Monthly Archives: February 2016

US Bank profit up 11.9%, Loan losses at 43.4%

The impact of plummeting oil prices has shown up in the financial picture of U.S. banks, whose losses from loans increased for the first time in five and half years, according to new government data.

U.S. bank earnings jumped 11.9 percent in the final three months of 2015 compared with the previous year as revenue rose. Legal expenses declined as some big banks wound down legal settlements that arose from the financial crisis.

But the data issued Tuesday by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. showed an increase in loan losses for the industry for the first time in 2009, during the crisis. The increase in loans that banks wrote off as uncollectible was especially strong — 43.4 percent — for industrial borrowers as tumbling oil prices hurt energy companies.

Falling oil prices over the past year and a half — now hovering around $30 a barrel for crude oil from a $100 high in mid-2014 — have sliced into the profits of energy companies and put projects on hold. Big Wall Street banks have made loans to energy companies to finance oil production in Texas, North Dakota and elsewhere. As cash flow from oil sales has trickled, some companies are straining to repay their loans.

The fallout has come fast. The six largest U.S. banks — JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Bank of America — have tens of billions of dollars of exposure to risky energy loans that won’t all be paid back. The value of those loans will have to be written down even further, and bank profits are going to take a hit, the credit agency Moody’s has said.

The energy-related loans on the balance sheets of the biggest banks represent only a small percentage of their overall lending, but the losses will be noticeable.

Smaller and regional banks that operate in areas like Texas and North Dakota and cater to energy companies also are feeling the pain.

This ripple for banks comes amid a steady recovery in the banking industry since the crisis struck in the fall of 2008. The FDIC reported that U.S. banks earned $40.8 billion in the October-December quarter, up from $36.4 billion a year earlier.

More than half of all banks, 56.6 percent, reported an increase in profit from a year earlier. Only 9.1 percent of banks were unprofitable.

The number of “problem” banks on the FDIC’s confidential list fell below 200 for the first time in more than seven years, since the financial crisis.

FDIC Chairman Martin Gruenberg took note of the impact of the steep fall in oil prices.

“Recently, domestic and international market developments have led to heightened concerns about the U.S. economic outlook and prospects for the banking industry,” Gruenberg said at a news conference. “Thus far, the performance of the banks has not been impacted materially. However, the full effect of lower energy and other commodity prices remains to be seen.”

In the fourth quarter, banks increased the amounts they set aside to cover potential losses on loans by 45.5 percent, or $3.8 billion, from a year earlier, the FDIC reported. That brought the total set aside for the latest period to $12 billion — the highest level in three years.

And lending grew by 2.3 percent, driven by a mostly seasonal increase in credit card balances and a rise in commercial and industrial loans.

The number of banks on the FDIC’s “problem list” fell to 183 from 203 in the third quarter.

The number of bank failures continues to slow, marking eight last year. That is still more than normal. In a strong economy, an average of four or five banks closes annually. But failures declined from 24 in 2013 and were down sharply from 157 in 2010 — the most in one year since the height of the savings and loan crisis in 1992.

The decline in bank failures has allowed the deposit insurance fund to strengthen. The fund, which turned from deficit to positive in the second quarter of 2011, had a $72.6 billion balance at the end of December, according to the FDIC. That was up from $70.1 billion at the end of the third quarter.

The FDIC was created during the Great Depression to insure bank deposits. It monitors and examines the financial condition of U.S. banks. The agency guarantees bank deposits up to $250,000 per account.

By marcy gordon, ap business writer

·WASHINGTON — Feb 23, 2016, 3:33 PM ET

The average rent is $1,931 a month

In Seattle, buying a home beats renting in less than two years

Home buyers in the Puget Sound region “break even” on a home purchase in 1.9 years.

The “Breakeven Horizon” study, published by Seattle online real estate company Zillow found that home buyers across the country break even on a home purchase in less than two years in 70 percent of housing markets.

Zillow credits the short time frame to low interest rates, rising home values and rising rent.

The average rent for an apartment in Seattle is $1,931 per month.

The study, featured in the paperback edition of “Zillow Talk: Rewriting the Rules of Real Estate,” defines the breakeven horizon as the number of years after which buying is more financially advantageous than renting.

The study notes that, nationally, those under 35 remain employed at the same place for about three years so buying may not make sense, even if paying a mortgage would be more affordable.

One prominent analyst — Matthew Gardner, chief economist of Seattle-based Windermere Real Estate — recently told the Business Journal that millennials in the Puget Sound region will begin to buy houses in 2016 because confidence in the housing market will grow. The median price of a King County home is now about $508,000.

Dallas has the shortest break even point, at 1.3 years. Washington, D.C., has the longest, at 4.5 years.

Rob Smith, Editor, Puget Sound Business Journal

Wells Fargo to pay $1.2B

San Francisco bank Wells Fargo Wednesday said it has agreed to fork over $1.2 billion to settle allegations that it fraudulently certified loans in connection with a government insurance program.

In a 2012 lawsuit, the U.S. government accused Wells Fargo of sticking it with “hundreds of millions of dollars” in Federal Housing Authority insurance claims as a result of years of “reckless” underwriting and fraudulent loan certification.

As a result, FHA had to pay out insurance claims on thousands of FHA-insured mortgages that defaulted, the government said.

On Wednesday, Wells Fargo said it had “reached an agreement in principle” with the parties that brought the complaint, including the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Manhattan Attorney’s Office the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The settlement is expected to retroactively ding the bank’s 2015 net income by $134 million, or 3 cents a share, to $22.9 billion, or $4.12 a share, the bank said.

The lawsuit alleged that Wells Fargo recklessly underwrote loans backed by FHA insurance from at least 2001 to 2010.

In that time, the bank certified over 100,000 FHA loans as meeting HUD’s requirements and therefore eligible for FHA insurance, even though the loans had not been properly underwritten and did not meet HUD’s requirements, the lawsuit said.

Wells Fargo also internally identified 6,558 seriously deficient loans that it was required to self-report. But rather than reporting the loans as required, the bank concealed 6,320 of these improperly certified loans, the government alleged.

Eight years after the mortgage meltdown of 2008, big banks continue to pay hefty fines for their alleged contributions to the crisis, including faulty underwriting and their handling of risky mortgage-backed securities, or loans bundled and then sold in slices to investors.

Last month, Goldman Sachs announced a $5.1 billion tentative settlement of a federal and state investigation of the investment for its handling of mortgage-backed securities leading up to the financial crisis.

Kaja Whitehouse, USA TODAY 10:22 a.m. EST February 3, 2016

Obtain a quote

Discover your options by requesting a free note analysis

The only way to decide what is best for your situation is to know the options available.

When you request a free note analysis it reveals the current market value of your payments – similar to what a real estate appraisal provides for real property. Sometimes referred to as a “note appraisal” or “request for quote,” it lets you know how much your future payments are worth in cash dollars today!