You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

Is The Fed Enabling Foreign Central Banks To Swap Out Their Agency Debt Into Treasuries?

Tyler Durden's picture




Another quite intriguing piece by Chris Martenson "The Shell Game - How The Federal Reserve Is Monetizing Debt" reveals some of the intricacies of the Fed's monetization game and, by digging deeper into the Fed's Custody Account, demonstrates not just how the Federal Reserve is enabling foreigners to swap out of Agencies into Treasuries, but how it is implicitly monetizing a markedly larger portion of debt than is assumed.

For the full details of the article we eagerly refer readers to the original Martenson piece, but in a nutshell here are the components of what Martenson coins "The Fed's Shell Game":

It is no secret that capital flows into the US have declined precipitously, a fact that can be substantiated by TIC flows and by the St. Louis Fed:

Comparing this data with TIC releases, indicates that from January to May the total capital outflows from the U.S. amount to ($314) billion in assets, consisting of central bank purchases of $50 billion, however, matched with private investor dispositions of $364 billion.

Ignoring the implications of what this decline would mean for an economy that relies exclusively on credit growth in order to perpetuate the monetary Ponzi scheme that the US economy has been for years, the simple conclusion here is that a combination of declining consumer credit and foreign interest for US debt purchases has very negative implications for the credit bubble the Federal Reserve is trying to reflate. As for the consequences for the U.S. Dollar as a result of this activity, these have recently become all too clear.

All well and good up to here.

However, what is very troubling is what Martenson points out is the cumulative change in the Fed's Custody Account, which at last check was roughly $2.8 trillion, and represented by Martenson's chart below:

Martenson provides a good explanation of what the function of the Custody Account is:

The Federal Reserve actually holds the bonds (or rather an electronic entry representing the bonds) in a special account for these various central banks.  This is called the "Custody Account" and it holds US debt 'in custody' for various central banks. Think of it as a magnificently vast brokerage/checking account, run by the Federal Reserve for central banks, and you'll have the right image.

Indeed, while TIC may indicate one thing, an observation of the CA indicates that foreigned have in fact been accumulating substantial amounts of US debt since the crisis began in earnest, at a rate that has not budged from its long-term average.

Yet the concerning conclusion by observing the above chart is the dramatic divergence in the CA of Treasury versus Agency holdings. Says Martenson:

Here we note that agency bonds peaked in October of 2008 at nearly a trillion dollars but have declined by $178 billion since then.  Treasuries, on the other hand, have increased by over $500 billion over that same span of time.  A half a trillion dollars!  If you were wondering how the US bond auctions have managed to go so smoothly, here's part of your answer.

At this point it bears pointing out the Fed's balance sheet, where the Fed's large appetite for agencies (including MBS for the purposes of this analysis) is evident. I present the most recent Federal Balance sheet as presented on Zero Hedge a week ago:

May this be an explanation of what is happening:

It would appear that foreign central banks have been swapping agency bonds for Treasury bonds, but that's not how the markets work.  First, they would have to sell those bonds, before they could use the proceeds to buy government debt. So to whom did they sell those Agency bonds in order to afford the Treasury bonds?

And here is where the concept of the appropriately coined Shell Game comes into play:

These are the three critical points to remember as you read further:

  1. The US government has record amounts of Treasuries to sell.
  2. Foreign central banks, which have a big pile of agency bonds in their custody account, would like to help but want to keep things somewhat under the radar to avoid scaring the debt markets.
  3. The Federal Reserve does not want to be seen directly buying US government debt at auctions (and in fact is not permitted to, but many rules have been 'bent' worse during this crisis), because that could upset the whole illusion that there is unlimited demand for US government paper, but it also desperately wants to avoid a failed auction.

For various reasons, the Federal Reserve cannot just up and start buying all the Treasury paper that becomes available in record amounts, week after week, month after month.

Instead, it uses this three-step shell game to hide what it is doing under a layer of complexity:

Shell #1:  Foreign central banks sell agency debt out of the custody account.

Shell #2 The Federal Reserve buys those agency bonds with money created out of thin air.

Shell #3Foreign central banks use that very same money to buy Treasuries at the next government auction.

The question arises, where are the agencies that the Fed is purchasing at such as gluttonous pace coming from? Absent an audit of the Fed, one can merely speculate, but likely is one of the primary motivations for the Federal Reserve Chairman and the Secretary of the Treasury to claim that any additional openness into the activities of the Fed would be "problematic to the country."

Would this "behind the scenes" rotation endorsed by the Fed, whereby the Custody Account is the middleman for Foreign-Fed transactions, be the primary reason for an apparently unwavering indirect interest in US Treasuries?

As Martenson concludes:

The Federal Reserve has effectively been monetizing far more US government debt than has openly been revealed, by cleverly enabling foreign central banks to swap their agency debt for Treasury debt.  This is not a sign of strength and reveals a pattern of trading temporary relief for future difficulties.

This is very nearly the same path that Zimbabwe took, resulting in the complete abandonment of the Zimbabwe dollar as a unit of currency.  The difference is in the complexity of the game being played, not the substance of the actions themselves.

The shell game that the Fed is currently playing does not change the basic equation: Money is being printed out of thin air so that it can be used to buy US government debt.

When the full scope of this program is more widely recognized, ever more pressure will fall upon the dollar, as more and more private investors shun the dollar and all dollar-denominated instruments as stores of value and wealth. This will further burden the efforts of the various central banks around the world as they endeavor to meet the vast borrowing desires of the US government.

One possible result of the abandonment of these efforts is a wholesale flight out of the dollar and into other assets.  To US residents, this will be experienced as rapidly rising import costs and increasing costs for all internationally-traded basic commodities, especially food items.  For the rest of the world, the results will range from discomforting to disastrous, depending on their degree of dollar linkage.

As more and more people dig behind the Fed lustrous facade, increasingly more troubling discoveries are made. On one hand you see POMO auctions that repurchase recently auctioned off securities; on the other - potential capital rotation via custodial accounts of which there is no mention in mainstream media venues. If this analysis is in fact correct, the Fed is monetizing not only the Treasuries it purchases via POMO, but effectively also the indirect bidders' treasury interest, which is represented by their rolling out of agencies purchased by the Fed, and the newly raised cash used for UST purchases. Has the Fed essentially monopolized the entire Treasury Auction process?

Whether this speculation of dollar abusive policies by the Federal Reserve, which will stop at nothing, to reinflate the credit bubble and debase dollar-based debt, is in fact true, is questionable. However, definitive answers from Chariman Ben will not be forthcoming until he is forced to show his hand, whether via a legal order such as the recently won Bloomberg lawsuit, or through political means, such as HR 1207 and S 604. In the meantime, it appears the Federal Reserve, whose accountability should be to the entire US population, not just to a select crowd of Wall Street oligarchs, continues to pursue activities that facilitiate at any and all cost the stratification of US society into that minority that will benefit vastly from the Fed's ongoing actions and the significant majority who will see the purchasing power of the paper in their wallets gradually disappear, and effectively put the entire concept of the "American Middle Class" at risk.

For the full link to Chris Martenson's article, please click here.




Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:33 | Link to Comment Sancho Ponzi
Sancho Ponzi's picture

OT: I KNEW this was coming, but couldn't they have the courtesy to wait until his body is cold?   ARRRRGGGGHHHHH! Bastards, all of 'em!

Dodd: "Maybe Teddy's Passing" Will Spur GOP To Act On Health Care

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/26/dodd-maybe-teddys-passing_n_269581.html

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:31 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:32 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:38 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Is The Fed Enabling Foreign Central Banks To Swap Out Their Agency Debt Into Treasuries?:  

 

Crystal ball says "yup"

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 00:35 | Link to Comment defender
defender's picture

Could you guys help me with this, wasn't the first week that the Fed bought agencies one week after the surge in treasury demand?

Sat, 08/29/2009 - 11:46 | Link to Comment ToNYC
ToNYC's picture

Man in the Mirror too. Ben is channeling Michael Jackson. El-Erian's sugar high? ...more like crack and a course of propofol..the new FED speedball for the 21st Century deconomy. The public isn't spending because it doesn't believe there is an economy to replace their assets and they need to learn how to invest in their survival without....credit AIDS. That disease is now being spread by the FED at their crack house at 33 Liberty.

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:42 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

It's shit like this that is sending the usa into the crapper (well, bidet I guess for the ZH crowd, lol!).  the only good news is these phucks can't sneak it by anymore due to the new media.  I hope this pushes H.R. 1207 forward.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:43 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Hey CNN, why don't you steal this article too.  Doubt they'd let you print it!

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:49 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:30 | Link to Comment zenith1
zenith1's picture

Standards Board decided to eliminate a concept known as the  special purpose entity"

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:50 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:50 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:12 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:24 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 08/30/2009 - 23:06 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:50 | Link to Comment Sancho Ponzi
Sancho Ponzi's picture

I assume lots of these Agency bonds were sold to fund FAN, FRE, etc. 

Would you not be delighted to trade FAN and FRE agency bonds for Treasuries?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:51 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:53 | Link to Comment Sqworl
Sqworl's picture

How do you convince the world that your credit worthy???

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:13 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:36 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

deleted.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:53 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:03 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Mish still thinks the Fed is incompetent rather than a criminal operation

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:35 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

LOL!

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:32 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Which will be his undoing. You bring up an excellent point, PM. In fact, this type of thinking is common to many deflationists that have interacted with. They generally believe that there is no significant government manipulation occurring in various markets - that they are generally free and fair; believe that government is more stupid than criminal when in fact the opposite is the truth; think that government is incapable of spending enough to overcome "deflation" (whatever they fantasize it to be); vehemently deny the existence of precious metals price rigging scheme even when faced with mountains of incontrovertible evidence; believe that people will mostly "struggle" to pay their debts thus increasing demand for the dollar/cash instead of defaulting on  them (IMNSHO, the majority of us - i.e. those with a brain and survival instinct - won't give two shits about defaulting on an underwater house); usually live in a US Dollar centric world where they are are totally, madly IN LOVE with the USD and cannot explain what will happen in other countries which are basically on a similar fiat regime; think that the USD today is same as the Gold backed USD of the 1930's when in fact due to removal of Gold backing we are talking about two entirely different monetary regimes; totally ignore the possibility of hyperinflation due loss of confidence in the currency.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:25 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:59 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

haha Nadler sucks so hard

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:18 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:39 | Link to Comment SteveNYC
SteveNYC's picture

Good post. What I don't get then, is if they are more "criminal" than stupid, and if they are in this to benefit their buddies and cronies etc, under the scenario we are in two things may happen:

 

1) Hyperinflationary spiral, in which people's cash becomes worthless, and we riot and lynch politicians, Bernanke etc. the lot of them. BUT, their buddies, who are loaded up with cash (yes, foreign currency and precious metals, which are easily stolen and looted from them in such civil unrest) also become poorer via the value of their dollars being destroyed.

Or

2) Massive deflation, in which a country with no savings and loads of debt is effectively crushed by this deflationary force, we lynch politicians, Bernanke etc. BUT their buddies, who have loads of cash, no debt, and some forex and commodities, literally get to own the place and buy the country for pennies on the dollar.

 

Hyperthetically, it would seem to me that if pure "crime" was behind their motives, the secondary outcome would be better for their cronies. Thoughts?

 

Disclaimer: The "lynching" comments were merely used for "effect"!

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:42 | Link to Comment Gilgamesh
Gilgamesh's picture

2, then 1.  They have backups standing by.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:47 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:57 | Link to Comment ED
ED's picture

Re the $700B Bank reserves held on the Feds books - If such funds could experience a multiplier of up to 100x when relased into the economy, when does the point arrive when people start not accepting paper in exchange for goods? It's a lever primed 'pull for hyperinflation' isnt it?

And does this make sense - could the Fed be trying to shake foreigners out of their long USD (savings) positions before smackin the deflation button? The Fed wouldnt want a severe deflationary episode to occur whilst foreigners hold all the cash would it?

 

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 21:47 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 08/27/2009 - 21:58 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 08/27/2009 - 06:50 | Link to Comment whacked
whacked's picture

PM and GG

Interesting that you can lay so much crap on a bloggist that is yet to be proven wrong. A recent report showed that out of the 15,000 economists, only about 120 predicted accurately. Neo classical economists missed the boat. The classical ones did not.

As for deflation, history will be the judge. Quite frankly though, do you not think it is a tad deflationary when capital goods and rent are reducing? With the unemployment one would expect as much. Then again, the both of you know what you are talking about don't you?? And before any snide remarks read up on the definition of deflation, so you both know what you are talking about.

Same to with homebuyers underwater... you two should go read his blog instead of forming preconceived ideas that have no relevance to his comments. Then again it is easy to bad mouth and trash people isn't it .. the anonymity of the internet... I appreciate TD's anonymity but seriously your personalities and sometimes sanctimonious comments are making it tuff to really appreciate the site.

I forgot GG has a brain and makes this comment without reading the Blog!

As regards the currencies I think that you fall far short of expectations when addressing the USD. When markets collapse the money will still flow through to the USD. All CB's have done worse than the Fed and all CB's attempted to deflate their currencies. It is mind boggling. And on the Euro I will follow Keynes idea of the road bump. The individual States unemployment and various other problems will no doubt see to that.

For the hyper-inflation angle ... again history will decide who is right and who is wrong .. but why dont you go buy some Real estate or shares if you feel that the inflation is going north .. is that not the cure?

So instead of being right proper wankers just concentrate on the big gorillas, the Fed and the people in charge of the US (whoever they may be) ...

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:25 | Link to Comment Arm
Arm's picture

Time to sell your gold holdings.

Paulson is talking his book (obviously to unload)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aJF7iETlOjQ4

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:35 | Link to Comment Arm
Arm's picture

Lack of confidence in a currency does not lead to hyperinflation in that currency - it leads to no currency.

That is precisely the point where new currencies are introduced.  (Think Brazil, Rome, Mexico, Argentina, etc)

In Zimbabwe most transactions are not paid with wheelbarrows of money; they are paid with dollars and euros on the blackmarket.  The Zimi is the currency that is used only when forced to.

 

Fri, 08/28/2009 - 16:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 18:13 | Link to Comment transition
transition's picture

that was me :)

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:32 | Link to Comment zenith1
zenith1's picture

pd are buying
massive amounts of citi and other zombie banks...
but they in fact

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:34 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Mish is FINISHED. Put a fork in him.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:02 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Well I still read Mish in hopes some day he'll come around...  yeah we are in deflation sort of , M3 might roll over.  But M0 and M1 will not.   What's it matter what the net 'difference' between the two (printing vs credit destruction) if there is currency crisis?

 

As some people have mentioned before, prices of everything you don't want will go down.  Prices of everything you need will go up.

 

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 02:19 | Link to Comment Assetman
Assetman's picture

Exactly, PM.

Economists will call it stagflation.

The rest of us will call it Major Pain.

If this hypothesis has truth behind it, prision may well be the safest place for Bernanke, Geithner and Summers.

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:30 | Link to Comment Arm
Arm's picture

Stagflation?  Would we be so lucky

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 14:13 | Link to Comment darkness (not verified)
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:00 | Link to Comment max2205
max2205's picture

Knew it, Ben says sorry bout them agencies. please don't dump'em I buy 'em back with Treasy's.  Oppps, but when those turn into poop, what will he use to make them whole?

 

Again, why are we making everyone whole except the freaking citizens of this f'd up country....never mind, back to my charts.

Humm, wonder why AIG FRE FRM ect are running....who had this inside info?  f'king sick of these inside trades

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:43 | Link to Comment agrotera
agrotera's picture

Some suggest ( i think probably bank agents) that there were private threats from around the world, and that the "giving" of money to AIG, and probably many programs by the Fed are like ransom money.

Even if this is true, it is exponentially worse that no clear statement against the operations, laws, and the people who pushed the laws and operations to bring us this mess has been made by either of our governments administrations.  Furthermore, on the day of the big announcement (Feb 09) when Obama reported that he and Geithner would be backing the Paulson/Bernake plan, some reporter asked when the people responsible for this mess would be prosecuted, and Obama's response was that we can't look back, we have to look forward--effectively letting everyone responsible for the crimes that brought us this mess, off of the hook.

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:58 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:59 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:50 | Link to Comment texpat
texpat's picture

Yep. Extortion, money-laundering, monetization.

Imagine we defaulted on those (worthless) MBS. Chinese and Russian dirty bombs would be popping up faster than Jack could shut them down.

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 13:44 | Link to Comment jp
jp's picture

#49120 Excellent observation. I would only add a few additional ideas. When we look at GOLD as we all like to do, WHO has the MOST?

The short answer, is here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_gold_reserves

Here is a real RE US National total value number in 2005 dollars.

$23.5T

http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20020725_homeowners.htm

 Macro food for thought.

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 21:23 | Link to Comment jp
jp's picture

They wanted more interest, now they are paying the price for the risk associated with that desire for a higher rate.

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:00 | Link to Comment andrew123
andrew123's picture

Doesn't this imply that their will be a bid in Treasuries until the rest of the world has finished liquidating their agency securities?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:00 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:11 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

All complexity is simplicity in motion.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:53 | Link to Comment ghostfaceinvestah
ghostfaceinvestah's picture

Yeah, I don't think Chris is really on to anything, sorry to say, it is pretty much as you describe: all money is fungible, so when the Fed buys agency debt, it frees up money to buy something else, like Treasuries.  Likewise, when the Fed monetizes 30 year Treasuries, it frees up money to buy 3 month Treasuries.  Which is what the Chinese are doing.

Note that the agency debt operations are for seasoned paper, just like the UST operations, so they can buy from FCBs.

With the MBS, you are correct - the Fed is not buying seasoned MBS, but the loans that go into the new MBS are partially mortgages that refi out of seasoned agency MBS (and seasoned private label MBS).  And that money goes back into Treasuries (or the stock market, or oil).

Bottom line is, the Fed's purchases of MBS and agency debt create dollars for someone to buy something.  that is all that is happening here.

Much more insidious is the monetization that is going on with the banks.  As they free up capital by unloading their toxic borrowers onto the govt, where is that money going?  UST.

The problem with the exit strategy for QE on MBS is not clearing out all the MBS and agency debt from the FCB, it is keeping the market for new MBS issuance from cratering.  Remember, the Fannie and Freddie MBS is still guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie.  Would you buy a pool of 30 year mortgages guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie without full faith and credit backing of the US govt?  What kind of guarantee are you going to have in 5 years?

Volume is a good question, though.  Say we do $2T this year.  Unless rates drop a lot, we won't do $2T next year, maybe $1.5T.

That has a lot of other implications - what happens in employment in the mortgage origination space if origination volume drops 25 - 30%?  The mini refi boom sure helped a lot of pocketbooks this spring.  That dries up and a lot of people get thrown on the unemployment pile.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:19 | Link to Comment ghostfaceinvestah
ghostfaceinvestah's picture

Yeah, I think at a $1T annual run rate market (as an example) spreads would stay a bit more in line, there will always be some index fund buying, some servicer buying, etc., and with the Fed holding a large chunk of the market, you don't have to worry about secondary market selling putting pressure on new issuance.

Right now, though, the basis is about 50bps below what would be normal, and mortgage rates are probably at the high side of where the Fed wants them already.  and the 10 year is at 3.45%.  Widening spreads or a rising 10 year rate and rates go well above what the Fed wants.

They know that any recent rebound in the housing market is artificial, due to the $8K FTHB credit and the lack of supply due to the foreclosure moratoriums, and once the pent up foreclosures hit the market we will have another leg down in prices. So they want to keep rates as low as possible.  Without a fix to Fannie and Freddie they will have to stay active.

Imagine this scenario - foreclosure moratorium backlog hits the market in the fall, $8K tax credit expires in Nov, unemployment continues to rise, and the Fed stops buying MBS at 12/31.  I can't see it happening.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:00 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:17 | Link to Comment SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

sleep?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:40 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:46 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

LOL!

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 14:13 | Link to Comment darkness (not verified)
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:00 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:10 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

The Fed is offering primary dealers the tempation of risk-free profits in bond speculation.  The Fed can put a floor on the 5y, 7y, and 10y interest rates at the expense of the US dollar.   Therre will probably be a disorderly collapse at some point if this madness continues. 

 

There also can be a skyrocket in dollar during deleveraging.  Basically we have entered period of nonlinear dynamics.  The system is no longer stable, how much longer this continue is hard to say.  Days, weeks,  a few months if they are really clever.  But certainly not longer. 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:31 | Link to Comment SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

"The Fed can put a floor on the 5y, 7y, and 10y interest rates at the expense of the US dollar."

Forgive me PM, but then it's not really risk free, is it?  It's more like Bernanke saying: "TRUST me, it's risk free!"

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:03 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Yes I think you are right.   It will work until it doesn't.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:09 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

equity money

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:19 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

check.  Big float there that can be used no doubt.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:52 | Link to Comment texpat
texpat's picture

Put it this way, any money you make on SDS calls will be worthless when you collect. Hahahaha.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:04 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Back to the make/collect discussion...  Bwhaaahaaa

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:17 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:00 | Link to Comment pros
pros's picture

The Treasury "gifted" $500-$600billion of US debt to Fed to facilitate this transaction...

widely discussed by those in know in DC

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:09 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Treasury may have also been covertly "gifting" some Reston, VA Hedge Funds.   I read this on FOFOA.  I am still researching this I don't have any proof yet.

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:41 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

the Reston 6.  I do hope something comes out on this matter.

let's hope someone at one of the R6 sends an email to tips at zerohedge dot com

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:45 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Amen.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:17 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:04 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

Markopolos implied in his Congressional testimony that Madoff was laundering billions in drug money.  So it wouldn't surprise me to see the same with other scams.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:25 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Welcome to 1989, 1999 & 2009..  Glad to see ya made it (hehe) here PM

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:51 | Link to Comment agrotera
agrotera's picture

The public deserves to know, apparently the rest of the world knows about the PPT, according to "Move over Adam Smith: The Visible Hand of Uncle Sam" avail at www.sprott.com

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:08 | Link to Comment Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

One wonders if the recent change in the definition of "indirect buyers" at Treasury auctions enables this process?

Checked the original article- addressed, but not answered: "

As we now know, at least some of that money has been recycled into US government debt, where "indirect bidders" have been snapping up an unusually high proportion of the recent offerings.  (Note: The way Indirect bidders  are calculated has recently changed, and I am not entirely clear on how much this influences the numbers we now see….I'm working on it)."

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:01 | Link to Comment Zippyin Annapolis
Zippyin Annapolis's picture

Audit the Fed.

 

If Bernanke is Mr. Blue, who is Mr. Pink?

 

More importantly who plays Harvey Keitel?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:13 | Link to Comment waterdog
waterdog's picture

Mr. Pink is Monkey man

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:34 | Link to Comment zenith1
zenith1's picture

tentativly knwn

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:05 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 23:08 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:06 | Link to Comment buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Nothing can go wrong as long as the Great and Powerful Bernanke is in charge.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:28 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:06 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

The backside trade that helps make the 4 & 5 ceilings possible.  For the moment.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:11 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:12 | Link to Comment buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

This move is actually quite ingenius. BB has to back the agency bonds anyway, and when FCB swap for Ts he/we get to pay lower interest on that money. If the trade deficit dies it will be more difficult to manipulate the bond market after the agency paper is gone tho...

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:16 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

The BTW to the OhBTW

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:15 | Link to Comment SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

This is a very important piece, thanks for bringing it to us.

I've come up with a very useful and accurate means for evaluating whether or not the government will engage in any given activity.  Simply put, if a) the activity in question is needed to maintain government control, then b) they will do it.  There are no other considerations.  Collateral damage, loss of jobs, loss of life, loss of reputation, etc do not matter.

The ONLY means we possess to influence this behavior is in the area of their "getting away with it."

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:56 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Bingo.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:08 | Link to Comment Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

There is always the presidential pardon.

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:21 | Link to Comment TraderMark
TraderMark's picture

Tim Geithner Video: Auditing the Fed is a "line we don't want to cross"

 

http://www.fundmymutualfund.com/2009/08/tim-geithner-video-auditing-fede...

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:24 | Link to Comment max2205
max2205's picture

If he was there in front of me and there was a line, I'd cross it....

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:07 | Link to Comment Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

I want to cross it too. I also want to drag a wood chipper across it.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:23 | Link to Comment max2205
max2205's picture

Are these people just acting like they want to do something knowing they can't possibly. (Timmy droped the F bomb when this was staffed).

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. regulators plan to gauge how severe a hit banks will take from an accounting change that will force them to bring more than $1 trillion of assets back on their books, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp proposed on Wednesday.

 

The FDIC voted to seek input on whether banks need more time to build capital cushions against the assets that were once held by off-balance-sheet trusts.

 

The accounting change requires that banks move those assets back on to their books on January 1, 2010, in an attempt to bring more transparency to banks' financial statements.

 

"I think it's very appropriate that we're asking the question should we phase this in over time or not," said Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan.

 

"Some type of transactions may require a different type of capital treatment than others," Dugan told the meeting of the FDIC board.

 

Banks have used off-balance sheet vehicles to avoid reporting requirements or to reduce the amount of capital they needed to hold to offset risks.

 

Banking regulators are worried about how current capital requirements would work with the accounting change.

 

Earlier this year, the Financial Accounting Standards Board decided to eliminate a concept known as the "qualified special purpose entity" that banks have used to keep assets such as mortgage-backed securities off their books.

 

FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said regulators needed more information about how the accounting change could affect securitization markets and loan modifications.

 

(Reporting by Karey Wutkowski and Steve Eder; Writing by Rachelle Younglai; Editing by Simon Denyer)

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:44 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

thanks for posting this.....this item is a huge deal and the ABankersAssoc has been lobbying on this for months already, and hitting it VERY hard, make no mistake. Judging by this statement, "I think it's very appropriate that we're asking the question should we phase this in over time or not," said Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan." it looks to me like the ABA is making progress.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:24 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:31 | Link to Comment Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

The fed is purchasing agencies on its balance sheet. The cash goes to the sellers: the article points out the sellers may well be foreign CBs who use it to purchase USTs in their stead, effectively skewing the S/D for both sets of securities, and making indrects more willing to buy USTs.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:52 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Which at some point WILL be monetized. Those who think the US Goverment (or any government for that matter) will pay off it's debts without resorting to the printing press are delusional.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:57 | Link to Comment texpat
texpat's picture

Didn't they already monetize by buying the MBS with printed money?

i.e. Print money -> Buy MBS for printed USD -> sell treasuries for CB USD

1.25 trillion BABY!!!! Yeah Baby!!

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:42 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

In this mechanism on the net they have monetized only one set of bonds - the MBS's - the money from which has then been funneled to fund US govt.'s operations via the UST's. The creditor is still left holding UST's, which WILL be monetized at a future date.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:59 | Link to Comment texpat
texpat's picture

Oh fuck.

Thanks Gordo.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:53 | Link to Comment gator gatlin
gator gatlin's picture

What potential role does the previous gigantic FCB currency swaps play in this particular caper?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:59 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Better to take a look at Bar,SocGen,DB and the other key players in the great circle route of liquidity and the processes of stripping headers....This has been the great float

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:35 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:29 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

THE go to folks for side letter arbitrage for the mentioned entities.. At 100% before event capital.. What a ratio!

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:26 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:36 | Link to Comment Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

Looking at the Fed's balance sheet it looks like what they are doing is taking the proceeds from the "wind down" of the Maiden Lane (Bear Stearns) assets and using that to buy the FCB-held MBS. This frees up cash for the FCB's to use as indirect bidders at Treasury auctions.

The size of the Fed's balance sheet has not changed materially since 2008. The actual 'monetization' took place back then -- when the Fed took on the Maiden Lane 'assets' with newly created dollars. Once the Maiden Lane assets have been disposed of, the Fed will once again need to increase the size of its balance sheet to keep this 'shell game' going.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:44 | Link to Comment GoldmanSux
GoldmanSux's picture

Why would this be even done? The interest savings? Don't make me laugh. Is the long term plan to let agencies default? Just asking. If this proves to be the case, the Fed is committing fraud.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:52 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

We both know that when it happens it will be called responsible monetary policy... After all, they will just scoop up the paper.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:01 | Link to Comment GoldmanSux
GoldmanSux's picture

In addition to this swap, if it is happening, if the US gov't doesn't backstop agency paper with its full guarantee, the Fed, Treausury, and Obama have been executing fraud for a year or more as the agencies have been operating recklessly as defacto gov't policy arms.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:21 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

It would appear as this article discusses that when Ben & Hank decided to scoop up Fan n Fred that the guarantee was de facto, at least until the FCB's and their institutions could move out of their agency holdings.  Part and parcel of the quid.  Once this play on agency paper has run its course their belief is that this "temporary crisis in confidence" wil have also run its course and they will have successfully swapped paper on our housing stock for gov't paper...

You are absolutely correct in saying that the agencies have been operating recklessly.  On one level this could be a play to regain the paper on our housing... and the other being the need to prop up the international swap n trade flow with more predictability, on our backs.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:44 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

This way they have to monetize only one set of bonds right now - the MBS's - and not both. See my comment above.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:27 | Link to Comment zenith1
zenith1's picture

uninhabitable and more expensive to repair than tear down and rebuild.  This needs to be subtracted from inventory.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:30 | Link to Comment Marshal Ney
Marshal Ney's picture

The regulators are speculators, the referees are in the game. It's economic science-fiction.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:40 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

"This is very nearly the same path that Zimbabwe took, resulting in the complete abandonment of the Zimbabwe dollar as a unit of currency. The difference is in the complexity of the game being played, not the substance of the actions themselves."

There is only one question that I want to ask all deflationists - Is Zimbabwe facing deflation? IS IT? Last I heard, Prechter was short Zimbabwe's stock market and advising Zimbabwe residents to stay in the safety of Zimbabwean cash.

 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:01 | Link to Comment nicholsong
nicholsong's picture

I don't think I've seen a single deflationist saying "deflation forever".  To the contrary, I've seen most or maybe all of them saying we'd experience deflation for a period of time and depending upon FED actions we would either reach a balance point or rush past it into high or hyper inflation. I'm fairly confident that what this post and others lately are pointing to is that the FED will likely not have the finesse or the understanding to stop when they need to, just as I'm fairly confident that what we've been seeing up until this point is largely what the deflationists have been saying. 

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:49 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Hyperinflation is closer than most deflationists think. For example, Mish has put a timeline of at least a decade on it happening in the US. He thinks US will muddle around kinda like Japan for at least the next decade.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:28 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:16 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

Most of the world's debt was not denominated in Zimbabwe's money.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:49 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:06 | Link to Comment nicholsong
nicholsong's picture

Oh yeah this is old news. It's all timed around the return of Halley's Comet in about 80 years or so. Well, to be more precise, Halley's return plotted against the recent strikes of an unknown planetesimal near Jupiter's pole. (Unknown to J6P but of course known to the reptilian overlords who control the stock market). Cheer up citizen, your Supreme Plutocracy of Unknown Noble Kleptocrats (SPUNK) have your future well planned for you.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:13 | Link to Comment Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

Now I know. Plot disabled.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:51 | Link to Comment Sqworl
Sqworl's picture

On a brighter note:

A husband and wife were having a fine dining experience at their exclusive country club when this stunning young woman comes over to their table, gives the husband a big kiss, says she'll see him later and walks away.
His wife glares at him and says, "Who was that?"
"Oh," replies the husband, "she's my mistress."
"Well that's the last straw," says the wife. "I've had enough, I want a divorce. I am going to hire the most aggressive, meanest divorce lawyer I can find and make your life miserable."
"I can understand that," replies her husband, "but remember, if we get a divorce it will mean no more wintering in Key West, or the Caribbean, no more summers in Tuscany, no more Cadillac STS in the garage, and no more country club, and we'll have to sell the 26-room house and move to two smaller homes, but the decision is yours."

Just then, a mutual friend enters the restaurant with a gorgeous young woman on his arm.
"Who's that with Jim?" asks the wife.
"That's his mistress," says her husband.
She replies, "Ours is prettier."

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:13 | Link to Comment Project Mayhem
Project Mayhem's picture

lol

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 02:45 | Link to Comment i.knoknot
i.knoknot's picture

tnx, i needed that :^)

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:54 | Link to Comment Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

There's a very simple explanation for all this.

The government knows that a Yellowstone supereruption is imminent and many of the economic distortions since then are part of a secret decades-long preparation plan (kept secret to avoid mass chaos and the wholesale destruction of public confidence, the stock market, and America's economy).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOn3wkehluk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR1bg_Yf0T4

This at least partially explains why they:

-Created the subprime mortgage mess (to ensure that there would be plenty of foreclosed properties for the Wyoming, Utah, and Montana evacuees to move into)

-Forced the banks to substantially increase liquidity

-Expanded FEMA's powers and created the so-called "FEMA camps" during the Bush administration

-Implemented substantial tax credits for roofing and insulation in the stimulus package

-Manipulated the natural gas markets

-Invaded Iraq and Afghanistan

 

...  and much more.

This is yet another reason to buy some canned food, store some water, buy a firearm, and brush up on your survivalism skills.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 23:13 | Link to Comment texpat
texpat's picture

On that firearm thing, I dug out my Star Ultrastar 9mm, then googled up some info (manual etc), and what-the-fuck, Star are out of business.

Even bloody gun makers are falling.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:01 | Link to Comment Mos
Mos's picture

Not to mention that if just 2% of the Fed's "assets" default then the Fed is rendered insolvent.  Charles Ponzi would be proud.

 

http://mises.org/story/3281

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:02 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

Can a printing press default? To answer that question we need to ask another one: Is the paper that the printing press emanates money? If so, what makes it so?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:59 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

Why are they valuing their gold at only $44 an ounce?

Thu, 08/27/2009 - 14:13 | Link to Comment darkness (not verified)
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:06 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:55 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

No matter what a CB does, fiat currencies have a finite life and they all end in hyperinflation. That's a historical fact. Period.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:25 | Link to Comment ghostfaceinvestah
ghostfaceinvestah's picture

Wasn't it Voltaire that said paper money always returns to its intrinsic value?  Something along those lines.

Zero value = hyperinflation.  1/0 = infinity.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:44 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

hyperinflation or hyperdeflation (read:default) it will indeed happen, and if things keep going at this rate sooner rather than later.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:32 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 08/27/2009 - 10:45 | Link to Comment Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

We didn't have a pure fiat money system till the '70's.

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:13 | Link to Comment Alitak
Alitak's picture

and this is the administration that has the gall to lecture China on currency manipulation!

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:21 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:28 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:47 | Link to Comment Rollerball
Rollerball's picture

"Matrix Revolutions" - we're fighting against machines (algos) to save Zion.  What color is the cyanide pill?

Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:51 | Link to Comment MurryRothbard
MurryRothbard's picture

why does the gold market continue not to react to what is going on?

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!