World financial news

Only 20 percent of Oregonians have earthquake insurance, even though Oregon is among the states at highest risk for a major earthquake, according to a survey by the state Department of Consumer and Business Services.

Standard home owner policies do not cover earthquakes, but optional earthquake coverage is readily available and relatively inexpensive, the department said.

“Consumers may want to think about their ability to rebuild if their house is destroyed in an earthquake,” said Cory Streisinger, director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services. “Insurance should be weighed as part of other earthquake preparations.”

Jan. 25 will mark the 310th anniversary of the last major Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake, magnitude 9.0, centered 75 miles offshore. That temblor damaged the coastline from Northern California to Southern British Columbia, according to the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries.

A 10,000-year geologic record shows these mega-quakes occur every 300 to 600 years, putting Oregon within the window of a major earthquake, said James Roddey, state earth sciences information officer.

Damaging earthquakes have also occurred within the past 16 years in different parts of the state, causing tens of millions of dollars worth of damage.

The Department of Consumer and Business Services Insurance Division last year surveyed 20 insurance companies that account for 80 percent of the home owner insurance premiums in the state.

It found:

• Home owners generally can buy earthquake insurance as an addition to their policy or as a separate policy. The few companies that do not offer earthquake insurance in Oregon typically refer clients to a company that sells stand-alone earthquake policies.
• Earthquake coverage is relatively inexpensive — often less than $300 a year for a $300,000 wood-frame home. Masonry homes are more expensive to insure.
• Owners of older houses may need to bolt their homes to the foundation or make other seismic upgrades before they can buy earthquake insurance.

Earthquake coverage generally features high deductibles. These typically amount to 10 percent or 15 percent of the amount covered by insurance. A home owner with a house insured for $300,000 and a 10 percent deductible would pay $30,000 before the policy would pay. Coverage for contents is separate.

Source

The Supreme Court again Monday turned away the latest challenge to Chrysler’s bankruptcy and sale to Italian automaker Fiat.

The justices declined an appeal filed by three Indiana state pension funds which hold a portion of Chrysler’s nearly $7 billion in secured debt. The court said the issue is moot since the Chrysler sale was formally completed six months ago.

The three funds — representing police officers and teachers — sought greater compensation for their share of the debt.

A federal appeals court — as well as a bankruptcy judge — approved the sale of the Chrysler assets.

The financially troubled domestic automaker had filed for bankruptcy April 30, and at the time pinned its future on the restructuring plan pushed by the White House.

Chrysler had been trying to leave behind its debt as part of the Chapter 11 process, a step that would wipe out much of the Indiana pension funds’ holdings.

The funds held about $42 million, or less than 1%, of Chrysler’s debt.

Lawyers for the funds argued to the Supreme Court that the Obama administration improperly used money from a federal bailout to help Chrysler. That money was designed, they say, to help only struggling financial institutions payday loan lenders.

Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock said the pension funds are secured creditors and, therefore, deserved a say in the outcome. They said they were no longer were seeking to block the sale but simply wanted to recover money for their investors.

Both Chrysler and the federal government said the sale to the Italian automaker had to be completed quickly to ensure domestic jobs were not lost and to keep Chrysler financially afloat for the long term.

The Justice Department, in a filing with the high court, said the president had the authority to tap into the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to help Chrysler. "As an economic matter … blocking the transaction would undoubtedly have grave consequences," wrote Solicitor General Elena Kagan.

The deal with Fiat and Chrysler was finalized in June, but legal appeals continued. The new company for now is to be owned jointly by the federal government, an autoworker’s union retiree fund and Fiat.

The case is Indiana State Police Pension Trust v. Chrysler LLC (09-285). 

Source

The Bank of Canada is widely expected to keep its hands off interest rates Tuesday, holding them at near zero and committing to do so until at least July, despite growing evidence the economy is kicking back to life.

Fears of prolonged economic stagnation eased Friday with a report showing employers hired five times as many workers as expected. The data supported the Bank of Canada's view that economic growth will speed up in the fourth quarter after a disappointing third quarter, when it barely crept out of recession with tepid 0.4 per cent annualized growth.

All 12 of Canada's primary securities dealers forecast the central bank would hold its overnight target rate unchanged at 0.25 per cent at its final policy-setting meeting of the year. The bank releases its rate decision and accompanying statement at 9 a.m. ET.

Two-thirds of the traders think the bank will follow through on its pledge to hold rates at that level through mid-2010, conditional on inflation staying on track.

Reuters News Agency

Source

Whole Foods Market announced Wednesday that it is seeking space in downtown Honolulu as an alternative to its planned Ward Village Shops location.

In a brief announcement, the company said it is looking for “a new location to serve the downtown area of Honolulu as construction of the Ward Village development has halted.”

The company said that no Whole Foods representatives were available for comment.

The store at the Ward Village Shops had originally been planned as Whole Foods’ flagship store for Hawaii. It was scheduled to open in early 2008, but the Texas-based natural foods chain instead opened its first Hawaii store at Kahala Mall in September 2008.

Construction at the Ward site — between Auahi Street and the Queen Street extension — stopped in December 2008 when landlord General Growth Properties ordered the general contractor on the project to stop work.

The Whole Foods building and the adjoining 900-stall parking structure are about 60 to 70 percent complete.

It was not clear from the statement if Whole Foods was permanently abandoning the Ward site or if it would still locate there if General Growth resumed construction. General Growth, which owns the Ward complex as well as Ala Moana Center, declared bankruptcy in April with about $10 billion in debt.

General Growth has not said when construction on the $100 million project, which has already been stopped several times because of the discovery of ancient Hawaiian remains on the site, would resume.

Whole Foods said it is still on track to open a Maui store in February and a Kailua store on Oahu in 2011.

Source

Citigroup Inc. hired Willem Buiter, a former Bank of England official who has criticized the Federal Reserve for being too close to Wall Street, as its chief economist.

Buiter, 60, will join the bank in January and fill the position left vacant by Lewis Alexander’s move to the U.S. Treasury eight months ago, New York-based Citigroup said in a statement today.

The appointment by the bank, which is 34 percent owned by the U.S. government, puts an academic known for his outspokenness in its most senior economics position. In 2008, Buiter told the Fed’s annual symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, that it pays an “unhealthy and dangerous” amount of attention to the concerns of the biggest U.S. financial institutions.

“As one of the world’s most distinguished macroeconomists, Willem’s deep knowledge of global markets and economies, and emerging markets economies in particular, will be invaluable to our clients,” Hamid Biglari, Vice Chairman of CitiCorp, said in the statement.

Buiter, currently a professor of political economy at the London School of Economics, has been unafraid to speak his mind about former or potential future employers.

CDO Comments

“In August 2007, several CEOs of major cross-border banks admitted they didn’t know what a CDO was,” Buiter said at the European Banking Congress on Nov. 20 in a discussion on the role of collateralized debt obligations in the financial crisis. “Most members of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee didn’t either.”

Buiter called Citigroup “a conglomeration of worst- practice from the across the financial spectrum,” in an April posting on his blog, posted on the Web site of the Financial Times.

In June, he wrote in the blog that the appointment of former Citigroup Chairman Winfried “Win” Bischoff to help oversee a report on the future of U.K. international financial services was “the most ridiculous appointment since Caligula appointed his favorite horse a consul.”

Citigroup spokeswoman Danielle Romero-Apsilos declined to comment. A message left for Bischoff at Lloyds Banking Group Plc, where he is now chairman, wasn’t returned. Felix Salmon of Reuters reported Buiter’s comments on Citigroup and on Bischoff earlier today.

Founding Member

Buiter was one of the founding members of the U.K. central bank’s rate-setting panel when he joined in June 1997. In March 1999, he voted for a 0.4-point interest-rate cut, the only attempt in the MPC’s history for a move that wasn’t in a quarter-point multiple.

In 2008, Buiter turned his fire on his hosts when the Fed invited him to its annual retreat in the Teton Mountains.

“The Fed listens to Wall Street and believes what it hears,” Buiter told an audience of central bank officials from the Fed and around the world. “This distortion into a partial and often highly distorted perception of reality is unhealthy and dangerous.”

Fed Governor Frederic Mishkin said at the same event that Buiter’s paper fired “a lot of unguided missiles,” and former Vice Chairman Alan Blinder “respectfully disagreed” with his analysis of the central bank’s crisis management.

Dubai Views

Buiter has been a consultant to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. since 2005, according to today’s statement. He has a bachelor’s degree from Cambridge University and a doctorate from Yale University.

Questioned on Bloomberg Television today about government- controlled Dubai World’s request for a standstill agreement with creditors, Buiter said that they shouldn’t expect a full state- backed rescue.

“This is a business that’s fallen on hard times and its creditors and bondholders simply have to take their lumps and not expect a sovereign bailout,” he said.

Buiter was chief economist for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development from 2000 to 2005. He has been an adviser to the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, according to the statement.

Alexander, who had worked at Citigroup since 1999, left in March to become a counselor on domestic finance issues to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. He was paid $2.4 million by Citigroup in 2008 and the first months of 2009, according to his financial-disclosure form filed with the Treasury. In December 2007, he predicted the U.S. would probably avoid a recession.

Buiter is married to Anne Sibert, an economics academic who was appointed as a member of Central Bank of Iceland’s five- member Monetary Policy Committee earlier this year, according to a Web log posting on his site.

Source

Retailers heading into the traditional start of holiday shopping are facing consumers who are only a bit less gloomy than they were a year ago as they worry about a weak job market.

The latest snapshot from the Conference Board showed shoppers’ confidence improved only slightly in November, from October, but it’s stuck far below what could be considered healthy and is about half of the historic average.

The private research group said Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence Index edged up to 49.5, up from a revised reading of 48.7 in October. Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters expected a reading of 47.7. That compares with a reading of 44 no checking account payday advance.7 in November 2008, a level that sank even lower before enjoying a three-month climb from March through May. But the road has been bumpier since June as rising unemployment has taken a toll on consumers.

A reading above 90 means the economy is on solid footing. Above 100 signals strong growth.

How consumers behave during the holidays and beyond will be key to how strongly the economy rebounds from the worst recession since the 1930s.

Source

A senior U.S. lawmaker unveiled a much-anticipated proposal on Wednesday that would give government regulators the power to break up financial firms that pose a risk to economic stability.

Democratic Representative Paul Kanjorski, chairman of the House capital markets subcommittee, said his proposal would give that power to a Financial Services Oversight Council, subject to review by the president in some cases.

He offered the plan as an amendment to a bill being debated and amended this week by the House Financial Services Committee as part of a broad push by the Obama administration and Democrats to tighten bank and capital market regulation.

“If my amendment is accepted, financial firms would need to demonstrate to regulators that their failure would not undermine the financial stability of the American economy,” Kanjorski said in a statement.

“No firm should be considered to be ‘too big to fail.’ Financial firms that want to play in a casino need to have their own resources to cover their bets and not assume that tax dollars are available in reserve if their bets fail,” he said.

Financial companies could appeal council actions, under the bill, according to a summary.

Size would be one factor considered by the council in determining whether to take action against a firm. Other factors would include “scope, scale, exposure, leverage, interconnectedness of financial activities,” the summary said.

Actions that could be taken would include “modifying existing prudential standards, imposing conditions on or terminating activities, limiting mergers and acquisitions, and in the most extreme cases, breaking up the company,” it said cash til payday.

Kanjorski added he will coordinate with the European Union on the issue. “After meeting with many European Union officials and members of the European Parliament earlier this year, I realized that we share many of the same concerns,” he said.

EU regulators are considering measures to force banks across Europe to sell assets and sometimes even break up to compensate for massive state aid they have received.

BIG BANKS WARN

On Monday, some of the world’s largest financial firms urged Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, a Democrat, not to pursue big bank break-up legislation.

The Financial Services Forum, a lobbying group for CEOs of firms such as Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, said empowering regulators to break up “too-big-to-fail” banks could cause “long-term damage to the U.S. economy.”

But small and mid-sized banks, which have demonstrated considerable political clout through this year’s financial reform debate, support break-up legislation, which would cut their largest rivals down to size, lobbyists said.

Giving break-up power to regulators would be “a good thing,” said Paul Miller, a policy analyst at investment firm FBR Capital Markets, on Wednesday. 

Read more

General Motors Co GM.UL is confident that it can find the financing to keep and restructure its European Opel unit, Chief Executive Fritz Henderson said on Thursday.

Henderson declined to say how many jobs would have to be cut at Opel or what plants would be closed, saying those details would be presented to Germany and other European governments soon as part of a restructuring plan.

Opel has the liquidity it needs to pay off the 900 million euros ($1.34 billion) remaining on bridge loan from the German government.

At the same time, GM can find ways to provide financing to Opel from its U.S. operations even after a restructuring funded by U.S. taxpayers that had placed some initial restrictions on the automaker’s ability to shift funds to its overseas units.

GM’s decision to keep Opel rather than selling a majority stake to a group that includes Canada’s Magna International and Russia’s Sberbank has touched off controversy in Europe.

Thousands of Opel workers in Germany on Thursday downed tools in a protest.

“We will be very shortly presenting our plan,” Henderson told reporters at a briefing at GM’s headquarters. “We feel confident that the plan will be financeable.”

Henderson said GM could provide liquidity to Opel by reducing the royalties that the European unit would otherwise pay to headquarters online payday advance.

The terms of GM’s exit from bankruptcy in the United States after taking $50 billion in U.S. government financing also allow GM to send funding directly to Opel if needed, he said.

“We are able to run a global business. We certainly need to be prudent about it. We need to be careful about it but we can run a global business,” Henderson said.

Henderson acknowledged that the automaker had “work to do to repair” its relations with the European unions.

GM’s Opel unit was rescued temporarily by a bridge loan from the German government that requires repayment by the end of November.

GM is outperforming its financial plans since emerging from bankruptcy in July and now sees more stability around its sales forecasts, Henderson said.

Henderson said the GM board meeting this week that scrapped plans to sell Opel had been “very vigorous.”

(Reporting by Kevin Krolicki, writing by David Bailey, editing by Dave Zimmerman)

Read more

Although U.S. President Barack Obama has never set foot there, China cast a long shadow in the Pacific region where he grew up.

Obama, who will visit Shanghai and Beijing for the first time on November 15-18, spent much of his childhood in Hawaii, five time zones away from Washington, D.C.; and beginning in 1967, when he was six years old, he lived in Jakarta for four years.

At the time, China was in the throes of Chairman Mao Zedong’s bloody Cultural Revolution. Abroad, the nation was less interested in selling widgets than in promoting Mao’s brand of radical communism — a force the U.S. saw behind communist movements and political upheaval in Vietnam, Indonesia and elsewhere in Southeast Asia.

In 1979, Obama’s senior year at Punahou school in Honolulu, China and the United States normalized diplomatic relations, launching a three-decade period in which ties between the two grew inexorably tighter and deeper — and complicated.

“Think of what China was in 1979: It was an autarkic, insular, inward-looking country that was preoccupied with its own internal things,” said a senior U.S. official. “Even 10 years ago … there was still a sort of sense of ‘We’re not a part of these global rules, we’re not doing this stuff.’ Now they see themselves as sitting at the table.”

If there were any doubts that China would have a seat at the table from now on, Obama dispelled those when he sent Secretary of State Hillary Clinton there on her first official trip abroad — not Pakistan, Afghanistan or any other foreign policy hot spot.

“That the first major visit (was) to China, and to Asia as well, is symbolic of where the locus of international economic activity — and to some degree the locus of international activity, period — is going to be in the coming years,” said economist and author Zachary Karabell, whose new book “Superfusion” posits that the U.S. and Chinese economies have effectively merged.

Beijing, once considered a wallflower on global affairs, is in turn warming to its more prominent role, though it’s unclear that will translate into greater cooperation with Washington on issues like climate change and the nuclear disputes with Iran and North Korea — not to mention human rights differences.

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg highlighted the tension at the heart of the relationship in a speech in September. “Given China’s growing capabilities and influence, we have an especially compelling need to work with China to meet global challenges,” he said.

But Steinberg added that there was a tacit bargain in which the United States expects China to reassure the rest of the world that its growing role “will not come at the expense of security and wellbeing of others.”

That of course includes America’s.

“The big challenge there is going to be to maintain a competitive U.S. economy, and at the same time to maintain a high degree of stability and equanimity in the U.S.-China relationship,” said Clyde Prestowitz, president of the Economic Strategy Institute think tank.

Indeed, even as the United States and China have grown closer diplomatically, their economic and trade ties have deepened to the point of mutual dependence. Not only does China depend on the U.S. export market to fuel its highflying economic growth rates, the United States relies on China’s vast savings to help finance its burgeoning budget deficits.

“It is clearly unsustainable. This relationship helped give rise to global economic imbalances,” said Ben Simpfendorfer, an economist with Royal Bank of Scotland in Hong Kong. “If we are ever going to free ourselves of these imbalances, we need to reverse this relationship, get China to buy things in the U.S. and the U.S. to invest in China.”

“STAKEHOLDER” STRATEGY 

Read more

Congress is considering proposals to greatly expand a soon-to-expire $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers — potentially applying it to all but the wealthiest homebuyers.

Supporters say doing so would further boost home sales, stabilize housing prices and generate jobs. Opponents say extending and expanding the credit would be a waste of money and only temporarily stave off further price declines.

The credit now can be claimed by anyone buying a home who has not owned one for three years and who closes the deal by Nov. 30.

Beyond extending that deadline, some lawmakers want to make the credit available to all homebuyers who meet income eligibility requirements. And some want to increase the amount of the credit from $8,000 to $15,000.

Currently the first-time home buyer credit is available in full to those buying their primary residence who make $75,000 or less ($150,000 for joint filers). A partial credit is available to those making between $75,000 and $95,000 ($150,000 to $170,000 for joint filers).

The case for expanding the credit

Through mid-September, 1.4 million tax returns had qualified for the credit, according to the IRS.

Some portion of those returns, which the IRS couldn’t specify, represents buyers who took advantage of an earlier version of the tax credit, which was only worth $7,500 and has to be repaid over time.

By the end of November, the credit will have been used by 1.8 million homebuyers, at least 355,000 of whom would not have bought a house without the tax break, according to estimates by the National Association of Realtors.

Mark Zandi, chief economist of MoodysEconomy.com, favors extending the current credit until June 1, 2010, and making it available to all home buyers regardless of income or at least to everyone except those at the highest end of the income scale. He estimates the cost of doing so wouldn’t exceed $30 billion over 10 years.

Zandi’s reasoning: Foreclosures are expected to rise next year because of rising unemployment, and that will drag home prices down further. Extending and expanding the credit will help mute that decline. And by June, there’s a chance the job market will have stabilized.

"The most fundamental argument for the credit is that nothing works in the economy if housing is falling — it hurts household wealth and credit becomes tight," Zandi said. "[The credit] is a good insurance policy. It’s vital to stem the housing price declines."

To kick start economic activity, Zandi believes lawmakers should set aside an amount of money for an extended credit and tell potential home buyers "first come first served."

The National Association of Home Builders would like the credit extended for all of 2010.

"We estimate that this would increase home purchases by 383,000 in the next year and help mitigate the foreclosure crisis by whittling down inventory," NAHB Chairman Joe Robson said in a statement. "This stimulus alone would create nearly 350,000 jobs over the coming year, which is exactly what the economy needs right now."

A study funded by the industry-supported Fix Housing First Coalition found that the current credit helped stimulate demand for homes at the lower end of the price spectrum.

"An expansion of the tax credit would spur an increase similar to what occurred in the lower end of the market, by motivating buyers in the ‘trade-up market’ to purchase a higher priced primary home," said Kenneth Rosen in testimony before Congress. Rosen runs the consulting group that conducted the study and is chairman of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at the University of California in Berkeley.

The case for letting the credit expire

Opponents of extending and expanding the credit worry that such moves offer poor bang for the buck and won’t stem housing declines.

"Everything spent on this program will ultimately have to be paid for later through higher, economically harmful taxes," Ted Gayer, co-director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, wrote in a Brookings blog.

Assuming there are 5.5 million home sales in 2010, Gayer said, expanding the credit to all homeowners "is poorly targeted because it would give a credit to 5.5 million homebuyers who would have bought a home anyway."

The current credit was estimated to cost federal coffers $6.64 billion over 10 years. But Gayer notes that the cost is likely to be much higher since more people than expected took advantage of it but only about 15% of people wouldn’t have bought a house otherwise.

It would cost an estimated $16.7 billion if the credit is extended until the end of June 2010 and made available to single filers making up to $150,000 and joint filers making up to $300,000. Those are the parameters that Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., are proposing in an amendment they introduced to a bill the Senate is expected to take up this week. (Please see correction.)

Another argument against an extension: It would only temporarily boost home prices and potentially set up those using it for a fall. That’s because home prices are likely to decline once the credit expires and interest rates ultimately trek north, according to Dean Baker, codirector of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

"Temporarily propping up house prices, so that a new set of homebuyers can incur losses, is a policy of questionable merit," Baker said in a CEPR column.

The sooner the market adjusts the better, Baker said. He did offer one caveat: "We may want to step in to prevent prices from overshooting on the downside in a select group of markets where this is a real possibility."

Zandi said that’s already happened in a number of markets, and that an extended credit might help turn around the deflationary psychology in those markets where buyers are worried about catching a falling knife.

- CNNMoney.com’s Les Christie contributed to this report.

Correction:This article originally misstated Sen. Isakson’s home state.  

Source