Yet another Banking Crisis – Maturity Mismatch by Kalidas Page 2 of 4
© 2009 Kalidas (Anil Selarka)General permission is granted to bona fide newspapers, magazines, reviewers, students, educational institutions subject totheir quoting this Author as source.
program or in discount windows at near zero rates. In reality, they were arbitraging betweenshort term borrowings and long term lending rates. THIS WAS SUICIDALLet us take a concrete example:Suppose Banker A grants $ 250,000 Fixed Rate Mortgage loan @4% 3,750 repayable in 30 years.The rates are fixed, without recourse (unique in America) and without escalation clause. See thestupidity of the American banker. How could they take the view of Interest rate for 30 years? Howcould they lend on such incredibly low rates for 30 years?LENDER IN HEAVENHe does not have enough capital. He borrows short term (monthly rollover or Libor based) eitherfrom Fed or interbank market. He pays at the most 0.25% and lends at 4% netting interest differential of 3.75% or $ 3,750 per borrower per year. It is his net profit with least maintenancecost. The stock price goes up, his stock options become more valuable asset and he also earns fat bonus at year end running into millions of dollars. That is his performance. He is considered by hiscolleagues and neighbors as “Smart Ass”LENDER IN HELLNow, what happens when the interest rates rise? Well, until the rates rise by 2% to 3%, his profit margin merely narrows down. Instead of earning arbitrage interest differential of 3.75%, hewould earn 1.5 to 2% or $ 1500 to $ 2000 per borrower per year.However, when the interest rates rise to 3.5%, and above, he will have to visit Wash Room often.He is losing in every case. Being a fixed rate mortgage, he can not pass on extra cost to hisborrower. If he tries to under other Alt-mortgages, the borrower will come to him, hand over thekey and say, sir, enjoy your property. He becomes “lender in possession” with no recourse to theborrower. In short, the banker is now in duress.If interest goes to say 8%, he will have shell out 4% from his own pocket or $ 4000 per $ 100Kmortgage per borrower per year. If he has granted $ 300 billions of such loans, he would lose 4%or about $ 12 billions from his bottom line. NOW, his bottom line becomes bottom less pit.There are about $5.5 trillions of mortgage loans in United States. In the event of massive rise ininterest rates, the banks would be losing $ 220 billions for rise in interest cost by 4%. In otherwords, the lenders would lose @ 55 billions for every rise in interest rate by 1%. If the rates riseto say 24% as it happened in early 80s, the bankers and mortgage lenders will lose over $ 2trillions ($ 2000 billions) per year. We are not counting derivatives which run nearly 6 to 20times the above amount.There will be catastrophe. The borrowers will not be affected because they have fixed ratemortgage. But when his lender gets bankrupt and gets sold to some third party, what happens if the said third party annuls the agreement on the ground of equity (it is possible legally) and fairplay?At the moment, thanks to Four musketeers – Hank Paulson, former Treasury Secretary fromGoldman Sachs, Timothy Geithner, incumbent Treasury Secretary, Ben Bernanke, incumbent Fed
Add a Comment