Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fed eyes Nordic-style nationalisation of US banks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fed eyes Nordic-style nationalisation of US banks

    Fed eyes Nordic-style nationalisation of US banks

    The US Federal Reserve is examining the Nordic bank nationalisations of the 1990s as a possible interim solution to the US financial crisis.

    The Fed has been criticised for its rescue of Bear Stearns, which critics say has degenerated into a taxpayer gift to rich bankers.

    A senior official at one of the Scandinavian central banks told The Daily Telegraph that Fed strategists had stepped up contacts to learn how Norway, Sweden and Finland managed their traumatic crisis from 1991 to 1993, which brought the region's economy to its knees.

    It is understood that Fed vice-chairman Don Kohn remains very concerned by the depth of the US crisis and is eyeing the Nordic approach for contingency options.

    Scandinavia's bank rescue proved successful and is now a model for central bankers, unlike Japan's drawn-out response, where ailing banks were propped up in a half-public limbo for years

    While the responses varied in each Nordic country, there a was major effort to avoid the sort of "moral hazard" that has bedevilled efforts by the Fed and the Bank of England in trying to stabilise their banking systems.

    Norway ensured that shareholders of insolvent lenders received nothing and the senior management was entirely purged. Two of the country's top four banks - Christiania Bank and Fokus - were seized by force majeure.

    "We were determined not to get caught in the game we've seen with Bear Stearns where shareholders make money out of the rescue," said one Norwegian adviser.

    "The law was amended so that we could take 100pc control of any bank where its equity had fallen below zero. Shareholders were left with nothing. It was very controversial," he said.

    Stefan Ingves, governor of Sweden's Riksbank, said his country passed an act so it could seize banks where the capital adequacy ratio had fallen below 2pc. Efforts were also made to protect against "blackmail" by shareholders.

  • #2
    Re: Fed eyes Nordic-style nationalisation of US banks


    The FED would have to do this OTHERWISE, every problem and every POTENTIAL problem will cause banks to try to get worse instead of better in the hopes of getting a bailout.

    The Bear Stearns type of situation ONLY encourages banks to go to the Nth Degree to ensure that problems are SO severe, that the CB has no choice but to bail them out. The Nordic CB's obviously saw the flaw in this arrangement (to their credit).

    IF the US Fed continues on the track they are on, it will be MORAL HAZARD to the Nth Degree and bailouts for all the bad players. (which would reward extreemly poor behavior).

    This solution seems much more realistic and proper.
    Last edited by jtabeb; March 31, 2008, 12:10 PM. Reason: grammer

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Fed eyes Nordic-style nationalisation of US banks

      This is actually right in my back yard. I could provide some insight to ITulipers on the Nordic crisis, though I can't translate much - it takes too much time. Perhaps this could be some use: "The Norwegian Boom-Bust Cycle and Banking Crisis Revisited" from a researcher at Norwegian School of Management BI, from a seminar by the Norwegian Financial Services Authority. It is in "Norwenglish", sorry. I'm not that impressed by the analysis, there's no criticism of fractional reserve banking (the root cause). But the issues sound terribly familiar. Bank stock holders were wiped out in the three major banks that were nationalized.

      I'm also a little proud to point out that Shiller's "a history of home values" was based on three series: a US series, the Dutch Heerengracht re-sale index, and a Norwegian index 1819-2003:

      Suffice to say, that the current real estate boom in Norway is up 80% inflation-adjusted over the last top in 1987 (201% un-adjusted), and up 215% inflation-adjusted up from the bottom in 1992 (330% un-adjusted). Do you think I'm crazy for jumping off?

      Translation of slide #17 of the presentation above:
      "Bad banking"
      - well documented. Most pronounced in Norway and Finland?
      - Banks pushed for relaxation of capital requirements
      - Re-organization of the regulatory authorities, behind the curve
      - Frantic race for market shares at any price
      - Unrealistic "visions" and frowth ambitions
      - Active "sales push" to speculative ventures
      - Low quality of the banking handicraft, especially credit risk assessment
      - Grave deficiencies in management oversight and internal risk control
      - The result: explosive credit growth and overcapacity
      - Large losses abroad, independent of the Norwegian economy
      - Some smaller banks ended up relatively unhurt

      Translation of slide 35, last slide, "Conclusions"
      - Credit liberalization probably explains a lot of the large increase in private consumption and real investment 1985-86
      - Credit financed speculation and bubbles probably due to a structural market failure caused by assets being bought on credit with limited liability
      - The scope of "bad banking" was large in Norway, probably due to mismanagement
      - The fixed exchange rate and free movement of capital meant that monetary policy increased instability in all the Nordic countries
      - Too high real interest rate in the stagnation period increased the fall in real estate prices, increased the debt problems and the scope of the banking crisis
      - The contraction policy increased the recession, the real estate slump and prolonged the stagnation
      - There is more stability in the Nordic countries now. Good monetary policy and low inflation is important to this stability.

      Figures:

      Figure 2: Real after-tax interest rate:

      Figure: Household savings rate, % of disposable income

      Figure: real estate prices

      Figure: bank loss provisions:

      Figure: bank bailout costs:

      Comment

      Working...
      X