|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Credit crisis reveals widespread accounting manipulation by
top US banks
By Joe Kay
27 November 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The developing credit crisis in the United States, linked to
the bursting of the housing market bubble, is beginning to reveal
the accounting manipulations employed by major US banks to engage
in speculative activities and hide risks. Several major banks
have already announced billions of dollars in losses associated
with subprime mortgages, and in the next months are expected to
announce tens of billions of dollars in further write-downs.
Among those most severely affected is Citigroupan American
financial conglomerate that is the worlds largest company
measured by asset value. CNBC reported on Monday that Citigroup
is planning major cost-cutting in response to its difficulties,
with layoffs of up to 45,000 of the companys approximately
320,000 employees.
In a statement, the bank insisted that reports involving specific
numbers of layoffs were not factual, but acknowledged
that the company is planning ways in which we can be more
efficient and cost effective to position our businesses in line
with economic realities. New cuts would come on top of 17,000
layoffs announced in April.
The announcement, coming amidst Wall Street nervousness over
the ongoing credit crisis, sent Citigroups stock down more
than 6 percent. Over the past six months, the price of the companys
stock has fallen nearly 50 percent. Citi led a steep market decline
on Monday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling nearly
240 points, more than wiping out its increase on Friday.
Chief among the economic realities behind Citigroups
announcement is the credit crisis brought on by record defaults
on home mortgages in the United States. Citigroup has already
announced a $5 billion write-down related to home mortgages, which
provoked the resignation of its CEO Charles Prince. It is expected
to announce further losses of up to $11 billion in the fourth
quarter.
The banks exposure could be much greater, however, as
it may be forced to acknowledge losses that it had previously
kept off its books. An article by Wall Street Journal reporter
David Reilly on Monday (Citis $41 Billion Issue: Should
it put CDOs On the Balance Sheet?) noted that the bank faces
an immediate threat from troubles involving off-balance-sheet
entities called collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)
The Journal notes that Citigroup was one of the
biggest arrangers of CDOsproducts that pools debt, often
mortgage securities, and then sell slices with varying degrees
of risk. The bank may be forced to bring these CDOs onto
its balance sheet. If Citigroup had to include an additional
$41 billion in CDO assets on its books, the Journal noted,
that could potentially spur a further $8 billion in write-downs,
above and beyond those already signaled, according to a report
earlier this month by Howard Mason, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein.
Throughout the housing boom of the past several years, the
CDOs, and related entities known as structured investment vehicles
(SIVs), made substantial returns. SIVs are also off-balance-sheet
entities, but are more open-ended, investing in other risky securities,
including CDOs. Even those entities closely associated with banks
have been nominally independent. The independence
of these entities has been entirely fraudulent, however. They
have been critical for the banks bottom line as sources
of lucrative fees, buying up mortgages and other assets from their
parent banks.
As the CDOs and SIVs have faltered with the collapse of the
housing bubble, the banks have looked for ways to bail them out.
The Journal notes, Over the summer, [Citigroup] was
forced to buy $25 billion in commercial paper issued by its CDO
vehicles because investors were no longer interested in the paper.
Citigroup already had an $18 billion exposure to these vehicles
through other funding it had provided.
The determination with which Citigroup and other banks have
scrambled to bail out these investment entities is itself testament
to the fact that they were never really independent to begin with.
Commenting on the way that major banks were able to shift their
risks off their balance sheets, New York Times economic
writer Floyd Norris noted in an article published November 16
(As Bank Profits Grew, Warning Signs Went Unheeded,),
Instead of being suspicious, many analysts believed that
banks had found a new way to prosper. Making a loan and keeping
it on the balance sheet until it was repaid was so old-fashioned.
It was far better to collect fees for arranging transactions and
passing on the risks to others.
In fact, many of these risks were not really transferred. Norris
notes that the banks often made arrangements (called liquidity
puts) with the purchasers of their CDO securities that would
allow the purchasers to sell the CDO securities back to the bank
if there was no other market. That risk may have seemed
slight when the securitization market was booming. But now the
banks are being forced to buy back securities for more than they
are worth.
In essence, the puts allowed the banks to sell CDOs and other
assets without really selling them. Use of the puts actually increased
as the housing market began to unravel, as it was necessary to
provide the guarantees in order for the banks to get investors
to buy mortgage-backed securities whose value was increasingly
in question.
The legality of these operations is highly dubious, since part
of the intention appears to have been to mislead investors regarding
the financial health of the company. Even if the operations by
banks were legal, the fact that they were not reported to investors
was likely a violation of accounting rules.
According to Norris, Citigroup and Bank of America were among
those banks that used liquidity puts heavily.
All of these arrangements amount to attempts by banks to gamble
on risky investments without acknowledging the risks they were
taking on. As the market for these investments has begun to collapse,
the real extent of the losses is only beginning to reveal itselfand
no one knows how severe the crisis really is.
Most banks were involved in such activities. Earlier this month,
the Securities and Exchange Commission opened an investigation
into investment bank Merrill Lynch that, according to the Wall
Street Journal, is intended to examine how the bank has
been valuing, or marking, its mortgage securities
and how it has disclosed its positions to investors.
In a November 2 article, the Journal reported that Merrill
arranged one deal with a hedge fund to sell $1 billion in commercial
paper related to mortgages, while giving the hedge fund the right
to sell it back after one year at a set price. The newspaper later
corrected its article to note that this deal, similar in many
ways to the arrangements at Citigroup, was rejected because the
bank determined that it was a violation of accounting rules.
Nevertheless, Merrill is highly exposed to the housing markets.
Earlier reports suggested that Merrill hid its own exposure to
the subprime mortgage crisis by shifting its assets to different
parts of the company subject to less strict accounting regulations.
(See Wall Street hides
impact of subprime mortgage meltdown)
As late as July 2007 executives at the bank, including former
CEO Stan ONeal, were assuring employees that its mortgage
risks were under control. At the end of October, Merrill announced
a $7.9 billion write-down, which was followed by ONeals
departure.
The crisis facing banks is an international phenomenon. The
stock market sell off on Monday was provoked in part by an announcement
from British-based HSBCEuropes largest bank and the
worlds fourth largest corporation in terms of assetsthat
it would bail out two of its SIVs and transfer their assets onto
its balance sheet.
Since the credit crisis began in full force this summer, banks
have scrambled to stave off a reckoning with the enormity of the
losses involved. The hope has been that the economic crisis will
be short-lived and that the housing market will eventually recover,
restoring the value of the assets in question.
It is unlikely that this will happen, however, and there is
an increasing likelihood of a recession. In an article published
in the Financial Times on Sunday (Wake up to the
dangers of a deepening crisis), Lawrence Summers, former
Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration, warned, [T]he
odds now favor a US recession that slows growth significantly
on a global basis. Summers noted, Forward-looking
indicators suggest that the housing sector may be in free-fall
from what felt like the basement levels of a few months ago.
The initial revelations of accounting manipulations and indications
of fraudulent activities are only a small indication of the extent
to which the American economy is pervaded by financial speculation
and out-and-out criminality.
It was the collapse of the dot-com boom in 2001 that ultimately
unwound the elaborate structure of corruption at companies such
as Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco. These companies were no longer able
to perpetuate their fraudulent activities once the stock market
ceased its continual upward march.
The major banks were heavily involved in the activities exposed
at that time. In 2003, Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase were forced
to pay out fines for aiding Enron in disguising loans as cash
to reduce reported risk and liabilities, thereby defrauding investors.
Essentially, the banks gave Enron loans, but cloaked these loans
in an apparent purchase of assets. This manipulation improved
Enrons financial reports, which was beneficial for banks
that were heavily invested in Enron stock. (See Citigroup,
Morgan Chase fined for Enron deals: corruption at the heights
of American finance)
The operations involving CDOs and SIVs bear a certain resemblance
in that they too were evidently intended to disguise risk. Much
of the risk was ultimately held by the bank itself, but this was
not readily apparent to investors.
Though the banks were involved in the manipulations at Enron
and other companies, the fraud was generally explained by the
media and the political establishment as the product of a few
bad apples. Several executives were put on trial and
imprisoned, but the underlying conditions remained and the banks
remained largely untouched. The dot-com bubble was quickly replaced
by the housing bubble, which had the effect of extending the speculative
mania of Wall Street to a much broader section of the economy.
The pervasiveness of accounting manipulation is closely linked
to the increasingly dominant role that speculation has come to
play in the American economy. Vast sums of wealthincluding
tens and hundreds of millions of dollars to top executives and
hedge fund managershave been made through mechanisms that
are largely divorced from any relationship to actual production.
The importance of these forms of speculative wealth accumulation
has increased as the underlying health of the American economy
has decreased.
The housing market has been a case in point, as a small layer
of the population has made billions through high-risk loans to
working class Americans who are now bearing the burden of a crushing
level of debt. The loans have been used to transfer wealth into
the hands of the ruling elite, and at the same time became a means
of speculation.
Entities such as CDOs and SIVs were set up as a means for Wall
Street to extract enormous profits, while at the same time cloaking
the extremely fragile foundation for this supposed economic growth.
As the housing market deflates, this whole structure is beginning
to unravel.
See Also:
US recession fears grow as bank losses
mount
[21 November 2007]
Near-panic atmosphere as US Federal Reserve
chairman testifies before Congress
[9 November 2007]
Citigroup ousts CEO, warns of billions
more in subprime losses
[6 November 2007]
Stock market gyrations fueled by credit,
housing market crises
[3 November 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |