Fed ‘Profits’ Would Have Blown Ponzi Away

There was good news yesterday for taxpayers, sort of:  the Federal Reserve turned $76.9 billion in 2011 profits over to the U.S. Treasury.  The not so good news is that it amounts to a meager 2.6% return on the Fed’s $2.9 trillion  portfolio. That may be better than George Soros and John Paulson did last year, but at what risk? Keep in mind that quite a few of the paper “assets” the Fed holds are still radioactive, including a mountain of subprime mortgages that would fatally poison the U.S. banking system if they were returned to their rightful owners.  Not that we even know who the rightful owners are; for in legal fact, the securitization mania of the past decade cast doubt on the title to each and every mortgaged home in America.  Thanks to the Fed, however, our commercial banks needn’t worry about such things. That’s why they pay protection money to Bernanke, buying Treasury paper by the boatload so that everything gets taken care of.  And what does the Fed care if it’s holding trillions of dollars’ worth of dodgy paper for the banks? It could write a check for Fannie and Freddie tomorrow and have enough left to over to buy every bank in Europe.

Unfortunately, this is effectively what the Fed has been doing via “swap” arrangements with the European Central Bank. The agreement is formally called  a “temporary dollar liquidity swap arrangement,” but the actual mechanism, like laws and sausages, was not meant to be scrutinized. For if it were, it would make the most brazen Ponzi scheme look as squeaky clean as a Lutheran bake sale.  Actually, compared to today’s high-level paper shufflers, Ponzi was a sap, working long hours to raise real money from new clients to pay old ones. The post-modern central bank, on the other hand, would never trouble itself  to look for real money from real lenders. Not when the central banks can simply swap digital dollars with each other in unlimited quantities. And it’s not even called a loan. Americans might get upset if they thought the Fed was lending hundreds of billions of dollars to European banks. Instead, the swapped dollars go to the ECB (and the Japanese Central Bank), who can use it however they please. Mostly, this means giving it to multinational banks that have stopped lending to each other.

Epic Skimming Operation

For this…let’s call it a “favor,” the Fed charges 50 basis points — without calling it a…ahem…loan.  The revenues could start to add up, since swaps are running at about $10 billion per week and climbing. We predict that the Fed will find a way to offset income from swaps come January 2013, lest the ‘Nank be embarrassed by unseemly gains.  For, were such profits to leap above $100 billion, some curious congressman or reporter might ask where all that money came from.  Better to underperform the hedgies than to incur their envy and awaken the muckrakers.  For the Fed, this protection racket has been more lucrative than mere seignorage (the income derived from the difference between interest on securities and the cost of printing them).  It is in fact nothing less than a skimming operation whose potential is as big as the growing sums required to allay fears of a global banking collapse.

***

(If you’d like to have these commentaries delivered free each day to your e-mail box, click here.)

  • Marion Cummins January 12, 2012, 11:51 pm

    Please cancel my Hidden Pivots and give a credit for recent billing of $106. Thank You Marion Cummins

  • Bernie January 12, 2012, 5:51 am

    A large part of the profits the Fed sent to the Treasury was income from Treasury securities that the Fed had bought from the same Treasury. What sense does that make?

    • Robert January 12, 2012, 5:27 pm

      HAHAHAHA What sense indeed?

      (Treasury (Liability) = Primary Dealer Purchase Price +/- Fed purchase price + Coupon (income)

      This can be a net positive or net negative value; but either way, the Treasury always will have a net liability as they must issue new debt today to pay the coupon on the debt they issued yesterday.

      So, when the magic formula nets a positive value, the Fed remits some portion of the “Profits” (and I am still laughing that they have the balls to call it that) back to the Treasury; after the dark overlords of the Federal Reserve system have taken their 6% cut; although ANY amount remitted back to Treasury is still only reducing the requirement for the Treasury to issue new liability- the only way this whole process could yield a net on-balance result is if the Fed’s profit remission back to the Treasury were equal to 100% of the primary dealer’s purchase price + the aggregate Coupon.

      Of course, the Treasury must collect enough in taxes to make up the shortfall, so that must balance the equation… right?

      Wait, what? they don’t collect enough? Are you kidding me? I mean, Warren Buffet says he is going to make sure all his Billionaire buddies are forced to liquidate and remit all their ill-gotten gains to the IRS…

      Wait, you mean that STILL won’t be enough?

      Watch, and learn a little more about what I said a few weeks back: Linear (simple decimal based financial) progression can NEVER solve an exponential (algebraic) problem:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ&list=UU6P8LT59hNgA8bes61IA9Ow&index=6&feature=plcp

      The fun starts at 2:40

      Ponzi has officially been out-ponzified.

      Party on.

  • bc January 11, 2012, 10:41 pm

    Of course, the gate swings both ways. When the Fed has losses from paying full retail for junk securities, and now junk currencies, the bill will go straight to Treasury too. When screwing the tax payers, a straight line is still the shortest distance between two points.

  • roger erickson January 11, 2012, 10:22 pm

    50 basis points is meaningless against the $US loan the foreign CBs are essentially getting

    Bernanke is taking incredible risks, with zero collateral that matters to us;

    currency swaps should be part of national policy, not left to banks;

    • Robert January 12, 2012, 6:28 am

      Yes I agree with that 100%…

      Now, is there a single Politician in Congress that would propose such radically simple (and therefore highly unlikely) legislation…?

      Eh, who cares- even if it was proposed, who else would vote for it?

  • fallingman January 11, 2012, 9:17 pm

    Yeah, and their trepidation is about a lot more than loss of revenue. It’s about losing power and control.

    The mainstream media are flatulent “mouth”pieces for the ruling “elite.” The goal is domination.

  • C.C. January 11, 2012, 6:48 pm

    Rich & Benjamin –

    Excellent points on Ron Paul. I’m sort of a media ‘watcher’, and I can tell you that it is almost ‘surreal’ to read/listen to the Lack of commentary regarding Ron Paul. It is as if media organizations receive prompts from somewhere, telling them to omit any reference to Ron Paul. The Jon Stewart video satire montage comes to mind.

    The larger point however, as underscored by Benjamin, is not Ron Paul per sey, it is his Movement that is feared the most. For the movement of Ron Paul’s ideals spells Disaster for a Media Construct built around 40+ years of ‘Right vs. Left’ politics-as-usual, ‘Rich Republicans’ vs. ‘Socialist Democrats’, McLaughlin Group-type political discourse, ad nauseam.

    This construct also just happens to be a Multi-$Billion dollar one too, so one can sort of understand their desperation. Think of what a Ron Paul mindset would do to that construct…

  • John Jay January 11, 2012, 6:26 pm

    Benjamin,

    I “googled” “billion dollar Fed buyout” and found lots of citations but no one has quoted the exact “buyout clause”. One guy wrote he read the whole FR Act and did not find a “buyout clause” in it. It might be urban legend. However, I would still argue for letting the Fed member banks buy up Treasuries and toxic debt and then tell them to drop dead. Not likely under the current regime policy of TBTF.

  • Robert January 11, 2012, 5:44 pm

    Hmmm 2.6%…. better than twice what you can get on a demand deposit account with an FDIC maxed out balance of 250 Large. I gotta get me some access to that magical Fed swap window.

    So the Fed is swapping with a 50 basis point surcharge (analogous to a “debit transaction fee”)

    Still plenty of decimals to crank that rate down if the profits get too unseemly, right?

    How does 0.5 basis points sound? (that would be 0.005% APR)

    This morning Romney was on the Corporate Needs Before Citizens network claiming that today’s US economy is more “complicated” than it was in the 80’s under Reagan… You know, because today we have more difficulty making the blood flow from the host to the parasite since the host is running out of blood and is starting to feel faint. The parasites are really having a hard time trying to figure out how to get the host, whose metabolism (real GDP growth) has already flat lined, to generate more blood.

    However, Romney did declare that he has flip-flopped on the idea of VAT (he adamently no longer supports VAT), and he was waffling on consumption tax- since consumers are the ones that are supposed to be pumping the dead patient’s corpse with fresh new blood… It’s not politcally expedient to obstruct the consumer’s progress in returning us to the glory days when it looked like there would soon be a Bed Bath and Beyond store on every corner….

    What was I saying yesterday about retardation?

    • fallingman January 11, 2012, 6:39 pm

      Funny.

    • Mark Uzick January 11, 2012, 7:11 pm

      Romney knows that conservatives want to be lied to about his denial of being an economic interventionist; they’ll believe anything as long as they don’t have to accept Ron Paul’s Constitution adhering package deal in both the realms of domestic economy and foreign affairs.

      Statists, like all bullies, whether from the left or the right, are fundamentally insecure; they find liberty so frightening to contemplate that they’ll believe leftists’ lies that they stand for peace and rightists’ claims that they stand for “free enterprise”. ( I put “free enterprise” in quotes because for conservatives, it means business subsidies, protection from free trade and competition – both domestic and foreign – and barriers to free travel and immigration.

      Romney’s a “good” businessman; he knows what people want – lies – and, as talk is cheap, he gives them as much as will satiate their appetites.

  • fallingman January 11, 2012, 4:26 pm

    “…it would make the most brazen Ponzi scheme look as squeaky clean as a Lutheran bake sale.”

    Hahahaha. Good stuff. Thanks Rick. Stylish as always.

    End The $%@!&#* Fed!

  • PhotoRadarScam January 11, 2012, 4:13 pm

    “the Federal Reserve turned $76.9 billion in 2011 profits over to the U.S. Treasury.”

    The article doesn’t make it very clear… what percentage of all profits was the $76.9B? How much did the owners of the Fed take in dividends?

    &&&&&

    Those who control the Fed have no ownership stake, since there is no equity stock. The $76B was nearly its entire profits for the year.
    RA

    • Rich January 12, 2012, 4:54 am

      Actually, the private Tax-Exempt Fed, owned by member banks with secret nominees like other Central Banks and the Bank for International Settlements, pays a 6% fixed dividend to shareholders before the Treasury:

      http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section7.htm

      The Deloitte Touche 2010 Combined Annual Fed Statement reported $82.925 B interest income, and $6.891 B in other income, for a total of $89.816 B income before expenses.

      Operating expenses included $2.722 B salaries and benefits, with 2200 employees in Washington, DC alone, $1.045 B in DC Board Currency Expenses, $681 M in other expenses, which may include the Fed Air Fleet, Art Collection and Fine Dining Rooms, with $297 M in Occupancy Costs.

      Net Combined Operating Fed Income plus a change in funding Benefit Plans was $81.735 B.

      Then $1.583 B in 6% dividends was paid and $884 M transferred to surplus before $79.268 B in 2010 Treasury Interest was paid….

    • Samuel January 15, 2012, 11:53 pm

      Rick wrote, “The $76B was nearly its entire profits for the year.”

      That is what they tell us. Recall they use their own made-up accounting “standard” that excludes much of the skull-duggery. They can essentially come up with any number they want.

      It is time for a full and complete audit of the Fed.
      http://www.dailypaul.com/155726/update-hr-459-55-co-sponsors

  • Rich January 11, 2012, 4:10 pm

    Nice reminder Rick what happens when enough market participants figure out what is going on with the Fed.

    No wonder they use High Freak AlgoBots.

    Sold calls and bought puts near the close yesterday.

    Then watched CNBC 60 Minutes and American Greed designed to make sheeple feel better about Wall Street, the Fed, FDIC bailouts and Regulators.

    It was worse than we thought.

    Fact is, Wall Street Lobbyists and Congress literally legalized gambling again after the Bucket Shop Crash of 1907 banned it, with the A-ok of Fed Reserve Chairs, Treasury Secs. and Wall Street Warlords.

    Consumers, the economy and taxpayers paid the breakage ever since, the imploding debt deficit derivatives sucking the oxygen and blood out of everyday life in this vampire economy.

    CNBC headlines claimed there was a strong rally last night in the Mini’s. We saw 1296, a wee mite short of the 1370/58 the day after May Day 2011.

    We may get to higher ground, but first we may wallow in the Jersey and Potomac Swamps for a bit.

    This Fed Fiat usury tax thing does not end well…

    • Rich January 11, 2012, 4:14 pm

      Meanwhile, Dr Ron Paul,the only Constitutionally Principled Candidate for life, liberty, peace and prosperity, keeps racking up second places with the people who are awake and all the monopoly media can do is ignore him, call him odd, old and dangerous or raise questions about his electability….

    • Benjamin January 11, 2012, 5:18 pm

      I think a better indicator for a Paul victory is how much his percentages have grown, compared to 2008. Thus far, he’s doubled to tripled them. And really, is there any doubt that it’ll at least come down to a GOP race between him and the robot?

      So even if he loses to Rom-bot, the establishment will have to quiver over the fact that Liberty still matters to the people!

    • Samuel January 15, 2012, 11:51 pm

      It will be Ron Paul vs. Romney at the republican national convention. Others are too weak or have missed registration deadlines in various states.

      And what is with the talk of the 2nd place finishes? Iowa delegates won’t be known until June, and the people who made it through caucus to the next level appear to be a lot of Ron Paul supporters. Maybe 1st in Iowa, though it is currently unknowable.

      Sure, 2nd place in NH is impressive, considering those Democrats drove to the polling place to write in Ron Paul. Yes, Ron Paul got second in the Democratic primary from all the Dems who wrote him in!!! Folks, the Dems are pissed off and will elect Ron Paul.

      Please get involved, or at least identify yourself to the campaign as someone who will bring their neighbors out.
      http://www.ronpaul2012.com/sign-up-as-volunteer

  • John Jay January 11, 2012, 3:45 pm

    If the Federal Reserve is actually a consortium of member private banks then I have solution. Let them accumulate all the Treausries and bad paper they want.
    When it all implodes, let the member banks eat it and disappear. I know it will never happen. And I know that Congress will never use the buyout clause that I have read would allow the USA to give them a billion dollars and relieve them of command of our economy.
    That will always be the dream though!

    • Benjamin January 11, 2012, 5:03 pm

      I suppose it doesn’t matter, but… What’s this about a billion dollar buyout clause? And are we talking dollars, as in 371.25 grains of fine silver dollars, or the funny kind?

  • Mark Uzick January 11, 2012, 10:51 am

    While the Fed makes a small percentage on all this massive, risky and irresponsible lending of the money it creates, its paper profits may seem huge, but they’re not really much at all when compared to the risks that it’s taking.

    When these debts implode, the Fed will find itself insolvent and it will either be bailed out at public expense through quantitative easing – so now there would be both a national debt and a Federal Reserve debt – or the Fed’s function will be nationalized along with its debt and run directly by Congress.

    One way or the other, either through outright default or devaluation of the dollar via money printing, the debt of the US government, along with its favorite cronies here and abroad will be reneged upon.

    For now, enjoy the latest bubble, as assets get pumped up again, for as long as it lasts; for who knows, it might not last for long and it might even be the last one before the pretense of an economic rebound gives way to the reality that the real inflation adjusted economic output, here and around the world ( China’s too, Mario.) have been rapidly declining when adjusted for actual price inflation; even the unadjusted GDP statistics are of dubious validity, as state spending is counted as productive activity when it should be discounted as wasted or even destructive use of productive activity.

  • Benjamin January 11, 2012, 9:26 am

    I can’t say that I fully understand what a swap is and how they work. But something tells me they’re a lot like switching one accounting book for the other one. In other words, keeping two books, one to show and another to try and keep track of the lies. Is that about right?

    Anyway, I couldn’t help but notice Rick’s use of the singular (congressMAN) when it comes time to explain where the money came from. Now, who would that congressman be, I wonder..!

    • William January 11, 2012, 3:09 pm

      Benjamin –
      I think this link came from the chat room. Give it a look – it las out the swap process and then some. I found it infuriating…

      http://ciovaccocapital.com/videos/europeandebtcrisis.html

    • Benjamin January 11, 2012, 4:58 pm

      Thanks, William. Nice refresher course on how this beast works (or rather, doesn’t work!). One thought that occured to me while watching it is all the anti-capitalist sentiment we see today is probably the default urge that government surely experiences on a second-by-second basis. And yeah, that is infuriating, given that they endlessly try to pass this off as being “for the little guy”. Well, who would _really_ be screwed in a default? Yeah… but they apparently can fool roughly 1/3rd to 1/2 of the sheep that it really, truly is in their best interest!

      Not that the other option is any better…

    • Robert January 11, 2012, 6:11 pm

      Currency swaps are simple:

      Central Bank “X” is in a country where US dollar denominated debt has become unserviceable. The demand for dollars in economy X is sky-rocketting and currency X is plummeting in the forex futures market. Hyper inflation is looming, and country X’s politicians know that the torches and pitch forks are right outside the door so they are screaming at the Central Bank to do something before their travel and expense accounts become frozen, which might mean no more ski trips (I mean economic summits) to Davos.

      For ease of discussion, let’s say that country X needs 100 Billion dollars of new liquidity to avoid insolvency, and the market foreign exchange rate is 2 units of currency X for every 1 US Dollar.

      Central Bank A can not legally create dollars, so the Fed steps up and says “We can provide you with the 100Billion dollars you need, in exchange for 200Billion of currency X, and another 50 basis point (.05%) surcharge (to cover the Fed’s inconvenience, I’m sure)

      So, Central Bank X waves their wand and credit’s the Fed’s account with 200,000,500,000 of currency X, and the Fed turns right back around and credits Central Bank X’s account with $100,000,000,000.

      Now Central Bank X can “loan” these new dollars to their member commercial banks at some interest rate greater than 50 basis points and the Country X commercial banks are the only ones who end up with the balance sheet liability. For the Fed, the transaction is a 50 basis point gain. For Central Bank X the gain is whatever they charge the commercial banks minus 50 basis points, and for the member banks the gain is whatever the market lending rate is minus the basis point premium they are paying to Central Bank X.

      In other words, a dollar swap is always an increase in the global supply of printed currency, cleverly disguised as a balance neutral transaction… It’s magic.

      But the TRUTH is that a currency swap always amounts to a further increase in the global supply of printed currency units.

    • Benjamin January 12, 2012, 4:05 am

      Okay, Robert. Thanks. Now let me see if I can add anything to further shed light on what’s going on…

      I take it the member banks would be lending to the government/Treasury. So their profit would be the bond interest, minus the premium they pay to the central bank. And as the yeild curve collapses, there is pressure on the CB to cut that premium. After all, how else will they make profits? By making loans to real businesses and the productive class? Of course not… we don’t have the power to issue debt from thin air. If we did, then the bankers and the government would have to become the slaves!

      And that’s why the Fed can’t just keep on cutting the premium. The government and the commercial banks would be driving price inflation, while the Fed sat there, looking all slave-like and worried about their lack of income in a highly inflationary environment.

      Vice versa, the Fed can’t raise their premium, as that would squash bank profits, whilst putting pressure on government to make bigger repayments on their debts. And just where would govt get the money? After all, with bank profits evaporated, there certainly wouldn’t be any lending to get the economy going so that the slaves-of-last resort could get around to paying those taxes that govt requires.

      Nor can the Fed jump the barrier by raising their premium, but instead credit directly to the govt (and it, in turn, just “pay” it through more debt). The reason they can’t do that is because Treasury interest would continue to collapse, which is one half of the equation that creates commercial bank profits.

      Ah, yes indeedy… Times is hard, even for the parasites!