RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

New York Fed and Treasury Tell Banks to Hold Cash

How often have Americans heard politicians screaming at banks for not providing credit? How often have those same politicians and bank regulators informed us that they are working to have banks inject money into the economy to support Main Street?

Regrettably, America deals with this pandering and posturing from our political leaders and regulators all too often. While Americans are being told one thing, what are the regulators telling the banks? Hold cash.

I am not shocked, but certainly disappointed, that American financial periodicals failed to run this story detailing these recommendations from our bank regulators. The London based Financial Times highlights this bombshell in writing, Regulators Tell U.S. Banks to Hold Funds: >>>>

US regulators have told banks not to increase dividends or buy back shares until political and economic uncertainty surrounding the industry dissipates, in a move that will delay by months the return of capital to shareholders.

Some investors in financial stocks argue that winners of the credit crisis, such as JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, have profitable businesses and strong balance sheets and should consider raising dividends or buying back stocks.

Executives at the two companies have talked in public and with regulators about the possibility of returning cash to investors after taking action to conserve resources during the turmoil. But they say they are not in a rush to go ahead, especially if their watchdogs oppose such moves. “Regulators are gun-shy at this stage, partly because they fear that giving the green light to healthier banks to return cash to investors would prompt demands from more troubled institutions to do the same,” one senior Wall Street executive said.

People close to the situation said government agencies, led by the New York Federal Reserve and the Treasury, told banks they would have to wait until the economic and legislative picture became clearer before returning funds to investors.

In a letter sent in December, officials reminded financial groups they would have to meet criteria, such as “stress-testing” their balance sheets and achieving sustainable profitability, before releasing funds to shareholders. The New York Fed and Treasury declined to comment.

Mike Mayo, an analyst at CLSA, said: “The word banks have used the most … is ‘fragile’.

Economic growth is predicated on the flow of money, otherwise known as the velocity of money. With news like this, we should expect that velocity to remain at a trickle.

The burden will remain on the Fed to keep its Fed Funds rate low so these banks can continue to recover. The burden should also remain on the regulators and bank executives to not allow the Fed liquidity to walk right out the front door of these banks in the form of big fat bonuses.

LD

  • sowsear

    I’m wondering if this is just more collusion between the Obama Administration and the financial clansmen. To whose benefit would it be to make sure that recovery does not occur before it politically more useful. Also, in 2011 and 2012 we may see the largest part of the stimulus funds reappear from their government hibernation cave. What a good time for recovery to occur.

  • Solara 9

    We are screwed–but thanks, Larry D for the good post.

  • Hank

    Oh yeah, not until the elections come up, will they start releasing some funds.   It’s all political, just like jobs will mostly come from being hired by the Gov’t.  I totally agree with sowsear.

  • EllenD

    OK – I stopped expecting credit from the banks a long time ago. The companies I handle are building up their own cash resources for bridge financing.

    I AM heartened to hear that the banks are waiting to see what the international regulations will be because I gave up on Congress a long time ago.

  • arabella trefoil

    Does this have anything to do with the catastrophe in Greece?

  • EllenD

    Goldman Sachs being helpful internationally.

  • EllenD

    LD – I want to thank you for giving us the latest in financial news. Most of us do not go to the FT site regularly. We are ordinary people.

    And as an ordinary”people” I finally have to let loose on the fake language which is going with the fake protestations of relaxed credit.

     I mean the term “Wealth Management” which has replaced “savings” or “nest-egg” or “retirement savings”.

    Just who do they think theyre kidding? The latest report is that Americans have an average of just $10,000. saved for retirement. “Wealth?” Don’t make me laugh!
    So along with the cremation services and long-term-care junk mail, anything that calls my savings “Wealth Management” gets pitched into the trash.

  • elaine

    You can chase growth & you can chase yield. Sometimes you can’t have both.  Anyone that bought GS or JPM right after the meltdown has scored BIG on growth, if they hang for the long term they’ll proably do ok on yield too. We can’t all be Warren Buffet.

  • Larry Doyle

    my pleasure….

  • EllenD

    Today’s headline:
    Women of Color Age 36-49 Have Median Wealth of just $5

    How low can the term WEALTH be used without it getting insane?

    I increased my wealth by finding a nickel?

  • EllenD

    I AM heartened to hear that the banks are waiting to see what the international regulations will be because I gave up on Congress a long time ago.

    Oh look, the EU wants to regulate hedge funds and Geithner is sending thinly veiled threats trying to block the regulations. Why am I not surprised?

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703625304575115930074404638.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5

  • oowawa

    I’m glad I didn’t have the money to short GS or JPM, because the temptation would have been overwhelming . . .

  • John johnwsmart.com

    so interesting. Thanks, 

blog comments powered by Disqus