• Reggie Middleton
    02/09/2010 - 05:12
    The levered assets of the banks in many Euro-sovereign nations easily outstrip those nations' GDP's. So when the nations' banks get in trouble from bad banking practices (and a very large swath have), the nations themselves are helpless in attempting to truly save the banks (and instead only institute a bait and switch wherein private default risk/insolvency potential is swapped for public manifestations of the same).
  • madhedgefundtrader
    02/09/2010 - 07:22
    The rug may about to be pulled out from under the market. The onslaught of contradictory news coming out of Washington is wearing the market down. An exclusive interview with Andrew Horowitz of The Disciplined Investor.

FDIC Q2 2009 Report Released

Project Mayhem's picture




View the Report

 

The FDIC has released it's Q2 report.  The answer to question many of us have been asking , which was basically, "how much cash did the FDIC have left (as of the end of Q2)?" is as follows:

 

"The Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) decreased by $2.6 billion (20.3 percent) during the second quarter to $10.4
billion (unaudited)."

 

This covers the approximately 26 bank failures which occurred during Q2 2009.  As of Q2 the reserve ratio had decreased 5 basis points to 0.22%. Given the number of bank failures during Q3, it is probably safe to say the FDIC is approaching the point at which it will have to tap it's emergency line of credit with the US Treasury -- if this has not already occurred without the appropriate fanfare.  The emergency line of credit is $100bn, which can be expanded to $500bn on a temporary basis through 2010.  

 

One interesting yet somewhat comical graph is as follows:

FDIC Problem Banks 15-Year High


 

Another gem from the report is this:

DIF Reserve Ratios


 

We can all look forward to another FDIC Friday of Fail -- coming in 24 hours to a media outlet near you.

 

4.2
Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (5 votes)



by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 09:59
#49874

How does it still have 10 billion + when from the bank failure data, they should have tapped that treasury line by now?? More fudged accounting I dare say!

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:33
#50104

More like Accounting 102 ... from the report:

"Accrued assessment income from the regular and the special assessment increased the fund by $9.1 billion. Interest earned, combined with realized gains on securities and debt guarantee surcharges from the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program added $1.1 billion to the fund. Unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities combined with operating expenses reduced the fund by $1.3 billion."

So they had $10.2 billion of income.

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 15:19
#50589

Is that the special assessment to "be collected September 30, 2009"?

by Señor Tranche
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:04
#49883

"The Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) decreased by $2.6 billion (20.3 percent) during the second quarter to $10.4
billion (unaudited)."

I think the last word says it all.

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:12
#49892

aaaand it's gone! This line is for people who have money in the bank. Please step aside.

by Digital Gunfire
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:03
#50173

For those who wonder:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/220760/?autoplay=false

required viewing and funny.

 

by e1even1
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:13
#49894

does the problem bank list ever get leaked? i sure like to see that right now.

by D.O.D.
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:22
#49914

Yes, but you have to be one of Goldmans VIP clients to get the list Thurs. nights.

by Howard_Beale
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:52
#50151

Weiss's weakest banks--new report coming in a few weeks but this is it:

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/files/documents/X-List.htm#Toc211675100

by Big Al
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 15:47
#50640

Try this link.  Probably the most accurate, since it tries to accurately calculate the bank's leverage ratio.  (Which is the criteria regulators allegedly use to determine whether a bank is insolvent)

http://bankimplode.com/list/troubledbanks.htm

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:15
#49899

Unofficial list from public sources: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/08/problem-bank-list-unofficial-aug-21.html

by e1even1
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:49
#49979

thanks much

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:23
#49918

Here's an "unoffical" list:

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/08/problem-bank-list-unofficial-aug-21.html

by e1even1
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:50
#49983

thank you also

by TumblingDice
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:26
#49930

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:30
#49937

They say this is the highest number of problem banks since the S&L crisis. The question is: Why isn't it worse? Is it because they've already shut down a lot of banks, which then leave the problem list, when they kept more bad banks on the problem list in the S&L crisis? I guess I'd like to see a column chart showing the problem banks PLUS cumulative failures, or a column chart of problem bank total assets. Bottom line is the problem must be much, much worse than it was then but these numbers make the situation look garden variety.

by smashmouth football
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:16
#50049

Bear in mind that comparison of the raw data from the era of the S&L crisis with today is a little bit like comparing apples and oranges. There has been a wave of M&A activity in the intervening 15-20 year time period, in part because of the de facto demise of antitrust, and in part because of the repeal of Glass-Steagall.

In sum, each failure today is probably, on average, bigger than the average failure in the S&L era.

I haven't looked at the data in detail so I can't be sure of the magnitude of the effect, but I'm sure it's substantial. But what worries me most are the failures yet to come. And the parabolic blow-off of the loss rates for each new failure.

by Joe Sixpack
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:09
#50181

It is worse. It is not the number of institutions failing that count, but the dollar amount. According to a recent William Black (lead S&L regulator) interview at UCLA, the Indy Mac failure alone was a greater dollar amount than the entire S&L debacle!

by Cognitive Dissonance
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:30
#49938

The insanity continues.

What's amazing is that as the dam springs more and more leaks the population still asks those who didn't "see" the last disaster coming if they can see the next one coming.

The answer to the question by the way is that everything is fine with no disaster in sight or projected. Sleep tight and don't let the bed bugs bite.

by crzyhun
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:31
#49939

Thanks for the cold water in my face....I needed it.

by waterdog
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:36
#49950

I bet the true number of insolvent banks is about 1,500 - 1,700, not the 750 or so being put out by the FDIC. Bernanke knows this, he cannot let this Bank Falure Friday event keep going on until all of the banks are sold- it could take 6 years. He must bring all the failures to a close at the same time, before the first quarter of 2010 begins. And he must bailout the FDIC for the full cost of the failure. Enter the Treasury- stage right.

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:03
#50017

Thank you, Sir.

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:12
#50048

Guess money really is bull#%** since they can make it whenever they feel like it... now all they do is type digits into a computer...They don't even have to print paper anymore!

by Howard_Beale
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:54
#50132

Has anyone heard even an inkling about Corus in the last week? There were numerous rumors regarding 4 different PE players in early August and then the nothing but dead air. Perhaps they were waiting for Sheila to lower the Tier One on PE takeovers of banks as announced yesterday but Corus is an utter mess. So please share if you have any news other than this from AP today

"Some critics say regulators have taken too long to shut down troubled banks. Chicago's Corus Bankshares, for example, has staggered for weeks under the weight of bad real estate loans."

by Arm
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:54
#50155

As you point out; this was at the end of Q2.  Would that be June 09?  That means that we have had some 25 bank failures since then.  Can someone add up the total amount?

by Joe Sixpack
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:10
#50186

I think it was Mish who declared on August 14 that the FDIC was broke.

by Project Mayhem
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:30
#50220

Yes, Mish was keeping track.  My count was -$3bn.  The FDIC is definitely broke.   They must have tapped the Treasury.

by Green Sharts
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 14:47
#50524

Sheila Bair said today that the FDIC had "no immediate plans" to tap the line of credit with Treasury. That's vague enough on timing that they could tap it in a week or two after the next group of bank failures without contradicting her.

However, I don't think she could get away with making that comment if the FDIC had already drawn on the Treasury.

by Project Mayhem
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 16:31
#50754

It's hard to say... I mean Mish thinks they are bust... my rough count was a few billion short, but that's going off secondary source data so that could be wrong...

 

1) Maybe there was better recovery than estimated on some of this garbage

2) Maybe they are lying

 

by windhorse2000
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:26
#50216

Thanks Project Mayhem,....... for the Sibel Edmonds tip on another post.  Great stuff.  Evil always present (in everyone) must be constantly vigilant.  Good work. 

by Project Mayhem
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:31
#50222

There is a whole article coming on Sibel Edmonds once I finish watching the deposition

by windhorse2000
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:30
#50219

Project Mayhem,......Sibel Edmonds worth writing about,....."this exposed activity" within our government, is rampant in the financial field,.....probably more.

by deadhead
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 13:57
#50407

Thanks for the article Mayhem...appreciate it very much!!  Nice job.

by ptoemmes
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 14:36
#50503

Hockey anyone?

by spanish inquisition
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 18:22
#50960

Here is an article that shows how the FDIC is handling negative ratio banks

http://www.startribune.com/business/52476387.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUs

Since both banks are chartered by the state, it's the Minnesota Department of Commerce's call to shut them down, a spokesman for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) said.

by AN0NYM0US
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 18:45
#50988

thanks PM

by Hephasteus
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 19:57
#51097

It's not really triage at this point. It's more. Ok all you dead banks just keep going until we can officially put you in the grave. It's not going fast enough and they are going to miss stuff with banks having ATM failures and inability to process payments. The FED audit won't set off a bank run but once you get 20 banks from 20 different states all screwing transactions. That'll set off the panic.  And as the wind down banks they will have more and more toxic balance sheet percentages.

by Anonymous
on Fri, 08/28/2009 - 11:35
#51813

As far as I can see, the 2nd Quarter FDIC Report has not been posted yet at the link you mentioned:

http://www2.fdic.gov/qbp/qbpSelect.asp?menuItem=QBP

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

CAPTCHA
This problem is intended to determine if you are a machine- or not sufficiently intelligent (or determined) to participate at Zero Hedge.
17 minus equals 72
Solve this math question and enter the solution with digits. E.g. for "two plus four = ?" enter "6".