| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Banks Running Out of Runway
Brian Pretti CFA / Financial Sense
After taking a pass on official QE at the Jackson Hole soiree, once again the focus is on the FOMC meeting this week. Will they or won’t they? After last week’s not unexpectedly weak employment number where the BLS birth/death model estimate accounted for 94% of reported headline payroll gains, pundits far and wide raised their percentage bets that QE will indeed be on the Thursday FOMC lunch menu. Personally, I’m convinced weak payroll and capital goods orders as of late are due to business concerns over the as of yet unaddressed fiscal cliff concerns. But the Street remains focused on the apparent self imposed Fed mandate of employment acceleration. The first two mega-QE’s could not light the cyclical employment fire, but hey, maybe the third time is the charm, right? Regardless, we know another Bernanke inspired QE is coming at some point, despite already high food and energy prices, to say nothing of equity prices in a declining earnings growth rate environment.
The point of this discussion is not to debate QE, nor when the next round will be unleashed. I believe that with the upcoming QE, regardless of the mystery date upon which it will arrive, we now need to focus on the banking sector. Why? Because the banks, with emphasis on the very large TBTF banks, are running out of earnings runway fast. Really fast.
Think back to early 2009 as the first QE was being concocted. One of the key rationales for implementation was the thinking that if the Fed could expand its balance sheet and essentially swap fresh cash with banking sector assets, the banks would be free to lend out this new found liquidity. And given the magic of fractional reserve banking, the lending multiplier would respark the core of the modern day global economy – credit acceleration. Without dragging you through an historical retrospective, we all know that despite unprecedented QE1, QE2 and Operation Twist, bank lending in the current cycle has been incredibly subdued. Certainly this is one of the key differentiating factors of the 2009-present cycle. But this becomes very important under QE3. In one sense, based on the character of bank earnings in the current cycle, the moment of truth has arrived. Why? Because the easy earnings gains for the big banks driven by declining loan loss reserves in the current cycle is coming to an end. Couple this with ongoing net interest margin compression (thanks largely to the Fed) and the banks potentially face flat to declining earnings ahead unless lending really starts to accelerate. In fact as you’ll see in the chart below, point to point banking sector earnings have not grown over the last four quarters (FDIC 2Q Bank Report data).
In the chart below, we are looking at quarterly bank operating earnings since 2006. Alongside is the quarter over quarter change in bank loan loss reserves. You can see that in 2006 and early 2007, bank earnings were robust and additions to loan loss reserves small to almost non-existent. Certainly as we moved into 2008 and bank balance sheets became ever impaired, loan loss reserve additions spiked as operating earnings coincidentally collapsed.
continue at Financial Sense:
http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/brian-pretti/running-out-of-runway
Fair Use Notice: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are makingsuch material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any suchcopyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest inreceiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that gobeyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
The theory of QE 1 & 2 is just theory as it doesn’t include the DI figures. When you have DI increases, (DI disposable income in a family unit after taxes) especially in the middle class, the economy grows by leaps and bounds. Investment availability “cheap rates” is a good idea, but since the middle class is shrinking so does the DI figures in that sector and so does the economy. The last great splurge was due to the invention of the computer and the explosion of growth it produced via hardware and software, just as in the beginning of the Industrial revolution with the textile industries and then the auto industries. The banks should be chasing growth and not creating growth. It just doesn’t work that way. I’m now old and all I can say is when your supportive government puts up barriers such as unwarranted regulations it also puts up flags restricting growth in the private sector. The last I heard was that 51% of all workers in the USA are government employees. This group gets superior benefits, guaranteed pensions, and unions to surge government expenses beyond bizarre. And, of course; the 49% of the private sector has to support this elephant. A large centralized government is what we have ended up with and going back is no longer possible. No more small family farms, and the small businessman has so many regulations they struggle to progress in growth. You cannot blame Obama, or Bush, or Clinton, you have to blame all of them including Congress and the Senate over the last 40 years. The USA sovereignty has decreased dramatically in the last 15 years and it continues to decrease under each government elected. Good, bad or indifference, the world has changed course and all of us are on the same train of change.