Welcome to Finance World

The Federal Reserve said the U.S. economy continues to show signs of modest improvement but signaled it will stay the course and keep interest rates low to help spur a recovery.

As expected, the central bank left its key interest rate, the federal funds rate, near 0%, the level it has been at since December 2008. That rate is used as a benchmark for a broad range of business and consumer loans.

In a statement released at the end of its two-day meeting, the Fed pointed to improvement in business spending, but said that the "recovery is likely to be moderate for a time."

While that may not sound like a ringing endorsement of economic growth, it was significantly better than what the Fed had been saying in its statements since last April — "Economic activity is likely to remain weak for a time."

Still, the Fed repeated its earlier forecast that conditions are "likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period."

But one member, Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig, voted against the Fed’s latest action. According to the statement, Hoenig thought that economic conditions had changed enough so that the continued expectation of low rates was "no longer warranted." It was the first dissenting vote among Fed policymakers since January 2009.

The Fed said it will stick with plans to let some of its efforts of the past two years expire in the coming months. But it provided no new details of how or when it plans to start pulling back on nearly $2 trillion it has pumped into the economy over the last two years through the purchases of mortgages, long-term Treasurys and the debt of mortgage finance firms Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) and Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500).

Some critics of the Fed have worried that the central bank is behind the curve in withdrawing that stimulus, which could feed inflation down the road. But the Fed repeated its earlier view that it believes inflation "is likely to be subdued for some time."

Bruce McCain, chief investment strategist at Key Private Bank, said Hoenig’s dissent is probably a good thing since it may assure markets that the Fed is not getting too far behind the curve in keeping prices in check.

Keith Hembre, chief economist at First American Funds, said if the Fed policymakers had followed Hoenig’s lead and dropped the language on keeping rates exceptionally low, it would have roiled financial markets not yet ready for the Fed to start raising rates.

"Hoeing is one of the more hawkish guys on inflation," Hembre said. "But I think the view [of other Fed policymakers] on inflation is on the mark."

Hembre added that due to the weakness in the job market, he thinks it will be years before there is a big enough increase in wages that could help drive the prices of goods and services higher.

Along those lines, the central bank did highlight some key economic weaknesses that remain, including tight credit, continued declines in real estate investment and employers still being reluctant to hire new staff.

McCain said that given the uneven signs of improvement in the housing market so far, it was not realistic to expect the Fed to lay out plans to start selling the $1.25 trillion in mortgages it expects to own by the end of March. Some have even argued the Fed should raise that limit in order to buy more mortgages.

"There is concern about what happens with the housing market when there is no longer the support of the Fed making these purchases," McCain said. He believes the Fed has decided its best course on mortgages is to "steer the middle course," and go ahead with the purchases it has committed to and no further.

The Fed’s latest meeting comes two days before the Commerce Department is expected to report the U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 4.6% in the fourth quarter. That would be its strongest pace in four years.

The meeting also comes as the Senate prepares for a key vote Thursday that could clear the way towards confirming Fed chairman Ben Bernanke for another four-year term as head of the central bank. His term is set to expire Sunday, and there has been growing opposition from both ends of the political spectrum to his reappointment. 

Source

The health care reform bill approved by the Senate on Thursday would do more than any proposal yet to reduce the deficit over time - by an estimated $132 billion over 10 years and by substantially more thereafter.

But reducing the deficit is not entirely synonymous with the oft-stated goal of health reform: reducing the growth rate in health care costs and expenditures - often referred to as "bending the cost curve."

That growth rate is what drives federal spending on Medicare and other federal health programs.

And it’s what budget experts say will pummel the federal budget in future years if nothing is done to change it.

So how would the Senate bill fare in bending the cost curve from the perspective of the federal budget? The short answer is the ever-unsatisfying "it depends."

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill could over time reduce the federal budget commitment to health care - that’s spending on programs like Medicare plus the amount of health-related federal tax breaks.

For instance, the CBO estimates that Medicare spending per beneficiary would grow by an average of 2% on an inflation-adjusted basis over the next two decades. That’s half the 4% annual growth rate that has marked the past two decades.

But that estimated reduction is highly dependent on a number of factors.

More than anything, it depends on whether this and future Congresses will do what the bill says … to the letter. The budget agency noted such stick-to-itiveness is rare when it comes to major legislation and said the bill includes measures that "might be difficult to sustain over a long period of time" - such as reduced pay increases for various Medicare service providers.

And reducing the federal budgetary commitment to health care also depends on how well the cost-bending provisions in the legislation work.

In addition to the Medicare savings called for in the bill, two other major provisions could help bend the cost curve, according to former CBO Director Donald Marron.

The first is the creation of an Independent Payment Advisory Board that would recommend ways to reduce Medicare’s spending growth beyond what the legislation calls for. The second is the establishment of an excise tax on very expensive health plans intended to encourage employers and their workers to become more consumer savvy in their health spending choices.

The CBO said in particular that the bill’s savings potential depends on whether the new Medicare board’s recommendations effectively control the growth rate in Medicare spending.

"We need real entitlement reform," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, another former CBO director. He thinks the board could help make meaningful fixes, but he doubts that Congress will follow the board’s toughest recommendations payday loans for bad credit.

Savings could be jeopardized, further, if any cost-bending provision is weakened or eliminated when the Senate and House hammer out their differences early next year on what a final health reform bill should look like.

Lastly, how far the Senate bill bends the cost curve depends on the success of pilot programs in the legislation designed to make health care delivery more cost-efficient.

"They’re setting up a framework under which we can learn what bends the cost curve over time," said Josh Gordon, policy director at the Concord Coalition, a deficit watchdog group.

In the meantime, while the bill is projected to reduce the deficit in between 2010 and 2019, the federal budget commitment to health care will increase by an estimated $200 billion because of provisions in the bill that call for, among other things, the federal government to subsidize the purchase of insurance by many Americans.

Best-case scenario

CBO estimates are never flawless. The agency strives to offer middle-of-the-road readings, neither too optimistic nor too pessimistic. And they’re based on the language of legislation, not the political realities of Congress.

"I would say the risks [including the political ones] tend to lean towards everything costing more and saving less, but it isn’t out of the realm of possibility that the bill could save more than CBO suggests," Gordon said.

Assume for a moment, though, that the CBO analysis is dead-on. The agency estimates that the Senate bill could reduce federal budget deficits by between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of GDP in the decade after 2019.

That’s a step toward putting the federal budget on a more sustainable track. But it’s just a start.

"It’s a relatively modest contribution to reducing the long-term debt overhang," said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., in an interview with C-SPAN.

Here’s what modest means. The so-called fiscal gap is estimated to be anywhere from 4% to 8% of GDP, Marron said. That’s a measure of how much spending would need to be permanently cut or taxes permanently raised if lawmakers were to put the federal budget on a more sustainable track long-term.

The Senate bill could move the needle by 0.5% of GDP in CBO’s best-case scenario.

While that doesn’t seem like a lot, it’s far from nothing, especially given how hard the goal of curbing health costs is. And it’s an indication of just how hard the fight will be next year when lawmakers are expected to consider proposals for how to address deficit reduction long-term. 

Source

Most Europeans believe the worst of the economic crisis has yet to feed through to the labor market, the European Union said, citing a Eurobarometer survey.

Some 54 percent of respondents “believe the worst is still to come regarding the impact of the crisis on jobs,” while 38 percent say it already has reached its peak. The poll of more than 30,000 people in 30 countries across Europe was conducted from Oct. 23 through Nov. 18.

“Citizens have clearly identified jobs as their main concern, and the EU must continue to give its full attention and commitment to dealing with the crisis,” Margot Wallstroem, vice president of the European Commission, the EU executive in Brussels, said in a statement.

The number of people employed in the euro region declined 2.1 percent in the third quarter from a year earlier, the largest drop since the data were first collected in 1996, the EU’s statistics office in Luxembourg said today. From the prior quarter, employment fell 0.5 percent.

“Even though the euro zone exited recession in the third quarter and activity is continuing to improve in the fourth quarter, growth is unlikely to be strong enough to generate net jobs for some considerable time,” Howard Archer, chief European economist at IHS Global Insight in London, said in a note one hour payday loan. “Unemployment still seems likely to rise significantly higher, thereby weighing down on consumer spending.”

Jobless Rate

Europe’s jobless rate has risen to 9.8 percent, the highest since December 1998, and is forecast by the commission to increase to 10.7 percent next year.

“Even if the European economies are showing signs of recovery, concern about the economic situation and unemployment is as widespread as in spring 2009,” the authors of the survey said. “Around half of Europeans consider unemployment to be the most important issue that their country faces.” Joblessness is “the top national concern” in 19 EU member states, up from 18 in the Eurobarometer survey carried out in June and July, today’s report showed.

Some 51 percent of Europeans deem jobs the most important issue, followed by the overall economy at 40 percent and inflation at 19 percent, tied with crime.

“The economic ‘feel-bad’ factor appears to be fading,” the authors of the report said. “For the first time since autumn 2007, short-term expectations about the economic situation are moving in a positive direction.”

Source

The U.S. Treasury on Monday set long-awaited guidance on a plan for mortgage companies to speed “short sales” of homes and other loan modification alternatives to stem a rising tide of foreclosures.

The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program provides financial incentives and simplifies the procedures for completing short sales, a growing practice in which a lender agrees to accept the sale price of a home to pay off a mortgage even if the price falls short of the amount owed, according to an announcement on the Treasury’s website.

Guidelines address barriers that have often sidelined short sales by setting limits on the time it takes a bank to approve an offer, freeing borrowers from debt and capping claims of subordinate lenders.

The incentives, first announced in May, expand on the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program, known as HAMP, that has seen limited success in lowering payments for distressed homeowners. The Treasury earlier on Monday stepped up pressure on mortgage companies to make permanent the 650,000 trial modifications they have started.

“While HAMP program guidelines are intended to reach a broad range of at-risk borrowers, it is expected that servicers will encounter situations where they are unable to approve” or offer a modification, the Treasury said in its announcement.

Financial incentives for completing short sales or similar deed-in-lieu transactions — in which the deed is simply transferred to the lender — include a $1,000 payment to servicers, and a maximum of $1,000 to go to investors who sign off on payments to subordinate lien holders, the Treasury said. Borrowers would receive $1,500 in relocation expenses.

Short sales are favored by real estate agents and community groups over foreclosure because they can preserve the borrower’s credit rating and leave the property in better condition than when a homeowner is evicted. While primary lenders typically realize steep losses, their recovery is typically far better than under foreclosure.

But short sales have been frustrating for borrowers and real estate agents, often hung up by negotiations with multiple lien holders and mortgage insurance companies. Real estate agents have complained that sales fall through as lenders bicker over the sales price, what they should receive from the proceeds, and whether the borrower will be held accountable for the debt in the future.

Among requirements, mortgage servicers have 10 days to approve or disapprove a request for short sale, and when done the transaction must fully release the borrower from the debt.

It also prohibits mortgage servicing companies from reducing real estate commissions on the sale, a practice that has dissuaded many agents from taking short sale listings.

In one of the most contentious issues gumming up negotiations between lenders, the guidance caps the aggregate proceeds to subordinate lien holders at $3,000.

Second lien holders in recent months have begun demanding more money from the first lender, seller, buyer or agent in exchange for releasing their claim, agents have said. Because primary lenders would face larger losses in a foreclosure, some subordinate lenders have felt empowered, the agents said.

The largest second-lien holders are Bank of America Corp, Wells Fargo & Co, JPMorgan Chase & Co and Citigroup Inc.

Second lien holders may proceed with a short sale outside of the Treasury program, if they felt the cap was too low, a Treasury official said in October.

“If there was a short sale program that didn’t recognize the second lien holder position, it could have pretty damaging consequences for the industry,” Sanjiv Das, chief executive officer of CitiMortgage, said in an interview last week.

(Editing by Leslie Adler)

Read more

Perhaps Barack Obama’s trip to China this month was not such a flop after all.

Obama was criticized for kowtowing to the Chinese and apparently returning empty-handed, but movement from Beijing last week on Iran’s nuclear program and climate change suggests the U.S. president got further than it seemed at first.

Obama went to China with three major issues on the table — economic relations, climate change and denuclearization — and seems to have made progress on at least two of them.

But analysts said it was unclear exactly how much the U.S. leader had actually influenced the Chinese, or what the long-term impact would be of what was announced last week.

“The Chinese were pressed in a very focused fashion on both of those issues,” said Kenneth Lieberthal, director of the John L. Thornton China Center at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

“I think their position does reflect, in fact, the impact of the Obama visit and of American diplomacy,” he said.

China offered rare backing on Friday to a vote by the U.N. nuclear watchdog to rebuke Iran for building a uranium enrichment plant in secret, the first such vote against Tehran in almost four years.

China, like Russia, backed the measure, smoothing its 25-3 passage through the International Atomic Energy Agency and departing from an earlier pattern of blocking global attempts to isolate trading partner Iran.

Obama stressed in Beijing that Iran’s nuclear program could disrupt the Middle East and world energy supplies, experts and administration officials said.

The Washington Post reported that U.S. officials had argued that Israel saw Iran’s nuclear ambitions as an existential threat, and implied Israel could one day attack Iran to disrupt those ambitions. That argument helped bring the Chinese on board to take a firmer line on Tehran, it reported.

“Obama pressed very hard with the Chinese,” Lieberthal said. “And they went the right way today.”

On Thursday, Beijing said Premier Wen Jiabao would go to U.N.-led climate talks in Copenhagen next month and offered its first firm carbon intensity target, pledging to cut the amount of carbon dioxide produced for each yuan of national income by 40-45 percent by 2020, compared with 2005 levels.

‘THESE THINGS ARE INCREMENTAL’

Washington gave only a guarded welcome to China’s emissions announcement, saying the world would watch progress by the top greenhouse gas emitter. Observers said measuring and verifying implementation would be central going forward.

Bonnie Glaser, a China expert and senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said China’s 40-45 percent reduction target was disappointing, but it was a good sign that they made an announcement at all. 

Read more

News Corporation, the media conglomerate controlled by Rupert Murdoch, has engaged in early-stage discussions with Microsoft about a pact to get paid by Microsoft to remove its news content from Google’s search engine and be available on Bing, according to a person briefed on the matter who spoke anonymously to discuss confidential negotiations.

Murdoch has been vocal of late about getting paid for the company’s content online. News Corporation owns many newspapers, including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, The Times and The Sun in Britain.

The Financial Times first reported on the discussions, which involve Microsoft possibly paying News Corporation to index its content on Microsoft’s search engine, Bing. The development has the potential for the newspaper industry to finally generate revenue from online news beyond advertising.

A spokesperson for Microsoft was not immediately available for comment. A News Corporation spokeswoman declined to comment.

Microsoft executives have been clear about their intentions to pursue bold measures – and tap into the company’s vast cash reserves – to disrupt Google’s dominant position in the search market.

In a recent interview, Steven Ballmer, the chief executive of Microsoft, noted that Google handled about six times as many search queries as Microsoft, while also producing more than six times as much revenue.

It’s unclear how a partnership with news organizations that fragmented search results and content on the Internet would be received. The notion of walled-off communities on the web falls into a thorny area of debate.

Source

American Express Co said credit card spending increased in October from September in another sign that the worst of the financial crisis may have passed for the largest U.S. credit-card company, sending its shares up 1.5 percent to a 14-month high.

American Express card spending, adjusted for foreign exchange factors, was down just 1 percent in October compared with a year earlier, Chief Executive Kenneth Chenault said on Tuesday.

That showed improvement from a decline of a bit more than 5 percent in September and almost 10 percent in August.

“The trends in spending are encouraging, and there are signs that the recession may be approaching an end,” Chenault said at a financial services conference organized by Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Spending volume rose in October to the highest level since last December. “We view this performance as positive,” Chenault said.

Chief Financial Officer Dan Henry in October said spending volumes had been stable since May and forecast spending could decline in the low single digits or be flat in the fourth quarter compared with a year earlier.

Total card spending fell 11 percent in the third quarter from a year earlier but showed an improvement against a 16 percent contraction in the second quarter low fee payday loans.

American Express was the fastest growing credit card company between 2003 and 2007 as it relaxed lending standards. But it paid a heavy price in the financial meltdown, and bad loans rose to record highs.

The company cut 11,000 jobs and reduced spending to save $2.5 billion, part of which it will invest now to grow. It also converted itself into a bank holding company to get access to government bailout funds, which it has repaid.

Analysts have said American Express, which relies on affluent and corporate customers more than its peers, is recovering faster from the recession as economic jitters ease.

American Express shares were up 59 cents, or 1.5 percent, to $39.64 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange, a 14-month high. The shares have more than doubled in price this year.

(Reporting by Juan Lagorio, Editing by Gerald E. McCormick and John Wallace)

Read more

Thomson Reuters Corp’s quarterly revenue fell but profit beat Wall Street estimates, helped by foreign currency rates and cost cuts, and the company affirmed its 2009 outlook.

The news and financial data publisher reported on Thursday that revenue in its markets division, which serves the financial industry, fell 4 percent to $1.86 billion in the third quarter.

Revenue from ongoing businesses, excluding the impact of foreign exchange rates, fell 2 percent to $3.21 billion. That compared to the average analyst forecast of $3.23 billion.

“Financial firms are watching costs and being very careful on spending money, so a lot of discretionary expenses regarding services are being cut back,” said Benchmark Co analyst Edward Atorino.

The company, formed last year by the merger of Thomson Corp and Reuters Group Plc, said underlying operating profit rose 3 percent to $711 million, from $690 million a year earlier.

Adjusted earnings per share fell to 43 cents from 47 cents, due to higher integration spending, but this beat the average analyst forecast of 40 cents per share, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

“While the weak year-to-date net sales experienced in recent quarters are now flowing through into revenues, we expect this dip to be shallow and limited to the next few quarters,” Chief Executive Thomas Glocer said in a statement.

He also said, “Our Tax and Accounting and Healthcare and Science businesses continued to perform very strongly, and sales of subscription products in our Markets and Legal units improved in Q3 over what we expect were their bottom in Q2 advanced payday loan.”

Thomson Reuters affirmed its previous guidance, saying it expects revenue to grow in 2009 and underlying operating profit margin and free cash flow to be comparable to 2008.

The company expected the impact of weaker subscription sales in its markets and legal businesses in 2009 to continue to drag on revenue in the first half of 2010. But it said growth in other units, a focus on costs and benefits of the merger are expected to reduce the impact on operating profit.

PROFIT MARGIN UP

Thomson Reuters expects at least $1 billion in annual savings by the end of the year.

Underlying operating profit margin rose to 22.1 percent in the third quarter from 20.7 percent a year earlier.

In the professional division, which includes products for lawyers, accountants and healthcare professionals, revenue rose 2 percent before currency adjustments to $1.36 billion. Higher sales in tax and accounting, and healthcare and sciences offset a 1 percent decline in legal business revenue.

In the markets division, revenue from the media unit fell 10 percent before currency adjustments, amid consolidation among traditional media outlets such as newspapers. 

Read more

Credit rating agencies would be more tightly regulated and more exposed to lawsuits under legislation approved on Wednesday by the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee.

In another procedural step forward for the Obama administration’s and congressional Democrats’ push for financial reform, the committee voted 49-14 to send the bill to the full House for a vote, likely next month.

Credit rating agencies are widely blamed for failing to spot credit market problems, with securitized debt and other instruments, in the run-up to last year’s financial crisis.

President Barack Obama and Democrats have been working for months on a package of proposals to tighten bank and capital market regulation after the crisis, the worst in decades.

“The rating agencies really screwed up and now people are asking for us to put their heads in the guillotine … But what really needs to happen is to see what can be done to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” said Representative Paul Kanjorski, author of the committee’s bill.

The agencies are viewed by critics as compromised by their prevailing business model, in which issuers of debt pay the agencies for debt ratings. Kanjorski said lawmakers explored ways to change that model, but found it was impractical no fax payday advances.

Instead, the bill imposes regulations on the industry intended to “close many of the weaknesses and the loopholes,” said Kanjorski, a Democrat.

Firms affected by the bill include Moody’s Corp, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings.

The bill would for the first time set up an office in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to oversee the agencies and their ratings and how they are determined.

It would also open the door to more lawsuits by investors against agencies over flawed ratings, a provision opposed by the agencies and likely to attract controversy as the bill works its way to the House floor and the Senate.

The bill also calls for removing some references in federal law that mandate certified agencies’ credit ratings as a way to reduce the pervasiveness of their use.

The committee, chaired by Democratic Representative Barney Frank, was expected to vote later on a bill to beef up the SEC’s budget and legal protection standards for investors.

(Editing by Dan Grebler)

Read more

Former Bear Stearns hedge fund manager Matthew Tannin, on trial for fraud and lying to investors early in the financial crisis, might have made strategic mistakes but he did not conspire with colleagues to commit a crime, his lawyer said on Thursday.

A New York jury also heard testimony from a wealthy investor who said he would have pulled money from a Bear Stearns Asset Management fund had he known Tannin’s boss and co-defendant, Ralph Cioffi, transferred $2 million of his own money to another fund.

Cioffi, 53, and Tannin, 48, have denied charges of fraud and conspiracy in a June 2008 indictment that made them the first high-profile Wall Streeters to face criminal charges stemming from problems with subprime mortgages and overall market liquidity.

Cioffi is also accused of insider trading over the transfer, a charge his lawyer described as “ridiculous” in his opening statement on Wednesday. He said Cioffi was not required to give notice to investors over decisions about his personal investments in the funds he managed.

“I would have pulled my money out. Why? If he didn’t have faith in what he was doing, why should I?” Howard Brown, chief executive officer of Rentacrate LLC, said under questioning by U.S. prosecutor James McGovern.

Brown, the first witness called by the government, said he lost a little more than $3 million. He first invested with one of Cioffi’s funds in mid-2006. Statements from the fund did not show a negative month until a drop of 6 percent in May 2007, which he told the court was “quite a shocker.”

Cioffi and Tannin managed two hedge funds that collapsed in mid-2007, costing investors — some of them large banks — between $1.4 billion to $1.6 billion. The funds were crammed with collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), securities backed by pools of debt that included subprime mortgage-backed securities.

Neither man is charged with contributing to the demise of Bear Stearns Cos not long after the funds collapsed. The company was sold to JPMorgan Chase & Co in a government-backed deal.

FEARS IN EMAILS

Emails written by Cioffi and Tannin are key to the government’s charges that they intended to deceive investors at an early stage in the subprime market meltdown.

“No one can lie about what the future will bring because nobody knows what the future will bring,” Tannin’s lead lawyer, Susan Brune, told the jury in her opening statement on Thursday in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn.

“He tried to foster debate, think through all the options and he used emails to foster that kind of debate,” Brune said.

Prosecutors contend that by March 2007 — more than 18 months before the full extent of the global financial crisis became clear — the pair promoted the funds to investors while privately emailing their fears about a possible market calamity.

Brune addressed a lengthy April 22, 2007, email by Tannin to Cioffi and another colleague, one paragraph of which was highlighted in the indictment. Tannin presents two extreme positions: either closing the funds or aggressive investment following an internal company report on CDOs.

He wrote that if the report was at all accurate “then the subprime market is toast” and the funds should be closed. 

Read more