Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The Atomic Bomb that is About to Explode at the Federal Reserve

I have consistently contended that Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke is something akin to a mad scientist who, in his development of new "tools" to manage monetary policy, is probably unaware of all the nuances and ramifications of the new tools he is developing. Indeed, one problem with one of his new tools may be about to blow up in his face.

It turns out that Bernanke's decision to pay interest on reserves held at the Fed by member banks has some twists to it that make what he is doing likely illegal. The blog Uneasy Money points this out in a post titled, Is the Federal Reserve Breaking the Law:



In a comment earlier today to this post, David Pearson shocked me by quoting the following passage from the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006:


Balances maintained at a Federal Reserve bank by or on behalf of a depository institution may receive earnings to be paid by the Federal Reserve bank at least once each calendar quarter, at a rate or rates not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates.

As I said to David Pearson in my reply to his comment, I am flabbergasted by this. The Fed is now paying 0.25% interest on reserve balances while and the interest rate on 3-month T-bills is now 0.01%. Yet the statute states in black letters that the rate that the Fed may pay on reserves is “not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates.” In fact, as can be easily seen on the Treasury’s Daily Yield Curve webpage, only on rare occasions was the 3-month T-bill rate as high as 0.25% in 2009 and it has been consistently less than 0.20% for most of 2009 and all of 2010 and 2011.
Got that? The Fed, as I have pointed out a number of times, is paying interest to bankers many times what is available in the marketplace and this turns out to be illegal.

Now it just so happens that the Congressional wording is a bit sloppy and says the pay out of "earnings" instead of interest, and you can be sure Bernanke is going to attempt to dance on the head of this pin , but the spirit of Act is clear, Fed member banks aren't supposed to be receiving payouts from the Fed that are greater than what they can get in the open market.

In other words, Bernanke is breaking the law, and one would think that now that this is public, he will have to cease paying interest at 0.25% to Fed bank members.

And as for him getting the law change, good luck to Bernanke trying to get new legislation through Congress, with the current anti-bankster sentiment in the country. Is there a Congressman around who will vote to allow the Fed to pay banks 25 times the current market rate?

This is where the atomic bomb explodes. Since Bernanke started paying interest on reserves (especially excess reserves),excess reserves have climbed from a few million to $1.6 trillion. If Bernanke stops paying interest at 0.25%, the money is likely to fly out of excess reserves and into the economy quicker than you can say, "hyper-inflation fiat money".

Maybe Bernanke will find a way to squirm out of this mess or simply ignore the law, the way recent Presidents have ignored many laws, but it will be nice to know that when the trials come Bernanke will be up there, with the other lawbreakers, having to explain why he ignored the law and paid the banksters interest 25 times greater than what is allowed by law.

(Thanks 2 Bob Murphy for pointing the Uneasy Money post out to me)

33 comments:

  1. WOW! Hey, Isn't this something that could justify RP sending a subpoena to Bernanke to justify coming to his sub-committee?

    My only concern is that this law from 2006 was rewritten by one of the financial bills passed in the last couple years.

    -Mike

    ReplyDelete
  2. this is so juicy



    but somehow i know that it's all so corrupt now that they'll be able to brush this aside

    perhaps - gasp - fox news is our only hope? - to push this story

    ReplyDelete
  3. Somehow we all thought MERS was going to blow up in the faces of the banksters, but the government saved them. I imagine the government will ignore this as well. Something about not biting the hand that feeds you (or buys up your debt).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Couldn't/won't the fed argue that since the funds rate is set to <0.25bps, that 0.25bps IS the general level ... the wording is not "market level/rate"

    I agree its a BS distinction, but one that imho would probably work (unfortunately)

    ReplyDelete
  5. These Counterfeiters also make huge loans to banker's wives at 0.25% so they can "invest" in our slavery in 10-year bonds paying 3%. What do these insiders do for their millions in interest payments other than sign loan documents? It seems Counterfeiting is easy money.

    ReplyDelete
  6. How we define the "general rate" is fickle. I am going to assume since most people would define the general rate as what they can get in their bank savings account (per annum).
    Let's assume the annual savings rate is %1, which is .25% quarterly.

    Wouldn't that be matching the general rate?

    ReplyDelete
  7. What a surprise, the Fed is doing something illegal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wow, this is great information. It would take Congress or some oversight committee to force the Fed to stop paying the 0.25% rate, correct? If that is the case, then I am not sure anyone would really push the matter considering the end result may very well be that those reserve hit the real economy and we go hyper. Still it is quite ridiculous that the Federal Reserve is breaking this law, and if I understand it correctly, a host of other laws with respect to the assets it holds.

    This rampant lawlessness at the Fed, on Wall Street and in the Halls of our local, state and Federal government will be the end of us.

    Mac

    ReplyDelete
  9. And on that note, since the Federal Reserve is a private company, do they pay taxes or are they immune (for whatever reason)?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Everyone knows that the Fed is a non-profit company.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Interesting. Short-term rates are commonly defined to be up to twelve months. Even then, the 52 wk TBill is trading at about 0.10%.

    ReplyDelete
  12. More lawbreaking and who but the creators knows what evolves next...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Folks, I think we all have a responsibility to get this story out to as many people as possible. The more people learn about the organized crime bosses in the Fed and our asshat politicians who love them are doing, the better. Thanks for posting.

    ReplyDelete
  14. They've been breaking the law by their very existence since 1913 - you think this is going to matter? They're above the law.

    ReplyDelete
  15. From today's FOMC Minutes:

    "Participants discussed whether to reduce the IOR rate, weighing potential benefits and costs. A number of participants judged that a reduction would result in at least marginally lower money market rates and could help stimulate bank lending. Several noted that reducing the IOR rate could help signal the Committee’s intention to keep the federal funds rate low. Some participants observed that keeping the IOR rate noticeably above the market rate on other safe, short-term instruments could be perceived as subsidizing some banking institutions."

    http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/fomcminutes20110921.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sorry, this article is sheer nonsense. The FED made 6% on its money in 2010, or $72 billion.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Everyone just stop,does this really surprise you ? to be in Goverment , you must be able to lie through your teeth while smiling at the TV cameras .An when your in office, fill your pockets with ever one else money. then get away free an clear. while the common fokes get the shaft.we need to tear down the federal reserve an put all of them jail, an get all the moneys back .bring on the revolution , I love this country,an hate the federal goverment,fu-king us

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oops, your wrong, they are not breaking the law. The official short term rate is 0.25%, the federal funds rate, established by the Federal reserve. The rate on reserves shall not exceed the level of the short term interest rate as established by the Federal Reserve. They established it at 0.25% and cannot help it if market conditions and the lack of demand for liquidity reserves has driven the rate below the Federal Funds rate. This may be semantics to you, but dont you think the Federal reserve's numerous lawyers lookd into this policy change before it was established in the banking system? Duh...........

    ReplyDelete
  19. Where is Ron Paul? Doesn't he oversee this group of criminals? He should be all over this.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @Anon 10/13/11 8:05am: You mean the same criminal lawyers that signed off on the Blackrock sole-source contract for Maiden Lane and the most fraudulent internal accounting scheme since Friehling?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yup, seems to me that anonymous is correct... I noticed it right away... the term "general level of short-term interest rates". Seems like that gives them an awful lot of leeway. Why do you feel the term alludes to rates on the 3 month t-bill rather than the fed funds rate? I'm no fan of the Fed but I just don't see that paying .25% is breaking the law.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Folks, the Fed has & is in violation of several laws, improperly citing & misapplying Sections of its regulatory 'authority' as justification for its 'activities' including GSE's - which were NOT government agencies, unlike Ginnie Mae operated by FHA which IS backed/guaranteed by US govt, the Fed is violating the Section which only applies to FHA govt agencies to 'cover' its improper GSE toxic debt it 'relieved' banksters of & now has on Fed's balance sheet, & more importantly, regulations PROHIBITING what the Fed has & is doing with respect to Maiden Lane I & II -
    To see the specifics, see the article Doug Hussman PhD posted on 'financialsense.com'
    highlighting just two examples (with links to the specific Fed reg. Sections) titled:
    'Four Talking Points for Qccupy Wall Street Protesters.'
    His article is also posted on his own website
    a link from his article posted on financialsense.com' will take you to the full text.
    Bernankenstein & Geithner have to GO.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Qualification for appointment to any job in the current administration: witnessed proof of extraction of all fillings from his mother's teeth at the burial site by the candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sitting here in Europe we had a fat laugh when Obama said Europe has to get its act together because we are threatening world financial stability.

    I have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that control of US finances has been wrestled away from the Washington based crooks that have been rigging markets for decades. Politics may be the art of the possible, but I'm not sure your president has even recognised what may be desirable.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Whatever Bernanke does, never forget who appointed him. It was none other than the devil himself, George W. Bush, the one who lad the red carpet for the Marxist in the White House.

    ReplyDelete
  26. So why should the banks lend any money if the Fed is paying interest on the money sitting in the vault?

    The Fed thinks that this will help the crisis situation. But it is screwing the people who want to refinance or buy homes thus ultimately it is putting the screws to every homeowner who has seen the value of their home go down in addition to prevent the sale of homes except at a loss to the homeowner. This a created a paralysis in the movement of sales of homes. The Fed needs to find a better way. I have got a great idea: WHY DOESN'T THE FED DISOLVE ITSELF....YES....GO OUT OF BUSINESS. THAT WOULD SOLVE ALL OF THE MONETARY PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE IN ADDITION TO PAYING OFF THE DEBT.
    ONCE THE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT HARM THE FED HAS BEEN DOING TO THE AMERICAN ECONOMY SINCE ITS FOUNDING IN 1913 THEY WILL GO OUT OF BUSINESS. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE FED IS ...A BUSINESS TO MAKE THE FOREIGN INVESTORS WHO OWN THE FED GUARANTEED WEALTH PAID FOR BY THE SUFFERING AMERICAN TAXPAYER.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Want to straighten out America then vote for Ron Paul. But understand that you will be voting for his ultimate demise because I am sure that if he is elected the International Bankers will assassinate him within the first 2 months he is in office. No one has been able to stand up to these International Banking monsters. I believe they got rid of Kennedy because he signed a authorization to reinstate silver as a replacement for the Federal Note which is only backed by NOTHING. But the BIG GUYS AT THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCE ARENA GET A GUARANTEED INCOME FROM THE INTEREST THAT THE TAXPAYERS PAY TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY OWN THE FED. RESERVE. YES, VIRGINIA, THE FED IS OWNED MOSTLY BY FOREIGNERS WHO DO NOT HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART....ONLY THEIR OWN. ALL OF THE WARS ARE FOUGHT SO THAT THEY CAN PUT MORE MONEY INTO THEIR POCKETS BY LOANING MONEY TO THE GOVERNMENT. THEY NEVER WANT TO SEE AMERICANS PAY OFF THE DEBT BUT THEY DO WANT TO SEE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS GO MORE DEEPLY INTO A NEVER ENDING DEBT SITUATION. THE $$ INTEREST ON THAT NEVER ENDING DEBT CYCLE IS TERRIFIC. WHEN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON THERE WILL BE A WAR BUT THE WAR WILL BE TARGETED AGAINST THE INTERNATIONAL BANKING CROOKS.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Don't say that ABOUT DR/ CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL.....We need to pray NO WEAPON FORMED AGAINST HIM WILL PROSPER...He is exposing them for what they are... the media is acting a though he does not exist...They are not reporting true polls...Biasing the people to who they are pushing...Ron Paul can make real change...Read his books...It is his bill TO AUDIT THE FED...it is our Tax $$$...we need to help him...Look at their buildings....I can think of better ways to spend my money ...can't you?

    ReplyDelete
  29. SNL this weekend was funny- it showed Dr Paul in the parking garage during the debate (he was exiled there since they don't think he can win) and an unwarked van pulls up and yanks him inside. You see gunshots from the van, and the commentator says it looks grim for Dr Paul- until you see him step out of the van, and adjust his suit jacket!

    It was a very good (and funny) portrayal of the good Dr!

    RDFitz

    ReplyDelete
  30. no way that this fake money flows into the real economy. finance and economy are already two separate worlds.

    ReplyDelete
  31. This law is still current. It has been codified at 12 U.S.C. § 461(b)(12)(A), and that section of the U.S. Code is current through August 12, 2011. I can't find anything in the statute defining what "the general level of short-term interest rates" is, but there is a weak case to be made that the Fed gets to define it since § 461(b)(12)(B) gives the Federal Reserve Board authority to "prescribe regulations concerning the payment of earnings in accordance with this paragraph."

    ReplyDelete
  32. Read about President Andrew Jackson's fight to do away with The Bank of the United States and how he succeeded. I forget under which administration this abomination was resurrected, but the seed for the demise of our economy was planted with that event. Are there any more Andrew Jacksons out there?

    ReplyDelete
  33. The Fed has more information about what to do than the naievete who challenged the Fed's action. There are novices everywhere trying to find something to wrrite.

    ReplyDelete