Via SchiffGold.com,

In the wake of two bank failures, the Federal Reserve and the US Treasury announced a bank bailout program that could be dubbed “QE Extra Lite.”

Last week, Silicon Valley Bank was shuttered by federal authorities after the bank suffered significant losses selling bonds in order to raise capital. When that news hit, depositors rushed to pull funds from the bank, making it functionally insolvent. Then over the weekend, federal authorities shut down Signature Bank.

On Sunday, the FDIC created “bridge banks” to handle both insured and uninsured customer deposits. Banking regulators assured depositors that they would have full access to all of their funds.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve announced a loan program that will allow other banks to easily access capital “to help assure banks have the ability to meet the needs of all their depositors.”

The Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP) will offer loans of up to one year in length to banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other eligible depository institutions pledging US Treasuries, agency debt and mortgage-backed securities, and other qualifying assets as collateral. Banks will be able to borrow against their assets “at par” (face value).

According to a Federal Reserve statement, “the BTFP will be an additional source of liquidity against high-quality securities, eliminating an institution’s need to quickly sell those securities in times of stress.”

The US Treasury will provide $25 billion in credit protection to the Fed from the Exchange Stabilization Fund.

This will ostensibly help banks avoid the situation that brought down Silicon Valley Bank.

Backdrop

Last week, SVB sold a large portion of its bond portfolio at a $1.8 billion loss. SVB CEO Greg Becke said the bank made the sale “because we expect continued higher interest rates, pressured public and private markets, and elevated cash burn levels from our clients.”

The bank bought the bonds when interest rates were low. As a result, the $21 billion available for sale (AVS) bond portfolio was not yielding above cash burn. Meanwhile, rising interest rates caused the value of the portfolio to fall significantly. The plan was to sell the longer-term, lower-interest-rate bonds and reinvest the money into shorter-duration bonds with a higher yield. Instead, the sale dented the bank’s balance sheet and caused worried depositors to pull funds out of the bank.

Many other US banks are likely in the same situation. As the Fed jacked up interest rates to fight price inflation, it decimated the bond market. (Bond prices and interest rates are inversely correlated. As interest rates rise, bond prices fall.) With interest rates rising so quickly, banks have not been able to adjust their bond holdings. As a result, many banks have become undercapitalized on paper. The banking sector was buried under some $250 billion in net unrealized losses on bond portfolios as of Dec. 31.

The BTFP gives banks a way out, or at least the opportunity to kick the can down the road for a year. Instead of selling bonds that have dropped in value at a big loss, banks can go to the Fed and borrow money at the bonds’ face value.

QE Extra Lite

You could categorize this plan as quantitative easing extra lite.

Understand, this is not exactly QE. The Fed is not buying Treasuries. It will only hold them as collateral for the loans. Once the loans are paid back, the Treasuries will go back on the bank’s books.

But it is like QE in the sense that the Fed will create money out of thin air to make these loans. That is inflationary, just like quantitative easing, although the inflation is ostensibly temporary. When the bank pays back the loan, that money will drain out of the system. Of course, that assumes the loans get paid back.

Also like QE, the Fed is putting its thumb on the bond market by incentivizing banks and other institutions to hold Treasuries instead of selling them into the market. In effect, it creates an artificial limit on the supply of Treasuries, which will artificially keep prices higher than they otherwise would be.

In effect, this Federal Reserve loan program will have some of the same systemic impacts as QE, but on a much more limited basis – thus the term “QE Extra Lite.”

Is This a Bailout?

The powers that be insist this is not a bailout. But it is absolutely a bailout.

The plan creates a mechanism for banks to acquire capital they couldn’t otherwise access under normal market conditions. Meanwhile, uninsured depositors will get their money back.

The government can plausibly claim it is not bailing out SVB or Signature Bank. Both institutions appear to be doomed. But the government is bailing out uninsured depositors and it is setting the stage to bail out other banks that would have suffered the same fate without the loan program.

In effect, the loan program and deposit guarantee signal to other banks that they have nothing to worry about. It also calms the public and lowers the likelihood of bank runs.

Will Taxpayers Foot the Bill?

The powers that be also insist this won’t cost taxpayers. Agins, in one sense, this is true. The US government isn’t going to raise taxes. And the only way the taxpayer would be directly implicated is if any of the banks taking loans defaults and Fed taps into the $25 billion in credit protection extended by the US Treasury. But as Peter Schiff pointed out in a tweet, the taxpayer will be on the hook for the inflation tax.

According to @POTUS the government bank #bailout won’t cost taxpayers any money. That’s a lie. While it’s true that no one’s taxes will be raised to pay for it, the #Fed will print lots of money to cover the cost. That’s #inflation and everyone will pay higher prices as a result.

— Peter Schiff (@PeterSchiff) March 13, 2023

Even if it’s only temporary, the loans will inflate the money supply. That is the definition of inflation.

And looking at the bigger picture, this bailout likely means the end of the Fed’s inflation fight.

Shares of European banks plunged on Monday, as yields on European bonds dropped on the implosion of Silicon Valley Bank could force central banks across the Western world to either slow the pace of interest rate hikes or even pivot if more regional banks fail. 

Credit Suisse Group AG is one bank that caught our attention this morning. The shares of this troubled bank, trading in Switzerland, plunged as much as 15%, hitting a new record low. This decline was due to concerns about the bank’s ability to recapture client funds, revive its investment banking business, and manage ongoing legal and regulatory investigations.

The selling pressure on Credit Suisse shares returned thanks to the collapse of SVB, sparking a crisis of confidence throughout the banking industry in the Western world. As a result, the Zurich-based lender’s five-year credit default swaps jumped to a record high of 448 basis points, data compiled by Bloomberg show. 

And it’s not just Credit Suisse, whole financial sector is seeing CDS spreads widen. 

Credit Suisse’s demise and shares falling to a record low come as the bank faces a long list of challenges. Just last week, shares hit a new low after it announced it would postpone the release of its annual report at the request of the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

Another concern is whether the bank can survive, given the substantial outflows from its wealth management division.

So much for aggressive interest rate hikes in Europe. 

*TRADERS SEE ONLY 50% CHANCE OF HALF-POINT HIKE BY ECB THIS WEEK

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 13, 2023

As for US regional banks, and to prevent a wave of failures, rate traders have priced out hikes for the rest of the year as some of the first cuts could arrive in the second half of the year. 

Will the Fed’s rescue of SVB be sufficient to revive confidence in the banking sector?

ETA until market realizes $25BN is nowhere near enough and futs react appropriately?

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 12, 2023

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Over one year since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, there are growing differences between Washington and Kyiv on how to move forward in the conflict, Politico reported Sunday.

One issue is over Bakhmut, the eastern Ukrainian city where Russian and Ukrainian forces have been locked in battle for over eight months. Biden administration officials think Ukraine has expended too many resources defending Bakhmut and worry it will impact their ability to launch a counteroffensive this spring, but officials in Kyiv have decided to keep fighting for the city.

Another point of contention is over Crimea as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky insists they will retake the peninsula, which has been under Russian control since 2014 and is populated by people who are happy to be part of the Russian Federation.

While some Biden administration officials have vowed support for Ukrainian attacks on Crimea, the Politico report said other US officials believe Zelensky’s insistence that there will be no peace talks until the peninsula is taken will only prolong the war. But publicly, President Biden and other US officials maintain that negotiations will only happen under Kyiv’s terms.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken has also acknowledged the risk of escalation that would come with a Ukrainian attempt on Crimea, calling it a “red line” for Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the Pentagon has said it’s unlikely Kyiv can take the peninsula.

The US also appears to be tired of Zelensky’s constant demands for weapons. Two White House officials told Politico that there are “grumblings” in Washington over Zelesnky’s constant requests and lack of gratitude. Despite the massive amount of support provided by the US and its allies, Ukrainian officials have frequently said that it’s “not enough” and are demanding fighter jets and longer-range missiles.

The Politico report mentioned the Nord Stream sabotage and how US officials are now linking the attack to Ukraine while insisting the Ukrainian government was not involved. But the vague claims are likely an attempt to shift blame from the US following the bombshell report from investigative journalist Seymour Hersh that alleged President Biden ordered the bombing of the pipelines.

Things are changing on Ukraine. You can detect it in these *major* policy shifts that are framed as no big deal parentheticals.

“The U.S. has been clear with Kyiv that it cannot fund Ukraine indefinitely at this level.” 1/https://t.co/FXEakVZbnJ

— Elbridge Colby (@ElbridgeColby) March 12, 2023

Publicly, Biden still maintains he will support Ukraine “for as long as it takes,” but there are other signs that the US is thinking about winding down its support. CIA Director William Burns visited Kyiv in January and told Zelensky that Congress might not pass any more massive aid packages for the war. Ukrainian officials are concerned that the administration might use Congress as an excuse to scale down assistance.

Over the weekend, when parsing through the carnage sweeping the US banking sector, we analyzed which banks are facing the highest deposit-run risk in the aftermath of the SIVB – and now SBNY – failures, and focused on a handful of names who have the bulk of their funding in the form of deposits – deposits which are now suddenly at risk amid what seems to be a major bank run.

JPM’s Michael Cembalest – whose bank is poised to benefit the most from the ongoing carnage – chimed in with the following chart, which added an additional axis looking at loans plus securities as a % of total deposits, but which after the new BTFP bailout facility is irrelevant since the Fed and TSY are effectively backstopping unrealized losses on securities.

So we are really down to which banks have the most bank run risk, which as we explained, are primarily America’s small, regional banks.

How are they holding up today? Well, not good: here is the KRE index…

$KRE down 30% in past week, a rare short-term plunge for something so diversified. pic.twitter.com/9zUWJzODYR

— Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) March 13, 2023

… while its consttiuent members are having a very bad day as the following headlines reveal:

• *FIRST REPUBLIC BANK HALTED FOR VOLATILITY, DOWN 65%
• *PACWEST HALTED FOR VOLATILITY; DROPPED 41% TO LOWEST ON RECORD
• *REGIONS HALTED FOR VOLATILITY AFTER PARING 31% DROP TO 20%
• *WESTERN ALLIANCE SINKS A RECORD 76%; HALTED FOR VOLATILITY

And this is how the various small banks are doing today.

The take home here is that, unfortunately, Joe Biden’s 9am pep talk did little to boost confidence in small US banks.

Or, as we put it earlier, “”It would be the Savings and Loan 2.0 Crisis but we regret to inform you there are no savings.” Meanwhile, all hail JPMorgan, pardon, JPMega, which is about to have some $18 trillion in deposits.

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Border patrol agents were forced to erect temporary barricades at a port of entry along the southern U.S. border on March 12, as thousands of illegal immigrants tried to enter the country, with hundreds stampeding border officials by force.

The stampede incident started at the Paso Del Norte International bridge entry point in El Paso, Texas, around 1.30 p.m. local time.

Hundreds attempted to forcefully cross the entry point to the bridge at Juarez, Mexico.

Video footage captured by Fox News showed the illegal immigrants rushing the border checkpoint, pushing down permanent barriers and overwhelming armed border officials who struggled to hold back the crowd as they attempted to cross the bridge to the United States.

NEW: Our live report this evening as a massive group migrants attempted to rush the Paso Del Norte port of entry in El Paso, TX this afternoon. CBP special response teams, some in crowd control gear, repelled the group. Live cams show migrants still gathered on the bridge. pic.twitter.com/Axw1PTI8kG

— Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) March 12, 2023

Meanwhile, others tried to enter the United States from other points.

Migrants, mostly of Venezuelan origin, attempt to forcibly cross into the United States at the Paso del Norte International Bridge in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua state, Mexico, on March 12, 2023. Hundreds of migrants, mostly Venezuelans, attempted to stampede across one of the border bridges in the northern Mexican city of Ciudad Juarez, desperate to enter the United States. (HERIKA MARTINEZ/AFP via Getty Images)

El Paso County Judge Ricardo Samaniego told ABC network affiliate KVIA that in total, the crowd was sized around 2,000 illegal immigrants. The judge said the majority of the immigrants were Venezuelan males.

After the Mexican National Guard was called in to disperse the crowd, some of whom were attempting to pull down the port barriers and concertina wire, around 100 asylum seekers remained, KVIA reported.

Human Wave Posed ‘Potential Threat’

Separate video footage captured and shared online appeared to show large numbers of the group returning to the Juarez checkpoint after the failed attempted crossing.

Video shows migrants returning to Juarez after attempting to rush U.S. border on Paso Del Norte Bridge in Downtown El Paso-Juarez, Mexico. https://t.co/FgiSNSb350

— Daniel Borunda (@BorundaDaniel) March 12, 2023

Fox News reported that the immigrants who reached the U.S. border were met with barbed wire fencing. They were later returned to Mexico.

According to the El Paso migrant situational awareness dashboard, CBP managed 1,210 encounters with illegal immigrants on Sunday, and took 2,023 individuals into custody.

In a statement shortly after the incident, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) said that officers, including members of the CBP Mobile Field Force, had implemented “port hardening measures” to prevent the migrants from illegally crossing the border, including the deployment of physical barriers.

“A large group of individuals formed on the Mexican side of the border and approached the international boundary posing a potential threat to make a mass entry,” the statement said.

CBP said that the incident had temporarily prevented northbound traffic at the Paso Del Norte Bridge.

El Paso Deputy City Manager Mario D’Agostino told CNN that crowds at the bridge were subsiding as of Sunday evening.

“At this time EOC (Emergency Operations Center) has shut down. Crowds [have] subsided and it’s just being monitored,” he said.

Traffic has resumed as of Sunday evening.

Parallel Charges at the Border

Additionally, similar breaches took place at two other crossings on Sunday: the Stanton crossing, and the Bridge of the Americas crossing, CBP said.

The attempted breach Stanton crossing took place from 2 p.m. until 2.45 p.m. and the one at Americas crossing happened from 2.45 p.m. until 3.30 p.m., CBP said.

Barricades were used in both of those incidents too to stop illegal entry, according to CBP.

“CBP is working to maintain the legal and orderly flow of entry to the U.S. while protecting the safety and security of legitimate trade and travel, CBP facilities, and the CBP workforce,” the agency said in a statement to CNN.

Biden Touts Work to Secure Border

Sunday’s incident comes after President Joe Biden in January announced that immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela will be returned to Mexico under Title 42 if they illegally enter the country.

However, the administration will also provide legal immigration opportunities to eligible asylum seekers, allowing them to live and work in the United States, provided they find a sponsor inside the United States and pass a background check.

During his State of the Union address earlier this month, Biden touted the “record number of personnel working to secure the border.”

The Epoch Times has contacted U.S. Customs and Border Protection for comment.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

The inevitable outcome was clear for a decade at least, but in the run up to the Covid lockdowns there were many economists in the corporate media that outright denied the reality of an inflationary or stagflationary crisis. Joe Biden, Janet Yellen, Paul Krugman and a host of journalists claimed that concerns about inflation were “overblown” and that the Federal Reserve had everything under control.

Some might say they were ignorant.

Some might say they knew the danger and they were lying about it.

In any case, reality always wins in the long run and those who refuse to take facts and evidence seriously will eventually be exposed. This is exactly what happened from 2020 to 2023 as the stagflationary spiral took hold. While some people might attribute this outcome to the Covid pandemic, Covid stimulus or the war in Ukraine, though the signs were evident well before either of those events.

During the build-up to this disaster, the Federal Reserve has been tightening and hiking interest rates into economic weakness. It’s the same thing they did in the early 1980s and the same thing they did at the onset of the Great Depression (which made the crash a hundred times worse).

In 2019 I outlined this conundrum in my article The Crash In U.S. Economic Fundamentals Is Accelerating.

The U.S. economy was already on the verge of a major crash by 2020 on top of an inflationary crisis. The $8 trillion Covid stimulus delayed the economic depression for a couple of years.

However, as we can see from the explosion in prices, it was also the straw that broke the camel’s back.

I noted in 2019 that there were a host of negative signals piling up and predicted that the Fed would continue to hike interest rates anyway:

For the past ten years, the Fed has refused to acknowledge that there is no recovery. For the past two years, the Fed has been tightening liquidity despite the lack of recovery. And, even in the past four months with all the talk of the Fed “retreating” on QE and going “dovish”, Fed bankers still claim in their public statements that the US economy is enjoying a “solid” recovery.

The Fed will not be cutting interest rates anytime soon. In fact, I continue to believe the Fed will hike rates again this year. Not that it matters, because the Fed’s benchmark interest rate has been climbing anyway, which may indicate the central bank is seeking to tighten liquidity while pretending it is “remaining patient.”

In 2021, Joe Biden claimed that infrastructure spending would be a solution to the inflation problem while ignoring the fact that government spending was the primary cause of inflation in the first place. In my article Infrastructure Bills Do Not Lead To Recovery, Only Increased Federal Control, I noted that:

Production of fiat money is not the same as real production within the economy… Trillions of dollars in public works programs might create more jobs, but it will also inflate prices as the dollar goes into decline. So, unless wages are adjusted constantly according to price increases, people will have jobs, but still won’t be able to afford a comfortable standard of living. This leads to stagflation, in which prices continue to rise while wages and consumption stagnate.

Another Catch-22 to consider is that if inflation becomes rampant, the Federal Reserve may be compelled (or claim they are compelled) to raise interest rates significantly in a short span of time. This means an immediate slowdown in the flow of overnight loans to major banks, an immediate slowdown in loans to large and small businesses, an immediate crash in credit options for consumers, and an overall crash in consumer spending. You might recognize this as the recipe that created the 1981-1982 recession, the third-worst in the 20th century.

In other words, the choice is stagflation, or deflationary depression.

Right now, the U.S. is entering the “end of the honeymoon” stage of stagflation.

The initial months of a mass stimulus program always creates indicators of economic health. But the truth is, these indicators are fleeting and the appearance of health is an illusion. The irony (or perhaps the agenda) when dealing with inflation induced growth is that the central bank often uses these signals to justify fiscal tightening and higher interest rates until the economy breaks.

For example, mainstream economists noted a sharp increase of 3% in retail sales in January, after two consecutive months of steep declines. They interpreted this as a sign of recovery, but also as a sign of an overheating economy. So, more rate hikes are now expected.

But did retail sales really increase? Or, are most goods and services just becoming too expensive and this is being translated as higher sales?

If people are buying more, then why do business inventories continue to rise each month? Maybe because Americans are spending more but buying less due to inflation.

Consumers have also been leaning heavily on credit cards the past year. Does this mean they are recovering and are more apt to spend recreationally, or, does it mean they are using credit cards to cover the price increases on their normal monthly expenditures?

In polls, 33% of Americans say it will take them at least 2 years to pay off their credit card debts, and 50% of Americans say they need their credit cards just to cover normal essential living expenses. Furthermore, 45% of people said they had to take on more debt during the pandemic – and 40% say they are worse off financially since Joe Biden took office and only 16% said their situation has improved.

This is not a recovery for the average American, but inflation in some areas of the economy can make it seem like things are improving on paper, if you only look at it from a narrow perspective.

Employment stats are another indicator used to promote the concept of recovery, and here we get into the real smoke and mirrors of inflation.

Biden often brags about creating 12 million jobs in the U.S. since he took office. What he doesn’t mention is that he destroyed over 25 million jobs with Covid lockdowns. And, the vast majority of jobs that have returned are low wage part time work. These jobs were essentially purchased with $8 trillion in fiat stimulus, as well as unemployment checks and the moratorium on rent payments. Americans were flush with a sudden influx of cash and so they went out and spent it, causing a temporary retail rush.

However, the money has run out. The credit cards are maxed out, and time is short. Many in the public are awake to the threat because it is hitting them directly in their wallets. Yet, many others are oblivious. In my view the talk of an economic “soft landing” is yet another deliberate disinformation narrative being fed to the citizenry to keep people docile and unprepared. But even if you think there is no agenda and no malice intended within our government or within the establishment media you still have to consider the reality that they have been wrong over and over again when it comes to the economy.

Why should anyone listen to them anymore?

The gullible will assume, once again, that the mainstream analysis is accurate and that the ship is righting itself. They will assume that the worst of the storm has passed. I’m here to say the worst of the storm has just begun. As the Fed continues its policy of tightening, many people will find that stagflation is persisting and that QT is making little difference. Prices will remain high on most necessities, but other parts of the economy will be shrinking.

Jobs markets will begin to falter, probably in Spring, along with stock markets, overseas trade, retail sales and wages. The initial indictors of “strength” will fall away revealing the true health of the system. Historically, this is usually when the populace gets very angry, and people are already on edge as it is. A rather dramatic distraction would be needed to keep the public busy and their minds off the central bankers and politicians that created this mess.

Something even bigger than the pandemic scare.

Economic disinformation is a double-edged sword – it buys the establishment time and keeps the public off balance, but by telling people circumstances are not as bad as they appear the shock is even greater when the crash occurs.

Because a crash is coming – make no mistake. I don’t expect most paper assets to survive, let alone entitlement programs. Social Security, pensions, annuities? Either gone completely, or shambling on like zombies, sending out increasingly-worthless paper checks so politicians can tell us they kept their promises. For those of us who see the future clearly, there are very few “safe havens” for our money: farmland, livestock and commodities (particularly physical gold and silver). Resilient households will be prepared for much more than a 72-hour emergency. Start preparing yourself and your family without delay.

The mainstream media and the administration are lying to us. Most Americans will be taken by surprise when the crash materializes – once they realize how thoroughly they’ve been duped, they’ll be looking for heads to roll.

*  *  *

After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.

First Republic Bank’s stock crashed in premarket trading in New York following a statement issued on Sunday night that sought to ease investor worries about its liquidity situation in the wake of the failures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

Shares of the regional bank are down 60% in the premarket. The lender said in a statement late Sunday that it had more than $70 billion in unused liquidity to fund operations from agreements that included the Federal Reserve and JPMorgan Chase & Co.

“The additional borrowing capacity from the Federal Reserve, continued access to funding through the Federal Home Loan Bank, and ability to access additional financing through JPMorgan Chase & Co. increases, diversifies, and further strengthens First Republic’s existing liquidity profile,” the bank said, adding that more liquidity is available through the Fed’s new lending facility. 

“The plunge in its shares is classic market psychology at work, with investors starting to question the credentials of any lender that may be remotely in the same category of Silicon Valley Bank,” Bloomberg’s Ven Ram wrote. 

We pointed out over the weekend, “as a result of the SVB failure – one look at what is already taking place at some smaller, vulnerable banks such as this First Republic Branch in Brentwood should be sufficient to see what comes tomorrow if the Fed makes the wrong decision today.”

I’ve never seen a bank run in Brentwood Los Angeles in over 40 years — this is at first republic bank branch. People standing in rain pic.twitter.com/k31PqqpyO3

— pjb.eth (@Dr_PhillipB) March 11, 2023

Despite the emergency lending program announced by the Fed and Treasury on Sunday to increase the availability of funds to meet bank withdrawals and prevent runs on other banks, fears have not been alleviated as other regional banks continue to experience significant pressure.

And why would that be? Well, as we outlined, “banks which are sitting on some $620 billion in unrealized losses on all securities (both Available for Sale and Held to Maturity) at the end of last year, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.” 

If the Fed’s goal was to shore up wavering confidence in the banking system by announcing the alphabet soup of bailout facilities, the BTFP lending program — well, it hasn’t worked yet this morning:

• PacWest Bancorp’s stock tumbled 27%
• Western Alliance Bancorp’s shares slid 17%
• Charles Schwab’s shares lost 6.7%
• Bank of America’s stock fell 4.4% 
• Citizens Financial Group’s stock declined 2.7% 
• Wells Fargo’s stock slid 2.3%

$25BN? They think $25BN will stop this bank run???

“With approval of the Treasury Secretary, the Department of the Treasury will make available up to $25 billion from the Exchange Stabilization Fund as a backstop for the BTFP.”

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 12, 2023

The current question on everyone’s mind is whether the measures taken by the Fed are sufficient in preventing further depositor panic at other regional banks.

Then there’s this: “There’s no doubt in my mind: There’s going to be more. How many more? I don’t know,” William Isaac, the former chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, told Politico on Sunday. “Seems to me to be a lot like the 1980s,” he added. 

ETA until market realizes $25BN is nowhere near enough and futs react appropriately?

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 12, 2023

… and Cramer strikes again. 

FRC is new focus… very good bank

— Jim Cramer (@jimcramer) March 10, 2023

Authored by Gavin O’Reilly via The Ron Paul Institute,

Friday’s announcement that Iran and Saudi Arabia had restored bilateral ties for the first time in seven years marks a major geopolitical development in the Persian Gulf.

As the region’s two main powerhouses, Tehran and Riyadh had found themselves supporting opposing sides in conflicts in both Syria and Yemen over the past decade, resulting in tensions that would culminate in the ending of diplomatic relations in January 2016, following the execution of Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr Al-Nimr by Saudi Arabia; seen as the dominant Sunni power in the Islamic world, with Iran regarded as the Shia equivalent.

Thus, the restoring of diplomatic relations between both nations should lead to increased stability in a region beset by conflict over the past two decades.

Reaching beyond west Asia, Friday’s announcement also signifies the establishment of a new multipolar world order, with China having brokered the deal between both countries. With Saudi Arabia being a key US-ally and trading partner in the region, this may also indicate that should Washington now feel that Riyadh is moving into Beijing’s sphere of influence, it may vie for regime-change in Saudi Arabia in a bid to maintain hegemony in west Asia.

Indeed such an occurrence has a historical precedent.

In July 1979, the-then US administration of Jimmy Carter would launch Operation Cyclone, a covert CIA programme which would see the arming, funding and training of Wahhabi militants known as the Mujahideen, who would then go on to wage war on the Socialist government of previously Western-friendly Afghanistan, which had come under Soviet influence following the 1978 Saur Revolution.

Five months prior to the commencement of Operation Cyclone, Iran – also a former Western ally in the region – would come under the leadership of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, following the Islamic Revolution which saw the overthrow of the US and UK-backed Shah Pahlavi. A major threat to US hegemony in the region, the Iranian Revolution was a key factor in the White House’s decision to arm the Afghan Mujahideen, lest its influence be weakened even further in west Asia, as well as drawing the Soviet Union into a costly military misadventure.

Should the United States now feel that Saudi Arabia is slipping away from its sphere of influence into China’s instead, and decides to pursue regime-change in response, one of the first steps it may take is a significant overhaul in corporate media coverage of Saudi Arabia’s brutal war on neighbouring Yemen.

In March 2015, following the seizure of the capital Sana’a by the Ansar Allah movement, Riyadh would begin an air campaign in a bid to restore the government of Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi to power

Using US and British-supplied bombs, and with military advisors on hand from both countries to assist in the selection of targets, Saudi Arabia has laid waste to the agricultural, medical and water infrastructure of Yemen over the past eight years, resulting in widespread starvation and the largest recorded Cholera outbreak in history in what is already the most impoverished country on the Arabian Peninsula. A situation exacerbated even further by a Saudi blockade preventing food and medical supplies from entering the country.

Despite the brutality of the Saudi campaign, it has received scant coverage from the corporate media over the past eight years, owing to the lucrative arms trade between Riyadh and the West, as well as the use of Saudi Arabia as a bulwark against Iran in the region, with Tehran long being accused of providing military aid to Ansar Allah.

Should the Chinese-brokered détente between Saudi Arabia and Iran now result in tensions between Washington and Riyadh however, and especially in a scenario where the Gulf Kingdom may decide to purchase weapons from China rather than the United States, a newfound concern for the situation in Yemen may arise amongst the western media, in a manner not dissimilar to their sudden coverage of the war in Ukraine following the Russian intervention last February, in spite of their miniscule coverage of the conflict during the previous eight years it had actually been taking place.

Such coverage of Saudi war crimes in Yemen may pave the way for a colour revolution attempt in Riyadh with the intention of bringing a more US-aligned leadership to power.

Indeed such an attempt is currently taking place in Iran, where the US has been supplying arms to the ‘Iranian opposition’ in a bid to install a client regime, and with officials from US-ally Israel already expressing their opposition to the Iran-Saudi deal, it may only be a matter of time before something similar occurs on the other side of the Persian Gulf.

*  *  *

Support the author via Patreon.

Since 2019, Chinese banks have held the top four spots on Brand Finance’s Banking 500 – an annual ranking of the most valuable bank brands.

Brand value in this context is a measure of the “value of the trade mark and associated marketing IP within the branded business”.

In other words, it measures the value of intangible marketing assets, and not the overall worth of the business itself.

In this infographic, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu and Rosey Eason visualize the Banking 500’s top 10 brands since 2019 to show you how the ranking has evolved (or stayed the same).

Top Bank Brands of 2023

The 10 most valuable bank brands of 2023 are evenly split between China and the United States. In terms of combined brand value, China leads with $262 billion to America’s $165 billion.

Chinese banks have a massive market to serve, which helps to lift the perceived value of their brands. For example, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) serves over 500 million individuals as well as several million business clients.

It’s worth noting that ICBC is the world’s largest bank in terms of assets under management ($5.5 trillion as of Dec 2021), and in terms of annual revenues ($143 billion as of Dec 2022). The bank was founded just 39 years ago in 1984.

After ICBC, the next three spots are occupied by the rest of China’s “big four” banks, all of which are state-owned.

The fifth to ninth spots on this ranking are occupied by an assortment of America’s largest banks, but who knows what the impact of any fallout from SVB will have on American banks’ brands.. Despite a string of controversies in recent years, Wells Fargo rose from eighth in 2022 to sixth in 2023. This goes to show that large corporations can often recover from a scandal in a relatively short period of time (e.g. Volkswagen’s Dieselgate).

Coming in tenth is China Merchants Bank, which is China’s first “joint-stock commercial bank wholly owned by corporate legal entities”.

Top Asset Management Brands

Brand Finance’s 2023 ranking also includes a separate category for asset managers.

Given America’s leadership in financial markets, it’s no surprise to see eight out of the 10 firms listed here as being based in the United States. The number one spot, however, is held by Canada’s Brookfield. The Canadian alternative asset manager is building a strong brand through its investments in renewable energy and other high-value infrastructure.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), a Democratic member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is leading the charge along with six other Democratic and Republican senators to get Russia’s Wagner Group mercenary firm labeled a terrorist organization. 

Shaheen’s legislation, titled the Holding Accountable Russian Mercenaries (HARM) Act would force the State Department to add Wagner to the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) list. It’s designed also to force the Biden administration’s hand, which has remained resistant to issuing a terror label, only dubbing it more ambiguously as a global criminal organization and thus bringing limited financial sanctions. This as Wagner is increasingly the focus of international headlines for its leading role in fighting for Bakhmut.

Biden’s reluctance is causing anger in Congress, and allegations of White House shortsightedness given Wagner’s outsized role in fighting in Ukraine’s east. “We’ve seen that again and again in terms of this support for the Ukrainians and this war, where Congress has been out ahead of the White House,” Sen. Shaheen said in a weekend statement. 

“It’s been true since Russia invaded Ukraine. I remember in 2014 supporting lethal weapons for Ukraine, and the White House refused to support that. I don’t see this as unusual,” she added. “I hope the administration and the State Department comes on board.”

The FTO designation would impose far-reaching costs on the group and open up more means of targeting the mercenary firm by Washington, including going after third parties that deal with Wagner. And given widespread accusations from Ukrainian and Western officials that it is committing atrocities in Ukraine, this has left some Congress members scratching their heads over why Biden hasn’t pulled the trigger on the FTO.

But one Congressional aide explained to The Hill that it relates to other regions of the world where Wagner is active, and that unexpected consequences would accrue and impact US relations with certain countries: 

“[The State Department] is concerned that if suddenly the FTO designation lands on Wagner, that those governments, where there’s various officials that deal with them [Wagner], that they would all, immediately be blocked from travel to the United States and have their assets seized for coming into contact with the FTO. So that’s the nature of their concern,” the aide said.

“They claim they’re not opposed to it on Ukraine grounds, but they’re opposed to it on Africa grounds.”

Wagner meanwhile, last week announced a major recruiting expansions, opening up new offices and recruitment centers in over 40 cities across Russia. The group with ties to President Putin has lately come under severe criticism by the Russian Defense Ministry and regular military chain of command for being too unaccountable and acting as a rival to authorized commanders.