China’s Predatory Lending
February 12, 2025
Some of the well-paid engineers in companies like Amazon pay about 45% of their income in taxes. They do so every year, and it seems unfair to them why the company that employs them gets away with paying about 1% taxes. Warren Buffet once famously remarked that he pays a smaller tax rate as compared […]
How the GameStop Saga is Small Investors Paying the Biggies in the Same Coin The past few weeks have seen Corporate America and the wider Investor community come to terms with the GameStop saga wherein hordes of individual investors banded together on social media platforms such as Reddit and wreaked havoc on many stocks through […]
What is Single Entry System ? Single entry accounting systems record only one side of every transaction. This happens because they use one entry to record every transaction. Therefore single entry system does not use nominal and real accounts. The emphasis is on cash and accounts receivable. Single entry accounting system can be described as […]
With the advent of technology, more and more people have started accepting digital payments. This means that corporations have to provide their customers the option to make payments using a wide variety of payment methods. Some of these payment methods are electronic whereas others are not. Commercial banks have identified the possibility of providing good […]
Scalable business models are the latest buzzword in entrepreneurial circles all across the world. Most new-age founders aspire to make their businesses more scalable. However, scalability has to be built into a business before it actually exists. It is for this reason, that the decision to scale or not becomes strategic and something that founders […]
The current crisis at the Silicon Valley Bank is a stark reminder of the dark days of 2008. Just like now, the entire banking system was in complete disarray. However, during that time, the government created the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) which was commonly known as the bailout.
After 2008, the government as well as the banks faced a huge blowback because of the bailout. This is because bailouts basically meant that the banks could enjoy their profits and distribute them to the executives when the going was good.
However, if things went downhill, the government and the taxpayer would step in to foot the bill.
The bailout was basically a privatization of profits and the socialization of losses. It had almost become a swear word in 2008.
Hence, now when the banking system seemed to be under duress because of the Silicon Valley Bank collapse, the same question was on everyone’s mind i.e. Will there be a bailout? Will the taxpayer be made to pay for the excesses done by greedy bank executives?
In this article, we will have a closer look at whether the Silicon Valley Bank was bailed out and what its impact is on the system as a whole.
The Fed seems to be completely aware of the negative connotation that the word bailout holds amongst the general population.
This is the reason why President Joe Biden and even the Fed have categorically denied that there will not be any bailout for Silicon Valley Bank.
However, it is important to note how the government defines a bailout. As per the implicit definition of the government, a bailout is when the government or the central bank intervenes to provide emergency financial assistance to shareholders of the bank in order to keep the bank afloat.
In the case of Silicon Valley Bank, both these points are not being met. Neither are the shareholders of Silicon Valley Bank being shielded from any loss nor will the bank stay in existence.
The shareholders of the Silicon Valley Bank have lost almost all their capital in the $15 billion write-down. Also, since the bank does not have any equity, it will be closed down and replaced by a new management that does have equity.
It is for this reason that the Fed and the United States government have been saying that there will not be a bailout. However, this statement is misleading to some extent. This is because the Fed and the United States government will use public money to ease the situation at the Silicon Valley Bank and this might result in some losses for the United States taxpayer.
The Silicon Valley Bank fallout has been managed by the Fed in a different manner. Instead of trying to save the Silicon Valley Bank, the Fed has let it go bankrupt. However, at the same time, the Fed has come up with a controversial program wherein they will lend money to the banks against securities that they hold.
Now, lending against government securities is a common practice that has been present in the banking system for decades. It has generally been viewed as a safe way to lend money. So, what is controversial about the Fed lending money against securities?
Well, it seems like the Fed is lending money against the original value of the securities. This is absurd since the market value of the securities has drastically changed as a result of markdowns. These markdowns have been caused by interest rate increases.
Let’s understand this with the help of an example.
Let’s say that the market value of government security was $100. Because of interest rate increases, the current market value of this security is $85. This means that ideally, the Fed should lend $85 if it is taking the security with a market value of $85 as collateral. However, this is not the case! The Fed is lending $100 against the security which is being valued at $85 in the market.
Hence, the Fed is virtually giving away money to the banks to temporarily cover their losses. The assumption is that these loans will build the confidence of the depositors and they will not try to withdraw money from the banks. However, what exactly happens if the current market value of the security falls even further, let’s say to $70 and the banks are not able to pay back their loans?
The Fed is using taxpayer money in order to temporarily prop up the banking system in the hope that the crisis will subside over a one-year period. However, in the course of doing that, the Fed has literally underwritten the interest rate risk of the entire market!
It is important to note that the Fed and the government of the United States have unintendedly lowered the threshold limit of risks in the market.
The actions the Fed takes today end up creating expectations for the future. Hence, going forward the Fed will be expected to cover all the deposits in any bank. This defeats the entire purpose of the Federal Deposit Insurance Committee (FDIC) and makes it meaningless. If all the deposits are implicitly insured, the $250000 guarantee seems pointless.
Hence, it can be said that the actions of the Fed jeopardize public money in order to prop up private banks. If all goes well, it is likely that the taxpayer will not face a loss. However, at the present moment, their money is being lent out by overvaluing risky investments.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *