Suzy Jagger in New York
Enter our Snapshots of Summer photography competition
A rift is emerging between the White House and the US Federal Reserve over whether banks should be bailed out by taxpayers, The Times has learnt.
It is understood that President Bush and his advisers are concerned about the repercussions of protecting a financial institution from bankruptcy because of its own poor decisions.
The White House is anxious about the long-term implications of a bank bailout and of the extension of emergency cheap credit facilities to investment firms.
In what is an election year in the United States, the President is worried that Washington will be accused of using taxpayers’ money to protect executives, staff and shareholders from the consequences of poor risk management.
He also fears that Wall Street will become mired in new, onerous regulation.
In an attempt to prevent a meltdown of the US financial system, the Fed has backed JPMorgan Chase’s takeover of Bear Stearns and agreed to provide a financial lifeline for the deal.
In addition, the Fed, in the broadest use of its lending authority since the 1930s, said that it would allow squeezed Wall Street investment houses to go directly to it for emergency loans. That has long been a privilege for commercial banks only.
There is little to suggest that the stress on the American banking system is easing. Yesterday it emerged that the banks that had agreed to finance the $19.5 billion (£9.7 billion) buyout of Clear Channel, led by Citigroup and Deutsche, stand to lose about $3 billion on the transaction because loan prices have tumbled since they promised to fund the deal.
The private equity firms Thomas H. Lee and Bain Capital Partners have filed lawsuits against the Wall Street banks to force them to fund the buyout.
The rift between the White House and the Fed emerged as Henry Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary, said yesterday that the collapse of Bear Stearns underscored the need for investment banks to be brought under the same federal supervision as commercial banks.
Mr Paulson said: “This latest episode has highlighted that the world has changed, as has the role of other nonbank financial institutions and the interconnectedness among all financial institutions.
“These changes require us all to think more broadly about the regulatory and supervisory framework that is consistent with the promotion and maintenance of financial stability.”
Kevin Logan, a senior economist at Dresdner Kleinwort in New York, said: “It is likely that there will be a move towards reforming the regulatory system. It’s a hotchpotch and reflects what used to be a fragmented financial system. It’s now much more integrated and reform would make sense.”
At present, commercial and investment banks must answer to the Office of Thrift Suspension, the Comptroller of Currency, the Federal Reserve, state federal banks, the US Treasury, the Office of Enterprise Oversight, the Securities and Exchange Commission and accounting regulators.
However, any reform of the regulatory system would now have to be spearheaded by an incoming government.
Mr Paulson is also suggesting that the Fed collect as much information as necessary on investment houses to “make informed lending decisions”.
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the collective power of smart thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Flip MinoHD Camcorder
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
42,945
2008
71,450
Car Insurance
Not Specified
MI6
UK-based
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Save up to £1,000 per couple with Elite Vacations at the five-star Constance Lemuria Resort
and do the British Isles this Summer.
Save up to 60% with Oxford Hotels and Inns
Try our inspiring luxury holidays to the Indian Subcontinent and South East Asia.
Great offers available
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
I agree with our President for the first time in seven years! We the working class folks who, by the way, will VOTE in record numbers in the upcoming election, are wondering why we should be forced to repay the losses incurred by PRIVATE Investment banks. Has our Congress or our President authorized the Federal Reserve Bank to take this action? When the times were great, the Private Investment Bankers did not share their monumental gains with the working class taxpayers.
Rick, Suffield, CT, USA
Free market capitalism theory: Profits are private but is necessary to ¨ socialize ¨ the losses.
neko Gomez , madrid, spain
Rumour has a bank is in trouble, the one´s who spread the rumour make millions and the ones who deny the rumour make millions. Who loses, we do the ordinary working person in this country. We pay for them both in higher taxes and a prolonged recession.
Paul, bath, uk
At last some common sense from the White House - all the Fed is doing is delaying the inevitable and storing up even more problems for the future.
Harry, warwick, uk
Instead of bailing out these investment houses, I say we charge them and put them in the BIG house. What right have these people to play God with our money and when decisions are made that prove immoral and criminal, they get ...bailed out?? I will never understand the need to protect thugs like this.
Frank Favot, Windsor
Frank Favot, Windsor, On
who kowns what happens.....
huang, beijing, china
Perhaps the government could put a cap on the remuneration of bank CEOs and not allow them to earn performance bonuses. That way bankers would have no incentive to bet the bank to enrich themselves. They could concentrate on banking instead of allowing their operations to degenerate to the level of a casino.
roger sykes, christchurch,
Seems to me like Mervyn King's initial relucance was right all along. We should not be bailing out banks as a result of their reckless greed and incompetance.
Stephen Jones, KL, Malaysia
Perhaps the US tax payer cannot afford to bail the banks out as it would effectively bankrupt the US?
stephen hulton, eure, france
We Americans have to grasp that from the perspective of the Bush administration, we are peasants, pure and simple. That's the way it has been for the past seven and a half years. Now....well, its come to a place where its not so easily hidden. We are, very simply, peasants in the service of the favored friends of Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney....and if our grandchildren will suffer from their actions, so???????????? That's the role of peasants. Pass me the cake, will you? Thanks.
Dan Ganner, Kittery, Maine USA
The whole notion that the state and tax payer should pay for the mistakes of private banks degrades the whole notion of free market capitalism. These capitalists are happy to let the market take its course only when it suits them.
But because the electorate will be effected by collapsing banks and the calamity that would cause for politicians, I fear we will all be held to their ransom. Risk another Northern Rock or bail out these failing businesses by printing out more money? Who ultimately has power, the banks or the politicians.
Jay Wright, durham, UK
Am I wrong in thinking President Bush has for once actually made some sense?!?!
Roughly every billion the Fed loans is equivalent $2.00 extra tax required. You, like us Brits, are going to be feeling the pinch of the tax burden created by this debacle for quite some time.
Enjoy!
Paul Sullivan, Chester,