Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: STOCK MARKET WATCH -- Monday, 23 July 2012 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)12. (CREDIT DEFAULT) Swap Market, Like Libor, Is Vulnerable to Manipulation
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/behind-credit-default-swaps-market-a-cartel-left-open-to-collusion/
The rate-manipulation scandal has demonstrated that banks will collude with one another for their own benefit. Banks didn't report the rate at which they were borrowing from other institutions. They could report a made-up rate that, not surprisingly, turned out to serve their economic interests at the time. So, it might come as a worry that there is another, multitrillion-dollar market - the credit-default swap market - that operates under a similar principle. Credit-default swaps are insurance-like derivatives, or side bets, that protect investors from bad events like a company going bankrupt or a country failing to pay its debts.
Whether a company has defaulted on its debt might seem unambiguous to some naïve souls out there. But that's hardly the case, especially when there are lawyers involved and billions of dollars at stake. Because credit-default swap contracts can be worthless when they expire, the timing of insolvencies can make the difference between making and losing a great deal of money. Decisions about when a swap pays out are made by a trade group called the determinations committee of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. The mere fact that a determinations committee exists is evidence that "insolvency" is not simple to define. Sure, credit-default swaps are products for grown-ups. Sophisticated investors play in this market. Foster children and the infirm are not putting their life savings into this market directly.
But they matter to corporations and countries. When Europe tried to bail out Greece, an enormous debate sprang up about whether the restructuring of Greece's debt was technically considered a "default." Initially, the committee said it wasn't. Then, after some details shifted, the committee ruled it was. A proper market would want an organization that was impartial, regulated, transparent and open to appeal. No such luck. The determinations committee has 15 members, 10 of which are the major dealers in credit-default swaps, the giant banks that are effectively permanent members. One criterion for dealer members is that they trade a certain amount of derivatives. After the 2008 financial crisis, there are fewer such firms, and they have consolidated their influence and power over our capital markets. The committee operates as a quasi-Star Chamber. It makes decisions without having to publish its reasoning and almost never has. There isn't any appeal process. The committee itself says it isn't bound by precedent....The biggest concern is that there's no prohibition against committee members deciding cases in which they may well have an economic interest. There is no recusal process. Indeed, it is almost impossible for the major dealers to not have a stake in the outcomes, since they are the major dealers.
A spokesman for the association contended that "there are safeguards built into the process which work to support integrity of process." The voting, if not the reasoning behind it, is publicly disclosed. The committee requires a supermajority for decisions, 12 of the 15 votes, so the dealers can't gang up on the other members. And it's entirely possible that banks might be on different sides of a trade, with some banks having sold protection and some having bought it. The hope would be that the conflicts of interest cancel each other out.
To the market's credit, there is no evidence that the process has become corrupted by big banks. Given the evidence of collusion in the rate-manipulation case, however, trusting it to remain that way doesn't seem like a good plan...
I SAY GIVE IT A WEEK.
The rate-manipulation scandal has demonstrated that banks will collude with one another for their own benefit. Banks didn't report the rate at which they were borrowing from other institutions. They could report a made-up rate that, not surprisingly, turned out to serve their economic interests at the time. So, it might come as a worry that there is another, multitrillion-dollar market - the credit-default swap market - that operates under a similar principle. Credit-default swaps are insurance-like derivatives, or side bets, that protect investors from bad events like a company going bankrupt or a country failing to pay its debts.
Whether a company has defaulted on its debt might seem unambiguous to some naïve souls out there. But that's hardly the case, especially when there are lawyers involved and billions of dollars at stake. Because credit-default swap contracts can be worthless when they expire, the timing of insolvencies can make the difference between making and losing a great deal of money. Decisions about when a swap pays out are made by a trade group called the determinations committee of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. The mere fact that a determinations committee exists is evidence that "insolvency" is not simple to define. Sure, credit-default swaps are products for grown-ups. Sophisticated investors play in this market. Foster children and the infirm are not putting their life savings into this market directly.
But they matter to corporations and countries. When Europe tried to bail out Greece, an enormous debate sprang up about whether the restructuring of Greece's debt was technically considered a "default." Initially, the committee said it wasn't. Then, after some details shifted, the committee ruled it was. A proper market would want an organization that was impartial, regulated, transparent and open to appeal. No such luck. The determinations committee has 15 members, 10 of which are the major dealers in credit-default swaps, the giant banks that are effectively permanent members. One criterion for dealer members is that they trade a certain amount of derivatives. After the 2008 financial crisis, there are fewer such firms, and they have consolidated their influence and power over our capital markets. The committee operates as a quasi-Star Chamber. It makes decisions without having to publish its reasoning and almost never has. There isn't any appeal process. The committee itself says it isn't bound by precedent....The biggest concern is that there's no prohibition against committee members deciding cases in which they may well have an economic interest. There is no recusal process. Indeed, it is almost impossible for the major dealers to not have a stake in the outcomes, since they are the major dealers.
A spokesman for the association contended that "there are safeguards built into the process which work to support integrity of process." The voting, if not the reasoning behind it, is publicly disclosed. The committee requires a supermajority for decisions, 12 of the 15 votes, so the dealers can't gang up on the other members. And it's entirely possible that banks might be on different sides of a trade, with some banks having sold protection and some having bought it. The hope would be that the conflicts of interest cancel each other out.
To the market's credit, there is no evidence that the process has become corrupted by big banks. Given the evidence of collusion in the rate-manipulation case, however, trusting it to remain that way doesn't seem like a good plan...
I SAY GIVE IT A WEEK.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
92 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The whole scam is just so massive. It's just mind boggling how complicit the richest criminals have
mother earth
Jul 2012
#9
These 12 Hellholes Are Examples Of What The Rest Of America Will Look Like Soon
Demeter
Jul 2012
#25
How Whole Regions of America Have Been Destroyed in the Name of Quarterly Profits
Demeter
Jul 2012
#50
I know some do not appreciate Taibbi, but who else tells it like it is? Looking forward to "more".
mother earth
Jul 2012
#11
I know, seems like RS & Vanity Fair have stepped up enormously. I love MattT.
mother earth
Jul 2012
#17
Holding Off Armageddon: The Libor Scandal In Full Perspective By Paul Craig Roberts
Demeter
Jul 2012
#8
Exclusive: Prosecutors, regulators close to making Libor arrests (REST THE CASE)
Demeter
Jul 2012
#14
Raining like mad in the markets, too. US Futures looking UG-LEE. Italy down 5%
Roland99
Jul 2012
#40