they expect."
...
An update on Fraser's plan and its financial impact will come in January along with fourth-quarter earnings.
...

 
The kinds of people those moves are aimed at...are SSI pensioners...RRRetirement or other Federally-protected or managed pensioners...persons on SNAP or other benefits cards.

Someone, say, upper-middle-class, with a nice bank balance, positive assets-to-debts, income...the banksters aren't going to lock them out. They're the DESIRED customers.

I'll be honest. I have a stack, and I have alternatives; but my day-to-day money comes from my Federally-managed railroad pension. Lock me out of my bank accounts, and I'll have grief.

FWIW, I've taken steps to mitigate it. I told Jamie Dimon's minions to pack sand, seven years ago (I was a longtime Bank One customer before it was bought up, when I was in Ohio). I have two accounts, at top-rated credit unions.

Still, nothing is certain, in this Liberal Age.
So far...

For the last few decades big banks have been merging with small failed banks and calling it a success story.

I'll never understand how taking on a failed bank's assets is considered 'good' business practice....
 
...
I'll never understand how taking on a failed bank's assets is considered 'good' business practice....

The domino table didn't get bumped. It's all about containing systemic risk (ie. contagion).
 
So far...

For the last few decades big banks have been merging with small failed banks and calling it a success story.

I'll never understand how taking on a failed bank's assets is considered 'good' business practice....

That one small Iowa bank cost the fund like $15 million dollars. And they only had $59 million in deposits. One big one and the jig is up.
 
A bunch of car repo's. How does one get a car without even registering the thing? Not to mention having a loan against an unregistered car.

 
The one good thing about using cash only is it allows you to identify businesses and people that support working against you with interests in enslaving you.
 
A bunch of car repo's. How does one get a car without even registering the thing? Not to mention having a loan against an unregistered car.


In California, and with some other states IIRC, the registration follows the car, not the buyer.

So. A car is sold, say in December. Every year in December the plates come due. But the car is traded in in March, and someone buys it off a lot in April.

The eight months of registration that go with the car (in California it's incredibly expensive) is a real selling point. But then, since he makes no payment since signing the note...why renew the plates? He can't without the lender's paperwork, anyway. I think maybe the bank or finance company has to initiate registration renewal.

Interesting situation: I bought one of my cars at CarMax. It was overpriced, but not wildly; and it was what I wanted, and there. It was in Washington, 200 miles and two states away.

I bought it, with financing in-house. Because I knew the insurance check was in the pipeline, and I had a grace period where I could pay back the principle and be charged nothing...which I did.

But I left the dealer with a 72-hour transport tag (all Washington would allow to out-of-state buyers) and all the paperwork to register the car. Had I been up to mischief, I could have just said the hell with it, and driven it with a stolen plate. I had a binder from my insurance agent, but I wasn't sure I'd buy the car until I actually did.

So, it depends on the state.

What that mess in the video looks like, is stupid bankers, low-tier loan officers, being pressured to sign loans...and buyers, WAY down on the dark side of the Bell Curve. I wouldn't borrow anything at 15 percent, certainly not a used car.

Absolute insanity. But sadder is that these older used cars are really the best buys - unlike the new, hyper-computerized ones with all the start-stop and emissions crap, the older ones could be repaired at a reasonable rate. A new car...I wouldn't own one. If I had to, I'd lease one - but they're not designed to last, or to be serviced once out of their warranty.
 
Follow up to post #336:

... a recent New York Times story giving infuriating details of innocent Americans being cut off by their banks reveals that the real cause of the banks' seemingly arbitrary behavior is government rules designed to make sure it knows everything it can about citizens' banking business, to discourage big cash transactions, and to ensure businesses the government disapproves of have as difficult a time as possible without being explicitly banned.

As the Times puts it, when citizens suddenly find their banks exiling them, it's because "a vast security apparatus has kicked into gear, starting with regulators in Washington and trickling down to bank security managers and branch staff eyeballing customers."
...

More:

 
Follow up to post #336:



More:

That smacks of fascism.

Fascism="Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power” ― Benito Mussolini​


Mussolini invented fascism, so he ought to know what it means.
 
Follow up to post #342:
Citigroup will soon begin layoffs in CEO Jane Fraser's corporate overhaul, CNBC has learned.

Employees affected by the cuts will be informed starting Wednesday, with new dismissals announced daily through early next week, according to people with knowledge of the situation.

Those impacted will include chiefs of staff, managing directors and some lower level employees, said the people. The cuts will spread to more rank-and-file staff by February, they added.
...

 
While there's never a good time to get laid off, Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Christmas to all you former Citigroup employees.

It's now become a commonplace saying, but for decades, I've told anyone who will listen that you need to take care of yourself first because, if you were to die today, your job position will be posted before your obituary.
 
Digital fraud and banking: supervisory and financial stability implications

The ongoing digitalization of finance can provide benefits to the economy as well as to financial stability. These include greater efficiency in the provision of key banking services (eg lower costs and faster execution), more convenience for customers (eg greater distribution channels and easier user interfaces), enhanced access to banking services for a greater portion of the world’s population (ie financial inclusion), increased transparency in financial transactions and faster response to crises (eg faster communication and decision making, helping authorities and institutions to respond more effectively). Examples of such benefits include instant and standardized payment systems, mobile banking platforms and, in principle, applications of distributed ledger technology to finance.

But technological banking advancements can also increase risks to bank soundness and financial stability. One such example is digital fraud: criminals are exploiting digitalisation to commit online fraud at a greater scale and scope than previously – notwithstanding important data caveats and gaps – as digitalisation enables fraudsters to be more agile. 1 The cybercriminal ecosystem is increasingly industrialised and includes ways for non-technical criminals to access/use cyber tools without having technical expertise (also known as crime as a service). There are dedicated marketplaces on the dark web for selling and purchasing payment card data and online banking access. The techniques used by fraudsters/attackers are getting more sophisticated: malicious codes adapted to many banking applications could bypass current security measures (eg two-factor authentication, biometrics).2

More:

 
The latest from Simon Black:

November 16, 2023

We’re going to talk about strip clubs and binge drinking today. Yet surprisingly this article is not about Hunter Biden.

I’m actually talking about the FDIC… as in the organization that’s supposed to insure customer deposits in the US banking system.

The FDIC isn’t typically an institution that’s associated with sex, drugs, and booze; in fact an agency that sends people from bank to bank across the country to comb through financial records and look for infractions of obscure regulations… should qualify as THE most boring in the world.

But the reality is the complete opposite.

According to a bombshell report published earlier this week by the Wall Street Journal, the FDIC has a hard-partying, sexed-up Caligula boozer dick pic culture that’s a cross between National Lampoon’s Animal House and the TV show Mad Men.

According to the Journal’s report, some FDIC meetings would take place at strip clubs. Senior bank examiners routinely sent around dick pics to the women on their teams. Auditors were encouraged and pressured to drink whiskey shots during work hours while in the field.

Female employees were openly rated on their looks and expected to have sex with their male supervisors in exchange for promotions and higher ratings.

And vomiting off the roof of the FDIC’s Washington DC area hotel was so common it became a rite of passage. (I was as surprised as anyone to learn that the FDIC owns and operates its own hotel…)

Taxpayers rightly have a certain expectation of their public officials-- especially when said public officials have the solemn charge of ensuring the safety of the banking system.

And I think it’s safe to say that a hypersex boozer dick-pic culture at the FDIC falls far, far short of that expectation.

Now, as ridiculous as the FDIC’s party culture may be, it’s made even worse by the fact that the organization has repeatedly failed at its core mission.

Earlier this year, several large banks in the United States (led by Silicon Valley Bank) went bust; these were all banks that were regulated and supervised by the FDIC.

FDIC examiners had conducted multiple audits and examinations of Silicon Valley Bank… yet they never sounded the alarm or raised a red flag.

Perhaps that’s because senior management was too busy f*cking the analysts and getting hammered on the job.

It reminds me of the revelation about the SEC back in 2010.

The SEC is the government agency that regulates financial markets; yet they totally missed the warning signs of the Global Financial Crisis, as well as the Bernie Madoff fraud.

Well according to an internal investigation by the SEC’s Inspector General, it turns out that many of the agency’s senior employees were too busy looking at porn to do their jobs.

According to that Inspector General report, one senior SEC regulator accessed porn sites 1800 times during a two-week period from her government laptop. Another top attorney at the SEC spent up to EIGHT hours per day watching porn at work.

Yet even the SEC’s brazen debauchery has now been surpassed by the clowns at the FDIC. And the problem clearly starts at the top.

The FDIC’s chairman was hauled in front of Congress earlier this week where he faced questions about his agency’s extreme misconduct, as well as his own.

The chairman blatantly lied while under oath to the Senate panel by claiming that he had personally never been investigated for misconduct.

Yet upon later realizing that he would be caught in his lie, the FDIC Chairman then reversed his testimony and admitted that, yes, he had in fact been investigated for personal misconduct.

It’s all so utterly pathetic. And yet, this is the organization that’s expected to maintain a sound banking system in the US… which is a pretty big challenge right now. Here’s why:

1) Banks already have accumulated $650 billion of losses

Commercial banks across the United States bought trillions of dollars worth of bonds with their customers’ money over the past few years, back when interest rates were at record lows.

But now that interest rates have risen from nearly 0% to 5%, those same bonds (that the banks acquired with YOUR money) have lost a ton of value.

In total, banks in the US have racked up a whopping $650 billion of unrealized bond losses; this is an enormous figure, and it poses a major threat to several institutions which may already be insolvent.

2) More losses are coming from commercial real estate

Commercial real estate is suffering-- especially office properties.

We can all see it: companies are cutting costs and reducing their real estate footprints, with a number of businesses permanently embracing remote work.

Demand for office properties has softened considerably. Prices are dropping. Defaults are rising. And many banks will end up taking significant losses from their roughly $1 trillion in exposure to US office real estate.

This problem is just starting to unfold, so there’s a lot more coming in the future.

3) The $221 TRILLION risk from derivatives is very difficult to calculate

Back in the 2008 financial crisis, one of the major problems that almost brought down the entire system was major derivatives losses. And ever since then, the term ‘derivatives’ has been a bit of a dirty word.

Derivatives are not necessarily bad; essentially they’re like insurance policies to protect investors against sudden and major price swings, sort of like how options can mitigate losses in the stock market.

The lurking problem with derivatives is that it’s easy for some institutions to take on WAY too much risk. And if a single Black Swan event arises, it only takes a handful of irresponsible boneheads to wreck havoc in the financial system.

The Treasury Department’s most recent report states that there’s $221 trillion in total derivatives contracts in the US financial system. This is obviously a lot of money… though in fairness it was twice that amount in 2008.

The real issue is that it’s extremely difficult to assess the real risk, or to stress test scenarios in which a Black Swan event may trigger another derivatives chain reaction meltdown of the financial system.

In theory the FDIC should be looking at all of these risks. They should be looking at derivatives. They should be looking at commercial real estate defaults. They should be looking at banks’ massive bond losses.

Yet at the moment they’re apparently too busy sending dick pics and getting so boozed up that they literally puke off the roof of their own hotel.

The good news for the US banking system is that there’s still a fair amount of equity-- totaling just over $2 trillion.

But that’s across the entire banking system. Many individual banks-- including a few large ones-- have taken on way too much risk and have suffered far too many losses.

So I wouldn’t be surprised to see more bank failures down the road, especially if interest rates remain high and the economy contracts. And once again the FDIC will be caught with its pants down… apparently in more ways than one.

To your freedom,
Simon Black, Founder
Sovereign Man
 
Actually, I think most people are oblivious. (sadly)
 
FDIC statement:

JOINT STATEMENT BY VICE CHAIRMAN TRAVIS HILL AND DIRECTOR JONATHAN MCKERNAN ON INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF FDIC WORKPLACE CULTURE​


This has been a difficult week for the FDIC. Restoring faith in the work environment at the FDIC will be challenging. One essential step will be a comprehensive review of the recently reported allegations that is truly and fully independent. This includes, at a minimum, the following:

First, the review must look at all conduct described in the recent news reports, in all parts of the organization, including that of the Chairman and General Counsel, and they need to fully recuse from the process.

Second, the FDIC board, not FDIC management, should determine the scope of the investigation, the appropriate structure for day-to-day direction of the review, and who conducts the inquiry.

News stories like these make it more difficult for the FDIC to do its job and undermine public confidence in the agency.

We will continue to work with our fellow Board members to restore the faith of the public and our employees in the FDIC.


Hey FDIC, the stories only make things difficult and undermine confidence if they are true.
 
Related to post #336:
...
In May, Galloway applied for a $30,000 Greater Houston Community Foundation grant to invest in her business. She got the good news in an email on Sept. 29.

"Out of all the people, I did win a $30,000 grant. Like - that's really good, so I was happy about that," Galloway said.

On Oct. 25, Galloway got the check and brought it to her local Regions Bank branch. She took out a couple hundred dollars that day, and the rest she was told would be available on Nov. 3. But that day, she was told the check was suspicious, and the bank would begin a three-month investigation and freeze the entire business account.

"I have the check in my hand, put it in the bank, and now they won't release the money to me," Galloway said.

A statement from The Greater Houston Community Foundation confirmed that Galloway was a recipient. The nonprofit said it confirmed with Regions Bank on Nov. 6 that the check was real, but Galloway said she's still unable to access any of the funds in that account.

"I asked them, 'Why are y'all freezing my account? What is the reason?' And they said, 'It's because of this check - it's suspicious,'" Galloway said.
...

 
FDIC doing top notch work:
Apparently, the FDIC has decided on the “winning bidders” of the Signature Bank (SBNY) commercial real estate and multifamily loan portfolio.

The portfolio was broken into several packages. Supposedly, a Related Companies affiliate is going to be awarded the multifamily package at 69 cents per $1 of principal even though there were several bids as high as 80 cents. My guess is that the fact that Related is teaming up with the Community Preservation Corporation and Neighborhood Restore is the reason the FDIC is choosing Related. This is a political consideration instead of a financial one.
...


The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has formed a special committee to investigate allegations of rampant sexual harassment, misogyny and partying at the bank regulator as it deals with fallout from the explicit allegations made in a Wall Street Journal report last week.

The special committee will be chaired by two FDIC board members: acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu, a Democrat, and board member Jonathan McKernan, a Republican, multiple outlets reported.
...

 
Back
Top Bottom