L'INFORMATION ...ou la façon de traiter un sujet : la crise...la réunion du G7...Je pense qu'il y a qd même un rapport avec notre préoccupation et que des incidences sur le trade sont possibles sinon probables . -1°- LE MONDE (les autres n'en parlent même pas) : ""Les grands argentiers du G7 (Allemagne, Canada, Etats-Unis, France, Grande-Bretagne, Italie et Japon), réunis vendredi 24 avril à Washington, se sont séparés sur une note optimiste : "les données récentes laissent penser que le rythme de contraction de nos économies a ralenti et que des signes de stabilisation émergent", affirme le communiqué final. Le ministre japonais des finances Kaoru Yosano a cependant souligné que l'expression "signes de stabilisation" incluait une part "d'interrogation" et a expliqué que le G7 "exprimait l'idée que le pire pourrait être passé". Dans sa déclaration, le G7 a aussi détaillé les initiatives susceptibles d'assurer un retour à la croissance. "Nous continuerons d'agir, chaque fois que cela sera nécessaire, pour rétablir le crédit, fournir un soutien de liquidité, injecter du capital dans les établissements financiers, protéger l'épargne et les dépôts et traiter les actifs dépréciés", pouvait-on lire dans le communiqué. "Nous confirmons notre engagement à prendre toute mesure utile pour faire en sorte que les établissements d'importance systémique soient sains."
A cet égard, plusieurs responsables européens sont revenus sur les estimations du Fonds monétaire international quant aux montants des actifs toxiques dont il faudrait encore se débarasser : 750 milliards de dollars pour les banques européennes, 550 milliards pour les établissements américains. "Nous observons cela avec beaucoup de prudence et nous pensons devoir éclaircir certaines questions de méthodologie avec le FMI", a ainsi déclaré le président de la Banque centrale européenne, Jean-Claude Trichet, tandis que la ministre française de l'économie Christine Lagarde appelait à relativiser les chiffres du FMI.
Le débat devrait se prolonger ce week-end à l'occasion des réunions bisannuelles du FMI et de la Banque mondiale, toujours à Washington "" ********************************************************************** et une autre culture de l'info :
"WASHINGTON -- The federal government will announce as soon as Monday a three-pronged plan to rid the financial system of toxic assets, betting that investors will be attracted to the combination of discount prices and government assistance.
But the framework, designed to expand existing programs and create new ones, relies heavily on participation from private-sector investors. They've been the target of a virulent anti-Wall Street backlash from Washington in the wake of the American International Group Inc. bonus furor. As a result, many investors have expressed concern about doing business with the government in this climate -- potentially casting a cloud over the program's prospects.
The administration plans to contribute between $75 billion and $100 billion in new capital to the effort, although that amount could expand down the road.
The plan, which has been eagerly awaited by jittery investors, includes creating an entity, backed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., to purchase and hold loans. In addition, the Treasury Department intends to expand a Federal Reserve facility to include older, so-called "legacy" assets. Currently, the program, known as the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, or TALF, was set up to buy newly issued securities backing all manner of consumer and small-business loans. But some of the most toxic assets are securities created in 2005 and 2006, which the TALF will now be able to absorb.
Finally, the government is moving ahead with plans, sketched out by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner last month, to establish public-private investment funds to purchase mortgage-backed and other securities. These funds would be run by private investment managers but be financed with a combination of private money and capital from the government, which would share in any profit or loss.
All told, the three efforts are designed to unglue markets that have seized up as investors have stood on the sidelines. One big problem is that many of these assets no longer trade, which means it's very hard to put a price on them. Banks are unwilling to sell at too low a price, and investors are unwilling to take the risk.
The Treasury's hope is that introducing private investors will help create market prices. Earlier attempts to have the government set the prices foundered because too high a price would have hurt taxpayers and too low a price would have hurt banks. Private investors, by contrast, could set a market price because they are unlikely to overpay and banks are unlikely to undersell.
To target troubled securities, such as mortgage-backed securities, the government will create several investment funds. Treasury will act as a co-investor, in most cases contributing $1 for every $1 contributed by the private sector and sharing in the first-loss position.
To target troubled loans, the government will create a Disposition Finance Program with the FDIC. In that case, the government will be a co-investor, but could also agree in some cases to contribute 80% of the financing, with the government putting up $4 for every $1 in private financing. As part of that program, the FDIC would provide guarantees against losses on a pool of loans that a bank wants to sell. The program could guarantee as much as $500 billion in loan investments.
To beef up the amount of government funding, the Treasury is relying on the Fed and the FDIC to provide backing for these programs. For example, under the newly launched TALF, the Fed provides inexpensive and low-risk financing for investors to buy loans backed by consumer credit.
Whether these programs will work as anticipated depends in part on how Wall Street investors react to the AIG furor this week. Congress is moving to clamp down on anyone receiving financial aid by severely taxing bonus payments.
More broadly, investors have become leery about signing on to government programs for fear Congress will abruptly change the rules. Hedge funds, for example, which stand to make sizable profits from participating, worry they won't be able to keep their gains if the mood swing further against Wall Street.
Bankers are already expressing anger at Congress's moves. In a letter to employees Friday, Kenneth Lewis, Bank of America Corp. Chief Executive, said that Congress's proposals to clamp down on bonuses "have the potential to damage the ability of the government to engineer a financial recovery." Several of the government's plans, he wrote, "depend on the private sector being willing to contract with the government. If investors or companies in the private sector believe that the rules can change quickly and indiscriminately, they will be unwilling to participate."
Those sentiments dominated some discussions among representatives of the Managed Funds Association, the biggest hedge-fund lobbying group, during meetings in Washington this week.
The Treasury is still discussing whether it can get around restrictions on executive compensation that were included in the stimulus bill. That provision was designed to hit any recipient of bailout funds and some investors worry that their participation in the toxic-asset program would subject them to those restrictions. The Fed's TALF program already has such an exception.
For Mr. Geithner, getting this plan right is paramount to confidence in his abilities as steward of the economy. His reputation has taken a hit this week as lawmakers demanded to know why he didn't do more to derail the AIG bonus payments. Earlier, Mr. Geithner's nomination was clouded by questions about his failure to pay personal taxes. His February announcement of the toxic-asset plan, which was shy on details, was also widely panned.
The plan might be the administration's best chance to make a big impact on the financial crisis. With bailout fatigue running high, the chances of Congress proffering more funds beyond the $700 billion authorized last fall are close to zero in the short term, lawmakers say. The Treasury instead will likely have to rely on the Fed, FDIC and private investors.""
|