- Goldman told investors in offering documents
that “[l]oans in the securitized pools were originated generally in
accordance with the loan originator’s underwriting guidelines,” other than
possible situations where “when the originator identified ‘compensating
factors’ at the time of origination.” But Goldman has today
acknowledged that, “Goldman received information indicating that, for certain
loan pools, significant percentages of the loans reviewed did not conform
to the representations made to investors about the pools of loans to be
securitized.”
- Specifically, Goldman has now acknowledged
that, even when the results of its due diligence on samples of loans from
those pools “indicated that the unsampled portions of the pools likely
contained additional loans with credit exceptions, Goldman typically did
not . . . identify and eliminate any additional loans with credit
exceptions.” Goldman has acknowledged that it “failed to do this
even when the samples included significant numbers of loans with credit
exceptions.”
- Goldman’s Mortgage Capital Committee, which
included senior mortgage department personnel and employees from Goldman’s
credit and legal departments, was required to approve every RMBS issued by
Goldman. Goldman has now acknowledged that “[t]he Mortgage Capital
Committee typically received . . . summaries of Goldman’s due diligence
results for certain of the loan pools backing the securitization,” but
that “[d]espite the high numbers of loans that Goldman had dropped from
the loan pools, the Mortgage Capital Committee approved every RMBS that
was presented to it between December 2005 and 2007.” As one example,
in early 2007, Goldman approved and issued a subprime RMBS backed by loans
originated by New Century Mortgage Corporation, after Goldman’s due
diligence process found that one of the loan pools to be securitized
included loans originated with “[e]xtremely aggressive underwriting,” and
where Goldman dropped 25 percent of the loans from the due diligence
sample on that pool without reviewing the unsampled 70 percent of the pool
to determine whether those loans had similar problems.
- Goldman has acknowledged that, for one August
2006 RMBS, the due diligence results for some of the loan pools resulted
in an “unusually high” percentage of loans with credit and compliance
defects. The Mortgage Capital Committee was presented with a summary
of these results and asked “How do we know that we caught
everything?” One transaction manager responded “we don’t.”
Another transaction manager responded, “Depends on what you mean by
everything? Because of the limited sampling . . . we don’t catch
everything . . .” Goldman has now acknowledged that the Mortgage
Capital Committee approved this RMBS for securitization without requiring
any further due diligence.
- Goldman made detailed representations to
investors about its “counterparty qualification process” for vetting loan
originators, and told investors and one rating agency that Goldman would
engage in ongoing monitoring of loan sellers. Goldman has now
acknowledged, however, that it “received certain negative information
regarding the originators’ business practices” and that much of this information
was not disclosed to investors.
- For example, Goldman has now acknowledged that
in late 2006 it conducted an internal analysis of the underwriting
guidelines of Fremont Investment & Loan (an originator), which found
many of Fremont’s guidelines to be “off market” or “at the aggressive end
of market standards.” Instead of disclosing its view of Fremont’s
underwriting, Goldman has acknowledged that it “[u]ndertook a significant marketing
effort” to tell investors about what Goldman called Fremont’s “commitment
to loan quality over volume” and “significant enhancements to Fremont
underwriting guidelines.” Fremont was shut down by federal
regulators within several months of these statements.
- In another example, Goldman was aware in
early-mid 2006 of certain issues with Countrywide Financial Corporation’s
origination process, including a pattern of non-responsiveness and
inability to provide sufficient staff to handle the numerous loan pools
Countrywide was selling. In April 2006, while Goldman was preparing
an RMBS backed by Countrywide loans for securitization, a Goldman mortgage
department manager circulated a “very bullish” equity research report that
recommended the purchase of Countrywide stock. Goldman’s head of due
diligence, who had just overseen the due diligence on six Countrywide
pools, responded “If they only knew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .”
- Meanwhile, as Goldman has acknowledged in this
statement of facts, “[Around the end of 2006], Goldman employees observed
signs of uncertainty in the residential mortgage market [and] by March
2007, Goldman had largely halted new purchases of subprime loan
pools.”
Tuesday, 26 April 2016
Something you may have missed in this month's news cycle
Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Stimulus package debate - so who do you believe?
Still wondering if Tony Abbott and Co are right about the Rudd-Gillard Government stimulus packages?
This might assist..........
On ABC TV Q&A Opposition last night Leader Tony Abbott said this:
Well, again, it's horses for courses and don't expect miracles. Now, if spending was the sure fire answer to any problem like this, why is it that the Americans are in recession? Why is it that the British have been in a recession, because their stimulus packages were roughly the same as ours and it didn't work? What got us through the global financial crisis was not fundamentally the stimulus package. It was fundamentally the strength of our economy and I've got to say that that owes far more to the reforms of previous governments, including the Hawke Keating Government, than it does to the spending spree of the current one.
Yesterday John Quiggin also published this:
We the undersigned economists are convinced by the evidence that the coordinated policies of the Australian Labor Government have prevented the Australian economy from a deep recession and prevented a massive increase in unemployment. Unlike most OECD economies we have come out of the Global Financial Crisis and the subsequent world recession with only one quarter of negative GDP growth and a smaller increase in unemployment.
We note that during a recession automatic stabilizers (increase in total unemployment benefit payments and decreased tax revenues) lead to an increased government budget deficit. In almost all the OECD countries there has been a massive increase in unemployment and in budget deficits. In Australia both have been trivial by comparison.
The Government Fiscal Stimulus package that was introduced was carefully crafted and implemented in a clever sequence. The first stage, the payment of $900 to most households, helped to boost confidence in the retail industry.
The second stage of the stimulus package (the Building Education Revolution, and the First Home Owners Grant) boosted the construction industry and created thousands of new jobs. Besides the employment effect, it also provided a much needed increase in the stock of public capital (better and greener homes, better schools) and prevented a sudden fall in house prices.
The last stage of the fiscal stimulus package (as it takes time to prepare plans etc.) was the infrastructure program that increased employment as well as increasing the stock of public capital and helping to overcome the significant short fall in Australian public infrastructure, and hence would increase future productivity, taxable capacity and the ability to repay public debt.
Just as a major corporation goes into debt to invest in its stock of capital, so does a government. Just as many householders have a debt to a bank or mortgage company, so does a government. A government has a budget deficit and a government debt, but it also has capital assets (roads, ports, better equipped schools, Broadband, etc.).
The performance of the Australian economy has been outstanding: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Organisation for the Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have show-cased Australia as a model economy.
We hope that the economic achievements of the Australian Labor Government will be recognized by the population.