US Housing Market Crash

When will the tsunami of foreclosures hit?

With millions of adjustable-rate mortgages about to reset this fall, experts expect a wave of foreclosures by Americans in every income bracket. Here's why they could soar in late 2006 and beyond.

Those easy-mortgage chickens are coming home to roost.

This fall the adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) that millions of Americans took out during the recent housing boom will be reset, and many homeowners will see their monthly mortgage payments shoot up by as much as 20%. According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, of all mortgages financed in 2005, 36% were ARMs -- the highest ever.

National foreclosures up 24%

Property foreclosures nationwide increased 24 percent in August from the previous month and 53 percent from a year ago, marking the highest rate so far this year, a foreclosure service reported today.

A total of 115,292 properties entered some stage of foreclosure during the month, according to a report from RealtyTrac. The report also shows a national foreclosure rate of one new foreclosure filing for every 1,003 U.S. households, the second-highest monthly foreclosure rate reported year to date.

This report is much bleaker than numbers reported by the Mortgage Bankers Association today. In a survey of more than 42.5 million loans nationwide, homeowners appeared to be keeping up with their mortgage payments.

What will it mean for Canada. Well for one thing its going to kick the crap out of Softwood lumber exports. Leaving those who take Harpers deal wth cash in hand but no market to export to. All those jobs the BQ is counting on...gone...poof.

As the lumber bosses take their cash and run. Canadian Banks operating in the U.S. will take loan losses. The Canadian dollar will rise against the American dollar and our manufacturing sector will cry the blues, more layoffs.

Housing prices have finally outrun incomes."

Runaway real estate prices, which had been growing in double digits throughout much of the country, are now pricing potential homeowners right out of the market. The ability of Americans to afford a home is the worst it's been in two decades, according to the National Association of Realtors.

The past year has been rough on consumers. First, mortgage rates began to rise. Then, there was the jolt from sharply higher energy prices. And now the apparent end of the long real estate boom is at hand. It's all combined to make Americans feeling distinctly poorer, and less confident. Mirroring other recent surveys, the U.S. Conference Board reported last week that its consumer confidence index suffered its biggest one-month drop in August since the devastation of hurricane Katrina a year ago.

Think it all doesn't matter to you? Think again. For nearly a decade now, the United States has been the economic driver for much of the world -- Canada included. The United States has been sucking up excess savings and consuming everything in sight, from cars to homes and everything that goes in them.

"It's hard to imagine that a U.S.-centric global economy wouldn't be at risk in the aftermath of a bursting of the U.S. housing bubble," warned Morgan Stanley chief economist Stephen Roach, one of Wall Street's most outspoken worrywarts.

"The non-U.S. world remains heavily reliant on selling exports to wealth-dependent American consumers. As the United States comes to grips with the aftershocks of another post-bubble shakeout, so too must the rest of the world."

As he put it: "If the American consumer sneezes, countries in both the developed and the developing world could easily catch a cold."

Globally this is a major consumer market crash, not seen since the crash of 1984 when the FIRE market in Americas cities, and around the world crashed. Australia is reporting record housing foreclosures.

House-price inflation is faster than a year ago in roughly half of the 20 countries we track... Apart from America, only Spain, Hong Kong and South Africa have seen big slowdowns. In ten of the countries, prices are rising at double-digit rates, compared with only seven countries last year. European housing markets—notably Denmark, Belgium, Ireland, France and Sweden—now dominate the top of the league. Anecdotal evidence suggests that even the German market is starting to wake up after more than a decade of flat or falling prices... Calculations by The Economist show that in Britain and Australia the ratios of prices to rents are respectively 55% and 70% above the long-term average... By the same gauge property is “overvalued” by 50% in America."

Canadas housing market is cooling off too. And in hot Alberta, the boom bubble could burst with ominous results despite high wages. The market is overpriced, it is inflationary and it means well paid workers are overextending their personal debt. Once again putting conditions on us that we saw in 1984 when the Oil Boom bottomed out. Despite a labour shortage in no way are average wages keeping up with home costs.

Central Bank Warns Over [Canadian] House Prices (Globe and Mail, September 7th): "the central bank said yesterday that one of the key risks to the Canadian economy is that housing prices will continue to climb steeply here, exerting inflationary pressure, even as the entire U.S. economy is dragged down by its crumbling real estate market. The Bank of Canada surprised no one and left its key interest rate unchanged yesterday... Average home prices are expected to reach an all-time high in 2006, although the increase from 2005 is not as big a leap as the year before, said Gregory Klump, chief economist of the Canadian Real Estate Association. He expects average prices to rise 6.1 per cent in 2006 and 4.7 per cent in 2007. The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corp. is forecasting a 12-per-cent increase in housing prices this year and 6.4 per cent in 2007."

The American economy will be a basket case, having to take out more loans to offset the crash in consumer spending which is the only thing holding up Wall Street. While Wall Street has made money off companies that layoff workers, that too will come to bite them in the ass.

WHEN THERE ARE MORE "home for sale" than "help wanted" signs, the U.S. economy may be mired in recession.

Most gauges are confirming that the housing market has hit the brakes and may be in a tailspin. Existing-home sales dropped a more-than-expected 4 percent in July and the number of unsold houses is the largest since 1993. New-home sales fell 22 percent from the same month last year. And construction spending fell the most in five years.

While higher mortgage rates and affordability concerns have been the bogeymen in the current U.S. housing decline, little attention has been paid to the combined demons of unemployment and adjustable-rate mortgages.

WSJ Economist Survey -- Housing Slowdown to Continue; Recession a Possibility (Eli Hoffman in Seeking Alpha, September 8th): "In a recent survey of 52 economists, most believe cooling in the housing market will extend into next year. Housing forecasts: Many predict no change, or even a decline, in home prices next year. The average prediction for next year was a 0.43% increase in housing prices, well below the 2.7% forecasted CPI inflation measure. The last time housing trailed inflation was in 1996."

Risk of U.S. Recession Growing: HSBC (Reuters, September 8th): "Investment bank HSBC has revised downward its forecast for 2007 economic growth and cautioned that the risk of an outright recession is growing as a retreat in housing threatens household balance sheets... They now see gross domestic product expanding just 1.9 percent next year, down from an earlier forecast of 2.6 percent and from an expected rate of growth around 3.5 percent for 2006."

Like his daddy before him, George will have to either raise taxes or take out more loans from China. Either way just in time for the November election. Republicans lose both houses.

The Return of Saving
The U.S. savings rate has been falling for decades. But that downward trend will likely soon be reversed, as factors such as rising mortgage interest rates force Americans to start saving more. The change will ultimately be for the better, but in the short term it could cause serious problems for the United States and its trading partners unless they start preparing immediately.

Also See:

Housing Bubble

Economy



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
homes, mortages, housing, bubble, US, economy, Canada, softwood, lumber, crash, recession,

US Home Prices Now Posting Biggest Monthly Drops Since 2009

(Bloomberg) -- Home prices in the US have taken a turn and are now posting the biggest monthly declines since 2009.

Median home prices fell 0.98% in August from a month earlier, following a 1.05% drop in July, Black Knight Inc. said in a report Monday. The two periods mark the largest monthly declines since January 2009.

“Together they represent two straight months of significant pullbacks after more than two years of record-breaking growth,” said Ben Graboske, Black Knight Data and Analytics president.

The housing market is losing steam fast with skyrocketing mortgage rates driving affordability to the lowest level since the 1980s. The Federal Reserve has sought to curb inflation, which has thrown cold water on the US real estate boom.

While prices are falling on a month-over-month basis, they’re still significantly higher than a year earlier when the buying frenzy was going strong. Values were up 12.1% from a year earlier in August.

The sharpest correction in August was in San Jose, California, down 13% from its 2022 peak, followed by San Francisco at almost 11% and Seattle at 9.9%, the company said.

IT BEGAN EARLIER THAN 2009

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for HOME CRASH 2007 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for CRASH 2008 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for HOUSING CRASH 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Super Bubble Burst 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Forward to the Past 

How an economic crash could line Trump's pockets

Thom Hartmann, AlterNet
November 5, 2024 

America’s billionaires would love to have a recession, particularly a really severe one.

In a recent “town hall,” billionaire Elon Musk acknowledged what 23 Nobel Prize-winning economists across the country have predicted: If Trump is elected and he and Elon undertake their project to gut government spending, it will provoke a severe recession.
“We have to reduce spending to live within our means,” Musk said. “And, you know, that necessarily involves some temporary hardship, but it will ensure long-term prosperity.”

Most Republican voters aren’t taking his embrace of a recession or a short-term depression like George W. Bush brought us seriously.

“Why would the Republicans,” they’re asking, “who generally represent the interests of corporations and the rich above all else, risk crashing the stock market and economy where those very same wealthy people have their money invested?”

The question itself reveals a misunderstanding of how things work for the morbidly rich.

They are, uniquely, in a position to profit from the same economic downturns that wipe out average working people or those who’ve put their money into 401Ks invested in the market or certain stocks.

This is a story as old as capitalism. During the Republican Great Depression of the 1930s, for example, some of America’s greatest fortunes were made or massively expanded.


My (late) friend Gloria Swanson once told me over dinner in her apartment how her former manager and lover Joe Kennedy, who’d made a pile of money manipulating the stock market, bailed out as the market began its slide and even shorted the market, increasing his wealth. But once it had crashed, when everybody was broke, she said, he bought stock with a vengeance.

“Cash is king” was the phrase of the day, and Kennedy was well stocked in cash (he even bought a movie studio). By the end of the Depression, he was one of the richest men in the nation.

J. Paul Getty’s favorite phrase was, “Buy when everyone else is selling, and hold on until everyone else is buying.” It’s something you can only do at scale if you’re fabulously rich to begin with.


The afternoon of the Great Crash — October’s Black Tuesday under Republican President Hoover in 1929 — Getty skipped his parents’ golden wedding anniversary to head to Wall Street where he began buying stocks, particularly in small oil companies that were in trouble.
“It is the opportunity of a lifetime to get oil companies for practically nothing,” Getty later wrote. Out of that, he became one of the richest men in the world.

Flash forward to the modern era.

When Wall Street banks — exploiting Republican-demanded deregulation of banking and investment rules — crashed the American economy in 2007, home prices (and, thus, homeowner equity) collapsed by 21%. Over 10 million Americans lost their homes to banking predators like “Foreclosure King” Steve Mnuchin, and tens of millions of others were underwater.


The stock market plummeted by over 50% in the last year of Bush’s presidency. On October 9, 2007 the Dow was at its all-time peak of 14,164 but by March 5, 2009 it had collapsed to 6,594.

While over 8 million Americans lost their jobs and were wiped out as the Bush Crash started today’s homelessness crises, the top 1 percent saw it as a buying opportunity.

Working-class people were desperately unloading stocks in their 401Ks at a loss just to pay the bills, as wages plummeted in the face of a loose labor market.


But the morbidly rich were doing great.

Between 2009 — the bottom of the Bush Crash — and 2012 when the recovery really began, the top 1 percent of Americans saw their income grow by over 31 percent. Fully 95 percent of all the income increases in the country were seized by the top 1 percent of Americans during that period.

As the economy recovered, rich people who’d used their increased income to buy stocks at the market bottom rode the S&P 500 up by 462 percent to 2020. A billion dollars invested in 2009 became $4.62 billion in just 11 years, a period during which the combined wealth of American billionaires went up by over 80 percent.


Then they did it again 10 years later!

The Trump/Covid Crash of 2020, for example, presented America’s morbidly rich with another brand new and huge opportunity to get richer on top of a crisis brutalizing the rest of America.

Once again the market collapsed, this time under Republican Trump, and working people, now out of work, were selling their stocks at a loss just to pay the mortgage and buy food.


But for the wealthy, it was a gift from God.

March 16, 2020 — just after Trump declared a pandemic and lockdown — the Dow sustained the largest single-day crash in its entire history. For the investor class, Trump and his billionaire buddies, this was an even better opportunity than the Bush crash of 2007!

Fewer than three months later, on June 4th, we learned that the seven richest people in America had seen their fortunes increase by fully 50 percent.

And with Trump’s massive tax cut for his fellow billionaires, they could keep most all of it: by that time the average American billionaire was paying less than 3 percent in income taxes (a situation that persists to this day).


Just during that one single terrible pandemic year of 2020, the Institute for Policy Studies documents, the world's 2,365 billionaires saw their wealth increase by a full 54%, as U.S. billionaires saw their net worth surge 62 percent by $1.8 trillion. Average billionaire wealth worldwide increased 27% in that one year alone.

Billionaires’ real taxes have fallen by a full 79 percent since Reagan’s election in 1980, and a 2012 analysis found that as much as $32 trillion was safely squirreled away in tax-fraud offshore shelters.

And, apparently, they’re happily anticipating the next crash that their boys Musk and Trump, along with their bought-off Republicans in Congress, are working hard to bring to pass with threats of massive federal spending cuts.


— Economic downturns not only cut wages and present buying opportunities for the wealthy and corporate America, they also give massive companies far more leverage when negotiating with vendors, which are typically desperate smaller businesses.

— Billionaires and massive companies retain access to credit so they can leverage their buying opportunities in ways smaller companies and working class individuals can’t.

— And corporate power to fight unionization increases exponentially as workers scramble and compete for jobs that have become vanishingly rare.


But the average American can be forgiven for thinking that Republicans would be reluctant to crash the economy. Their lived experience is very different from that of Elon Musk (532% increase in wealth during the single year of 2020), Mark Zuckerberg (86% increase), or Jeff Bezos (65% increase).

During the Bush Crash, average income for the poorest 10% of Americans fell by a full 23%, making business (and billionaires) much more profitable while working people were skipping meals, selling their houses for a song, and cutting pills in half.

Thirteen years later, the Trump Crash threw 8,500,000 Americans out of work: According to the World Economic Forum, the adjusted unemployment rate hit 22.7 percent in 2020, higher than even during the Bush Crash, and it’s taken almost four years for working people to get back on track.

Small business revenue collapsed by more than a fifth under Trump, new business formation cratered, and by July 2020 one-in-five American families were behind on their rent. The rate of hunger in America doubled at the same time the GOP sought to cut food stamps (SNAP) and Medicaid benefits.

The Bush and Trump crashes, in other words, did the work the morbidly rich have been demanding for years. Wages fell, unions struggled, corporate profits hit highs literally never before seen in America, and hedge funds bought up millions of distressed single-family homes to flip into high-priced rentals.

The stock market became absurdly cheap with both crashes, providing both the multimillionaire members of Congress and their billionaire backers with what used to be once-in-a-lifetime buying opportunities.

Now, they want to do it again. And Musk is gleefully proclaiming his willingness to pull it off.

So don’t be so sure Republicans in the House and Senate won’t celebrate billionaires Trump and Musk dragging America into a second Republican Great Depression if they have a chance.

They and their billionaire buddies have almost nothing to lose and a new and even larger fortune to gain.

AMERIKA

Fannie Mae CEO says she has never seen a housing market like this before

Fannie Mae CEO Priscilla Almodovar has worked in the housing-finance industry for decades, including during the 2007-09 financial crisis. The current market is unlike any she’s ever seen, she said. - 

Cindy Ord/Getty Images for American Institute for Stuttering

Aarthi Swaminathan

MARKET WATCH

Wed, October 16, 2024

After two decades working in housing policy, Priscilla Almodovar is intimately familiar with the challenges the U.S. faces when it comes to housing.

The Brooklyn native took the reins of the New York State Housing Finance Agency in 2007 amid a financial crisis that was fueled by a crash in subprime mortgages. Today, buyers are facing the opposite problem: Demand for homes is so insatiable that even as mortgage rates remain elevated and home-insurance costs soar, home prices keep inching up to new record highs.

As the chief executive of Fannie Mae FNMA, a government-sponsored enterprise that backs one in four residential mortgages in the U.S., Almodovar, 57, has a front-row seat to it all. That lands her on the MarketWatch 50 list of the most influential people in markets.

“It’s a highly unaffordable market right now. We are monitoring and following all these trends, things that we’ve never seen before,” Almodovar told MarketWatch in an interview.

“You have home prices the highest we’ve seen in two decades,” she said.
Home sales on track for worst year since 1995

Home buyers and renters are facing record-high housing costs. The issue has become such a big priority for average Americans that the presidential candidates are proposing various solutions to make homeownership more affordable.

Meanwhile, some renters are taking matters into their own hands with rent strikes, while some aspiring homeowners have abandoned the idea and decided to rent indefinitely, finding it far cheaper than owning.

Even though mortgage rates have come down after the 30-year rate posted a big jump to 8% in October 2023, the average mortgage payment — which includes principal and interest, as well as property taxes and homeowners insurance — hit a new record high of $2,070 in August, according to Intercontinental Exchange. That’s up 24% from before the pandemic.


Mortgage rates are unlikely to drop back down to prepandemic levels anytime soon, Almodovar said. Regarding the 3% rate seen during the pandemic, she said, “we probably will never see that again in our lifetime.”


Even if buyers can afford the price of a home, there aren’t many options to choose from. The market is still enduring the lock-in effect, with current homeowners seeing little benefit in selling their current property and buying a more expensive one at higher interest rates.

The lock-in effect in particular is an unusual phenomenon that has stalled the housing market. Homeowners’ unwillingness to sell resulted in home sales that were 57% lower in the fourth quarter of 2023 than in the same quarter the previous year, the Federal Housing Finance Agency estimated in March.

Put another way, the lock-in effect “prevented” the sale of 1.33 million homes, the agency said.

Addressing the nation’s housing challenges will likely take more than initiatives from whoever wins the presidential election. Bringing the cost of housing down will also require policy makers at the federal, state and local levels to get involved, Almodovar said.

“There’s a consensus today that part of the solution is more supply,” she said. That means preserving the nation’s old existing homes and also building new units, she added.

Many of the obstacles to increasing housing supply are controlled at the local level, she noted.

“It’s zoning. It’s not-in-my-backyard NIMBY-ism,” Almodovar said. “The No. 1 issue is the local. That’s where decisions really get made.”
Homeownership is still part of the American dream

The pressure brought on by high rates and high prices has stalled the housing market. Fannie Mae’s economists expect only 4 million existing homes to be sold in the U.S. through 2024, the lowest number since 1995.

Nonetheless, most Americans aspire to own a home. About 84% of respondents in a 2023 survey by LendingTree said that homeownership is part of their American dream.

Almodovar grew up in New York City, and her parents bought their first home when she was 5 years old. In reaching that milestone, they felt like they had achieved the American dream, she recalled, noting that the idea is still “very much ingrained in what we think, and the mindset of our country.”

For that reason, the current environment has made housing “one of the most important domestic policy issues that we have to tackle,” Almodovar said.
Housing costs pushed up by unstable variables

It’s not just the challenges of saving for a down payment and of navigating elevated mortgage rates that are making homeownership unaffordable for many Americans. Rising insurance costs also mean homeowners are struggling more to fit their monthly payments into their budget.


Unlike a monthly mortgage payment, which remains the same throughout the life of a fixed-rate loan, insurance costs have surged over the last few years, adding instability to an otherwise stable 30-year loan.

Recent natural disasters — including hurricanes Milton and Helene, which caused significant damage in parts of the southeastern U.S. — illustrate the challenges climate change is posing to homeowners and to the housing industry.

Climate risk is something Fannie Mae is monitoring closely, Almodovar said.

As real-estate companies race to bring climate-risk information to prospective home buyers and homeowners, government agencies are revving up not only to offer assistance to affected homeowners but also to impose a moratorium on foreclosures of mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration.

They are also trying to stay ahead of the risk by encouraging people to make their homes more resilient to climate disasters.

Because it guarantees one in four mortgages in the U.S., Fannie Mae has skin in the game — and officials there are worried.

There is a gap between how much risk is understood by homeowners and what private-sector companies know, Almodovar said.

The federal government publishes maps of places that are expected to flood, but Hurricane Helene demonstrated how locales that are further inland and have historically not been prone to flooding can end up inundated. “So it is something that concerns us,” Almodovar said.

Ultimately, “climate is one of those areas where there’s no one silver bullet,” she said. Instead, “it’s really all sectors working together, and all industries working together.”

Housing Crash the New S&L Crisis

When you build a house the key to the solidity of its construction is a well built basement. When you buy a house the key to its market stability is your mortgage. When you are poor and buy a house using a sub-prime mortgage you are buying on a weak foundation as the market is discovering in the U.S. this week.

As housing prices fall and interest rates increase those who bought over-valued homes in the U.S. on a variable mortgage will find themselves paying more for a home of less value.

And what they thought were sub-prime mortgages, that is below prime rates, are actually variable rate mortgages. The were sold as below prime due to being longer to pay back, but if interest rates increase they will increase to be above the prime rate. It is a classic bait and switch scheme. Already the U.S. is experiencing thousands of bankruptcies and foreclosures.

It is yet another example of business as usual which cheats the poor to line the pockets of the rich. In this case folks with bad credit were given credit by companies that had dubious funds themselves, who in effect once they had enough debt were able to be financed by the big banks looking to sink their profits into the market.

Then the market crashes, and the banks withdraw their funds from the sub prime market leaving the dubious credit companies without financial backing, and their creditors in foreclosure to the same banks that lent their creditors the credit in the first place. But only one of these crooked credit lenders is going to jail. And it ain't the big banks.

Instead the U.S. economy could tail spin, especially in light of massive layoffs recently announced by Chrysler and Hershey's, and other companies. The result will be massive foreclosures leaving banks and lenders holding declining valued properties that cannot be sold off fast enough to recoup their loses. And then they will come with their hands out asking for taxpayers to bail them out.

The market correction yesterday on news of the sub-prime crash impacted on global markets world wide even as far away as South Africa; US sub-prime crisis batters JSE

Sub-prime worries echo the S&L crisis

DID those troublemaking sub-prime US home borrowers actually know that their mortgage rates could (and in many cases certainly would) go up one day? Were they properly informed by sub-prime lenders? That's the startlingly mundane question at the core of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown, which threatens global markets and may billow into a financial cataclysm to rival the 1980s US savings and loan (S&L) financial debacle.

Both the question - obvious though the answer might seem to most Australians - and the comparison are worth scrutiny.

There is a reasonable chance some of these poor and usually first time home buyers - with loans Wall Street likes to refer to as "trailer-trash mortgages" - didn't understand they were taking out variable rather than fixed-rate home loans.

After all, most US mortgages historically were flat rate - repayments were constant over their 20 or 30-year term, although the mix of interest costs and capital repayments obviously varied.

Just as Australian mortgages became a more diverse mix of fixed and variable rate loans through the 1990s, a minority of the US market has gradually shifted to variable rate loans. And thanks to the exceptionally low level of near-term interest rates in recent years, which made these loans appear stable and cheap, these were often the very loans that sub-prime lenders pushed hardest to less traditional home buyers, such as those in, yes, you already know where they supposedly live.

The S&Ls were pillaged of their best assets by the big Wall Street houses, which quickly figured out that a bunch of dusty Fannie Mae-supported mortgages snapped up at 60 per cent of face value from struggling narrowly based S&Ls in the flyover states could be pooled, securitised and resold as diverse, near federal-quality, mortgage-backed bonds at large profits.

Fears of US mortgage crisis as homeowners face 12% interest

· Shares fall on worries for wider economy
· Research predicts 2.2m defaults on homeloans

Larry Elliott and Jill Treanor
Wednesday March 14, 2007
The Guardian

The US central bank was under pressure last night to underpin the country's troubled housing market as figures showed an increasing number of US homeowners falling behind with their mortgage payments and having their properties repossessed.

The problems had a knock-on effect on Wall Street where the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 242 points to close at 12,075 amid fears the malaise in the housing market would infect the rest of the economy. There were signs of mounting problems for firms that have aggressively sold home loans to people with poor credit ratings - so-called sub-prime mortgages.

The US Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) yesterday pushed back its forecast of a rebound in the real estate market from the middle of 2007 until the end of the year after reporting an increase in both late payments and foreclosures in the final three months of 2006. It said defaults had risen for all loan types but were particularly marked for those with sub-prime mortgages with adjustable rates.

Borrowers with loans totalling $265bn (£137bn) are scheduled to have the interest rates on their mortgages reset this year and many of the poorest homeowners in the US could face interest rates as high as 12%. The Fed meets next week to set base interest rates but is expected to leave them unchanged at 5.25% despite the latest mortgage default figures.

Research by the Centre for Responsible Lending has predicted that one in five of the sub-prime mortgages made in the past two years will end in foreclosure, resulting in the biggest crisis for the mortgage market in modern times.

The centre said 2.2m sub-prime home loans had already failed or would end in foreclosure and that the losses to homeowners could be as high as $164bn.

The data from the MBA showed total mortgage defaults up from 4.67% to 4.95%, but sub-prime delinquencies rose from 12.56% to 13.33%.

The problems have most clearly been illustrated by New Century Financial, which is on the brink of bankruptcy without enough cash to repay its own lenders. Its shares have been suspended by the New York Stock Exchange and it has admitted receiving a grand jury subpoena as part of a criminal inquiry into trading in its shares as well as accounting errors. State regulators in Massachusetts yesterday ordered New Century to fulfil its promises on loans in process and barred it from making new loans. It was coordinating its order with several other states, including New York, New Jersey and New Hampshire.

Other states, however, were reluctant to take action that could contribute to a lender filing for bankruptcy, leaving borrowers stranded.

US banks face sub-prime note inquiry

The fallout from America’s mortgage implosion continued yesterday when the state of Massachusetts said it is investigating the possibility that Wall Street firms had issued unrealistically upbeat research notes on leading “sub-prime” home loan makers to safeguard lucrative investment banking business.

William Galvin, the state’s commonwealth secretary, has subpoenaed Bear Stearns and UBS Securities for documents about their analysts’ recommendations of New Century Financial and other troubled lenders of high-risk mortgages made to people with the lowest credit ratings.

Mr Galvin said he was concerned that some investment banks may be violating terms of a 2003 global research settlement, reached in the wake of the bursting of the dot-com bubble. Under that agreement, investment banks paid fines and agreed to isolate their analysts from other businesses after regulators accused them of publishing biased research to win investment banking work from companies they covered.

Mr Gavin said: “Recent revelations that research analysts issued positive reports on mortgage lenders to those with less than solid credit ratings even as those companies faced more and more defaults suggests that the commitment of 2003 has not been met.”

See

China Burps Greenspan Farts Dow Hiccups

Housing Bubble

Housing

Economy



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
homes, mortgages, housing, bubble, US, economy, Canada, sub-prime mortgage, Wall Street, crash, recession,

Crashing the economy: Inside Trump's blueprint for more grifting

Thom Hartmann,

 AlterNet
January 30, 2025 

Photo illustration: Christopher Sciacca/Shutterstock

Democrats are warning that Trump’s threats to increase our national debt by as much as $7 trillion (with new tax cuts for billionaires), shift billions of Treasury dollars into crypto, and impose tariffs on imported goods risk creating a financial crises and maybe even a second Republican Great Depression.

After all, tariffs will jack up inflation, crypto is incredibly volatile, and increasing the national debt will pull hundreds of billions out of the treasury in interest payments that could have otherwise been used to help the American people, rebuild our infrastructure, and upgrade our schools. Any of the three could trip off a national economic emergency: all three could be a perfect storm.

Trump, though, seems unconcerned, even though Republican economists are also signaling their alarm. Which raises the question: Why is he so willing to risk an economic crash on his watch with these risky policies?

To the average person, the idea of a recession or even a crash like we saw under Bush in 2008, Reagan in 1981/82, or Hoover in 1929 seems grim. Millions are laid off work, businesses are in crisis as bankruptcies erupt across the nation, and poverty explodes during a time when more than half of American families live paycheck-to-paycheck.

To understand why a billionaire like Trump — and the billionaires who put and keep him in office — might be not just willing but enthusiastic about creating an economic crisis, you first must view it from a rightwing billionaires’ point of view.

— First, a time of economic disaster is a great excuse to gut government programs or reduce taxes with the excuse that federal tax revenues have cratered along with the economy. Both Reagan and George W. Bush used recessions as an excuse to “stimulate the economy” by cutting trillions from the taxes of billionaires and big corporations.

Reagan’s Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 used that year’s severe recession as an excuse to reduce funding for social programs including food stamps, Medicaid, and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). George W. Bush used his recession as the justification to try to cut Social Security, although that plan died in the face of widespread public opposition.

— Second, times of economic crisis increase the tolerance for strongman governments. FDR, for example, pushed through a number of then-radical programs using the Republican Great Depression as his excuse. Rightwing politicians were beside themselves, calling him a tyrant, communist, and usurper of constitutional authority, but the majority of Americans at the time were largely with him.

In Europe, Hitler used the Depression to his advantage when he came to power in 1933, demanding — and receiving — massive emergency powers including the ability to rule by decree and outlaw his political opponents.


Trump could similarly use a severe economic crisis to consolidate his power and ram through the authoritarian Project 2025 wish-list as a starting point to take America down the road to an America First form of neofascism.

His billionaire social media backers are already seeding the ground. The US and the UK both embraced neoliberalism (destroy unions, cut taxes on the rich, embrace free trade) around the same time (Thatcher/Reagan) with similar consequences for the middle class of each country.

A new study by Channel 4 in England, reported in The Times, found:

“Most young people are in favour of turning the UK into a dictatorship, according to a ‘deeply worrying’ study, which has revealed an acceptance of authoritarianism and radicalism among Generation Z.
“Fifty-two per cent of Gen Z — people aged between 13 and 27 — said they thought ‘the UK would be a better place if a strong leader was in charge who does not have to bother with parliament and elections.’
“Thirty-three per cent suggested the UK would be better off ‘if the army was in charge.’”

Where did they get these ideas? From social media, it turns out, including the feeds of accused racists, misogynists, and neofascists like “Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson,” who were “trusted” by 42 percent of British young men.

Fifty-eight percent said they trusted social media posts more than traditional news sources. And 45 percent believe women have gained too many rights, echoing Tate’s argument that, as young British men told Channel 4, “We have gone so far in promoting women’s equality that we are discriminating against men.”

Here in America, the percentage of young men who believe women have acquired too much power has increased from 32% to 45% in just five years, while fully 52% say they trust what they read or see on social media.


— And third, billionaires often make the most money when there’s a crash. They absolutely love market collapses because they are, uniquely, in a position to profit from the same economic downturns that wipe out average working people or those who’ve invested their 401Ks in the market.

This is a story as old as capitalism. During the Republican Great Depression of the 1930s, for example, some of America’s greatest fortunes were made or massively expanded.

My (late) friend Gloria Swanson once told me over dinner in her apartment how her former manager and lover Joe Kennedy, who’d made a pile of money manipulating the stock market in the 1920s, bailed out as the market began its slide in 1929 and even shorted the market, increasing his wealth. But once it had crashed, when everybody was broke, she said, he bought stock with a vengeance.


“Cash is king” was the phrase of the day, and Kennedy was well stocked in cash (he even bought a movie studio). By the end of the Depression, he was one of the richest men in the nation.

J. Paul Getty’s favorite phrase was, “Buy when everyone else is selling, and hold on until everyone else is buying.” It’s something you can only do at scale if you’re fabulously rich to begin with.

The afternoon of the Great Crash — October’s Black Tuesday under Republican President Hoover in 1929 — Getty skipped his parents’ golden wedding anniversary to head to Wall Street where he began buying stocks, particularly in small oil companies that were in trouble.


“It is the opportunity of a lifetime to get oil companies for practically nothing,” Getty later wrote. Out of that, he became one of the richest men in the world.

Flash forward to the modern era.

When Wall Street banks — exploiting Republican-demanded deregulation of banking and investment rules — crashed the American economy in 2007, home prices (and, thus, homeowner equity) collapsed by 21%. Over 10 million Americans lost their homes to banking predators like “Foreclosure King” Steve Mnuchin, and tens of millions of others were underwater.

The stock market plummeted by over 50% in the last year of Bush’s presidency. On October 9, 2007 the Dow was at its all-time peak of 14,164 but by March 5, 2009 it had collapsed to 6,594.


While over 8 million Americans lost their jobs and were wiped out as the Bush Crash started today’s homelessness crises, the top 1 percent (and the Bush and Cheney families) saw it as a buying opportunity.

Working-class people were desperately unloading stocks in their 401Ks at a loss just to pay the bills, as wages plummeted in the face of a collapsing labor market.

But the morbidly rich were doing great.


Between 2009 — the bottom of the Bush Crash — and 2012 when the recovery really began, the top 1 percent of Americans saw their income grow by over 31 percent. Fully 95 percent of all the income increases in the country were seized by the top 1 percent of Americans during that period.

As the economy recovered, rich people who’d used their increased income to buy stocks at the market bottom rode the S&P 500 up by 462 percent to 2020. A billion dollars invested in 2009 became $4.62 billion in just 11 years, a period during which the combined wealth of American billionaires went up by over 80 percent.

Then they did it again 10 years later!


The Trump/Covid Crash of 2020, for example, presented America’s morbidly rich with another brand new and huge opportunity to get richer on top of a crisis brutalizing the rest of America.

Once again the market collapsed, this time under Republican Trump, and working people, now out of work, were selling their stocks at a loss just to pay the mortgage and buy food.

But for the wealthy, it was a gift from God.

March 16, 2020 — just after Trump declared a pandemic and lockdown — the Dow sustained the largest single-day crash in its entire history. For the investor class, Trump, and his billionaire buddies, this was an even better opportunity than the Bush crash of 2007!

Fewer than three months later, on June 4th, we learned that the seven richest people in America had seen their fortunes increase by fully 50 percent.

And with Trump’s massive tax cut for his fellow billionaires, they could keep most all of it: by that time the average American billionaire was paying less than 4 percent in income taxes (a situation that persists to this day).

Just during that one single terrible “crash” year of 2020, the Institute for Policy Studies documents, the world’s 2,365 billionaires saw their wealth increase by a full 54%, as U.S. billionaires saw their net worth surge 62 percent by $1.8 trillion. Average billionaire wealth worldwide increased 27% in that one year alone.

And now it begins anew: Republicans are meeting at Trump’s Doral golf resort in Miami today to plan strategy.

Don’t expect them to argue that it would be a bad thing if his plans provoked an economic crisis: To the contrary, that may well be exactly what they — and their billionaire owners — are hoping for.

RONA Vs Greenpeace

What is behind Greenpeace's attack on RONA three weeks ago? The Eastern Canadian home retailer, who has a strong base in Quebec.

Canada's largest home renovation retailer said yesterday it cannot comply with the more environmentally friendly lumber standards demanded by Greenpeace.

About 75 per cent of the lumber products sold at RONA Inc. stores meet the environmental standards of three certifying bodies, a company spokesperson said. But of that 75 per cent, only 15 per cent of wood meets the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council, often considered the most stringent certification program.

Earlier this week, Greenpeace blasted RONA and other retailers for using suppliers that chop down trees from endangered areas of Canada's Boreal Forest.

Canada's forest companies are no angels. For more than a century after Confederation they were, in fact, looters. But government-mandated reforestation and advances in silviculture since then make it hard to swallow Greenpeace's claims that Canada's boreal forest is "indisputably" sick.

What's indisputable is that the boreal forest is a massive storehouse of greenhouse gases that covers 58 per cent of Canada's territory. That 70 per cent of it is commercially inaccessible. That only 0.5 per cent is logged in any given year. That Canada has a deforestation rate of zero. And that in Ontario and Quebec, Abitibi and Kruger are cutting much less than their annual allotment in the face of slumping lumber prices.

What's more, forestry engineers - a group that indisputably loves the forest every bit as much as Greenpeace - marvel at the boreal forest's capacity to regenerate itself more than any other type of forest in the world. Experts are also finding that self-regeneration - whether after natural fires, insect epidemics or logging by humans - may be a more effective way to promote biodiversity than intensive replanting.

All of which makes Greenpeace's attack on Abitibi curious enough. But why does Rona get blacklisted and not IKEA or Home Depot? Greenpeace says it's because the latter two retailers have made specific undertakings to source FSC products. But IKEA conceded in April that only 4 per cent of the wood used in its Chinese factories - the source of most of its furniture - meets the FSC grade.

Much of the wood used in Chinese furniture manufacturing is illegally logged in Russia and Myanmar.

Massive deforestation in Russia, Asia and South America is a real, verifiable, contributor to global warming. And when reforestation occurs, it's on plantations, as in China or Brazil, where such monoculture is biodiversity's worst enemy. Yet, those are the same countries whose low-cost lumber, pulp, paper and furniture are decimating Canada's forest industry.

RONA (TSX: RON), the largest Canadian distributor and retailer of hardware, home renovation and gardening products, has been made aware of a document published earlier today by Greenpeace and wishes to make the following clarification.

Sustainable development has long been a priority at RONA. The Company has a responsible purchasing policy that applies to all of its products. With respect to forest products, the Company does not buy any product derived from endangered species and favours the purchase of products that bear Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Canadian Standards Association (CSA) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) as well as ISO 14001 certifications. Furthermore, RONA ensures that all of the goods it procures, whether forest products or other, have been produced in conditions that respect human rights and the environment. RONA applies these principles in its choice of suppliers, sub-contractors and other business partners.

Over the past 10 years, RONA has recovered 3.6 million containers of paint in Quebec, or over 30% of all paint recovered in the province. Left unrecovered, old paint may be poured out into nature - a real threat to the environment. By promoting the recovery of these products, RONA is offering the public an economical and ecological alternative to burial in landfills or incineration.

From collection points at stores across RONA's Quebec network, the old paint and containers are then sent to the RONA distribution centre in Boucherville. From there, the old paint is sent to Peintures recuperees du Quebec. About 80% of the old paint is reconditioned and put back on the market. Leftover latex and alkyd paint, stain and varnish are all accepted in the recovery and recycling program.

RONA (TSX:RON), the largest Canadian distributor and retailer of hardware, home renovation and gardening products, has announced a 9.1% increase in sales and an 11.6% increase in operating income for the second quarter of 2007. This increase in sales and income can be attributed to acquisitions made in the last 12 months and additional measures taken at the beginning of the quarter to stimulate sales and earnings growth in a business environment that was more difficult than anticipated.

Net earnings increased by $6.2 million or 7.7%, from $80.0 million in the second quarter of 2006 to $86.2 million in the second quarter of this year.

Operating income reached $161.8 million in the second quarter of 2007, an increase of $16.8 million, or 11.6%, over 2006. EBITDA margin rose from 10.8% in 2006 to 11.0% in the second quarter of 2007.

Net earnings for the second quarter of 2007 stood at $86.2 million, or $0.74 per share, diluted, compared to $80.0 million in 2006 or $0.69 per share, diluted. This represents an increase of 7.7% in net earnings and 7.2% in diluted earnings per share.

Well its a back handed attack on Abitibi which is in merger talks with American forestry products company Bowater.

In a recent report, Greenpeace cited logging and pulp companies such as Abitibi-Consolidated, Bowater, Kruger and SFK Pulp as being directly responsible for destroying nearly 200,000 square kilometres of boreal forest.

The activists charged pulp manufacture, SFK Pulp, with purchasing wood
chips from destructive logging operations. Two of the main suppliers of wood
chips to SFK Pulp, Abitibi-Consolidated and Bowater, log in the last remaining
intact areas of the Boreal Forest, in the habitat of threatened species as
woodland caribou, and in areas where industrial logging is opposed by local
First Nations.
"Logging companies like Abitibi-Consolidated and Bowater continue to deny
that there's anything wrong in Canada's forests," said Ferguson. "But anyone
who's seen the satellite images showing massive fragmentation, the scientific
reports showing species extirpation, and the news reports describing closure
after closure of mills and towns knows different."

A detailed new Greenpeace report,Consuming Canada's Boreal Forest: The Chain Of Destruction From Logging Companies To Consumers, traces the journey of clear-cut trees from virgin boreal stands to retail store shelves.

The group fingers what it calls the worst despoilers of northern timberland: Abitibi-Consolidated Inc., Bowater Incorporated and Kruger. The first two merged last month, creating a corporate colossus with cutting rights to an area of the Ontario and Quebec boreal as big as the state of Nebraska.

Also named are a list of retailers buying products from the three – part of a campaign to get firms to buy forest products made either from recycled material or from logging operations certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.

Consuming Canada's Boreal Forest: The Chain Of Destruction From Logging Companies To Consumers,

The report release follows on the hanging of a massive banner from the Montreal headquarters of Abitibi-Consolidated two weeks ago. Canada’s Boreal Forest stretches across the north of the country, from Newfoundland to the Yukon. It represents a quarter of the world’s remaining intact ancient forests and stores 47.5 billion tonnes of carbon in its soils and trees. Ontario and Quebec's intact Boreal Forest represent 14% and 18%, respectively, of the entire country’s intact forest areas.

The demands of the Logging Companies are to:
o Cease logging in all intact forest areas, caribou habitat, and mapped endangered forests immediately, and work with governments and nongovernmental organizations to formally protect these areas;
o Shift to FSC certification across all tenures to ensure environmentally and socially responsible management of these forested areas, and ensure all products are FSC-certified;
o Commit publicly to not pursue licensing and new logging activities in currently unallocated areas of the Boreal Forest; and
o Refrain from logging without the prior and informed consent of First Nations whose territories are affected.

Left Nationalists like Mel Hurtig and Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians may want to ask Greenpeace if this really helps Canada. Attacking indigenous capitalist industries like Abitibi and Rona.

While we ponder the silence over the sale of Abitibi to Bowater in the MSM and among the politicians. You see that was yesterday's news. Before Alcan and Stelco.

A union representing forestry workers said the move by Abitibi and Bowater should cause concern in government and community circles.

"There are many issues underlying this announced merger which should raise alarm bells in Ottawa," said David Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada. "Our forest-based industries and communities are already in crisis with the loss of some 10,000 jobs over the past few years.

"Our history with mergers and acquisitions has been that so-called 'synergies' really mean more mill closures, job losses and devastation in our communities," he said.

The deal continues a wave of consolidation in the forestry sector as companies try to get bigger to deal with increased competition and to cut an increase in operating costs due to higher fuel, transportation and raw material costs and the rising Canadian dollar.

For example, Montreal-based Domtar (TSX: DTC) is expected to soon close a $3.3-billion deal to muscle up its operations by merging with the fine paper division of U.S.-based Weyerhaeuser, one of the world's largest forestry companies.

The marriage of Abitibi and Bowater is just the latest move in a tectonic shift that sees North America forestry players jostling to grow and compete with the rest of the world, said Bowater president and CEO David Paterson, who will move to Montreal to head the new corporate entity.

"This is a continuation of what I see as a long-term trend of a globalization of the market, that North American companies have to be able to compete with Asian, South American and European producers and they have to do that from a low-cost platform and that's what we're trying to create here."

However the merger is still in the works. Abitibi-Consolidated and Bowater Provide Merger Update

And with the high dollar and housing crash in the U.S. comes the warning of more plant closings.

The double blow of slowing home construction and falling newsprint demand is hitting wood and paper companies and forcing them to try to adapt quickly. The strategies of choice: consolidation and cost-cutting.

Shareholders of Montreal-based Abitibi-Consolidated Inc. (nyse: ABY - news - people ) and Bowater Inc. (nyse: BOW - news - people ), based in South Carolina, approved a deal last month to combine the two companies. U.S. regulators still need to give approval before the two can become AbitibiBowater Inc., which would be the third-largest forest products company in North America.

The deal could close by the end of September, and may lead to plant closures.

"U.S. regulators are expected to require mill closures in order to let the merger go through," Banc of America Securities analyst George Staphos told investors in an industry update last week.

Since May, Abitibi shares have dropped 21 percent, Bowater fell 23 percent, International Paper by 16 percent and Weyerhaeuser 21 percent.

But in Roberval–Lac-Saint-Jean it was a crucial issue, leading to the election of a Mayor who can get things done. Grease the palms, bring in a bit of largese; some federally funded development projects to offset in some small way the devastation occurring in primary forestry in the region.

Quebec experienced the greatest decline in the country, as production decreased by 20.4 per cent to 1.18 million cubic metres, or 19.1 per cent of total Canadian output.

Quebec's production has declined monthly by double digits since July 2006.

Producers face reduced overall harvest quotas from the provincial government. They have also reduced volumes to fit a quota agreed to under option B of the softwood lumber agreement with the United States.

As Jean Paul Blackburn has in the neighboring riding. After all Abitibi is the major employer in that region.

The new mega forestry giant Abitibi/Bowater will face a tremendous responsibility to employees and their communities as the planning now begins to integrate the two paper companies.

Abitibi-Consolidated and Bowater will now put the troops to work planning detailed integration of their global pulp and paper and lumber business. Both company’s Canadian mills are being bled by high energy and fibre costs and especially by the Canadian dollar’s surge – as all products are sold in U.S. dollars. “Costs will have to be cut right across the system,” said David Paterson, Bowater’s CEO who will become CEO of the new Abitibi/Bowater. John Weaver of Abitibi-Consolidated would not comment on possible rationalization in eastern Canada, where the highest cost mills are located.

While Bowater has to pay for a less than stellar environmental record.

Bowater Inc. will pay $42.5 million to Weyerhaeuser Co. to settle a dispute over costs at a Canadian pulp and paper plant Bowater sold to the company in 1998. Bowater and Washington-based Weyerhaeuser (NYSE:WY) have been arbitrating a claim regarding the cost of environmental matters related to the mill.

And while the Conservatives assert a lassiez faire attitude to corporate takeovers, try and pawn the disaster that their Softwood Agreement onto the Charest government, they realize that Quebec expects state capitalism in some form. And that is how you keep seats.

 MONTREAL, Sept. 7 /CNW Telbec/ - A new Leger Marketing poll commissioned
by Greenpeace reveals that 86 per cent of Quebecers support the suspension of
logging in the last remaining intact areas of Boreal Forest in the province.
Additionally, only 18% per cent of respondents believe that forest
companies and the government of Quebec are managing forests in a way that
serves the public interest and forest workers.
"The public's lack of confidence in the government and logging companies
is significant," said Melissa Filion, a forest campaigner with Greenpeace.
"Without taking quick and concrete action to protect the forest, the
government and logging companies will not regain the public's trust."

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Alcan, Canada, foreign takeover, workers, smelter, surplus-value, van Houtte, Marxism, capitalism
Harper, Emerson, softwood, US, NAFTA, free-trade, lumber, duties, taxes, Canada, B.C., Ontario, Quebec, mills,
Canada, Alberta, green, environment, climate change, global warming,
pine beetle, B.C., lumber, forest, softwood,

Private equity is predatory capitalism with a long trail of destruction

Prem Sikka
5 April, 2024
LEFT FOOT FORWARD


There won’t be enough money to contain the tsunami caused by private equity collapse. Yet there is no move to shackle private equity.



Prem Sikka is an Emeritus Professor of Accounting at the University of Essex and the University of Sheffield, a Labour member of the House of Lords, and Contributing Editor at Left Foot Forward.

Private equity is part of predatory capitalism that is swallowing everything from accountancy firms and airports to supermarkets and more. Some see it as a saviour of distressed companies and jobs, but it has no long-term interest in companies. It only buys to sell, and has left a long trail destruction which the rest of society has to mop-up.

The UK economy is yet to fully recover from the 2007-08 banking crash, but the path to the next crash is being laid by private equity which is unregulated. It controls assets of £6.3 trillion and in 2022 invested around £47bn in UK companies.

Private equity is effectively a consortium in which sovereign-wealth funds, banks, pension funds, hedge funds, insurance companies, financial technology firms, mutual funds, clearing houses, money market funds, private credit funds, trusts and wealthy individuals pool resources to buy a variety of business entities and generate high returns by selling them, often by breaking them.

Private equity operates through complex corporate structures and key components are almost always located in low/no tax jurisdictions with little or no transparency. High leverage, low wages, low investment, asset-stripping, strategic bankruptcies, profits shifting, tax avoidance and financial engineering are key tools for extracting profits.

It loads the acquired entity with secured debt because interest payments qualify for tax relief, which lowers the cost of capital and helps to increase returns. The secured creditor status enables private equity to drastically reduce or eliminate the losses which might arise from bankruptcies because it has to be paid before all other creditors.

Some may refer to Benson for Beds and B&M as examples of the private equity success story, but overall its focus on the short-term is destructive. Private equity controlled businesses are 10 times more likely to go bankrupt than those who aren’t. More often than not, it is deliberate to increase returns. Its UK victims include Bernard Matthews, Byron Burger, Casual Dining Group, Cath Kidson, Comet, Debenhams, Flybe, Four Seasons Health Care, HMV, TM Lewin, Maplin, Monarch Airlines, Paperchase, Planet Organic, Poundworld, Southern Cross, Toys R Us and many more. Thousands of jobs have been lost and town centres have been turned into economic deserts. Tax bills are not paid. Too many SMEs in the supply-chain have been wiped out as they could not recover the amounts owed to them.

Bernard Matthews was a well-known poultry business and fell upon hard times after its founder’s death. It was sold to a private equity consortium which loaded it with secured debt. Within the next three years, its private equity owners sold-off parts of the business and then deliberately placed it into bankruptcy. They refused to sell the whole business because that would have required the new owner to buy liabilities and pension scheme deficit, in return for a lower price. Instead, they only sold the tangible assets because that maximised the profits for private equity. Unsecured creditors and pension scheme deficit was dumped. This pattern has been repeated across numerous collapses.

In 2021, Debenhams closed its doors after 242 years, with the loss of 12,000 jobs. It was destroyed by private equity which increased debt from £128m to £1.6bn, and paid itself dividends of £1.3bn. The company was strangled by debt which left no wiggle room for investment and collapsed owing £616m to its suppliers.

Private equity has its tentacles in England’s water companies. Thames, Yorkshire and Southern Water are all inflicted by private equity and have higher leverage than other water companies. Profits are made by dumping sewage in rivers, not plugging leaks and low investment. Since 2020, Thames Water is has dumped 72bn litres of sewage into rivers and has not built any new reservoirs since 1989. It is now struggling for survival and has hiked customer bills by 12.1%, well above the rate of inflation.

Private equity has moved bought GP surgeries, nursing homes, hospitals, opticians, dermatology, and ophthalmology providers. Accessing GPs is becoming harder and doctors are being replaced with less qualified staff. A 2023 research study concluded that private equity ownership was “most consistently associated with increases in costs to patients or payers” and “associated with mixed to harmful impacts on quality.” It could identify “no consistently beneficial impacts of PE ownership.”

Some 75% of children’s care homes are private, and eight of the 10 largest UK private providers are private equity owned homes. Local councils are charged more than £30,000 per week or £1m per year for placements for children with significant care needs. Some 30%-40% of all public money handed to private equity controlled care homes vanishes in profits. Profiteering and neglect is never far away.

Care home workers are some of the lowest paid, a key factor in high vacancies, high staff turnover and low quality of care. Executive pay has rocketed. Highly paid executives focused on profit extraction have not delivered high quality of service. Numerous private equity controlled care homes attract “inadequate” and “requires improvement” quality ratings from regulators but they still pay high dividends. For example, HC-One, the UK’s largest care home service provider for more than 14,000 residents in 321 homes pays dividends even when the company makes losses. Research studies have concluded that for-profit homes provide lower quality of service than not-for-profit homes, and “private equity financing and independent for-profit ownership are associated with lower quality”.

A House of Commons report noted that around 16% of the fees paid to care homes vanish in interest payments to service high levels of leverage. Companies dodge taxes through the use of “tax havens, complex related party transactions and other artificial arrangements. It further added that there is “no transparency over ownership”, “no rules to stop or discourage financially risky behaviour”, and “providers bear no responsibility for the continuity of care if they suddenly leave the market or change ownership”.

Private equity has moved into supermarkets. In 2021, Morrisons wasacquired by private equity for about £7bn, which was loaded on to the company as debt. With rising interest rates, it soon hit the buffers. Asset stripping began with the sale of 337 petrol forecourts for £2.5bn. It is raising finance through sale and leaseback of stores. It may sell its manufacturing arm, which includes abattoirs, vegetable packing houses and fish processing plants, to raise cash to repay debt. It is goodbye to the benefits of integrated business synergies. Worker’s pay has been cut and employer pension contributions reduced. Customers complain of less choice, higher prices, a less-rewarding loyalty scheme, fewer staff, increasingly tatty stores and more self-checkouts.

In 2021, Issa Brothers in collaboration with private equity consortium TDR Capital bought Asda, and loaded it with £6.8bn debt. Through a complex corporate structure, Asda is controlled by a company registered in the tax haven of Jersey. Issa Brothers deny that the offshore vehicle will facilitate tax avoidance, but there is little other use of it. Soon after the debt-laded acquisition, the company announced job losses and 5% pay cut for about 7,000 workers. In February 2024, it was reported that one of the Issa Brothers is considering selling part of his stake in Asda.

The Bank of England has expressed concerns about the debt pile of private equity and its vulnerability to higher interest rates. Any major collapse would infect the whole economy. After the 2007-8 banking crash the state provided £1,162bn of support (£133bn cash and £1,029bn of guarantees) to bailout ailing banks and £895bn of quantitative easing to support capital markets. There won’t be enough money to contain the tsunami caused by private equity collapse. Yet there is no move to shackle private equity.

For starters, tax relief on interest payments should be abolished. Whether an investment is funded with debt or equity makes no difference to the systemic risk but tax relief facilitates high returns for the dealmakers and encourages high leverage. That subsidy must end. All prudential rules applied to banks, such as capital adequacy; need to be applied to private equity. The Competition and Market Authority should not permit takeovers where the buyer has consistently abused its powers. The gains made by private equity dealmakers are their incomes and must to be taxed at the marginal rates between 20%-45% instead of capital gains currently taxed at rates between 10% and 28%. Insolvency law needs to be changed to prevent private equity masquerading as a secured creditor from walking away with almost all of the proceeds from the sale of business assets. At least 50% must be ring-fenced for the benefit of unsecured creditors, and enable innocent SMEs caught up in the private equity games to survive and flourish.

Image credit: Marc Barrot – Creative Commons