The US banking recovery is a sham

By Associate Editor David Stevenson Jul 16, 2010

David Stevenson

Share with
friends:

Comments (9) Print this article

Let's hear it for the bankers!

There may be plenty of gloom gathering elsewhere. But the moneylenders – or some of them at least – seem to be doing very nicely. For example, US giant JP Morgan Chase has just revealed a staggering 76% jump in its second-quarter profits.

So is it safe to buy US bank shares again?

No. Those bumper profits are nothing like as good as they appear on the surface. Nor will the figures set to be reported by other US lenders be as good as they first appear.

What's more, the sector could be about to go sour again...

Recommended reading

Bank profits are higher than anyone expected

Racking up a $4.8bn profit in just three months is no mean achievement for anyone. But in an industry supposed to be at death's door two years ago, it's particularly noteworthy.

Yet that's what JP Morgan Chase, America's second biggest bank as measured by assets, has just done. Not only was the firm's quarterly profit up by more than 75%, it proved far better than even the most optimistic estimate by the experts.

What's more, it's part of a steadily rising trend in improved results.

The chart below shows JPMorgan's recent quarterly profits. These have now climbed right back to 2007's high point. That's nothing short of amazing. And it's more than enough to get bank bulls quite excited again.


Source: Bloomberg

But hang on a minute. Maybe there's a con trick being played here.

For one thing, JP Morgan hasn't achieved any 'real' growth. The bank's revenues actually fell by 8%. Investment banking and fixed-income trading results both dropped.

So where did all the money come from?

The figures aren't as good as they first seem

Well, the bank only turned in such a 'good' result because it slashed its "provision for credit losses" by two thirds, from $9.7bn to $3.4bn. In other words, all (and more) of JP Morgan's latest profit was due to the bank making a much lower allowance for bad debts – loans that could go sour because the debtors can't repay to the bank the money they've borrowed.

Fine, the bank's accountants may have called this right. But there have to be question marks. "People can debate whether that's artificially inflating the quality of earnings," says Christopher Wolfe at Fitch Ratings. "If you think banks have identified their problem assets, then that's valid. If you think banks have problem loans they haven't come clean about, then that would be a concern."

But this isn't just about bad debts – or JP Morgan. As Bradley Keoun and David Henry at Bloomberg point out, other US banks will be pulling strings to make their results look good: "Bank of America and Wall Street firms are now depending on an accounting benefit last used in the depths of the credit crisis to prop up their results".

New accounting rules artificially inflate earnings

The arcane-sounding FASB 157 rule may seem deadly dull, but for bankers it's very important – and very controversial, too. Here's how it works. When banks want to borrow money, they often do so by selling bonds. These are in effect IOUs. FASB 157 lets these banks pretend they'll buy back their IOUs at current market rates, even though they may have no real intention of doing so.

Now let's say that a bank's IOUs drop in price – for example, because it's reckoned by the market to be dodgier than was previously thought, meaning that the risk of holding those IOUs rises.

Although the face value – the actual amount owed on the IOUs – stays the same, the bank is now allowed to assume that it owes less money to its creditors. So it can book the difference between the previous IOU value and the current, lower price as a profit.

Bank of America, the biggest US bank by assets, may record a $1bn second-quarter gain from writing down its debts to their market value, says Keith Horowitz at Citigroup. Morgan Stanley will also probably record $1bn in such debt valuation adjustments in the second quarter, he says, equal to 60% of his estimate for the firm's pre-tax income.


Special FREE report from MoneyWeek magazine: When will house prices bottom out - and how will you know?

  • Why UK property prices are going to fall 50%
  • When it will be time to get back in and buy up half price property

Chris Kotowski at Oppenheimer is very clear what this really means. It's an accounting "abomination", he says, because fluctuations in the value of the debt don't change the amount the banks owe.

Then there's 'mark to model'. To cut a long story short, this lets banks put valuations on their assets that are more likely than not to be higher than a true market price. In turn, that difference can be added back to boost profits.

Banks will be in the firing line as the economy turns down

For investors who've tried to assess stocks in the sector by taking their profit numbers at face value, it's all a huge worry.

Even worse, for banks this could now be as good as it gets. As the US economy heads into double dip territory, which looks increasingly likely, judging by yesterday's US economic data, lenders are going to be right in the firing line.

Extra losses on commercial property, home loans, consumer loans, credit cards… you name it, America's lenders will really feel the pinch again if the economy nosedives. And bank profits could be crushed. Superstar banking analyst Meredith Whitney – one of the few to foresee the sector's 2007 problems – still pulls no punches. Last week she slashed her second-quarter earnings estimate for Goldman Sachs from $4.75/share to $1.70 due to a "heinous trading environment".

Already 90 US regional banks have gone bust this year. Many more could follow. In short, it could all get very nasty indeed.

Meanwhile, the US senate has just approved a new bank regulation bill, which is not good news for big American lenders. We'll have more on this later today. But it all means that instead of buying US banks right now, selling seems to make much more sense.

You may already have done that. But if you fancy a punt on bank share prices falling sharply, there are ways of doing so. Like buying the Ultra Short Financial Proshares ETF (NYSE: SKF). It 'short sells' financial stocks – for every 1% the sector drops, the ETF rises around 2% (although it doesn't track precisely because of the way it's structured). Of course, it's risky – shorting always is. And you have to get your timing right. But if you reckon bank shares are heading south, this could be one to watch.

Our recommended article for today

Six reasons why we're headed for a double-dip recession

As leading economic indicators point down, a double-dip recession is looking more and more likely, says Bengt Saelensminde. Here, he gives six reasons why, and explains how to safeguard your wealth.

Comments (9)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Alastair Morrison

    (16 July 2010, 11:16AM)  Complain about this comment

    This may be a good call, but UK investors must be aware that nearly all foreign listed (and some UK listed) ETF gains are taxed as income (not capital). So many investors could be paying 50% tax to HMRC!!. The tax rules are very complicated - but I am advised losses can be treated as capital losses. There was a Big article in FT money section July 1oth on this.

    Money Week please note - you have been a big advocate of ETFs, you need to make people aware of these disadvantages and also lobby the ETF industry to be clearer and upfront of this problems

  • 2. alex

    (16 July 2010, 11:48AM)  Complain about this comment

    I disagree with your conclusions, but hats off to you for being the first person in MW to be aware of, and refer to FAS 157.

  • 3. Steve

    (16 July 2010, 01:34PM)  Complain about this comment

    ETFs' tax status can be checked on the UK Inland Revenue's lists of 'reporting funds' at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/collective/cis-centre.htm.

  • 4. gs

    (16 July 2010, 11:17PM)  Complain about this comment

    Am I correct in understanding therefore that if you take it to the "nth" degree, the closer a bank gets (or is perceived to get) to default, the lower its debt liabilities fall?...Therefore the bank's profits (from this sham at least) would peak right at the point when it was closect to or in default/bankruptcy? This speaks volumes.

  • 5. Pieter Schoonheim Samara

    (18 July 2010, 12:09PM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 1
    See my articles below on the Federal Government’s collusion with special interest Wall Street too big to fail banks and related Oligarchs (GE, etc) as inthe 1930’s, where a stealth change from hold to maturity accounting to mark to market accounting enabled the collapse intended this time for government to take over the ownership and control of Private Sector capital and production/productivity to itself, the Federal Reserve and these special interests.

    Regime change articles:
    1/ Obama’s “Regime Change” of Socialist Control 06/17/10
    http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/06/samara-obamas-regime-change-of-socialist-control.php
    2/ Capitalism's economic mechanism, versus Socialism's economic mechanism: Part One 05/25/10 http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=6133

  • 6. Pieter Schoonheim Samara

    (18 July 2010, 12:11PM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 2 (articles 3-5)
    See my articles below on the Federal Government’s collusion with special interest Wall Street too big to fail banks and related Oligarchs (GE, etc) as inthe 1930’s, where a stealth change from hold to maturity accounting to mark to market accounting enabled the collapse intended this time for government to take over the ownership and control of Private Sector capital and production/productivity to itself, the Federal Reserve and these special interests.

    Regime change articles 3-5
    3/ Goldman Sachs Short Sales Based on Insider Information That The Banking Sector Would Collapse In November 2007
    http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=6127
    4/ The Myth that the subprime market caused the collapse of 2007 and 2008: Part Two 05/25/10 http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=6132

  • 7. Pieter Schoonheim Samara

    (18 July 2010, 12:14PM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 3: (articles 5-6)
    See my articles below on the Federal Government’s collusion with special interest Wall Street too big to fail banks and related Oligarchs (GE, etc) as inthe 1930’s, where a stealth change from hold to maturity accounting to mark to market accounting enabled the collapse intended this time for government to take over the ownership and control of Private Sector capital and production/productivity to itself, the Federal Reserve and these special interests.

    Regime change articles:
    5/ Empowering the Private Sector and Restoring wealth creation through the reversal of one stealth regulatory change made November 9, 2007
    http://admc24-7city.com/files/V/empowering_the_private_sector_and_restoring_wealth_creation_through_the_reversal_of_one_stealth_regulatory_cha.pdf
    6/ Freedom versus Enslavement 05/19/10
    http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=6108

  • 8. Pieter Schoonheim Samara

    (18 July 2010, 12:16PM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 4: (articles 7-8)
    See my articles below on the Federal Government’s collusion with special Wall Street too big to fail banks and related Oligarchs (GE, etc).

    Regime change articles:
    7/ “The Theory of Baking Economics (Short)” 10/29/08 [best to start with this article, then the Q&A below, etc.)
    http://admc24-7city.com/TheoryBankingEconomicsShort/The_Theory_of_Banking_Economics_Short.pdf
    8/ Q&A re the after effect of MTM FASB 157 extending from November 9, 2007 and its implications for 2011 (222 KB) 05/25/10 http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=6147

  • 9. GF

    (31 July 2010, 07:26PM)  Complain about this comment

    Our banking system must return to older values like the ones we had after the great depression but before the 1990s. We need to have divisions between the types of banking and their scales need to have some limitations placed on them. We need to keep speculation down and investment in manufacturing and productive assets up.
    The three laws of thermodynamics apply just as much to economics as they do in our physical universe. This is due to the fact that economics is really the study of human interaction and productivity(energy exchange) in the physical universe. The laws of thermodynamics in plain english are as follows:
    1) You can never get something for nothing.
    2) You can only get less than you thought you could.
    3) You can never get out of the game.
    If you think you have beaten any or all of these laws it is because you are taking from someone or somewhere else.

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


FREE - MoneyWeek's daily investment emailJohn Stepek

Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.
Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.

>