ohomen171's Journey Through Life

Financial reports show 5 biggest banks face huge loss risk

Story | Q&A: How today is — and isn't — like the Great Depression
Story | Recession or depression? There's a case for both
Story | The worst recession since World War II? Shaping up that way
Story | It may be a decade before Dow's back to 12,000, oracle says
Story | Obama lends a little help to homeowners who face foreclosure
Story | Answers to questions about Obama's foreclosure relief plan
Graphic | Big banks in big debt
PDF | J.P. Morgan 4th Quarter Call Report
PDF | HSBC 4th Quarter call report
PDF | Citibank 4th Quarter Call Report
PDF | Bank of America 4th Quarter Call Report
Comments (11) Recommend (18)
By Greg Gordon and Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — America's five largest banks, which already have received $145 billion in taxpayer bailout dollars, still face potentially catastrophic losses from exotic investments if economic conditions substantially worsen, their latest financial reports show.

Citibank, Bank of America, HSBC Bank USA, Wells Fargo Bank and J.P. Morgan Chase reported that their "current" net loss risks from derivatives — insurance-like bets tied to a loan or other underlying asset — surged to $587 billion as of Dec. 31. Buried in end-of-the-year regulatory reports that McClatchy has reviewed, the figures reflect a jump of 49 percent in just 90 days.

The disclosures underscore the challenges that the banks face as they struggle to navigate through a deepening recession in which all types of loan defaults are soaring.

The banks' potentially huge losses, which could be contained if the economy quickly recovers, also shed new light on the hurdles that President Barack Obama's economic team must overcome to save institutions it deems too big to fail.

While the potential loss totals include risks reported by Wachovia Bank, which Wells Fargo agreed to acquire in October, they don't reflect another Pandora's Box: the impact of Bank of America's Jan. 1 acquisition of tottering investment bank Merrill Lynch, a major derivatives dealer.

Federal regulators portray the potential loss figures as worst-case. However, the risks of these off-balance sheet investments, once thought minimal, have risen sharply as the U.S. has fallen into the steepest economic downturn since World War II, and the big banks' share prices have plummeted to unimaginable lows.

With 12.5 million Americans unemployed and consumer spending in a freefall, fears are rising that a spate of corporate bankruptcies could deliver a new, crippling blow to major banks. Because of the trading in derivatives, corporate bankruptcies could cause a chain reaction that deprives the banks of hundreds of billions of dollars in insurance they bought on risky debt or forces them to shell out huge sums to cover debt they guaranteed.

The biggest concerns are the banks' holdings of contracts known as credit-default swaps, which can provide insurance against defaults on loans such as subprime mortgages or guarantee actual payments for borrowers who walk away from their debts.

The banks' credit-default swap holdings, with face values in the trillions of dollars, are "a ticking time bomb, and how bad it gets is going to depend on how bad the economy gets," said Christopher Whalen, a managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, a company that grades banks on their degree of loss risk from complex investments.

J.P. Morgan is credited with launching the credit-default market and is one of the most sophisticated players. It remains highly profitable, even after acquiring the remains of failed investment banker dealer Bear Stearns, and says it has limited its exposure. The New York-based bank, however, also has received $25 billion in federal bailout money.

Gary Kopff, president of Everest Management and an expert witness in shareholder suits against banks, has scrutinized the big banks' financial reports. He noted that Citibank now lists 60 percent of its $301 billion in potential losses from its wheeling and dealing in derivatives in the highest-risk category, up from 40 percent in early 2007. Citibank is a unit of New York-based Citigroup. In Monday trading on the New York Stock Exchange, Citigroup shares closed at $1.05.

Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett, a revered financial guru and America's second wealthiest person after Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, ominously warned that derivatives "are dangerous" in a February letter to his company's shareholders. In it, he confessed that he cost his company hundreds of millions of dollars when he bought a re-insurance company burdened with bad derivatives bets.

These instruments, he wrote, "have made it almost impossible for investors to understand and analyze our largest commercial banks and investment banks . . . When I read the pages of 'disclosure' in (annual reports) of companies that are entangled with these instruments, all I end up knowing is that I don't know what is going on in their portfolios. And then I reach for some aspirin."

Most of the banks declined to comment, but Bank of America spokeswoman Eloise Hale said: "We do not believe our derivative exposure is a threat to the bank's solvency."

While Bank of America advised shareholders that its risks from these instruments are no more $13.5 billion, Wachovia last year similarly said it could overcome major risks. In reporting a $707 million first-quarter loss, Wachovia acknowledged that it faced heavy subprime mortgage risks, but said it was "well positioned" with "strong capital and liquidity." Within months, losses mushroomed and Wachovia submitted to a takeover by Wells Fargo, which soon got $25 billion in federal bailout money.

Trading in credit-default contracts has sparked investor fears because they are bought and sold in a murky, private market that is largely out of the reach of federal regulators. No one, except those holding the instruments, knows who owes what to whom. Not even banks and insurers can accurately calculate their risks.

"I don't trust any numbers on them," said David Wyss, the chief economist for the New York credit-rating agency Standard & Poor's.

The risks of these below-the-radar insurance policies became abundantly clear last September with the collapse of investment banker Lehman Brothers and global insurer American International Group, both major swap dealers. Their insolvencies threatened to zero out the value of billions of dollars in contracts held by banks and others.

Until then, "we assumed everyone makes good on the contracts," said Vincent Reinhart, a former top economist for the Federal Reserve Board.

Lehman's and AIG's failures put in doubt their guarantees on hundred of billions of dollars in contracts and unleashed a global pullback from risk, leading to the current credit crunch.

The government has since committed $182 billion to rescue AIG and, indirectly, investors on the other end of the firm's swap contracts. AIG posted a fourth quarter 2008 loss last week of more than $61 billion, the worst quarterly performance in U.S. corporate history.

The five major banks, which account for more than 95 percent of U.S. banks' trading in this array of complex derivatives, declined to say how much of the AIG bailout money flowed to them to make good on these contracts.

Banking industry officials stress that most of the exotic trades are less risky — such as interest-rate swaps, in which a bank might have tried to limit potential losses by trading the variable rate interest of one loan for the fixed-rate interest of another.

In their annual reports to shareholders, the banks say that parties insuring credit-default swaps or other derivatives are required to post substantial cash collateral.

However, even after subtracting collateralized risks, the banks' collective exposure is "a big, big number" and a matter for concern, said a senior official in a banking regulatory agency, speaking on condition of anonymity because agency policy restricts public comments.

In their reports, the banks said that their net current risks and potential future losses from derivatives surpass $1.2 trillion. The potential near-term losses of $587 billion easily exceed the banks' combined $497 billion in so-called "risk-based capital," the assets they hold in reserve for disaster scenarios.

Four of the banks' reserves already have been augmented by taxpayer bailout money, topped by Citibank — $50 billion — and Bank of America — $45 billion, plus a $100 billion loan guarantee.

The banks' quarterly financial reports show that as of Dec. 31:

_ J.P. Morgan had potential current derivatives losses of $241.2 billion, outstripping its $144 billion in reserves, and future exposure of $299 billion.

_ Citibank had potential current losses of $140.3 billion, exceeding its $108 billion in reserves, and future losses of $161.2 billion.

_ Bank of America reported $80.4 billion in current exposure, below its $122.4 billion reserve, but $218 billion in total exposure.

_ HSBC Bank USA had current potential losses of $62 billion, more than triple its reserves, and potential total exposure of $95 billion.

_ San Francisco-based Wells Fargo, which agreed to take over Charlotte-based Wachovia in October, reported current potential losses totaling nearly $64 billion, below the banks' combined reserves of $104 billion, but total future risks of about $109 billion.

Kopff, the bank shareholders' expert, said that several of the big banks' risks are so large that they are "dead men walking."

The banks' credit-default portfolios have gotten little scrutiny because they're off-the-books entries that are largely unregulated. However, government officials said in late February that federal examiners would review the top 19 banks' swap exposures in the coming weeks as part of "stress tests" to evaluate the institutions' ability to withstand further deterioration in the economy.

Representatives for Citibank, J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo declined to comment.

Hale, the Bank of America spokeswoman, said that the bank uses swaps as insurance against its loan portfolio — they "gain value when the loans they are hedging lose value."

She said that Bank of America requires thousands of parties that are guarantors on these insurance-like contracts to post "the most secure collateral — cash and U.S. Treasuries, minimizing risk roughly 35 percent." The collateral is adjusted daily.

Bank of America's report of an $80.4 billion exposure doesn't count the collateral and "also assumes the default of each of the thousands of counterparty customers, which isn't likely," Hale said. Counterparties are the investors on the other side of the deal, often other banks or investment banks.

In response to questions from McClatchy, HSBC spokesman Neil Brazil said that the bank closely manages its derivatives contracts "to ensure that credit risks are assessed accurately, approved properly (and) monitored regularly."

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY

To ask a question about this story or any economic question, go to McClatchy's economy Q&A

Another week, another bailout: U.S. throws more funds at AIG

Nationalizing troubled banks may be the only answer

Bernanke: This isn't nationalization (experts aren't so sure)

Watchdogs: Government overpaid for Wall Street assets

Concern over Geithner shifts from tax returns to bailout role

McClatchy Newspapers 2009

email | print |
JOIN THE DISCUSSION

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. Obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules.

Comments are displayed newest first. If you would like to read a thread from beginning to end, select "Oldest first" from the drop down menu.

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register


Comments: 11 Showing:


JJR60616 wrote on March 9, 8:20 PM:
RE:In response to questions from McClatchy, HSBC spokesman Neil Brazil said that the bank closely manages its derivatives contracts "to ensure that credit risks are assessed accurately, approved properly (and) monitored regularly."

Well...now I feel better..after all they did such a fine job so far. Guess we can all breath easy now...NOT!

Recommend (1) Report abuse

LiberalChristian wrote on March 9, 7:43 PM:
YES Tonic...we have to start a movement on this. It will work and even those banks will be really bailed out by it. It will start up the economic machine. Spread the word!!!

Recommend (1) Report abuse

raresilk wrote on March 9, 7:41 PM:
jp morgan's exposure, to those who are paying attention, has always been as bad as anyone else's. they got thrown a "get out of jail free" card by being allowed to acquire bear, which had a lot of their counterparty which would have been defaulted earlier. but the aig dirty laundry is going to come out. the taxpaying public is not going to tolerate it. and all of these giants are going to go down as they certainly deserve.

Recommend (1) Report abuse

LiberalChristian wrote on March 9, 7:32 PM:
Marcimayerson: I hope not:-(

I believe that we can prevent that from happening by enough voters demanding a BAILOUT for the middle class, i.e. one home purchase at 2% interest.

Recommend (1) Report abuse

Tonic_Writes wrote on March 9, 7:24 PM:
LiberalChristian: Sounds good to me! I understand that some people are in trouble thru no fault of their own (lost jobs, medical crisis), some are in trouble because they are just dumb, and some - like me - are not in trouble YET. But it has always fried me a little that the help was going to assist the first 2 categories of people and do nothing for me even though I've done everything right (bought a house I could afford, stayed 10 yrs and not tried to "trade up", didn't take out a bunch of equity, paid my bills even though my husband is now unemployed). So your plan works for me!

Recommend (2) Report abuse

marcimayerson wrote on March 9, 7:14 PM:
Marx said that history is played out the first time as tragedy, and repeated as farce. Hence the Second Depression which is about six months from starting and which will last twenty years. It will be a farce because four very weak-minded presidents fell for a Svengali-like cult that convinced them that an unproven theory about unregulated markets breeding democracy (or some other hocus-pocus crap) would assure them of their own memorial someday on the Potomac. Zombie-fied, they let Volcker, Greenspan, Rubin, Geithner, Summers and Bernacke overturn all the laws that our grandparents and parents put in place to keep another Depression from happening. And now, Geithner and Summers and Bernacke are still in charge. Do you really think this cult has any clue what it's doing? It doesn't, and it should be banished from D.C. But apparently Obama's fallen under its spell as well. Let the farce begin.

Recommend (0) Report abuse

LiberalChristian wrote on March 9, 7:02 PM:
Want to FIX THIS MESS? BAILOUT the middle class NOW, while there is still time.

HOW? Give everyone an option to buy one home at 2% interest. It can be a refi, second home, or fixer upper to resell.

The foreclosures would stop.

Those who have done it right all along will recoup some of their losses.

It will put the country back to work while they are retraining for those "green jobs".

It will allow people who did it right to put those solar panels on their homes and that plug-in electric hybrid in their garage.

It WILL get those toxic assets off of the bank sheets.

It will allow all of those toxic assets to sell.

People will be able to get out from under properties that they can't afford.

It will NOT cause another "bubble" because people could only get what they could afford.

We, as a nation, know HOW to build/remodel/buy/sell homes. Once the economy starts moving the path can be shifted toward infrastructure.

Recommend (4) Report abuse

JacklynD wrote on March 9, 6:52 PM:
First of all, they are way too big. No institution should be so powerful that they can impact our economy they way these behemoths have. I think they should be sold off in pieces. Instead of giving them money to cover their losses, we should suck it up and distribute the spoils throughout the community banks where the loans originated.

Recommend (1) Report abuse

racom40 wrote on March 9, 6:45 PM:
nationalize them all now. They are not worth the billions already given to them. Re-organize them, fire the officers, hire competent people and keep them in business without all the toxic paper.

Recommend (2) Report abuse

borisjimski wrote on March 9, 6:30 PM:
Betting with borrowed money, great way to go broke and drag down others with you. Didn't anyone learn anything from the Great Depression?

Recommend (0) Report abuse
More comments on this story: 12
Most ViewedWorldNationalWashingtonPolitics
MOST VIEWED LAST 24 HOURS
Financial reports show 5 biggest banks face huge loss risk
It only looks different: Both parties love big government
China's thirst for copper could hold key to Afghanistan's future
N. Korea threatens war if U.S. shoots down satellite
Russian advice on Afghanistan: More troops won't help
advertisement

TODAY'S FEATURED CARTOON

» More Cartoons
advertisement

| McClatchy Washington Bureau | McClatchy Newspapers | About McClatchy | Correspondents | Contact the Bureau | Terms of Use | Privacy