The GSE debate is resurfacing, just like all the other Hallowe’en zombies:
President Barack Obama and lawmakers from both parties have called for the two mortgage-finance companies to be replaced by a new U.S. housing system. While the official position hasn’t changed, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators writing legislation is grappling with how to ensure that changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac don’t disrupt the recovering housing market.
Some Democrats said they are leery of engineering a switch that would liquidate the government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, leaving it to private entities to risk their own capital on home loans.
…
Since they nearly collapsed during the 2008 credit crisis, the two companies have drawn $187.5 billion from taxpayers and have been considered too politically toxic to be preserved. While the U.S. holds controlling stakes, the outcome will affect private investors including hedge funds Perry Capital and Paulson and Co., which have accumulated preferred shares and have spent months lobbying for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to be recapitalized.
…
Driving investor hopes and the change in tone are the record profits Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (FMCC) have been posting as the housing market rebounds from the worst recession since the 1930s. The companies are required to send almost all of those profits back to the Treasury. So far, they’ve remitted about $146 billion, which under terms of the bailout counts as a return on the U.S. investment rather than a repayment.
Shareholders including Perry Capital and Fairholme Funds Inc. have sued the U.S., charging that Treasury is expropriating the value of its investors’ preferred shares in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those suits are adding urgency to lawmakers’ efforts.
James Hamilton of Econbrowser commented in August:
I have not seen the details of the specific proposals favored by Senators Corker and Warner or President Obama. If the suggestion is to return Fannie and Freddie to the status of supposedly non-governmental entities, insisting that this time the government really, truly would not bail them out if they get into trouble, I would not support the plan. We tried that idea, and it’s just not operational. The notion that a truly private company could plausibly earn its profit by guaranteeing trillions of dollars in mortgages is on its face implausible, because there is no private strategy that could truly diversify or hedge away the risk associated with major aggregate disruptions. What Fannie or Freddie really did was “guarantee” the loans as long as times were good, and count on federal assistance when times were bad.
If instead the proposal is to keep Fannie and Freddie in government receivership, and with that authority gradually slow and eventually stop the GSEs’ issuance of new debt and guarantees, then I am all on board.
The Tea Party is in a tizzy about China:
The U.S. must “shoulder its responsibility” as the world’s biggest economy and holder of the main reserve currency and “take concrete measures before Oct. 17 to avoid a default,” Deputy Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao said at a briefing with reporters yesterday in Beijing in which he referred to “the attitude of the Tea Party.”
Lawmakers tied to the Tea Party didn’t appreciate the advice, even from a nation that holds almost a quarter of foreign-owned Treasuries — $1.28 trillion as of July.
“They need to stay out of our politics,” Representative Blake Farenthold, a Tea Party-backed Texas Republican, said in an interview. China’s criticism “almost sounds like a threat,” said Representative Ted Yoho, a Florida Republican. “For them to say something derogatory about the Tea Party, I take offense to that.”
It would appear that the Tea Party needs remedial education about the relationship between “paying the piper” and “calling the tune”. But they may have actually gone too far this time:
But some of them had to be queasy when they saw an NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll last week: Only 24 percent of Americans had a favorable view of the Republican Party, the lowest ever. By eight points, the public said it preferred a Congress controlled by the Democrats over one in Republican hands. Positive feelings toward the Tea Party fell to an all-time low.
Meanwhile, fear is taking its toll:
Investors pulled $41.6 billion from U.S. money-market mutual funds in the past week, or 1.6 percent of total assets, as concern grew over lawmakers’ inability to strike a budget deal that would avert a default on Treasury securities.
The exodus in the seven days through yesterday was punctuated by the withdrawal of $21.6 billion on Oct. 11, according to research firm Crane Data LLC in Westborough, Massachusetts. Investors pulled $15.7 billion in the preceeding seven days.
While the spike appeared connected to the approaching debt ceiling, it was exacerbated by companies moving cash to make bi-monthly payroll and meet a quarterly tax payment deadline on the next business day, Peter Crane, president of Crane Data, said in an interview.
The capitalist folk hero has commented on US bank regulation:
Billionaire investor Warren Buffett said JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon will withstand litigation and legal probes that led his bank to take a $7.2 billion charge in the third quarter.
“If a cop follows you for 500 miles (800 kilometers), you’re going to get a ticket,” Buffett, the chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), said today in an interview on CNBC. “And believe me, you’ve had a lot of cops that have been following a long time, and they’re going to write some tickets.”
…
Banks rely on so many licenses that the threat of criminal charges can undermine their business, Buffett said. The billionaire served as interim chairman and CEO of Salomon Inc. in 1991 and 1992 as the company sought to recover from involvement in a Treasury debt auction scandal.
“A large financial institution just can’t take that,” he said. “You are in a terrible negotiating position, and I’ve been in that position. If they want to take a pound of flesh, they can take a pound of flesh. But if they want to take a ton of flesh, they can take that, too.”
The Feds have succeeded in driving away foreign capital:
Egyptian telecom investor Naguib Sawiris vows to never again consider investing in Canada after the federal government’s decision to block a $520-million bid for Manitoba Telecom Services Inc.’s Allstream division, according to a published report.
“I am finished with Canada, I tell you,” Mr. Sawiris is quoted in a lengthy article in Ahram Online, the English-language website of Egyptian news organization Al-Ahram.
I was very pleased to learn of a proposal to mitigate the effects of the dairy monopoly:
The Canadian government has struck a tentative trade deal with the European Union but is now seeking the consent of all the provinces before agreeing to the accord, sources say.
…
The development comes after a breakthrough in long-running talks where Ottawa agreed to more than double the amount of European cheese that can enter this country without facing steep protectionist tariffs.
Getting unanimous provincial consent sounds like a job and a half, but perhaps somebody will convince Marois that Muslims don’t eat dairy products. Regrettably:
NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair signalled he’s girding to fight the deal on the grounds it would allow in more than 13,500 additional tonnes of European cheese each year, a development that threatens to crowd out Canadian product.
I have sent the following eMail to my NDP MP:
I was very disappointed to learn ([LINK]) that the NDP intends to oppose an increase in the amount of European cheese that can enter this country without facing steep protectionist tariffs.
Why does the NDP favour charging single mums and kids extortionate rates for their dairy products in order to prop up a grossly inefficient industry that has as its main purpose the subsidization of bucolic lifestyles for the favoured few?
Why are you making it more difficult for working Canadians to provide nutritious food to their families?
But don’t worry, Big Government fans! There are plenty of little piggies waiting for their turn at the trough:
Newspaper publisher turned wannabe oilman David Black says he’s looking for $8-billion in loan guarantees from Ottawa to help cover the costs of his planned $26-billion oil refinery project. Mr. Black argues the undertaking is crucial to the country’s economy, and could even help build the energy partnership between Alberta and British Columbia.
It’s a black day for the professionalism of the Canadian investment management industry, such as it is. It looks like the OTPP’s foray into politics (sneered at on October 7) comes straight from the top:
Ontario’s proposal to create a voluntary disclosure rule to boost women on boards is unlikely to cause much improvement and will likely have to be turned into a quota, warns the head of Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan.
Speaking at a public forum Wednesday hosted by the Ontario Securities Commission, Jim Leech said Canada has a smaller proportion of women on corporate boards than countries like Turkey and Poland. He said voluntary disclosure rules can be tried for three or four years, but will probably end up being rejected as inadequate.
“Let’s skip this intermediate step we don’t think is going to work,” Mr. Leech proposed.
Teachers has urged regulators to instead require all public company boards to have at least three women directors.
Maybe Leech is sucking political arse in hopes of a position with the proposed Ontario Pension Plan.
Ottawa’s busy with another idiotic throne speech:
“Our government will introduce balanced-budget legislation,” the speech, read by Governor-General David Johnston Wednesday, said.
…
There are loopholes in the balanced-budget legislation if the economic turns sour. “It will require balanced budgets during normal economic times and [set] concrete timelines for returning to balance in the event of an economic crisis,” the Throne Speech said.
Balanced-budget legislation has been criticized as gimmicky because a future government could simply pass a bill repealing it.
So Spend-Every-Penny is up to his usual tricks – claiming that a balanced budget is a major accomplishment, while doing absolutely nothing to run a surplus in good times.
There’s an interesting trend on Wall Street:
Inside One Equity Partners are as many as eight Olympians and even more of their world- or Olympic gold medals, said managing partner Dick Cashin, who competed internationally as a rower and now hires former college athletes while recommending others do the same.
“Everybody thinks sports is about winning,” says the 60-year-old Cashin, who didn’t earn a medal as a member of the 1972 U.S. Olympic team. “For me, it’s more about losing and then figuring out a way to win. It’s those things that make working with athletes and hiring former athletes a reasonable thing to consider.”
I don’t have the experience to endorse the idea – and, more importantly, I don’t have the experience for you guys to accept any endorsement of mine as meaning anything – but there is a similarity to my favouring of science grads. Science grads make great analytical employees because they have the attitude that for every question, there is exactly one right answer. We can’t get there, but we can get close, and the closer your answer is to the Platonic ideal, the better it is. An athlete’s win/loss mentality is similar. Leave second place to the Arts students.
DBRS has confirmed LB.PR.E (PerpetualDiscount) and LB.PR.F (FixedReset) at Pfd-3(low) with a Positive Trend:
Laurentian’s improved earnings profile has contributed to its ability to sustain profitability from core businesses, despite a slowing Québec economy. Segment and geographic diversification continues to improve with the growth of B2B Bank (organically and through acquisitions). Notwithstanding, geographic concentration continues to be a challenge, with 62% of the loans based in Québec at the end of Q3 2013. The Bank has been able to generate consistently respectable levels of profitability in the face of maintaining conservative credit and financial risk profiles. There have been some gains made in Laurentian’s expense ratio from 2012 to the first nine months of 2013, but the cost structure remains high.
DBRS has confirmed CWB.PR.A at Pfd-3(high) [Stable]:
CWB’s most important strengths are its strong asset quality as evidenced by its very long history of low write-off rates, its proven niche strategy using relationship-based lending, its low cost base (partially due to business mix) and its strong internal capital generation. Additionally, funding diversification has improved over the past several years. CWB recently recorded its 101st consecutive profitable quarter.
Challenges remain, including concentration in the loan book, both geographically (Alberta and British Columbia) and by industry (commercial, construction and real estate lending), although the secured nature of the loan book and low write-off rates suggest this issue has been well managed throughout the Bank’s history.
It was a mildly negative day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts off 2bp, FixedResets losing 17bp and DeemedRetractibles down 3bp. Given such lack of movement the Performance Highlights table is surprisingly lengthy, featuring losing FixedResets. Volume was above average.
Update: US uncertainty resolved… for a while:
The U.S. Congress voted to halt the 16-day government shutdown and raise the U.S. debt limit, ending the nation’s fiscal impasse.
The House of Representatives voted 285-144 to clear a measure that now heads to President Barack Obama for his signature. The House vote was less than three hours after the Senate passed the bill, 81-18.
…
The agreement negotiated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell will fund the government at Republican-backed spending levels through Jan. 15, 2014, and suspend the debt limit through Feb. 7, setting up another round of confrontations then.
All of the votes against the proposal in the Senate were from Republicans. One senator, Republican James Inhofe of Oklahoma, was absent.
HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices
These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices
Values are provisional and are finalized monthly |
| Index |
Mean
Current
Yield
(at bid) |
Median
YTW |
Median
Average
Trading
Value |
Median
Mod Dur
(YTW) |
Issues |
Day’s Perf. |
Index Value |
| Ratchet |
0.00 % |
0.00 % |
0 |
0.00 |
0 |
0.0633 % |
2,444.4 |
| FixedFloater |
4.32 % |
3.58 % |
28,972 |
18.26 |
1 |
0.0000 % |
3,888.9 |
| Floater |
2.77 % |
2.98 % |
63,588 |
19.78 |
5 |
0.0633 % |
2,639.3 |
| OpRet |
4.62 % |
2.77 % |
63,971 |
0.45 |
3 |
-0.0769 % |
2,642.5 |
| SplitShare |
4.76 % |
5.10 % |
64,290 |
3.99 |
6 |
0.0540 % |
2,948.0 |
| Interest-Bearing |
0.00 % |
0.00 % |
0 |
0.00 |
0 |
-0.0769 % |
2,416.3 |
| Perpetual-Premium |
5.83 % |
3.96 % |
108,961 |
0.08 |
7 |
0.0725 % |
2,280.7 |
| Perpetual-Discount |
5.58 % |
5.61 % |
159,522 |
14.44 |
30 |
-0.0204 % |
2,332.7 |
| FixedReset |
4.98 % |
3.77 % |
230,721 |
3.41 |
85 |
-0.1669 % |
2,441.0 |
| Deemed-Retractible |
5.15 % |
4.42 % |
191,828 |
6.85 |
43 |
-0.0345 % |
2,372.4 |
| Performance Highlights |
| Issue |
Index |
Change |
Notes |
| BAM.PR.X |
FixedReset |
-2.49 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 21.28
Evaluated at bid price : 21.56
Bid-YTW : 4.50 % |
| TRP.PR.C |
FixedReset |
-1.78 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 21.67
Evaluated at bid price : 22.11
Bid-YTW : 3.98 % |
| IFC.PR.A |
FixedReset |
-1.27 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2025-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.05
Bid-YTW : 4.34 % |
| MFC.PR.K |
FixedReset |
-1.14 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2025-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 23.39
Bid-YTW : 4.76 % |
| TRP.PR.A |
FixedReset |
-1.05 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 23.00
Evaluated at bid price : 23.50
Bid-YTW : 4.11 % |
| SLF.PR.H |
FixedReset |
-1.01 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2025-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.61
Bid-YTW : 4.23 % |
| CGI.PR.D |
SplitShare |
1.28 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Soft Maturity
Maturity Date : 2023-06-14
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 23.80
Bid-YTW : 4.43 % |
| CIU.PR.C |
FixedReset |
1.79 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 19.34
Evaluated at bid price : 19.34
Bid-YTW : 4.36 % |
| GWO.PR.N |
FixedReset |
1.88 % |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2025-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 22.17
Bid-YTW : 4.64 % |
| Volume Highlights |
| Issue |
Index |
Shares
Traded |
Notes |
| BMO.PR.P |
FixedReset |
102,522 |
RBC crossed 100,000 at 26.17.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2015-02-25
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 26.13
Bid-YTW : 2.59 % |
| BAM.PF.C |
Perpetual-Discount |
50,267 |
TD crossed 17,000 at 19.55.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 19.55
Evaluated at bid price : 19.55
Bid-YTW : 6.27 % |
| GWO.PR.I |
Deemed-Retractible |
30,513 |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2025-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 21.18
Bid-YTW : 6.49 % |
| BMO.PR.M |
FixedReset |
29,113 |
RBC crossed 15,100 at 24.64.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2022-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.59
Bid-YTW : 3.76 % |
| BAM.PF.D |
Perpetual-Discount |
27,075 |
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 20.00
Evaluated at bid price : 20.00
Bid-YTW : 6.19 % |
| TD.PR.R |
Deemed-Retractible |
25,444 |
TD crossed 25,000 at 25.97.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-04-30
Maturity Price : 25.75
Evaluated at bid price : 25.96
Bid-YTW : 3.45 % |
| There were 42 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares. |
| Wide Spread Highlights |
| Issue |
Index |
Quote Data and Yield Notes |
| PWF.PR.A |
Floater |
Quote: 22.31 – 23.29
Spot Rate : 0.9800
Average : 0.6621
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 22.08
Evaluated at bid price : 22.31
Bid-YTW : 2.35 % |
| TRI.PR.B |
Floater |
Quote: 19.75 – 20.49
Spot Rate : 0.7400
Average : 0.6263
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 19.75
Evaluated at bid price : 19.75
Bid-YTW : 2.67 % |
| MFC.PR.K |
FixedReset |
Quote: 23.39 – 23.70
Spot Rate : 0.3100
Average : 0.1971
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2025-01-31
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 23.39
Bid-YTW : 4.76 % |
| FTS.PR.J |
Perpetual-Discount |
Quote: 22.41 – 22.89
Spot Rate : 0.4800
Average : 0.3750
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 22.10
Evaluated at bid price : 22.41
Bid-YTW : 5.36 % |
| BAM.PR.G |
FixedFloater |
Quote: 22.01 – 22.53
Spot Rate : 0.5200
Average : 0.4284
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 22.42
Evaluated at bid price : 22.01
Bid-YTW : 3.58 % |
| TRP.PR.B |
FixedReset |
Quote: 20.16 – 20.49
Spot Rate : 0.3300
Average : 0.2540
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2043-10-16
Maturity Price : 20.16
Evaluated at bid price : 20.16
Bid-YTW : 4.05 % |
