Spain's Bankia As Crooked As It Looks: Cooked The Books Using "Dynamic Provisioning"

And the EU knew about it. So says Jonathan Weil for Bloomberg.com, here:

One of the catalysts for last weekend’s bailout request was the decision last month by the Bankia (BKIA) group, Spain’s third-largest lender, to restate its 2011 results to show a 3.3 billion-euro ($4.2 billion) loss rather than a 40.9 million-euro profit. Looking back, we probably should have known Spain’s banks would end up this way, and that their reported financial results bore no relation to reality. ...

One of the more candid advocates of Spain’s approach was Charlie McCreevy, the EU’s commissioner for financial services from 2004 to 2010, who previously had been Ireland’s finance minister. During an April 2009 meeting of the monitoring board that oversees the International Accounting Standards Board’s trustees, McCreevy said he knew Spain’s banks were violating the board’s rules. This was fine with him, he said.

“They didn’t implement IFRS, and our regulations said from the 1st January 2005 all publicly listed companies had to implement IFRS,” McCreevy said, according to a transcript of the meeting on the monitoring board’s website. “The Spanish regulator did not do that, and he survived this. His banks have survived this crisis better than anybody else to date.”

McCreevy, who at the time was the chief enforcer of EU laws affecting banking and markets, went on: “The rules did not allow the dynamic provisioning that the Spanish banks did, and the Spanish banking regulator insisted that they still have the dynamic provisioning. And they did so, but I strictly speaking should have taken action against them.”

Why didn’t he take action? McCreevy said he was a fan of dynamic provisioning. “Why am I like that? Well, I’m old enough to remember when I was a young student that in my country that I know best, banks weren’t allowed to publish their results in detail,” he said. “Why? Because we felt if everybody saw the reserves, etc., it would create maybe a run on the banks.” ...

Someday maybe the world’s leaders will learn that masking losses undermines investor confidence and makes crises worse. We can only hope they don’t manage to blow up the whole financial system first.

21st Century Bank Runs are Runs on Treasury Bills, Not Dollars

Jeffrey Snider explains their role as the new prime financial collateral, here, and why Quantitative Easing slowed the velocity of this new money by reducing their supply:

It is operationally no different than a 1930's bank experiencing a run on its stock of national currency. The lower that level of real money gets, the shakier the perception of the bank becomes, the more counterparties continue the cycle of real money removal - physical dollars in 1930, rehypothecated collateral in 2011. The perception of risk becomes reality, and this may be exactly what is playing out today as banks with questionable exposures to PIIGS have seen their abilities to operate in wholesale money markets dwindle into this current crisis.

Recent Explosion in M2 in US a Sign of European Bank Run?

Larry Kudlow explores the issue here:

According to the St. Louis Fed, M2 is up 24.2 percent at an annual rate over the past two months. Almost out of the blue, that comes to a near $500 billion increase. In rough terms, the M2 explosion breaks down to $165 billion in demand deposits and $335 billion in savings deposits.

What's going on here? There's a flight to government-guaranteed accounts. Some people believe Europeans are withdrawing from their own banking system and parking their money in the U.S. banking system, guaranteed by Uncle Sam.

The smart money has already left Europe. Last one out please switch off the lights. 

A Hypothetical US Bank Run Exercise: How Much Would You Get?

According to The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, here, only about one third of US currency in circulation is thought to be held within the United States:

In April 2008, M1 was approximately $1.4 trillion, more than half of which consisted of currency. While as much as two-thirds of U.S. currency in circulation may be held outside the United States, all currency held by the public is included in the money supply because it can be spent on goods and services in the U.S. economy.

Current observations by The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, here, show that currency in circulation as of the end of December 2010 came to about $983.7 billion.

So let's ask hypothetically, just for the mental exercise, that if we had a bank run in America and we decided we would ration the available cash in equal shares to the adult population of, say, 228 million people, assuming of course each such person had some digits on a bank statement warranting cash claims, how much maximum could each claimant expect to get under such circumstances?

$1,438 each.