Walk a Kb or Two in my Moccasins- Nobody 'splained it to me like that!

Simple answers to Complex Questions and Complex Answers to Simple Questions. In real life, I'm a Greater-Toronto (Canada) Realtor with RE/MAX Hallmark Realty Ltd, Brokerage. I first joined RE/MAX in 1983 and was first Registered to Trade in Real Estate in Ontario in 1974. Formerly known as "Two-Finger Ramblings of a Forensic Acuitant turned Community Synthesizer"

Friday, August 14, 2009

"...amost 15 times the FDIC Deposit Ins. Fund" .... oh well, maybe they ALL won't fail ...(sigh)

".... banks with nonperform(ing loans/mortgages) above 5 percent(of total assets) had combined deposits of $193 billion, according to Bloomberg data. That’s almost 15 times the size of the FDIC’s deposit insurance fund at the end of the first quarter. "

Toxic Loans Topping 5% May Push 150 Banks to Point of No Return
Bloomberg Aug 14/09

By Ari Levy in San Francisco at alevy5@bloomberg.net

More than 150 publicly traded U.S. lenders own nonperforming loans that equal 5 percent or more of their holdings, a level that former regulators say can wipe out a bank’s equity and threaten its survival.

The number of banks exceeding the threshold more than doubled in the year through June, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, as real estate and credit-card defaults surged. Almost 300 reported 3 percent or more of their loans were nonperforming, a term for commercial and consumer debt that has stopped collecting interest or will no longer be paid in full.


Cash Drain
... snip

“This is a fairly widespread issue for the larger community banks and some regional banks across the country,” said Mix of LECG, where William Isaac, former head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., is chairman of the global financial services unit.

Ratios above 5 percent don’t always lead to failures because banks keep capital cushions and set aside reserves to absorb bad loans. Banks with higher ratios of equity to total assets can better withstand such losses, said Jim Barth, a former chief economist at the Office of Thrift Supervision. Marshall & Ilsley and Synovus said they’ve been getting bad loans off their books by selling them.

Bloomberg’s list was compiled by screening U.S. banks for nonperforming loans of 5 percent or more, and then ranked by assets. The list excluded U.S. territories and lenders that have already failed. Also left out were the 19 lenders that underwent the Treasury’s stress tests in May; they were deemed “too big to fail” and told by regulators that government capital was available to keep them in business.

Excluding the stress-test list, banks with nonperformers above 5 percent had combined deposits of $193 billion, according to Bloomberg data. That’s almost 15 times the size of the FDIC’s deposit insurance fund at the end of the first quarter.

About 2.6 percent of the $7.74 trillion in bank loans outstanding in the U.S. at the end of March were nonaccruing, the highest in 17 years, according to the most recent data from the FDIC. Nonaccrual loans peaked at 3.27 percent in the second quarter of 1991, during the savings and loan crisis, and averaged 1.54 percent over the past 25 years.

‘Off the Charts’
“These numbers are off the charts,” said Blake Howells, an analyst at Becker Capital Management in Portland, Oregon, referring to the nonperforming loan levels at companies he follows. Banks are losing the “ability to try and earn their way through the cycle,” said Howells, who previously spent 13 years at Minneapolis-based U.S. Bancorp.

Corus, with more than two-thirds of its loans nonperforming, has the highest rate among publicly traded banks. The company said last month that it’s “critically undercapitalized” after five consecutive quarterly losses tied to defaults on condominium construction loans. Randy Curtis, Corus’s interim chief executive officer, didn’t respond to calls for comment.

..... excerpt end

Full Article

Urban-Rural Disparities ..... "Equalization" by function

Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 8:27 AM
To: cmuir@bcrea.bc.ca

Mr Muir,

re: BC Housing Market Exhibits Balanced Conditions -Regional Differences Persist

Hooray for the return to overall "balanced" conditions.

This urban -rural disparity embodies the conundrum of 21st Century Canada - people don't live in provinces, they live in and around cities.

The rich cities, subsidize the rural and then the rich provinces subsidize the poor ones.

What would Canada be if the 5-10 largest "urban-ities" were granted provincial status and told to tax & spend for their own constituents' needs - with no equalization in or out, while the rest of the country took care of itself fiscally but controlled the natural resource revenue?



PS Remember the story about the economist with his/her feet in the freezer and her/his head in the oven? ... on average felt "fine"

Politics Blog Top Sites