fractional-reserve banking

No-Reserve Banking And Less Capital, Too!

by

BANK CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS

The Federal Reserve Board voted last week to move ahead with a proposal to scale back the amount of capital that banks must hold as part of their assets. A Reuters report indicated that the amount of capital that banks must set aside will depend on the size of the role they play in the global financial system.

Is reducing capital requirements for banks a good idea?  The Federal Reserve and the banks think so. The banks want to use the restricted capital to buy more Treasury bonds. Fed Chair Powell said it was “prudent” to reconsider the current requirements.

Here is a short summary of the situation from an article at https://www.pyments.com …

“Currently, banks are required to hold a flat percentage of capital in reserve against all assets, per the report. The CNBC report said that for this purpose, lower-risk assets are treated essentially the same as high-yield ones, and banks are practically penalized for holding Treasuries.

The current requirement was put in place after the 2008 financial crisis, increased over the years, and has for years been the target of banks that argue that it unnecessarily restricts their ability to facilitate trading in lower-risk assets, such as Treasury bonds, the Reuters report said.” (source)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wants to see the requirements relaxed, too. Bessent said “we are very close to moving” on this issue and he thinks it would allow greater flexibility for banks to increase holdings in government bonds. That may be so, but…

ARE TREASURIES LOWER-RISK ASSETS?

For the past three years, Treasury bonds have proven to be anything other than a “lower-risk asset”. Below is a chart that shows how badly U.S. Treasuries have performed…

TLT (Long-Term Treasury Bond ETF) 2020-25

Who needs more restricted capital? Let’s buy more Treasury bonds, instead. They are safe and liquid. Oh-oh…

SILICON VALLEY BANK 

Existing higher capital requirements put in place in 2008 did not help Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). Liquidity problems forced SVB to sell Treasury bonds that had declined by 30% or more.

The argument for higher capital requirements is that it can reinforce and support overall capital structure (strong capital base) and maintain solvency. The additonal capital can be a source of temporary liquidity, when necessary.

Unfortunately, it did not work that way for SVB. Their flawed lending strategies (borrow short and lend long) put them at a huge disadvantage. Being forced to liquidate long-term bonds at huge losses in order to meet customer withdrawl demand erased any illiusion of solvency and catapulted them straight into bankruptcy.

Regardless, there is another issue that looms large in the SVB debacle and portends ill for all banks.

SVB’s bankruptcy, and some other bank failures in 2023, occurred three years after the Federal Reserve suspended the 10% reserve requirement for banks. What was “fractional-reserve banking” became “no-reserve banking”.

NO-RESERVE BANKING 

Under the fractional-reserve system, banks were required to keep a portion of customer deposits on hand. The amount could vary, but was formerly 10% of the deposits on hand. The reserves were required in order to meet ongoing withdrawl demand. The other 90% could be lent out to individuals and businesses.

If too many people wanted too much of their money in a short period of time, the bank might not be able to satisfy the demand for withdrawls of money. (see Fractional-reserve Banking – Elephant In The Room).

However bad the problem was before, it is worse now. Previously, the 10% threshold gave us an indication of just how seriously worse was the situation of any particular bank if they dropped below the threshold. Now, we know nothing.

The 10% reserve requirement was reduced to 0% on March 15, 2020, just as the economy entered its forced shutdown. The entire banking systm now functions on a 0% reserve requirement.

CONCLUSION 

Banks are horribly illiquid. Solvency is an illusion – not a reality. Relaxing bank capital requirements at this time probably doesn’t add much to the exagerated risk that already exits in the banking system.

The additional capital won’t prevent financial institutions from going bankrupt; they already are. (see Bank Stress Test Results Are Just Window Dressing)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

System Liquidity Risk – Cash Is Preferred & Appreciated

by

SYSTEM LIQUIDITY IS THE BIGGER RISK – “CASH IS PREFERRED AND APPRECIATED”

There is quite a bit of debate right now about whether inflation’s effects will worsen again soon; or, whether the inflation threat has been minimized and “disinflation” will prevail. Don’t look now, but the specter of a liquidity crisis is looming in the background.

The situation is such that a liquidity crisis of epic proportion might overtake all of us in our arguments about the quantity and extent of inflation’s effects. My concern was heightened this past weekend when I drove to a small, local restaurant to pick up a take-out order.

Read more

A Visit To Jekyll Island – The Fed Is A Banker’s Bank

by

A VISIT TO JEKYLL ISLAND

Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to visit Jekyll Island and see some of the landmark buildings where secret meetings took place which led to the origin of the Federal Reserve  in 1913…

With all the attention that the Federal Reserve gets today, it might be a good idea to learn a bit more about that origin which is steeped in controversy regarding claims of conspiracy.

Read more

The Fed Always Does Its Job

by

The Fed always does its job. So, just what is their job? And, how well do they perform?

For the answer to the first question, one statement will suffice: The Fed’s job is to create money; at all times and in all seasons. 

The Federal Reserve Bank creates money for the US government to spend and for banks to loan. It is a partnership that dates back more than one hundred years.

Read more

Fractional-Reserve Banking Is The Elephant In The Room

by

(Note: This article is an updated version of an original article published in 2017.  On March 15, 2020, the Federal Reserve Board reduced reserve requirement ratios to zero percent effective March 26, 2020.  The action eliminated reserve requirements for all depository institutions.)

FRACTIONAL-RESERVE BANKING

The expression “elephant in the room“…

“…an important or enormous topic, question, or controversial issue that is obvious or that everyone knows about but no one mentions or wants to discuss because it makes at least some of them uncomfortable or is personally, socially, or politically embarrassing, controversial, inflammatory, or dangerous. (source) 

A wordy definition, yes; but it is applicable to our topic of Fractional-Reserve Banking. After reading the rest of this article, you should be able to see just how important and enormous  Fractional-Reserve Banking is; as well as how dangerous.

Lets’s start with some history.

Read more

Fed-Watching Is Overhyped And Overdone

by

FED-WATCHING IS OVERHYPED

If you are one of those who is looking for clues from the Federal Reserve as to the direction of the markets, forget it. You are too late.

Too many people think that the latest Fed minutes will give them some indication of what to expect from the markets. Those same people think that the Fed actually has a strategy and that they are “managing the economy” with the intention of pursuing what is best financially and economically for the country.

Wake up! The Federal Reserve does not exist and operate with the intention of acting in our best interests financially, economically, or in any other way.

Read more

Need A Second Opinion?

by

DO YOU NEED A SECOND OPINION?

Let’s face it. No one plans financially for disaster. We assume that if we are conscientious, persistent, and long-term oriented, that our plans –  generally speaking – will find fruition.

We carry insurance to protect ourselves against financial loss from events such as death,  major illness, disability, property damage, long-term care, etc.

But what about systemic risk?

How will you survive a complete credit collapse and loss of 50-90 percent of the value of all assets denominated in U.S. dollars? What about a full-scale depression?

When most advisors talk about investing in such a way as to minimize risk and avoid market blowouts, there is an implicit assumption that whatever the situation, it will be temporary; that the financial markets will continue to function.

Maybe that isn’t the case. Wide-scale bankruptcies, bank failures, and interruptions in communication channels could effectively stop markets from functioning at all.

Suppose you have an investment that generates huge profits for you during a stock market collapse; say a short position on some individual stocks or an ETF with a similar strategy.

Because of the leverage involved, if a market decline is steep enough and swift enough, there may not be any traders or other investors with money to whom you can sell your profitable ETFs or from whom you can buy back your existing short positions.

What if the U.S. dollar renews its long-term decline in accelerated fashion? Is runaway inflation a possibility and how would you be affected?

Do you understand the concept of fractional-reserve banking and the danger it presents?

Maybe you don’t own stocks. You might own bonds which provide you with interest income. Or real estate; or gold. Extreme negative market conditions will affect all of these things in ways you probably cannot imagine.

If you are worried or concerned about any of  these things, or just feel the need to be better informed, you could benefit from a personal consultation.

Or, perhaps you are a corporate officer who has employees that would gain from a better understanding of these issues.

Whatever your particular situation, take action today. Send me an email with your concerns and questions. I will get back to you quickly.

Let’s talk…  kwilliams@kelseywilliamsgold.com

Bio: KelseyWilliams

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

 

Gold Price – US$700 Or US$7000?

by

Does either of the above preclude the other?  In other words, if we expect gold to reach $7000.00 per ounce, and we are correct, does that mean that we can’t reasonably expect gold to go as low as $700.00 per ounce? Conversely, if we are predicting or expecting gold to decline from its current level and even breach $1000.00 per ounce on the downside, can $7000.00 per ounce, or anything even remotely close to that number, be a reasonable possibility? 

Read more

Arguing About Fed Policy Is A Waste of Time

by

When government (or a President) claims that Federal Reserve policy is hurting the economy, they are either grandstanding, or are ignorant about the function and purpose of the Federal Reserve.

No one wants to see the economy suffer, anymore than they want to see a plague, or infectious disease, affect millions of people. And no President wants to be in office to preside over a recession or depression. But neither can they exercise any power or influence regarding the implementation of Fed policy; particularly when it comes to interest rates.

Read more

The Federal Reserve And Long-Term Debt – Warning!

by

FEDERAL RESERVE AND LONG-TERM DEBT

Won’t somebody please say something different about the Federal Reserve? Or nothing at all?

It seems amazing to me that we are so studiously focused on comments, statements, or actions emanating from the Fed. It is as if we expect to find a morsel of truth that will give us special insight or a clue as to their next move.

I suppose that is reasonable to a certain extent – especially today. We are social-app (il)literate and very impatient. Seems to be a sort of day-trader mentality.  Problem is that every morning we see the same headlines. All week long we hear about the most recent Fed meeting, or the release of minutes from the last meeting, or what to expect at the next meeting, etc., etc. And the cycle repeats itself every month. (I’m not Bill Murray and this is not Ground Hog Day.) 

Read more