Banks Ease Credit for Themselves But Not You
It was the freeze-up of the wholesale lending markets used by banks to fund day-to-day operations that caused the financial system to break down in September. That crisis has eased significantly, thanks to government intervention to guarantee loans and prop up financial institutions.
But the credit crunch hasn't gone away. It has just moved to Main Street, where businesses and consumers are hard-pressed to get loans. And the scarcity of credit is intensifying the economy's downward spiral.
"Lending standards on most forms of credit are now tighter than at any time in recent memory," Ryan Sweet, an economist with Moody's Economy.com, wrote in a recent report. "The reduction in credit availability threatens to lengthen and deepen the recession."
In an October survey of bank lending practices, the Federal Reserve noted a broad move to restrict credit.
About 85 percent of domestic banks told the Fed they had imposed stricter lending standards on large and mid-size commercial borrowers, while 75 percent said they had done so for small businesses. At the same time, 60 percent indicated they had tightened criteria for credit cards, and 65 percent clamped down on other consumer loans.
Tighter standards
"This matches my observation of institutions in the West," said Steven Buster, chief executive officer of Mechanics Bank in Richmond. "It's very clear to me there has been a tightening of credit standards."
With banks on the receiving end of hundreds of billions of dollars in aid from Washington, the credit cutback could become a significant political issue. Institutions will find themselves under pressure from political leaders to open the spigots.
Last week, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, fired a shot across the banking industry's bow, warning that it faced the wrath of Congress if it used bailout money to pay dividends and bonuses or buy out other institutions.
"Increased lending activity is the only legitimate purpose for taxpayer funding of these institutions," Frank declared. "It is very important if congressional and public support for this program is to continue that we receive assurances ... that the money being advanced will be used only for relending and for no other purpose."
Bankers argue that it's legitimate to use public money to buy securities such as corporate debt, because those markets also were shut by the credit lockdown. And they say allowing strong banks to buy weak ones also serves the public good because it means taxpayer money wouldn't be needed to pay off depositors at failing institutions. They point to JPMorgan Chase's takeover of insolvent Washington Mutual in September, carried out without use of Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. funds.
The Treasury Department plans to buy ownership stakes in an array of strong banks, providing additional capital to fund loans. The problem, bankers say, is that in a recession there aren't a lot of good lending opportunities. For example, no lender would finance expansion of a shopping center when retail sales are falling fast.
Mechanics Bank, one of the larger community banks in Northern California, is an exception in that it hasn't tightened loan qualifications. It has long been a conservative lender with strict standards on commercial loans, according to Buster.
"Our underwriting hasn't changed at all in the last two years," he said. "It's just that fewer projects meet our underwriting criteria."
The bank used to assume it would take roughly 18 months from construction for a developer to sell the units in a condominium. The borrower had to demonstrate they had the resources to carry the project during that absorption period. Now, the bank assumes it would take substantially longer to fill up the condo, which would make it a lot harder for the developer to qualify for a loan, Buster said.
Things are similar for consumers, where a combination of stiffer standards and worsening household finances are undermining borrowing power for credit cards and home and auto loans.
Cherry-picking
With credit cards, lenders have become much more aggressive about segmenting the market, cherry-picking consumers with the best credit records and squeezing everybody else.
"Credit card issuers are playing defense and are being much more selective about which cardholders qualify for the best rates," said Greg McBride, senior analyst with Bankrate.com, a personal finance Web site. "They're also being more proactive in reducing exposure by cutting down credit lines."
It's a similar story for home loans. "Good credit, proof of income and money for a down payment - if you have those three ingredients, credit is widely available," McBride said.
But, he noted, the best rates are reserved for customers with credit scores above 740, a tiny elite among borrowers.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
8 Comments so far
Show AllHow about 'bailing out' these robber barons for good! Out of Wall Street and into jails.
Wall Street owns Congress. Did you really expect help for the regular guy? How naive. How stupid. How American.
Aren't we the superior one.
Joe
It is already obvious that assumptions of how the money will be spent are being violated. In a contractual carelessness that would be called out by Judge Judy over a $500 loan, nothing has been spelled out. The banks are using the money for mergers & acquisitions and bonuses.
Accountant and super-hero do not usually go together, but that's what we need.
As the owners of this endless stream of bailout money, we need to see a daily report of what is happening to it, how it is moving through the companies that receive it. We are the people as in of---, by---, and for---. We are ultimately in charge and have to start acting like it.
I don't want another situation like in Iraq where billions are paid out and then later - whoops! - we just don't know what happened to it. Or with the real estate bundling - sorry! - it's too hard to trace what happened, so whoever made money at the top of the Ponzi scheme gets to keep it. And it there was fraud, no record is available, evidently.
The accounting firms I have heard mentioned, Price Waterhouse and Ernst and Young, are part of the system that created the problems. They are just as lumbering and opaque as the deals they are supposed to monitor. They have been in the news in last decades for incidents of sloppy / dishonest accounting that ignored obvious red flags and failed to connect the dots.
We need someone special this time, the smartest independent forensic accountant that can be found. I'll supply the cape, mask and tights.
Joe
In contrast to how overwhelmingly the masses of this sick country ate up the BS that was spewed to get us into a war with Iraq, it would seem that, at least when it comes to themselves, they aren't the connoisseurs of merde that Congress is. A full 90% of the masses opposed the bogus $750B bailout package; even as our Congress overwhelmingly snubbed their noses at the masses, and approved it! And, in the fashion they are now famous for,Congress totally forgot about their stated objections that the bailout might be used for exactly the purposes it is being used for, and they (and Obama!) are now pushing for a second bailout to achieve the purpose of the first. Their brashness is only surpassed by the indifference of the masses. But such brashness can only result from continued indifference to being shafted. The American people are to blame for this, and so there is some justice in the fact that their children and grandchildren will pay the price. The sprouting of tent cities across the country, and the increased outsourcing of middle class jobs overseas is just the beginning. Just today Obama again supported the need for a second bailout. Either he is making an attempt to not tip his hand until January 20, or he really is just another brick in the wall of our corporatocracy. It's one thing to play it cool when you have no real popular support. But when you have the support of 90% of the masses and STILL you play that game? Well, one can one say? If Obama doesn't totally rescind the bailout (or, what's left of it- Bush et al. are doing their best to give it all away prior to January 20), then I fear that his vision of hope is all too aligned with that of Congress; namely to get what it can for itself no matter what the cost to the masses. Time will tell- very soon!!!
There is no randomness. It is only our ignorance
This would not be a problem for congress if they had used the money to focus on job creation instead of a massive give away to the banks.
Credit is much too expensive and prohibitive to the average consumer. Who really needs it any way.
"And (Bankers) say allowing strong banks to buy weak ones (with the bailout money) also serves the public good because it means taxpayer money wouldn't be needed to pay off depositors at failing institutions."
Yeah, and if there are fewer banks we stupid consumers won't have to worry about making choices. Let's just get rid of that pesky competition.
meanwhile... back at the soup line...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/business/07retail.html
- the loyal opposition