Cyprus: Deposit insurance and moral hazard

The outcry over Cyprus levy on depositors in defaulting banks raises the question: Why were depositors not more wary of where they deposited their funds? Not all banks are created equal. The reason is deposit insurance for deposits under €100,000 implied that the government would stand behind its banks and rescue depositors should the banks ever default. The problem is that no one considered the possibility that all the banks would suffer losses sufficient that the government would be forced to default on both its explicit and implied obligations.

Some time ago I wrote about the moral hazard of deposit insurance:

Deposit Insurance: When too much of a good idea becomes a bad idea

Deposit insurance was introduced in the 1930s and saved the US banking system from extinction. Administered by the FDIC, and funded by a levy on all banking institutions, deposit insurance, however, encourages moral hazard. Depositors need not concern themselves with the solvency of the bank where they deposit their funds so long as deposits are FDIC insured. High-risk institutions are able to compete for deposits on an equal footing with well-run, low-risk competitors. This inevitably leads to higher failure rates, as in the Savings & Loan crisis of the 1980s.

The FDIC does a good job of policing deposit-takers, but no regulator can substitute for market forces. Deposit insurance is critical during times of crisis, but should be scaled back when the crisis has passed. Either limit insured deposits to say $20,000 or only insure deposits to say 90% of value, where the depositor takes the first loss of 10%. That should be sufficient to keep depositors mindful as to where they bank. And restore the competitive advantage to well-run institutions.

Requiring depositors to take the first loss of 10 percent should be standard practice for deposit insurance. The same should hold true for bank creditors. But we need to distinguish between insolvency — where liabilities exceed assets — and a liquidity event where the central bank is only called on to provide temporary respite. If the bank is rescued from insolvency by the regulator, bond holders should be required to take an equivalent haircut — painful yet not life-threatening. No one is entitled to a free ride. And bank shareholders, if a there is a bail-out, should lose everything — similar to the Swedish approach in the 1990s.

Cyprus Deposit Levy: No Panic Yet But Scary Long-Term Consequences – Forbes

Karl Whelan, Professor of Economics at University College, Dublin reminds us:

….the fact that we don’t see lines at ATMs in Spain and Italy doesn’t mean there isn’t a bank run going on. The Northern Rock episode was a complete anomaly. Modern bank runs stem from people pushing buttons to execute electronic withdrawals of large amounts of funds. For example, I was living in Ireland in 2010 when non-residents pulled €186 billion out of Irish banks between the end of July and the end of December. This was over 100% of Irish GDP and yet there wasn’t a single sign of panic among retail depositors.

Read more at Cyprus Deposit Levy: No Panic Yet But Scary Long-Term Consequences – Forbes.

J.P. Morgan, Goldman Get a Dose of Fed's Reserve | WSJ.com

David Reilly reports on the Fed’s latest stress tests:

The passes show how far big U.S. banks have come since the financial crisis. But capital levels seen under the tests, and taking into account the capital-return plans, weren’t especially strong. Tier 1 common ratios for J.P. Morgan and Goldman, for example, were only marginally above the 5% minimum needed.

What’s more, leverage ratios including capital returns are particularly thin: Of the six biggest banks, four had ratios below 5%. While above the test’s 3% minimum, such levels wouldn’t give banks tremendous room to maneuver in a crisis.

The leverage ratios are particularly telling because they don’t allow for risk-weighting of assets. That approach is coming under increased criticism for potentially allowing banks to mask the true level of risk on their books.

Read more at HEARD ON THE STREET: J.P. Morgan, Goldman Get a Dose of Fed's Reserve – WSJ.com.

ZERVOS: 'This Is A Nuclear War On Savings And Wealth' – Business Insider

Joe Weisenthal reports on Jefferies strategist David Zervos’ latest note:

What happened to Cyprus on Friday evening was one of the most significant developments in the Eurozone since the Greek election last summer. To tax the bank deposits of savers sends an ominous message to the entire global investment community. All of us should really take a moment to consider what the governments of Europe have done. To be clear, they initiated a surprise assault on the precautionary savings of their own people. Such a move should send shock waves across the entire population of the developed world.

Read more at ZERVOS: 'This Is A Nuclear War On Savings And Wealth' – Business Insider.

NGDP level targeting – the true Free Market alternative (we try again) | The Market Monetarist

Scott Sumner suggests that NGDP targeting is a far more conservative approach than the current inflation targeting practiced by the Fed and many other central banks:

Most of the blogging Market Monetarists have their roots in a strong free market tradition and nearly all of us would probably describe ourselves as libertarians or classical liberal economists who believe that economic allocation is best left to market forces. Therefore most of us would also tend to agree with general free market positions regarding for example trade restrictions or minimum wages and generally consider government intervention in the economy as harmful.

I think that NGDP targeting is totally consistent with these general free market positions – in fact I believe that NGDP targeting is the monetary policy regime which best ensures well-functioning and undistorted free markets.

And here explains why inflation is not a threat under NGDP targeting:

Inflation will be higher under NGDP targeting. This is obviously wrong. Over the long-run the central bank can choose whatever inflation rate it wants. If the central bank wants 2% inflation as long-term target then it will choose an NGDP growth path, which is compatible which this. If the long-term growth rate of real GDP is 2% then the central bank should target 4% NGDP growth path. This will ensure 2% inflation in the long run.

Read more at NGDP level targeting – the true Free Market alternative (we try again) | The Market Monetarist.

Fed's Fisher: Too-big-to-fail banks are crony capitalists | Reuters

Pedro Nicolaci da Costa reports

The largest U.S. banks are “practitioners of crony capitalism,” need to be broken up to ensure they are no longer considered too big to fail, and continue to threaten financial stability, a top Federal Reserve official said on Saturday……

[Richard Fisher, president of the Dallas Fed] said the existence of banks that are seen as likely to receive government bailouts if they fail gives them an unfair advantage, hurting economic competitiveness.

Read more at Fed's Fisher: Too-big-to-fail banks are crony capitalists | Reuters.

Dousing the flames with gasoline

We are in the fifth year of recovery from the worst collapse of global financial markets in more than 50 years fueled by massive debt expansion, with non-financial debt rising as a percentage of GDP from 50% in the 1980s to almost 100% in 2008.

Household Credit Market Debt as % of GDP

Household debt subsequently fell to 80% of GDP during the GFC as households diverted income away from consumption to reduce debt. But now we are starting to see worrying signs: consumer debt is again rising as a percentage of disposable income.

Consumer Debt % of Disposable Income

Corporate bond yields have fallen to lows last seen in the 1960s.

Yields on Baa Corporate Bonds

Interest margins for large banks are falling

Large Bank Interest Margins


Yahoo: Steve Keen Interview

(Click on the image to open the Yahoo: Steve Keen interview in

Expanding debt: Dousing the flames with gasoline

We are now in the fifth year of recovery from the worst financial crisis in 50 years — fueled by expanding household debt, rising from 50% of GDP in the 1980s to close to 100% in 2008. Contraction since the GFC has brought US household debt back to 80% of GDP…

Household Debt as % of GDP

But a worrying sign is that consumer debt has started to rise
Consumer Debt as a % of Disposable Income

And Steve Keen points out that margin debt is also rising, fueling the latest stock market rally.

Yahoo: Steve Keen Interview
[click on the image to view the video in a separate window]

Holding interest rates at artificially low levels for an extended period risks fueling another credit bubble. The Fed/central bank needs to react quickly to expanding credit in any area of the economy. We all hope for a recovery, but it must be sustainable — with consumption fueled by rising employment rather than rising debt — and not another debt-fueled boom-then-bust.

S&P 500 tests 2007 high

Dow Jones Industrial Average has broken through its previous high at 14,000. Long-term (13-week) Twiggs Money Flow oscillating above zero indicates strong buying pressure.
S&P 500 Index
Bellwether transport stock Fedex breakout above $100 signals rising economic activity.
Fedex

The S&P 500 is testing its 2007 high at 1550. Rising 13-week Twiggs Money Flow indicates strong buying pressure. Reversal below the latest trendline is unlikely at present but would warn of a correction. Target for the current advance is 1600*.

S&P 500 Index

* Target calculation: 1475 + ( 1475 – 1350 ) = 1600

VIX Volatility Index is headed for its 2005 lows at 0.10. While this coincided with the start of a ($SPX) bull market in 1995, it also occurred just before the peak in 2007; so does not offer much reassurance. Breakout above the quarterly high at 0.20 would be a warning sign.
VIX Index
The Nasdaq 100 broke resistance at 2800 despite bearish divergences on both 13-week Twiggs Momentum and 13-week Twiggs Money Flow. Reversal below the latest rising trendline would warn of a correction, while follow-through above 2900 would signal an advance to 3300*. Only breach of primary support at 2500 would signal a reversal.
Nasdaq 100 Index

* Target calculation: 2900 + ( 2900 – 2500 ) = 3300

Rising debt indicates consumers are once again spending. While there are still structural flaws in the US economy, the market is gaining momentum and the current advance shows no signs of ending.

Philip Maymin, Why Financial Regulation is Doomed to Fail | Library of Economics and Liberty

Philip Maymin highlights a problem with volatility:

…..securities with historically low volatility tended to have almost twice as much subsequent risk, while those with historically high volatility tended to have almost half as much subsequent risk. For both the riskiest and least risky securities, therefore, historical risk is a statistical illusion.

He further points out that regulation encourages banks to act in concert, increasing systemic risk, while deposit insurance reduces the level of self-imposed discipline among banks.

Read more at Philip Maymin, Why Financial Regulation is Doomed to Fail | Library of Economics and Liberty.