When times are tough, treasures change hands, the late Burt Blumert, once a gold dealer and Mises Institute Board Chairman, used to say. “Prices are high, and I need cash,” Branden Sabino, a thirty-year-old information technology worker said, adding that with the cost of rent, groceries, and car insurance rising, he doesn’t have any savings. He sold a gold necklace and a gold ring to King Gold and Pawn on Avenue 5 in Brooklyn. “People are using gold as an ATM they never had,” said store owner Gene Furman.

At King Gold, fifty-five-year-old Mirsa Vijil pawned a bracelet to pay her gas bill. “Gold is high,” she said, adding she’d never pawned her jewelry before but will do it again if she needs to.

Adrian Ash, director of research at online gold investment service BullionVault says there is twice as much selling as a year ago on BullionVault’s platform. “People are very happy to take this price.”

“It’s very busy and we are getting more calls than ever before about clients wanting to bring in their jewels,” Kahn said. “I’m telling the clients to bring them in now, as we are at unprecedented levels.”

So while there is plenty of liquidating to pay the bills, demand at the United States Mint is tepid, with sales in March the worst since 2019 for its American Eagle gold coin.

It turns out more than a few of those well-publicized Costco gold bar buyers are having trouble selling them. The bars, not being American Eagles or other similar gold coins, are not as liquid, given that the seller, Costco, will not buy them back. The Wall Street Journal reports, thirty-three-year old Adam Xi called five different gold dealers to get a price he would accept for the gold bar he bought at Costco in October.

He was offered $200 less by one dealer than the $2,000 he had paid. But he found a Philadelphia coin dealer near his home willing to pay $1,960, or twenty dollars under market price.

Mr. Xi has learned, or should have learned, that buying gold to turn a quick profit is a fantasy. His plan was to rack up credit-card points buying the gold and then quickly resell it for a profit.

Buyers can expect their gold to immediately lose around 5 percent of its value, according to Tom Graff, chief investment officer at the wealth advising company Facet. One pays a premium to buy and pays fees to sell. “You need a holding period that’s long enough to overwhelm that cost,” said Graff.

Luke Greib told the Wall Street Journal that he sold a one-ounce Credit Suisse bar on a Reddit page dedicated to trading precious metals to avoid taxes and fees. Buying physical gold is purchasing insurance against monetary mischief by the Federal Reserve, not to earn a profit via a quick flip.

Perhaps it’s hard to imagine currency destruction so devastating that your gold would serve as not only a store of value but a medium of exchange. Peter C. Earle explains in a piece for the American Institute for Economic Research, “During the peak of its 2008 hyperinflation, [Zimbabwe] experienced a catastrophic economic downturn, characterized by the issuance of billion—and trillion-dollar banknotes that were, despite their nominal enormity, virtually worthless.”

Dr. Earle writes that twenty-eight years of inflation “topped a total 231 million percent” and “the ZWD was demonetized in 2009.” The government is making its sixth attempt at a new currency, Zimbabwe gold (ZiG). “ZiG is there to stay forever,” said Vice President Constantino Chiwenga. “This bold step symbolizes government’s unwavering commitment to the de-dollarization program premised on fiscal discipline, monetary prudence and economic revitalization.”

Reportedly, ZiG “is backed by a basket of precious metals including about 2.5 tons of gold along with $100 million of foreign currency reserves held by the central bank.” As always, the Zimbabwe authorities are already blaming speculators for price increases. “Speculators should cease,” Chiwenga said. “Behave, or you get shut down or we lock you up.”

Dr. Earle has his doubts about whether the Zimbabwean authorities will maintain the ZiG backing with the required rigor. While he hopes for success, “Without fundamental changes guaranteeing private property protection, pro-market reforms, and safeguards against corruption, though, the ZiG is likely to retrace the unfortunate steps of its predecessors.”

The reason to buy and hold gold is just in case the Federal Reserve goes the way of Zimbabwe.

Internal or external auditors occasionally comb through individual loans in a bank’s portfolio and make judgments as to whether those loans are worth what the bank says they are worth due to lower appraised values and other issues either particular to an individual property or the market as a whole. Bankers then, begrudgingly, set aside earnings for potential loan losses.

In the case of the real estate loans at New York Community Bank, loan examiners must have told senior management to increase the bank’s loan loss provision by 790 percent to $552 million. This balance sheet expense drove the fourth-quarter loss and caused the bank to cut its dividend.

“The bank reported a near $2 billion increase in criticized multifamily loans—debt with a probability of default,” wrote Suzannah Cavanagh for the Real Deal. “Of its $37 billion multifamily loan book, which comprises 44 percent of its total portfolio, 8 percent was marked criticized in the quarter.” The bank also reported a $42 million net charge-off—debt unlikely to be paid back—for an office loan on which the borrower stopped paying interest.

The bank’s chief financial officer John Pinto pooh-poohed the loan carnage, saying, “We had higher levels of substandard [loans] throughout the Financial Crisis, throughout the pandemic. The rise in substandard loans does not lead directly to specific losses.”

Hope Springs Eternal

Like the 2008 financial crisis, what happens in the US isn’t staying in the US. Tokyo-based Aozora Bank said losses in its US office’s loan portfolio will likely lead to a net loss for the year ending in March, the Wall Street Journal reports. Also, the private Swiss bank Julius Baer took a roughly $700 million provision on loans made to Austrian property landlord Signa Group. The bank said shutting down the unit was what made the loans, and the chief executive has resigned.

Jay Powell made no mention of the New York Community Bank’s news in his prepared remarks, and reporters didn’t ask him about the bank’s troubles during the Q and A. There were no questions concerning the Bank Term Funding Program that will be sunsetted March 11 despite having risen to record highs. According to the Wall Street Journal’s Andrew Ackerman, the popularity of the program was not because of new stresses on banks. But reportedly, “some banks had recently figured out a way to game the program by pocketing the difference between what they pay to borrow the funds and what they can earn from parking the funds at the central bank as overnight deposits.” On January 31, banks had borrowed more than $165 billion from the facility.

It’s doubtful there are no new stresses on banks. New York Community Bank is not an anomaly.

To that point, real estate investor Barry Sternlicht told a conference crowd…

We have a problem in real estate. In every sector of real estate, not just office, because of the 500 basis point increase in rates that was vertical. The office market has an existential crisis right now . . . it’s a $3 trillion dollar asset class that’s probably worth $1.8 trillion [now]. There’s $1.2 trillion of losses spread somewhere, and nobody knows exactly where it all is.

Sternlicht mentioned a project in New York that was purchased for $200 million that he thought was now worth just $30 million, encumbered by a $100 million loan.

Harold Bordwin, a principal at Keen-Summit Capital Partners LLC in New York, which specializes in renegotiating distressed properties, told Bloomberg, “Banks’ balance sheets aren’t accounting for the fact that there’s lots of real estate on there that’s not going to pay off at maturity.”

Bordwin went on to say, “Banks—community banks, regional banks—have been really slow to mark things to market because they didn’t have to, they were holding them to maturity. They are playing games with what is the real value of these assets” (emphasis added).

The plan for the Bank Term Funding Program was hatched in haste over a weekend in March of last year in the wake of the Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank failures (Signature’s assets were purchased by New York Community Bank). To hide their embarrassment over banks using the facility for risk-free interest rate arbitrage, they say they are shutting the program down because there is no stress in the banking system.

There is stress aplenty in the banking world. As Murray Rothbard wrote in The Mystery of Banking, “Fractional reserve bank credit expansion is always shaky, for the more extensive its inflationary creation of new money, the more likely it will be to suffer contraction and subsequent deflation.”

While bankers and regulators have their heads in the sand, the contraction has already begun.

About the Author

Douglas French is President Emeritus of the Mises Institute, author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply, and author of Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master’s degree in economics from UNLV, studying under both Professor Murray Rothbard and Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe. His website is DouglasInVegas.com.

Take John Allison. He’s the chairman of a bank holding company, Home BancShares. He told the Wall Street Journal about a time when the regulator of Home BancShares, the Federal Reserve, was badgering him to slow down on real-estate lending in 2019. “They’re telling us the construction lending space is going to blow up . . . and the world is coming to an end,” Allison recalled. “And I said, ‘You know what? I don’t see it.’”

A CEO I worked for was pithier when the regulators sang the same tune about his bank’s growth. “What do you want me to do, close at noon?” he said. A decade later his bank failed.

Mr. Allison’s Home BancShares is the holding company to Centennial Bank, based in Conway, Arkansas, which is a “big funder of developers building luxury skyscrapers in New York and Miami. Construction loans are among the riskiest types of real-estate lending,” report Shane Shifflett and Konrad Putzier for the Wall Street Journal. “If the big, bad wolf shows up it will hurt a lot of banks, but it won’t hurt Home BancShares,” Allison said in a recent interview.

It’s hard to imagine a bank in Conway funding big deals, or at least pieces of big deals on tall buildings in places like New York and Miami. But how much loan business can there be in Conway? And you can tell from Allison’s quotes that he’s a guy who wants to grow his business, so his bank went where the loans were. This isn’t It’s a Wonderful Life, and Allison isn’t George Bailey.

Shifflett and Putzier tell us banks smaller than $250 billion in assets held about 75 percent of all commercial real-estate loans as of the just completed second quarter of this year. These banks (like Allison’s) accounted for nearly $758 billion of commercial real-estate lending since 2015, or about three-quarters of the total increase during that period. That loan volume pushed up commercial real estate prices by 43 percent from 2015 to 2022, according to real-estate firm Green Street.

While Mr. Allison figures his bank is bulletproof, commercial property sales in July were down 74 percent from a year earlier, and sales of downtown office buildings hit the lowest level in at least two decades, according to MSCI Real Assets. “When deal volume picks up, deals will be made at far lower prices, which will shock banks,” said Michael Comparato, head of commercial real estate at Benefit Street Partners, a debt-focused asset manager. “It’s going to be really nasty,” he told the Wall Street Journal.

And then there’s coming maturities. Each of the next five years has $400 billion to $500 billion in loans coming due, with many of these projects being uneconomic (or underwater) at current interest rates, not to mention higher rates.

Of course, Mr. Allison may not be aware of, or refuses to believe, this bad news because real estate developers are as optimistic as bank CEOs, or more so. The developer tells his loan officer everything is going to be okay and talks about leases that will never be signed and other rose-colored vignettes. The loan officer relays to his or her department manager the happy news, which trickles up to the bank CEO who wants to believe everything he or she touches will turn to gold. No big, bad wolf is gonna blow CEO Allison’s bank door down.

But as Murray Rothbard wrote in the Mystery of Banking, “Fractional reserve bank credit expansion is always shaky, for the more extensive its inflationary creation of new money, the more likely it will be to suffer contraction and subsequent deflation.”

A bank’s loans may be on big, tall buildings, but fractional reserves make any bank a house of cards.

About the Author

Douglas French is President Emeritus of the Mises Institute, author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply, and author of Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master’s degree in economics from UNLV, studying under both Professor Murray Rothbard and Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Now it’s 2023 and Scott Hildenbrand, the chief balance sheet strategist at Piper Sandler, tells Joe Weisenthal and Tracy Alloway on Bloomberg’s Odd Lots podcast,

And so if you had told me, Joe, or Tracy five years ago, you had me on here and you said, “There’s a bank and all they’re going to do is buy treasuries and all of their deposits are in checking accounts. And by the way, they’re going to fail,” I would’ve laughed at both of you. I wouldn’t have come back. I would have been like, “You all are crazy.”

Rothbard wasn’t so crazy after all.

Hildenbrand was on Odd Lots to explain how tough things are for small community banks. Jamie Dimon’s JPMorgan has all sorts of revenue streams, but the community bank has to take deposits, lend them out, and live on the difference in interest rates. Silicon Valley Bank was “not like the WAMU days or not It’s a Wonderful Life. It was three hours and $42 billion. That’s what happened.”

Hildenbrand made a point that’s never mentioned: banks don’t make money lending; banks make money because “they don’t pay at market rates on the deposit side.” Banks don’t typically pay anything on checking account deposits. That is where banks earn their spread. It didn’t matter because it used to be that bank customers were very loyal. Bankers could count on that checking account money staying in place. Not so much anymore. Money moves fast for two reasons according to Hildenbrand: technology and demographics.

Back in the day customers were very loyal but had very little trust. Today, “there’s a ton of trust. They’ll move money around on phones. They don’t even know the name of the bank they’re banking at,” Hildenbrand said. “They’ll move it so quickly. But there’s very little loyalty. And therein lies the difference in why we’re struggling with how to determine how to manage and hedge a balance sheet from a deposit perspective.”

Bankers didn’t realize the effects on deposits of technology, social media, and demographic changes from a liquidity perspective in a higher rate environment. A decade or two ago a community bank had almost half of its deposits in CDs. And, as Hildebrand says, “That gave banks time.” Now bankers won’t get that kind of time due to demographics.

Hildebrand interviews lots of young people for Piper Sandler who come to New York to learn about community banking. As smart as these young people are, he quipped, “I always have a question they can’t answer. Do you know what a CD is? And they’ve never heard of it, whether it was banking or music.” A certificate of deposit (CD) is a savings product that earns interest on a lump sum for a fixed period of time. The money must remain untouched for the entirety of their term or penalties or lost interest may apply. As an incentive for lost liquidity, CDs usually have higher interest rates than savings accounts.

Nowadays, “people want CD rates with money market flexibility and operational flexibility,” Hildebrand told Alloway and Weisenthal. “We have no contractual liabilities on most bank balance sheets anymore.”

Since the spring spate of regional bank failures, only one bank has failed—the $139 million Heartland Tri-State Bank in Elkhart, Kansas. But more failures and consolidations are coming. Hildebrand said half the banks in the country are trading at less than book value (assets-liabilities/shares). That means investors don’t trust the loan and investment values on bank balance sheets. He believes from the four thousand banks the United States has now, the number of banks will shrink to two hundred over the next ten to fifteen years.

Rothbard wrote in Making Economic Sense, “The banking system, in short, is a house of cards.” The house of fraud will have fewer cards going forward.

Sound off about this article on our Economic  Collapse Substack.

About the Author

Douglas French is President Emeritus of the Mises Institute, author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply, and author of Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master’s degree in economics from UNLV, studying under both Professor Murray Rothbard and Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Article cross-posted from Mises.

But that same debt ceiling fix will unleash a torrent of US Treasury issuance that will overwhelm the markets leaving stock investors in its wake. Cem Karsan of Kai Volatility Advisors told Maggie Lake on Real Vision, “By most estimations . . . we’re going to have to issue $1.4 trillion in debt before the end of the year. That is a massive sucking sound out of asset markets.”

“There’s got to be buyers of that debt,” Karsan said, stating the obvious, “which means that money is going to come from somewhere. And if that means interest rates go higher, as that supply comes on the market, demand has to be met. That means equity markets or somewhere else, some other risk asset has to reduce liquidity.”

Another expressing concern about liquidity is Eurodollar University‘s Jeff Snider who says those who think the Fed is just printing money are missing the real story. Snider told Raoul Pal on Real Vision,

Nobody ever stops and thinks about what are these bank reserves and what do they actually do? Are they actually a form of base money? And the answer is no. And they haven’t been in decades. In fact, this was a major problem that Paul Volcker confronted in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Banks had found different ways of doing money in liquidity that didn’t involve these bank reserves.

The hyperfocus on the size of the Fed’s balance sheet and in turn that its increase obviously means more money has been created is wrong, says Snider, who points out that people don’t see the money destroyed in the shadow system. He also points out that it’s not the amount of the money stock that’s important but the circulation of money and credit in the real economy.

This year money is leaving the banking system and not returning. According to Reuters, “The FDIC said the $472 billion in deposit outflows in the first quarter was the largest it had recorded since it began collecting such data in 1984.” This deposit exodus in search of higher yields likely continued in the second quarter.

While we’re left believing that the Fed has printed a bunch of money that’s highly inflationary, in certain circumstances—especially 2008, 2009, and to a degree 2020, 2021, 2022, and now 2023—we know that there’s more deflation in the monetary system than whatever the Fed might have created in terms of bank reserves. Snider says banks are supposed to do intermediation as well as money creation but haven’t done either since 2008. Banks, he says,

want to just hold to the safest and liquid assets, and just try to pick up as many nickels as they can. Understanding that whether it’s in a couple months or a couple years, they’re going to go through another liquidity problem again, and have to worry more about safety and liquidity than they do about risk-taking.

In the simplest terms, banks just haven’t created enough money. Murray Rothbard explained how banks create money in The Mystery of Banking. Banks create money by lending to individuals and businesses, not, for instance, by parking money at the Fed’s reverse repo facility, where balances have grown from zero in March 2021 to over $2.1 trillion currently, earning 4.3 percent.

So, in Snider’s view, “Even though the Fed is creating all these trillions of bank reserves, there isn’t enough bank money around in the Eurodollar system which leaves it susceptible to what should be nothing. The smallest little thing can set off this major issue, because it’s that fragile.” Banks aren’t taking risks, and neither are money market funds, which are looking for safety before return.

If this reminds you of 2008, it should. According to Snider,

The 2008 crisis wasn’t really about subprime mortgages. That’s just where it began. And once it started to infect all of these major functions in the banking system, it led to the situation that we’re confronting now, where money didn’t circulate freely throughout the global Eurodollar system, which led to all sorts of problems.

Likewise, falling commercial real estate prices are infecting other things, leading to disruptions in the market, which leads to a lack of liquidity and more risk aversion. And more risk aversion means more lack of liquidity in these markets. Don’t count on the Fed to fix this mess. As Snider said, “The Federal Reserve and central banks are always looking backwards. They don’t see these things coming so there’s no help from them either. And pretty soon before you look around, markets are illiquid. Banks are struggling for funding. Some more of them are failing.”

Lyn Alden is another who is being kept up at night worrying about liquidity. She tweeted on June 1, “However, now that the Treasury cash drain is finished, and we start looking ahead past the debt ceiling, we are potentially encountering the next period of negative liquidity (rather than sideways liquidity).”

She wonders what will break next. Last September it was the United Kingdom gilt market and nearly the US Treasury market. In March a few regional banks with unusually high duration exposure and uninsured deposit exposure failed, and now she says we have to watch the small banks and the Treasury market.

Jeff Snider has his eye on September for a liquidity crisis. “So, if you’re thinking ahead, there’s probably a really good chance that something happens in September, if not beforehand.” Karsan echoes that view: “It’s not a coincidence that mid-August into mid-September is often a scary time.”

You can talk with your registered investment advisor about your stocks’ fundamentals, but as Karsan says, “It hasn’t been about fundamentals for decades now. That’s the narrative you hear on CNBC.” It’s liquidity that moves stock prices.

Stock investors—danger lurks, and Uncle Sam is going to crowd you out.

About the Author

Douglas French is President Emeritus of the Mises Institute, author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply, and author of Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master’s degree in economics from UNLV, studying under both Professor Murray Rothbard and Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Article cross-posted from Mises.

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross described five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. ‎On Twitter, describing the typical timeline for a banking crisis, Real Vision’s Raoul Pal posted:

It’s one bad apple,

Well maybe it’s just a few

“Banks remain strong”

It’s the evil short sellers (we are considering a ban)

Ok, now we are banning shorts

Oh, seems that didn’t work

Cut rates

That didn’t work

Panic

Change . . .

Kübler-Ross’s denial stage would include Pal’s “one bad apple,” “just a few,” and “Banks remain strong.” The anger stage would be “evil short sellers,” “banning shorts,” and it “seems that didn’t work.” The bargaining stage would be “Cut rates” and “That didn’t work.” Depression would be “Panic,” with “Change” being the acceptance stage.

We clearly appear to be only in the anger stage. Kimberly Adams writes for Marketplace:

The American Bankers Association is laying some of the blame for that at the feet of short sellers trying to scare people into thinking banks are about to go under so that the stock price falls and they can profit. On Thursday, the ABA sent a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission asking the agency to look into the issue. . . .

“We’ve been in constant communication with our members, and they’ve shared with us their concerns, including engagement that they’ve seen on social media,” said Naomi Camper, chief policy officer at the ABA. “And many believe that their shares have been manipulated by short sellers. They’re seeing trading in their shares that defy the underlying fundamentals, and they’re worried about it.”

During the Q and A at Berkshire Hathaway’s annual meeting televised by CNBC, Warren Buffett mentioned a bank stock short-selling ban. Reuters reports that Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, a law firm that has represented large companies, said in a letter to clients that “the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should regulate what it defined as ‘coordinated short attacks’ by imposing a 15-trading day prohibition on short sales of financial institutions.”

Taking the other side of the argument is longtime bank analyst Dick Bove. Bloomberg reports: “‘The funds and others who are shorting bank stocks are doing the American public a meaningful service,’ analyst Bove said in a note. ‘They are winnowing the banking industry and forcing these companies to stabilize their financial statements.’”

Bove is right. The average depositor can’t make heads or tails of their bank’s financial statements. At least short sellers give John and Jane Q. Public a heads-up about their banks. Bank regulators are like the fire department, the hook and ladder doesn’t arrive until a house is fully inflamed.

If it plays out the way Mr. Pal believes, a couple more banks will fail, the Securities and Exchange Commission will impose a short-selling ban, and then a few more banks will fail. Then, it will be time for a Federal Reserve rate cut.

Reuters reports that the Fed futures market is factoring in a more than 70 percent chance of a rate cut at the Fed’s September meeting.

This summer may be an interesting one.

About the Author

Douglas French is President Emeritus of the Mises Institute, author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply, and author of Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master’s degree in economics from UNLV, studying under both Professor Murray Rothbard and Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Article cross-posted from Mises.