Business Week – by Nick Summers
More than $114 billion exited the biggest U.S. banks this month, and nobody’s quite sure why.
The Federal Reserve releases data on the assets and liabilities of
commercial banks every Friday. The most current figures, covering the
first full week of 2013, show the largest one-week withdrawals since the
Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Even when seasonally adjusted, the level drops
to $52.8 billion—still the third-highest amount on record, and one for
which bank experts and analysts were reluctant to give a definitive
explanation.
The most obvious culprit is the expiration of the Transaction Account
Guarantee program, the extraordinary federal effort to shore up the
country’s non-gigantic banks during the 2008 financial crisis. Big banks
were considered “too big to fail,”
while smaller ones were vulnerable to runs. The TAG program backstopped
their deposit bases by temporarily offering unlimited insurance on
money kept in non-interest-bearing accounts. That guarantee ended on
Dec. 31, so a decrease in deposits would be expected first thing in
January.
But hold on: The Fed data show $114 billion leaving the 25 biggest
banks—about 2 percent of their deposit base. Only $26.9 billion left all
the others, equivalent to 0.9 percent of their deposit base. Experts
had predicted that the end of TAG would hurt the nation’s small banks
because the big ones are still considered too big to fail. “I think [customers] are going to go back to the mega banks,” the head of a regional bank in Bethesda, Md., toldThe Washington Post in December. “They’ve been assured by the government that mega banks are too big to fail. It’s a horrible, bad, poorly-thought-out situation.”Small banks fearfully lobbied the Senate to extend TAG, with analysts telling the New York Times that they expected $200 million to $300 million—yes, with an m—to move from affected accounts into money market funds or elsewhere.
So if the missing $114 billion is not the result of the TAG program
expiration—or at least not all related to TAG—what’s going on? Paul
Miller, a bank analyst with FBR Capital Markets, cautions against reading
too much into the Fed’s weekly data. “It’s a noisy database,” he says.
Among large U.S. banks, there have been movements of greater than $50
billion (not seasonally adjusted) during 107 different weeks since 2000.
It’s not uncommon to see 11-figure swings—that is, tens of billions of
dollars—from positive to negative, or vice-versa, one week to the next.
Noise can increase near the start of a year. “The first quarter is
always a wacky quarter,” Miller says. And January 2013 has seen an
incredible amount of change. First, the fiscal cliff drama had companies
shifting dividends and had bank clients guessing what their tax liabilities
would be, which might explain the $60.4 billion pumped into the largest
banks during the week ending Dec. 26. (Seasonally adjusted, it was the
sixth-highest level on record.) Second, the payroll tax just went up, sticking most wage earners with paychecks that are 2 percent smaller.
Third, ordinary investors may be ready to move out of federally
guaranteed accounts and into investments. Stocks did very well in 2012.
As Bloomberg Businessweek’s Roben Farzad wrote on Jan. 16, equity mutual funds saw their second-highest inflows on recordin the first week of the year. Economists are worrying that market exuberance is getting too high, with one measure of risk aversion at a three-decade low.
“If deposits are really trending down—and at the end of the month,
we’ll be smarter than we are now—if that’s the case, it can tell us a
few things,” says Dan Geller, executive vice president of Market Rates
Insight. “And one thing that it could tell us is that the law of
elasticity is finally catching up with deposits.” In other words,
contrary to what economic theory predicts, deposits have been piling up
at banks ever since the crisis, even though they offer pitiful yields.
Geller says that may finally be ending—though like Miller, he says not
to put too much stock in just one burst of Fed data.
“One week is just a very thin slice,” he says. Still, $114 billion is
a big figure, and it’s one to keep an eye on in order to understand
where the economy is headed in 2013.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-23/missing-114-billion-from-u-dot-s-dot-banks
No comments:
Post a Comment