Rated
Oct 14 2008
•
1 review
•
economics, banking, finance, usa, money
• nytimes.com
The Treasury's plan would help the United States catch up to Europe in what has become a footrace between countries to reassure investors that their banks will not default or that other countries will not one-up their rescue plans and, in so doing, siphon off bank deposits or investment capital.
"The Europeans not only provided a blueprint, but forced our hand," said Kenneth S. Rogoff, a professor of economics at Harvard and an adviser to John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate. "We're trying to prevent wholesale carnage in the financial system."
In the process, Mr. Rogoff and other experts said, the government is remaking the financial landscape in ways that would have been unimaginable a few weeks ago -- taking stakes in the industry and making Washington the ultimate guarantor for banking in the United States.
But the pace of the crisis has driven events, and fissures in places as far-flung as Iceland, which suffered a wholesale collapse of its banks, persuaded officials to act far more decisively than they had previously.
"Over the weekend, I thought it could come out very badly," said Simon Johnson, a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund. "But we stepped back from the cliff."
The guarantee on bank debt is similar to one announced by several European countries earlier on Monday, and is meant to unlock the lending market between banks. Banks have curtailed such lending -- considered crucial to the smooth running of the financial system and the broader economy -- because they fear they will not be repaid if a bank borrower runs into trouble.
But officials said they hoped the guarantee on new senior debt would have an even broader effect than an interbank lending guarantee because it should also stimulate lending to businesses.
Another part of the government's remedy is to extend the federal deposit insurance to cover all small-business deposits. Federal regulators recently have been noticing that small-business customers, which tend to carry balances over the federal insurance limits, had been withdrawing their money from weaker banks and moving it to bigger, more stable banks.
Congress had already raised the F.D.I.C.'s deposit insurance limit to $250,000 earlier this month, extending coverage to roughly 68 percent of small-business deposits, according to estimates by Oliver Wyman, a financial services consulting firm. The new rules would cover the remaining 32 percent.
"Imposing unlimited deposit insurance doesn't fix the underlying problem, but it does reduce the threat of overnight failures," said Jaret Seiberg, a financial services policy analyst at the Stanford Group in Washington.
"If you reduce the threat of overnight failures," Mr. Seiberg said, "you start to encourage lending to each other overnight, which starts to restore the normal functioning of the credit markets."
Recapitalizing banks is not without its risks, experts warned, pointing to the example of Britain, which announced its program last week and injected its first capital into three banks on Monday.
Shares of the newly nationalized banks -- Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Lloyds -- slumped on Monday, despite a surge in banks elsewhere, because shareholder value was diluted by the government.
The move, analysts said, makes the government Britain's biggest banker. And it creates a two-tier banking system in which the nationalized banks are run like utilities and others are free to pursue profit growth. As part of the plan, the chief executives of the three banks stepped down.
Still, Mr. Paulson's strategy was backed by lawmakers, including Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who said he preferred capital injections to buying distressed mortgage-related assets -- a proposal that Treasury pushed aggressively before its turnabout.