Zurück
Die Stress-Tests wurde von der veranschlagten "Krisen-Schärfe" so ausgelegt, dass Geithner mit seinen verbleibenden 110 Mrd. Dollar an Stützungsgeldern auskommt. Da nach jüngsten Berichten jedoch 100 bis 150 Mrd. bei den Banken fehlen, könnte eine Unterdeckung von bis zu 40 Mrd. entstehen. Dann müssten noch mehr Hilfspakete angeschoben werden.
Der Stress-Test ist für Obama und Geithner eine Nagelprobe. Probleme dürften ihrem Image schaden. Der Aufschub der Ergebnisse, die statt wie geplant heute erst Donnerstag kommen, lässt nichts Gutes ahnen.
(Auszug aus dem Handelsblatt): Nach Auffassung der Financial Times (unten) werden die Ergebnisse der Stresstests maßgeblich über Erfolg oder Misserfolg der ersten 100 Tage von US-Präsident Barack Obama entscheiden. Nach der Bekanntgabe der Tests im Februar hätten die Aktienmärkte eine erfreulich positive Entwicklung genommen, doch für US-Finanzminister Timothy Geithner würden die Testergebnisse zum Balanceakt. "Ihm stehen nur noch 110 Milliarden Dollar zur Verfügung, um angeschlagenen Banken zu helfen. Der US-Kongress hat deutlich gemacht, dass er in nächster Zukunft kein weiteres Geld mehr genehmigt." Insider gingen deshalb davon aus, dass die Behörden bei den Tests sicher stellen, dass nicht mehr Kapitalbedarf festgestellt wird, als der US-Regierung noch zur Verfügung steht. "Letztlich sind die Urteile darüber, ob eine Bank einen weiteren Abschwung aushält oder nicht, nur so gut wie die Annahmen dahinter, und die bestehen aus Prognosen etwa zum Wachstum oder zur Arbeitslosigkeit." Auch hätten einige der betroffenen 19 Banken gute Ergebnisse für das erste Quartal 2009 erzielt. Analysten gingen davon aus, dass die Ergebnisse von "wenig Kapitalbedarf und viel Nachsicht" geprägt sein werden. "Wenn alles gut geht, wird Geithner gefeiert. Wenn es schlecht läuft, wird Obama erneut mit Forderungen nach der zeitlich begrenzten Verstaatlichung von Banken konfrontiert werden."
FT (GB)
Bank test gamble ahead for Obama
By Edward Luce in Washington
Published: May 1 2009 19:59
At Barack Obama’s 100th-day press conference on Wednesday, the US president was spared any questions on the release next week of the stress tests on the nation’s largest 19 banks.
But if anything has the capacity to make a misery of Mr Obama’s second 100 days then a failed stress test would top the list.
Announced in February to buy his administration time in the midst of continued freefall in banking stocks, the intervening period has smiled on Tim Geithner, the now slightly less besieged Treasury secretary. The stock market has since risen roughly a fifth, credit spreads have narrowed and the “green shoots” of reviving consumer sentiment have hinted at the possibility of spring.
All of which means that Mr Geithner may be able to emerge from next week’s exercise with his reputation enhanced. But it will be a delicate balancing act. The fact Mr Geithner can only draw upon $110bn (€83bn, £74bn) in remaining troubled asset funds (das ist weniger als die 150 Mrd., die laut jüngsten Berichten fehlen sollen - A.L.) to help plug whatever capital shortfalls are identified in bank balance sheets has set the limits of what will be possible. Congress has made plain it will not authorise any more money in the near future.
“There is no doubt the regulators will have done some reverse engineering to make sure that the capital shortfall does not exceed the resources at the administration’s disposal,” says Douglas Elliot, a former investment banker at JPMorgan, one of the 19 banks involved.
“If they are fortunate, the green shoots will continue to grow. If they are not then President Obama would have to go back to Congress to ask for more capital.”
The judgment behind the stress tests, which have been pushed back from next Monday to Thursday, partly because some of the more troubled banks have been contesting their results, is as much art as science. Designed to see what the banks can withstand if there were a further decline in the economy, the results are only as good as the assumptions behind them – these include declines in foreclosure rates, unemployment, economic growth and counterparty risks. The results can be tailored to produce a number that Mr Geithner will be able to handle. Forecasters believe the administration will identify a shortfall next week of between $100bn and $150bn. The banks will then be given six months to plug the gap.
“This is more like an essay contest than a multiple choice questionnaire,” says Bill Gale, an economist at the Brookings Institution think-tank. “There is no right or wrong answer. It is a question of judgment.”
Many of the banks have been assisted by surprisingly good first-quarter results driven by strong trading profits, particularly in fixed income where a decline in competition and narrowing credit spreads delivered windfalls. In addition, many analysts suspect the regulators showed “forbearance” towards the banks’ internal accounting methods to enable them to post healthy income growth.
That same approach is expected to be in evidence next week. “Our view is that the stress tests will show the need for a little bit of capital and a lot of forbearance,” says Andy Laperriere at Investment Strategy and Investment, a boutique investment bank. “It is very hard to believe the government will come up with a number greater than the firepower at its disposal.”
The result is expected to show between two and six banks will need to raise more capital privately. If they prove unable to do so, they will have the option of converting existing troubled asset relief programme funds from preferred into common equity – a capital boosting exercise that will cost the Treasury nothing (dann zahlen die Aktionäre mit Kursverwässerung - A.L.).
If more money is needed, Mr Geithner can draw upon unused Tarp funds and allow healthier banks, notably Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan, to repay the $45bn that they received last year. “I would give this a 50:50 chance of working,” says a former adviser to the Treasury. “But its success will depend on things that are out of Tim Geithner’s control, such as the continued bottoming out of the economy. It is a risk. But it is the only real option.”
Were it to succeed, Mr Geithner would be hailed as a conjurer who made a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. Should it fail, Mr Obama will be subjected again to demands that he temporarily nationalise some banks – a scenario that sends shudders through his administration.
