Digg It |   Del.icio.us |   Printer Friendly |   PDF |   Email

What does it mean?

Tuesday, February 5, 2008 | Helmut Is this Spam?

Rating:

I posted this question previously but somehow the article never appeared.

Deposit-taking institutions must have capital reserves that are a small proportion of the deposits they have taken, currently approximately 5%. For example, on 5 December 2007 the monetary base was $mil824,857 and required reserves were $mil42,170. Total reserves were actually $mil43,993, of which $43,794 was non-borrowed.

The reserves can comprise non-borrowed and borrowed amounts, because in times of dire stress, the Federal Reserve will lend money to depository institutions who come up a bit short in their capital account, for which it charges a small interest, currently 3% p.a.

In the past, the worst period was 1984, when 32% of reserves had to be borrowed by deposit-taking institutions. The repercussions of that borrowing played out until 1987.

Today, we have an unprecedented situation:

On 19 December 2007, of total reserves of $mil40,834, $mil37,001 was non-borrowed.

On 2 January 2008, of total reserves of $mil44,040, $mil8,733 was non-borrowed.

On 16 January 2008, of total reserves of $mil41,574, only $mil198 was non-borrowed.

And on 30 January 2008 (provisionally), minus $mil8,751 was non-borrowed.

In other words, depository institutions have gone from plus $mil43,794 to minus $mil8,751 in less than two months, a loss of $mil52,545!

The possible repercussions of this situation are beyond my imagination. Would one of the Tycoon experts be able to analyze it?

Data obtained from http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h3/Current/



Rate this article
Thank you for your vote!

1 Comments

Post your own comment
  • Most recent
  • 1
  • Oldest
  1. Helmut (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    One of the things it might mean is a collapse of the financial system as we know it.

    According to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation report of 30 September 2007, the system comprises 8,560 insured institutions, of which 5,193 are FDIC-supervised.

    Together, these institutions hold total assets of $bil12,707, of which $bil7,704 is held in loans. The assets are covered by an equity to assets ratio of 10.45%.

    To give a different meaning to "double-entry book keeping", I bet every bank had two sets of books: one, which it shows to the public, where assets that have gone down in value are shown at cost, and assets that have gone up in value are shown at current value; the other book, which it keeps to itself so it knows the true state of the situation, does the exact opposite, i.e. assets that have lost value are shown at current value because the loss may never be recovered, and assets that show paper profits are shown at cost because paper profits are not profits until they are realized.

    Banks should be forced to reveal both sets of books. Investors could then make a value decision between the two results. The first is clearly an over-estimate and the second is likely an under-estimate of true assets.

    Who said it's the small, unobserved factors that are usually the first signals of a disaster?

    In a system that has assets of $12.7 trillions, even if the assets are "trumped up", a shortfall of $52.5 billion is a drop in the ocean.

    But that is exactly my point. How come that a system that has $1.3 trillion in equity ( 10.45% of $12.7 trillion), has to borrow $52.5 billion from the Federal Reserve to cover its statutory reserve requirements of $40.8 billion? A case of "asset rich and cash-flow poor", which happens to people when they mismanage their affairs?

    You have to wonder how much mismanagement has occurred? Why borrow $52.5 billion when all you need is $40.8 billion? Reminds me of the time when I borrowed more than I needed so I could meet future interest payments. Or have they actually dipped into their depositors' funds?

    How could such a small thing signal the collapse of the system? For starters, the banks can raise $52.5 billion in one foul swoop by increasing their charges. Then, why are the Federal Reserve and Government so panicky?

    They know something we don't!

    Data obtained from http://www.fdic.gov/bank/statistical/stats/2007sep/industry.html
  • Most recent
  • 1
  • Oldest

Add Your Comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed.

Please fill in the missing field(s).

Important: To comment on Tycoon Report articles, you must first log in. If you are a paying customer of Tycoon, you may use the same login and password that you use normally. If you do not yet have a login, please take a moment to register below. It’s free, and you only need to do it once.

Register

(email address and password information will NOT be displayed publicly)

Name *

Email *

Password *

Subscribe to The Tycoon Report
By registering, you agree to our terms of service.

Already a member? Log in!

(you will not be taken away from this page)

Email *

Password *

Remember?

Forgot Password?




Important Notice to all stock spammers, scammers and penny stock pump-and-dumpers: You will get no respect here. Don’t bother submitting fraudulent or misleading information in the guise of an article, because we will remove it. Any piece of content submitted on this site can be removed at the sole discretion of the Tycoon staff.