It is all about the banks yet again

If there is a prime feature of the credit crunch in the financial world it is the woes and travails of the banks. That is quite an anti-achievement when you consider that if you count from the first signs of trouble at the mortgage book of Bear Stearns we are now in out second decade of this period having lost one already. Before we come to today’s main course delightfully prepared first by chefs in Italy and then finished off in Brussels I have a starter for you from the UK.

The Co-op Bank

Back on the 13th of February I gave my views on this institution being put up for sale.

So the bank is up for sale and my immediate thought is who would buy it and frankly would they pay anything? Only last week Bloomberg put out some concerning analysis……..Co-Operative Bank Plc, the British lender that ceded control to its creditors three years ago, has plunged in value to as little as 45 million pounds ($56 million), according to people familiar with the matter.

Since then we have had regular reports in places like the Financial Times that a deal was just around the corner whereas I feared it might end up in the hands of the Bank of England. This morning has come news that the ill-fated sale plans have been abandoned and replaced by a doubling-down by the existing investors. From Sky News.

The beleaguered Co-operative Bank is closing in on a £700m rescue deal with US hedge funds amid ongoing talks about the separation of the vast pension scheme it shares with the Co-op Group.

Much of the issue revolves around funding the pension scheme and if I was worker at the Co-op I would be watching that like a hawk. Also the name may need some review as the shareholding of the Co-operative group falls below 5%.

We have also seen in the UK how a bailed out bank boosts the economy in return for taxpayers largesse. From Reuters.

British lender Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS.L) is planning to cut 443 jobs dealing with business loans and many of them will move to India, the bank said

The Veneto Banks

As we move from our starter to the main course we find ourselves facing a menu which has taken nearly a decade to be drawn up. The Italian response to the banking crisis was to adopt the ostrich position and ignore it for as long as possible. Indeed for a while the Italian establishment boasted that only 0.2% of GDP ( Gross Domestic Product) had been spent on bank bailouts compared to much higher numbers elsewhere. Such Schadenfreude came back to haunt them driven by one main factor which was the rise and rise of non-performing loans in the Italian banking sector which ended up with more zombies than you might expect to see in a Hammer House of Horror production. Even worse this was a drag on the already anaemic Italian rate of economic growth meaning that its economy is now pretty much the same size as when it joined the Euro.

There has been a long program of disinformation on this subject and I am sure that regular readers will recall the claims that Monte Paschi was a good investment made by then Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. There have also been the regular statements by Finance Minister Padoan along the lines of this from Politico EU in January.

Italian Finance Minister Pier Carlo Padoan has defended the way his country dealt with its banking crisis, saying the government had “only spent €3 billion” on bailouts, in an interview with Die Welt published today.

If we are being ultra polite that was especially “odd” as Monte Paschi was in state hands but of course over this weekend came more woe for Padoan. From the European Commission.

On 24 June 2017, Italy notified to the Commission its plans to grant State aid to wind-down BPVI and Veneto Banca. The measures will enable the sale of parts of the two banks’ activities to Intesa, including the transfer of employees. Italy selected Intesa Sanpaolo (Intesa) as the buyer in an open, fair and transparent sales procedure:

I will come to the issue of Intesa in a moment but let us first look at the cost to Italy from this.

In particular, the Italian State will grant the following measures:

  • Cash injections of about €4.785 billion; and
  • State guarantees of a maximum of about €12 billion, notably on Intesa’s financing of the liquidation mass. The State guarantees would be called upon notably, if the liquidation mass is insufficient to pay back Intesa for its financing of the liquidation mass.

This has opened up a rather large can of worms and as Bloomberg points out we can start with this.

Rome will effectively by-pass the EU’s “single resolution board” which is supposed to handle bank failures in an orderly way and the “Banking Recovery and Resolution Directive,” which should act as the euro zone’s single rulebook.

Why? Well as we have looked at before there was the misselling of bonds to retail investors.

The government could have taken a less expensive route, involving the “bail in” of senior bondholders. It chose not to: Many of these instruments are in the hands of retail investors, who bought them without being fully aware of the risks involved. The government wants to avoid a political backlash and the risk of contagion spreading across the system.

Privatisation of profits and socialisation of losses yet again. Also only on the June 8th we were told this.

Italian banks are considering assisting in a rescue of troubled lenders Popolare di Vicenza and Veneto Banca by pumping 1.2 billion euros (1.1 billion pounds) of private capital into the two regional banks

Good job they said no as they would have been over 3 billion short! Oh and Padoan described the problems as “exaggerated” whereas if we return to reality this was always the real problem.

A bail in has the problem of the retail depositors who were persuaded to invest in bank bonds.

Intesa

This seems to have got something of a free lunch here provided courtesy of the Italian taxpayer. From Reuters.

The government will pay 5.2 billion euros ($5.82 billion) to Intesa, and give it guarantees of up 12 billion euros, so that it will take over the remains of the banks.

So it can clear up the mess? Er not quite.

will leave the lenders’ good assets in the hands of Intesa,

So it is being paid to take the good bits. Heads it wins if things turns out okay and tails the Italian taxpayer loses if they do not as it will use the guarantees. Also as you can see it seems to have thought of everything.

You think Santander made a killing with Pop until you realise will even make the state pay for the redundancy package of V&V staff ( @jeuasommenulle )

It may even be able to gain from some Deferred Tax Assets but chasing down that thread is only in very technical Italian.

Comment

There is much to consider here so let me open with the two main issues. The European Banking Union has just been torpedoed by the Italian financial navy. The promised bail in has become a bailout. Next comes the issue of how much all the dilatory dithering has cost the Italian taxpayer? As in the end the cost is way above the sums that Financial Minister Padoan was calling “exaggerated”. I note that BBC Breakfast called the cost 5 billion Euros this morning ignoring the 12 billion Euros of guarantees which no doubt Italy in a by now familiar attempted swerve will try to keep it out of the national debt numbers. Although to be fair Eurostat has mostly shot down such efforts.

Over the next few days we will no doubt be assailed with promises that the money will come back. For some it already has. From the FT.

Intesa Sanpaolo, the country’s strongest lender that will take over the failed banks’ good assets, was the second biggest riser on the eurozone-wide Stoxx 600 index. Shares in the bank were up 3.6 per cent at publication time, to €2.71.

 

 

 

 

 

The problems of the banks of Italy part 101

It is time to look again at a topic which is a saga of rinse and repeat. Okay I am not sure it is part 101 but it certainly feels like a never-ending story. Let us remind ourselves that the hands of the current President of the ECB ( European Central Bank) Mario Draghi are all over this situation. Why? Well let me hand you over to the ECB itself on his career so far.

1997-1998: Chair of the Committee set up to revise Italy’s corporate and financial legislation and to draft the law that governs Italian financial markets (also known as the “Draghi Law”)

It is a bit awkward to deny responsibility for the set of laws which bear you name! This happened during the period ( 1991-2001) that Mario was Director General of the Italian Treasury. After a period at the Vampire Squid ( Goldman Sachs) there was further career progression.

2006-October 2011Governor, Banca d’Italia

There were also questions about the close relationship and dealings between the Italian Treasury and the Vampire Squid over currency swaps.

https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2010/02/09/145201/goldmans-trojan-greek-currency-swap/?mhq5j=e2

But with Mario linking the Bank of Italy and the ECB via his various roles the latest spat in the banking crisis saga must be more than an embarrassment.

The inspection at Banca Popolare di Vicenza that began in 2015 was launched at the request of the Bank of Italy and was conducted by Bank of Italy personnel. Any subsequent decisions were not the responsibility of the Bank of Italy but of the European Central Bank, because in November 2014 Banca Popolare di Vicenza had become a ‘significant’ institution and was subject to the European Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM). ( h/t @FerdiGiugliano )

So we can see that the Bank of Italy is trying to shift at least some of the blame for one of the troubled Veneto banks to the ECB. At this point Shaggy should be playing on its intercom system.

It wasn’t me…….It wasn’t me

An official denial

At the end of last month the Governor of the Bank of Italy gave us its Annual Report.

At the end of 2016 Italian banks’ non-performing loans, recorded in balance sheets net of write-downs, came to €173 billion or 9.4 per cent of total loans. The €350 billion figure often cited in the press refers to the nominal value of the exposures and does not take account of the losses already entered in balance sheets and is therefore not indicative of banks’ actual credit risk.

Indeed he went further.

Those held by intermediaries experiencing difficulties, which could find themselves obliged to offload them rapidly, amount to around €20 billion.

I suppose your view on this depends on whether you think that 20 billion Euros is a lot or a mere bagatelle. It makes you wonder why the problems at the Veneto banks and Monte Paschi seem to be taking so long to solve does it not?

Meanwhile he did indicate a route to what Taylor Swift might call “Trouble, trouble,trouble”.

At the current rate of growth, GDP would return to its 2007 level in the first half of the 2020s.

An economy performing as insipidly as that is bound to cause difficulties for its banks, but not so for the finances of its central bank.

The 2016 financial year closed with a net profit of €2.7 billion; after allocations to the ordinary reserve and dividends paid to the shareholders, €2.2 billion were allocated to the State, in addition to the €1.3 billion paid in taxes.

The QE era has seen a boom in the claimed profits for central banks and as you can see they will be very popular with politician’s as they hand them over cash to spend.

The ECB is pouring money in

The obvious problem with telling us everything is okay is that Governor Visco is part of the ECB which is pouring money into the Italian banks. From the Financial Times.

According to ECB data as of the end of April, Italian banks hold just over €250bn of the total long-term loans — almost a third of the total.

There is a counter argument that the situation where the Italian banks rely so much on the ECB has in fact simply kicked that poor battered can down the road.

“Some of them [Italian banks] are unprofitable even with the ECB’s cheap funding,” adds Christian Scarafia, co-head of Western European Banks at Fitch.

Fitch also observes that the TLTRO funding is tied up with Italy’s management of the non-performing loans that beset its banks. “The weak asset quality in Italy is certainly the big issue in the country and access to cheap ECB funding has meant that banks could continue to operate without having to address the asset quality problem in a more decisive manner,” says Mr Scarafia. (FT)

It was intriguing to note that the Spanish bank BBVA declared 36 million Euros of profits in April from the -0.2% interest-rate on its loans from the ECB. A good use of taxpayer backed money?

The Veneto Banks

For something that is apparently no big deal and according to Finance Minister Padoan has been “exaggerated” this keeps returning to the news as this from Reuters today shows.

Italian banks are considering assisting in a rescue of troubled lenders Popolare di Vicenza and Veneto Banca by pumping 1.2 billion euros (1.1 billion pounds) of private capital into the two regional banks, sources familiar with the matter said.

Good money after bad?

Italian banks, which have already pumped 3.4 billion euros into the two ailing rivals, had said until now that they would not stump up more money.

As you can see the ball keeps being batted between the banks, the state , and the Atlante fund which is a mostly private hybrid of bank money with some state support. Such confusion and obfuscation is usually for a good reason. A bail in has the problem of the retail depositors who were persuaded to invest in bank bonds.

Monte Paschi

On the 2nd of this month we were told that the problem had been solved and yet the saga like so many others continues on.

HEDGE FUND SAID IN TALKS TO BUY $270 MILLION MONTEPASCHI LOANS ( h/t @lemasabachthani )

Seems odd if it has been solved don’t you think? Mind you according to the FT the European Banking Authourity may have found a way of keeping it out of the news.

The EBA said it would be up to supervisors to decide whether to include any bank in restructuring within the stress tests, and European Central Bank supervisors have decided not to include Monte dei Paschi, people briefed on the matter said.

So bottom place is available again.

Comment

This has certainly been more of a marathon than a sprint and in fact maybe like a 100 or 200 mile race. The Italian establishment used to boast that only 0.2% of GDP was used to bailout Italian banks but of course it is now absolutely clear that this effort to stop its national debt rising even higher allowed the banking sector to carry on in the same not very merry way. This week the environment has changed somewhat with Santander buying Banco Popular for one Euro. Although of course the capital raising of 7 billion Euros needs to be factored into the equation. I guess Unicredit has troubles enough of its own and could not reasonably go for yet another rights issue!

Me on TipTV Finance

http://tiptv.co.uk/living-extraordinary-times-not-yes-man-economics/

 

The British and Irish Lions

I have been somewhat remiss in not wishing our players well on what is the hardest rugby tour of all which is a trip into the heart of the All Blacks. I am thoroughly enjoying it although of course we need to raise our game after a narrow win and a loss. Here’s hoping!

 

 

 

The economics of the 2017 General Election

Tomorrow the United Kingdom goes to the polls for a General Election. Yesterday’s anniversary of the D-Day invasion of Normandy in France reminded us that the ability to vote is a valuable thing that people have fought and died for. Let me repeat my usual recommendation to vote albeit with the realisation that as far as I can see it has been an insipid and uninspiring campaign. Time for “none of the above” to be on the ballot box I think.

Moving to economics there have been a couple of reminders over the past 24 hours that some themes remain the same. From BBC News.

RBS has finally reached a £200m settlement with investors who say they were duped into handing £12bn to the bank during the financial crisis.

The RBS Shareholders Action Group has voted to accept a 82p a share offer.

The amount is below the 200p-230p a share that investors paid during the fundraising in 2008, when they say RBS lied about its financial health.

If you look at the sums you see that the compensation is nowhere near the problem if you feel that there was a misrepresentation back then. Also as there was a 1:10 stock split back in 2012 is this not really an 8.2p offer? As to the theme of there being no punishment for bank directors there is also this.

A settlement means that the disgraced former chief executive of RBS, Fred Goodwin, will not appear in court.

Of course the UK is not alone in such machinations as I note this from Spain today. From Bloomberg.

Banco Popular Espanol SA was taken over by larger Spanish competitor Banco Santander SA after European regulators determined that the bank was likely to fail…..

The purchase price was 1 euro, according to the statement.

Santander plans to raise about 7 billion euros ($7.9 billion) of capital as part of the transaction. ( Bloomberg ).

That much? The situation has been summed up rather well in a reply to the article.

Santander could be buying a time bomb filled with bad debt. What is the CEO thinking? Why should shareholders bail out Popular?! ( @ ken_tex )

We are left with a general theme that the banking sector carries on regardless and simply ignores things like elections. Democracy has not reached the banking sector. There is a British implication as of course Santander is a big player in UK banking and as an aside this sees the first bail-in of a so-called Co-Co bond.

How is the economy doing?

We have the Bank of England with its foot hard down on the monetary policy pedal with a Bank Rate of 0.25% which as far as I can recall has barely merited a mention in the campaign! Amazing how that and £445 billion of QE ( including the Corporate Bonds) can be treated as something to be pretty much ignored isn’t it? Partly as a result of this we are facing a spell of higher consumer inflation which will lead to a contractionary effect on the economy due to the way it seems set to reduce real wages. But again this seems to have been ignored. Of course the Bank of England will be happy to be outside of the political limelight but when it is such a major part of economic policy there should at least be a debate.

Fortunately the edge has been taken off things by the decline in the price of crude oil back towards US $50 in Brent Crude terms and the rally of the UK Pound to US $1.29. This is a factor in the Markit business survey telling us this on Monday.

The three PMI surveys are running at levels that are historically consistent with GDP growing at a robust 0.5% rate, albeit with the slowing in May posing some downside risks to the near-term outlook.

So the economy continues to grow but at a slow pace overall. Of course the Bank of England will be concerned about this reported this morning by the Halifax.

House prices in the last three months
(March-May) were 0.2% lower than in
the previous three months (DecemberFebruary).

The mood of Bank of England Governor Mark Carney will not be improved by this as it refers back to a time before it began its house price policy push in the summer of 2013.

Prices in the three months to May
were 3.3% higher than in the same
three months a year earlier. This was
lower than April and is the lowest annual
rate since May 2013 (2.6%). The annual
rate is around a third of the 10.0% peak
reached in March 2016.

The Bank of England will also be worried by this signal that emerged yesterday. From Homelet.

UK rental price inflation fell for the first time in almost eight years in May, new data from HomeLet reveals. The average rent on a new tenancy commencing in May was £901, 0.3% lower than in the same month of 2016. New tenancies on rents in London were 3% lower than this time last year…….This is the first time since December 2009 the HomeLet Rental Index has reported a fall in rents on an annualised basis. The pace of rental price inflation across the UK has been slowing in recent months, having peaked at 4.7% last summer.

Of course whilst there will be concern and maybe some panic at the Bank of England that the £63 billion of the banking subsidy called the Term Funding Scheme has run out of puff. Meanwhile over at HM Treasury someone will be having a champagne breakfast as they slap themselves on the back for starting a rush to get rents in the official UK consumer inflation measure ( CPIH) last Autumn.

Fiscal policy

Back on the 23rd of May I looked at this.

Labour promised £75 billion a year in additional spending and £50 billion of additional taxes. The Liberal Democrats are also aiming for tens of billions of pounds in extra spending partially funded by more tax. Yesterday’s Conservative manifesto was much more, well, conservative………The Conservatives do not appear to have felt the need to spell out much detail. But they have left themselves room for manoeuvre.

Whoever wins we seem set for a period of higher taxation and higher expenditure but we remain in a situation where there is a lot of smoke blowing across the battlefield. There is of course also this from Labour.

we will establish a National Investment Bank that will bring in private capital finance to deliver £250 billion of lending power.

Comment

This has been an election where the economy has been out of the limelight. In a way this is summarised  by the fact that we have heard so little from the current Chancellor of the Exchequer Phillip Hammond. This means that many important matters get ignored such as the apparent devolution of so much economic power to the Bank of England. An issue which is important as in my opinion it was captured by the UK establishment and now pursues policies that politicians would be afraid to implement.

Other important issues such as problems with productivity and real wages which have bedevilled us in the credit crunch era get little debate or mention. To that list we can add the ongoing current account deficit.

Yet some markets are at simply extraordinary levels and it is hard not to raise a wry smile at the ten-year Gilt yield being a mere 0.99%! Whatever happened to pricing an election risk? It also provides quite a boost over time to the fiscal numbers as it is well below the rate of inflation.

 

 

It is always the banks isn’t it?

Modern economic life invariably revolves around the banking sector or as it has been named “The Precious” in a nod to the Lord of the Rings saga. This is because it is inextricably linked to the supply of credit and hence money via the amount of lending they do. Today I wish to look at some ch-ch-changes which have happened this week but this comes also with another notable change from earlier this month. It came from a UK portfolio manager famous for not investing in banks.

New holdings that have resulted from this strategic shift include Lloyds Banking Group. I have often heard Neil say that banks should be viewed as warrants on economic growth. In a modern ‘fiat money’ system, banks play a pivotal role in the economy through the creation of credit. ( Woodford Funds).

Meanwhile if we remain with the UK some things have remained the same as this week saw yet more retrenchment and deleveraging.

Barclays  cut its stake in Barclays Africa Group  to 15 percent sooner than expected on Thursday, ending more than 90 years as a major presence in the continent. (Reuters)

There is something familiar here though as we look at the result of a bank going international.

it will lead to an initial 1.2 billion pound loss.

There is also much going on elsewhere including some familiar names.

Monte Paschi

The saga of the world’s oldest bank has gone as follows. It found itself with ever more non- performing loans which increasingly challenged the solvency of the bank itself. This was met with a barrage of denial and political rhetoric as Italy’s Finance Minister Padoan told us that there would be no bailout and a year or so ago Matteo Renzi who was Prime Minister declared that the shares were good value. After shareholders tired of putting ever more good money after the 8 billion Euros they had put in turned bad this happened last December. From Bloomberg.

Monte Paschi was forced to turn to Italy for aid after it failed to raise extra capital from investors in December. The European Central Bank said then it needed to secure 8.8 billion euros ($9.9 billion) to bolster its balance sheet. The government would contribute about 6.6 billion euros, according to a Bank of Italy calculation, with the rest covered by creditors.

As we have discussed before this looks something of a hybrid as there are both bailout and bail in elements to it. We also learnt never to take financial advice from Matteo Renzi. Another issue is the way that this has gone on and on and on, after all it is now June. The media yesterday proclaimed a solution had been found but the detail was weaker.

The deal, following “intensive” talks between Italy, the EU and the ECB, still requires formal approval.

Remember the miss selling scandal?

Monte Paschi will compensate retail junior bondholders who weren’t properly informed of the risk they were taking on that bonds might be converted to equity, according to the statement. The bank will buy the converted equity from those investors and pay them in “more secure senior instruments.”

That is what depositors were told – “secure” – when the existing bonds were miss sold to them! Also why would investors want to do this?

Monte Paschi is in discussions with funds including Credito Fondiario SpA and Fortress Investment Group LLC about investing in the riskiest tranches of the securitization, which is backed by loans with a face value of as much as 30 billion euros, people said last month. Atlante II, the private investment fund set up with the help of the state to invest in non-performing loans, is expected to buy the largest portion of the same tranches, they said.

Let us remind ourselves that in a bailout the taxpayer usually takes the riskiest debt, otherwise why is a bailout necessary? If I was an Italian taxpayer I would want to know what was going on here and also why I was backing a private fund like Atlante II?

The Veneto Banks

This saga seems to be something of a never-ending story.

the future of the Veneto banks is still uncertain. The 6.4 billion-euro precautionary recapitalization requested for the two small lenders were thrown into doubt last week after the commission rejected a request by the banks to reduce the 1 billion euros of private capital they’re required to raise, according to people with knowledge of the matter. ( Bloomberg).

Still I spotted this earlier and there are translation risks but Finance Minister Padoan does of course have a track record.

the problem of banks was exaggerated

Yet some seem to disagree with this. From Reuters.

“The effects of not solving the crisis at the two banks would not be smaller than those created by a default by Greece,” CEO Fabrizio Viola said in an interview with daily Corriere della Sera………Viola added that the effects should not be underestimated given that the two lenders have extended loans worth 30 billion euros, mainly in the industrial north eastern regions of the country, and “calling them back would create tremendous chaos”.

Usually we find people telling us that they are not Greece!

Banco Popular

This is a different type of situation as the Spanish economy has been doing well in recent times but Banco Popular has been unable to benefit enough from this to offset past troubles. From the Financial Times.

Popular, which earlier this month disclosed a €137m loss for the first quarter, linked to higher provisions on its real estate portfolio.

As ever pouring in more equity via rights issues has been unable to match the scale of the downturn.

Mr Lowe ( an analyst at Berenberg ) estimates the bank, which has a market capitalisation of €2.6bn and raised €2.5bn from shareholders in a rights issue last year, needs to raise €3bn-€5bn in additional capital, on top of asset sales. “If you were to raise €3bn, the market may still question the capital situation,” he said, adding that even in that case, the share count would more than quadruple, creating “huge dilution” for shareholders.

As we see shareholders being blitzed let me raise an issue which gets swept under the carpet. The official prospectus for a rights issue is supposed to be a true and fair record of the situation yet banks keep doing them and then heading south at full speed ahead. But no-one seems to go to jail for what must be misrepresentations. This is an international issue as for me the Royal Bank of Scotland rights issue of 2008 seems an example of this which could not be much clearer.

Bond Vigilantes have provided us with another example of the woes of Banco Popular.

Comment

This September marks the end of a type of lost decade for UK banks as it will be the anniversary of Northern Rock having to go cap in hand to the Bank of England. Who thought we would still be reviewing something of a mess this far down the road back then? However have one or two like Lloyds Bank finally seen the beginnings of a new hope? If so it will be because the UK did at least face up to some of the problems at the time. Sadly not all of them or we would be in a better economic place now.

However if we look at Italy we see an example of country that has used this lost decade to mostly stick its head in the sand and deny everything. So presumably it will take it much longer to even have a hope of a turn for the better.

 

 

How are the bank and Alitalia bailouts going in Italy?

It is time again to dip into the delightful country that is Italy as one of the features of life there makes the news. The saga of the national airline Alitalia has been going on for the best part of a couple of decades but has now reached something of a climax. Here is Sky News on the subject.

Shareholders in Alitalia have voted unanimously for the airline to enter administration, in a deal with the Italian government that would allow it to keep flying.

The move was approved by investors days after the airline’s staff rejected a proposed restructuring that would have seen 1,700 of them lose their jobs – with the rest subject to salary cuts of around 8%.

The business model was not viable and Etihad Airlines who own 49% of the airline were unwilling to put in any more cash without reforms. I guess the same sort of reforms which ECB ( European Central Bank) President Mario Draghi asks for at each monetary policy press conference in the one certainty in it. So the Italian state had to step up as Reuters explains.

The government appointed three commissioners to assess whether Alitalia can be restructured, either as a standalone company or through a partial or total sale, or else liquidated.

Rome also threw the airline a short-term lifeline by guaranteeing a bridge loan of 600 million euros ($655 million) for six months to see it through the bankruptcy process.

So another 600 million Euros is being added to the Italian national debt I guess as we wonder if 6 months will be long enough to get us to the other side of the upcoming election. Also there is an element to this saga that makes Alitalia sound rather like a bank.

Outraged at repeated bailouts that have cost taxpayers more than 7 billion euros over a decade, many Italians are urging the government to resist the political temptation to rush to its rescue again.

Speaking of banks

If we think of Italian banks it is hard not to wonder what is happening about the nationalisation about Monte dei Paschi di Siena? After all it was supposed to start at the beginning of the year although there were many problems as I pointed out back then as will in be a bailout or a bail in? According to Il Sole there are ch-ch-changes afoot.

According to certain estimates reviewed by Il Sole, raising the number of job cuts to 5,000 would have a €654 million effect on costs (around half a billion more than the October plan,) the equivalent of 18% of 2016’s costs. This would significantly improve the 54.5% cost/income ratio that the bank had established as a goal for 2019; now, it seems that this could be achieved by 2021.

So the number of job cuts is pretty much doubled which is being sugared by extending the plan a couple of years, or the sort of thing applied to Greece when the numbers do not add up. Also the non performing loans ( let us hope that they do not include Alitalia now ) have not been sorted as putting them in the rescue fund Atlante is so 2016.

Another decisive element, obviously, is the management of the €29 billion in gross non performing loans that still weigh on the bank: many options are being considered, but at the moment the most realistic one calls for Atlante to acquire around €500 million of a junior tranche.

Times must be hard if Atlante is the best option as views like this from Nicholas Zennaro on The Market Mogul have been replaced by write-offs and losses.

The investment in Atlante could not only generate significant profits but also create positive side effects and support a more positive perception of big banks in Italy.

Actually only yesterday Il Sole was looking at another job for Atlante.

 the three banks will be recapitalized (from the Resolution Fund, then by “healthy” banks) for 450 million. The other condition was the sale of approximately 2.2 billion euros of impaired loans, to which the Atlas Fund will be charged.

They are referring to what now seems to be called Ubi Banca.

Meanwhile in something of a dizzying whirl as some banks are moved into Atlante from the state others are heading in the opposite direction. This is Il Sole via Google Translate last month on Banco Popalare and Veneto Banca.

the share in public hands will probably exceed 70% , While – as confirmed by three different sources at Il Sole 24 Ore – Quaestio’s fund ( Atlante) should be at 20-25%, leaving crumbs of crumbs on small members, already marginalized by the increases of a year ago.

Apologies for the clunky translation but I think you can all figure what happened to existing shareholders. But this looks like a game of pass the parcel with everybody hoping that the music never stops. Indeed I wonder if any real progress has been made.

The situation is fluid because regulators have not yet agreed with prices and how NPL will be disposed of and what will be the consequent erosion of the 3.9 billion of net assets currently available to banks,

This is all quite a mess as we wonder if this will be a bailout or a bail-in and what will happen to the bondholders? These are supposed to take the strain now but the fact that ordinary Italian savers were miss sold some of these bonds means that the government is twisting and turning to try to avoid that. It has created a type of paralysis which seems to be speading. What can happen to bonds well Alitalia did give us a clue?

I wonder who the holders are/were? No doubt someone is already suggesting that the ECB should buy them all……

The unemployment problem

The paralysis described above seems to lead into this as we saw yet another disappointment yesterday as follows.

In March 2017, 22.870 million persons were employed, unchanged over February 2017. Unemployed were 3.022 million, +1.4% over the previous month….. unemployment rate was 11.7%, +0.1 percentage points over the previous month,

This is supposed to be an economic recovery driven by negative interest-rates and some 1.8 trillion Euros of bond purchases and yet unemployment rises and not falls. There was better news on youth unemployment but look at the level of it.

Youth unemployment rate (aged 15-24) was 34.1%, -0.4 percentage points over February 2017

Comment

The Italian system seems ossified creating something of a zombified banking sector and indeed national airline. This means that even in a much better phase for the Euro area with economic growth just reported of 0.5% in the first quarter of this year that unemployment in Italy rises instead of falls. It represents quite a failure in the circumstances for the level of unemployment to be 29,000 higher than last year.

Yet there are areas where Italy shows excellent management skills. Allegri has taken Juventus to the Champions League semi-finals and Claudio Ranieri took little Leicester to English Premier League triumph last year. As we stand Antonio Conte’s Chelsea  lead this year with 4 games to go. What of course is lacking in the banking story is the sort of decisive action that he took when switching to three at the back. The exact opposite of paralysis. If men like these were in charge then it is hard to avoid the feeling that we would see more news like that below rather than more “girlfriend in a coma” worries.

The rate of growth in manufacturing output reached the highest for six years in April, having accelerated for the third month in a row

The ethical problems of UK banking continue to pile up

On Friday Bank of England Governor Mark Carney was in full flow at Thomson Reuters headquarters in London. In particular he wanted to lecture us about the improvements in ethical standards at the Bank of England and in banking more generally.

The high road to a responsible, open financial system

Okay so what does that mean?

The financial system is fairer because of reforms that are ending the era of “too big to fail” banks and
addressing the root causes of a torrent of misconduct.

I am sure that many of you will be wondering about how he defines the word “fairer” or how the many mergers that were a feature of the UK response to the credit crunch helped end “too big to fail”? The creation of a mega bank by merger Lloyds with Halifax Bank of Scotland for example surely only made the situation more acute. As to addressing the root cause of misconduct we still actually await this happening in practice.

There was plenty of high-flying rhetoric to be found.

On one path, we can build a more effective,
resilient system on the new pillars of responsible financial globalisation.

The new buzz phrase is “efficient resilence” which if the previous buzz words and phrases are any guide ( temporary…… vigilant etc.) will mean anything but! Here is how Mark describes it.

Finally, efficient resilience is why the Bank of England, working with the Financial Conduct Authority, has
been at the forefront of efforts to increase individual accountability in financial services. While the UK’s
action plan to improve conduct includes stronger deterrents and reduced opportunities for bad behaviour, we
recognise that ex post penalties are only part of the solution.

Events other the weekend have brought the claims and boasts of the section below into focus.

To put greater emphasis on individual accountability, the UK has introduced new compensation rules that go
much further than other jurisdictions in aligning risk and reward. And we have put greater stress on the
importance of better governance and firm culture. …
Since codes are of little use if no one reads, follows or enforces them, the UK has instituted a unique Senior
Managers Regime to embed cultures of risk awareness, openness and ethical behaviour. Based on its early
successes, international authorities are now considering following the UK’s lead.

Barclays

Let us see if this is one of the early successes? It too has the rhetoric with its values of  Respect,  Integrity,  Service,  Excellence,  Stewardship or RISES program. ( https://www.home.barclays/about-barclays/barclays-values.html )

Barclays PLC and Barclays Bank PLC (Barclays) announce that the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) have commenced investigations into:

·    Jes Staley, Group Chief Executive Officer of Barclays, as to his individual conduct and senior manager responsibilities relating to Barclays whistleblowing programme and an attempt by Mr Staley in 2016 to identify the author of a letter that was treated by Barclays Bank PLC as a whistleblow; and  

We are expected to believe apparently it was all just a misunderstanding.

The Board has concluded that Jes Staley, Group Chief Executive Officer, honestly, but mistakenly, believed that it was permissible to identify the author of the letter and has accepted his explanation that he was trying to protect a colleague who had experienced personal difficulties in the past from what he believed to be an unfair attack, and has accepted his apology

I would imagine that pretty much everyone reading this is aware of modern whistleblowing procedures so it seems strange that the CEO of Barclays was not. Actually even when he was told he had another go a month later.

There is a clear example of “back to the future” when we note that rather than being sacked we move into Yes Prime Minister land as he will receive one of the “strongly worded letters” so beloved of the apochryphal civil servant Sir Humphrey Appleby! We are told there will be this too “a very significant compensation adjustment will be made to Mr Staley’s variable compensation award.” But as it is “variable” how will we know?

The Bank of England

There is bad news in the offing tonight for the Bank of England as the BBC’s Panorama has looked again at its role in Libor ( London Interbank Offered Rate ) rigging.

A secret recording that implicates the Bank of England in Libor rigging has been uncovered by BBC Panorama.

The 2008 recording adds to evidence the central bank repeatedly pressured commercial banks during the financial crisis to push their Libor rates down.

Well done to Andy Verity for continuing to pursue this issue and along the way we meet some old “friends”

The recording calls into question evidence given in 2012 to the Treasury select committee by former Barclays boss Bob Diamond and Paul Tucker, the man who went on to become the deputy governor of the Bank of England.

It is like a television series with a regular cast isn’t it? Also the BBC does not do Paul Tucker full justice as there was this from 2013.

Paul Tucker, who served as a deputy governor at the Bank of England, has been given a knighthood for services to central banking.

Some might think that a substantial salary and a pension which would current cost around £7 million to buy were rewards enough in themselves. Unless of course you believe that Paul Tucker got his “K” for covering things up.

Comment

There is much to consider here and in the individual case of Governor Carney the Libor or as it became named the Liebor issue predated his arrival. However he has his own problems. The most recent was the resignation of Charlotte Hogg who seemed as uninformed about monetary policy as she was about the consequences of her bother’s job. It was put well by Deborah Orr in the Guardian.

Clearly, people run the risk of feeling over-entitled. They believe strongly in rules, but develop a belief that they are the people who make the rules, not the people who follow them……..….Finally, of course, privileged people assume, often rightly, that no one is going to hold them to account.

Only on Thursday we looked at Gertjan Vlieghe and his problems understanding that once he was at the Bank of England he had to break his financial links with the hedge fund Brevan Howard. Hardly a brave new dawn is it?

Meanwhile if we look back to the effective bailout by the Qataris of Barclays back in the day we wonder how the court case into this will play out? It is all quite a mess is we throw in PPI miss selling and the way that small businesses were miss sold interest-rate swaps as well as those who became “mortgage prisoners”.

Meanwhile though in Mark Carney’s world it is all going rather well.

Being at the heart of the global financial system reinforces the ability of the rest of the UK economy, from
manufacturing to the creative industries, to compete globally. And it broadens the investment opportunities
for UK savers, giving them the potential to earn better risk-adjusted returns.

Do UK savers realise how good they apparently have it? Oh and was the Barclays story released today to help take the pressure off the Bank of England Liebor news?

 

 

The ongoing disaster that is Novo Banco of Portugal

A constant theme of this website is an ongoing consequence of the credit crunch where more than a few banks have not been reformed and are still damaged goods. They are banks which were somewhat presciently sung about by the Cranberries.

Zombie, zombie, zombie

Certainly in that list was Banco Espirito Santo of Portugal which found itself in a spider’s web of corruption and bad loans. This led to this being announced by the Bank of Portugal in August 2014.

The Board of Directors of Banco de Portugal has decided on 3 August 2014 to apply a resolution measure to Banco Espírito Santo, S.A.. The general activity and assets of Banco Espírito Santo, S.A. are transferred, immediately and definitively, to Novo Banco, which is duly capitalised and clean of problem assets.

The point of this was supposed to be that Novo Banco would then be like its name, a New Bank. It would be clean of the past problems and would then thrive and the bad bank elements would be removed. Reuters took up the story.

Novo Banco, or New Bank – will be recapitalised to the tune of 4.9 billion euros by a special bank resolution fund created in 2012. The Portuguese state will lend the fund 4.4 billion euros.

At the time there were various issues as Portugal itself had only recently departed an IMF bailout so was not keen to explicitly bailout BES. Thus the bank resolution fund was used except of course it had nowhere near enough money so the state lent it most of it. These sort of Special Purpose vehicles are invariably employed to try to keep the debt out of the national debt. To be fair to Eurostat that usually does not work but left an awkward situation going forwards where in theory the other Portuguese banks created Novo Banco but in reality the Portuguese taxpayer provided most of the cash.

Novo Banco

As regular readers will be aware investors in Novo Banco later discovered that the word “clean” was a relative and not an absolute term.

The nominal amount of the bonds retransferred to Banco Espírito Santo, S.A. totals 1,941 million euros and corresponds to a balance-sheet amount of 1,985 million euros………This measure has a positive impact, in net terms, on the equity of Novo Banco of approximately 1,985 million euros.

This may have happened just after Christmas 2015 but there was no present here for the holders of these bonds who found them worth zero. To say that institutional investors were unhappy would be an understatement and I will return to this later but for now I just wish to point out that the bill is escalating and also how can a clean new bank have to do this?

The sale of Novo Banco

There were various efforts to sell Novo Banco which went nowhere and of course trust in the Bank of Portugal was damaged by what happened above which added to the misrepresentations issued by it as BES declined. Just over a year ago it published this.

Banco de Portugal has defined the terms of the new sale process of Novo Banco, following the re-launch announced on 15 January 2016.

This January the Lex Column of the Financial Times pointed out why buyers have been in short supply.

Available for purchase: one crippled bank suffering from poor credit quality and high costs. Location: Portugal. Important information: Potential for future damages arising from litigious creditors. The sale prospectus for Novo Banco does not look enticing.

It gets worse.

Quarterly losses since Novo’s creation have averaged €250m. A quarter of all loans are delinquent or “at risk” of being so.

Again we are left wondering exactly how the Bank of Portugal defines the word “clean”?! But whilst the FT thought there were bidders it looks to me that the only player was the appropriately named Lone Star.

Lone Star

What happened late on Friday was summarised by Patricia Kowsman of the Wall Street Journal.

Dallas-based Lone Star will inject €1 billion ($1.07 billion) in Novo Banco for a 75% stake, while a resolution fund supported by the system’s banks will hold the remainder. The setup could ultimately leave Portuguese taxpayers exposed to losses, which is what the country’s central bank had tried to avoid when it imposed a resolution on the lender almost three years ago.

Actually they are only paying 750 million Euros up front with the rest by 2020. But as we number crunch this there are a lot of problems.

  1. The nearly 2 billion Euros of bonds written off do not seem to have made the situation much better.
  2. The Portuguese Resolution Fund put in 4.9 billion Euros for a bank which is now apparently worth 1 and 1/3 billion.

The Resolution Fund took steps last September to cover this.

the maturity date of the loan will be adjusted so as to ensure that it will not be necessary to raise special contributions,

I would like to take you back to August 2014 when it told us this.

Therefore this operation will eventually involve no costs for public funds………..This applies even in exceptional cases, such as this one, in which the State is called upon to provide temporary financial support to the Resolution Fund, as that support will later be repaid (and remunerated through payment of interest) by the Fund.

The use of the word “temporary” was a warning as its official use is invariably the complete opposite of that to be found in a dictionary. Also I am reminded of my time line for a banking collapse.

5. The relevant government(s) tell us that they are stepping in to help the bank but the problems are both minor and short-term and are of no public concern.

6. The relevant government(s) tell us that the bank needs taxpayer support but through clever use of special purpose vehicles there will be no cost and indeed a profit is virtually certain.

Back in August 2014 we were told this. From Reuters.

“The plan carries no risk to public finances or taxpayers,” Carlos Costa, the central bank governor, told reporters in a late night news conference in Lisbon.

Litigation

You might think that things could not get much worse. Yet apparently they continue to do so. From Reuters.

Blackrock and other asset management institutions are seeking an injunction this week to block the sale of Portugal’s Novo Banco to U.S. private equity firm Lone Star.

Okay why?

The bond transfer had caused losses of about 1.5 billion for ordinary retail investors and pensioners

Comment

A critique of the banking bailouts has been the phrase “privatisation of profits and socialisation of losses ” and we see this at play here. Whilst there is a veil of a Special Purpose Vehicle ( the Resolution Fund) the Portuguese taxpayer has had to borrow money to back most of it. It is plain that we were not told the truth or anything remotely like the truth when a “clean” bank was created. As no cash at all has been returned from the sale of Novo Banco – the funds are to boost bank capital – they are left hoping that one day the money will be repaid except they have been diluted by a factor of four.

Let us take a happy scenario where Novo Banco now does well the majority of the gains will go to Lone Star and a minority to the Resolution Fund. So the minor stakeholder gets the majority of the returns? Oh and even worse the Fund is backing another sector of potential losses. From the Algarve Daily News.

In a statement issued today, PS party leader Carlos César says MPs “should know in detail all the preparatory and contractual aspects of the sale operation” – bearing in mind the State has no say in the bank’s management, but is guaranteeing to underwrite extraordinary losses of up to €4 billion.

In a happy scenario the other Portuguese banks will be likely to be able to put some extra money into the Resolution Fund but of course many of them have their own problems and the Portuguese economy could do with them backing it.

And a bad scenario? Well look at the sums above……..