Ad: BlueJ Better Tax Answers. -Accomplish hours of research in seconds -Instantly draft high-quality communications -Verify answers using a library of trusted tax content. Learn more

More ‘Fiscal Blood on the Tax Tracks’

Following up on my previous post, NY Times: LILOs & SILOSs Cause "Fiscal Blood on the Tracks":  Business Week, Wall Street Plays Hardball:

Across the nation, local governments and related public entities, already reeling from the recession, face another fiscal crisis: billions of dollars in fees owed to UBS, Goldman Sachs, and other financial giants on investment deals gone wrong.

The seeds of this looming disaster were sown during the credit boom, when Wall Street targeted cities big and small with risky financial products that promised to save them money or boost returns. Investment bankers sold exotic derivatives designed to help municipalities cut borrowing costs. Banks and insurance companies constructed complicated tax deals that allowed public utilities, transit authorities, and other nonprofit organizations to extract cash immediately from their long-term assets. Private equity firms, pointing to stellar historical gains, persuaded big public pension funds to plow billions of dollars into high-cost investments at the peak of the market. Many of the transactions shared a striking similarity: provisions that protected the banks from big losses and left the customers on the hook for huge payouts.

Now, as many of those deals sour, Wall Street is ramping up its efforts to collect from Main Street. "The banks stuffed customers with [questionable investments] and then extorted money from the customers to get rid of them," says Christopher Whalen, managing director at research firm Institutional Risk Analytics. The New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, for instance, must pay nearly $1 million a month at least until December 2011 to Goldman Sachs on derivatives deals tied to municipal debt—even though the state retired the debt last year. The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA), having entered into complex arrangements to lease its equipment to outside investors and then lease it back, could face termination fees of $30 million. The investors could collect penalties because American International Group (AIG), which backed the arrangement, has seen its credit rating tumble. "These [sorts of deals] are potentially huge liabilities," says Stanford Law School's Joseph Bankman. "Investors aren't going to be settling for chump change."


About the Author

Ad: BlueJ Better Tax Answers. Blue J's generative AI tax research solution is transforming how tax experts work. Learn more.
Information and rates on advertising on TaxProf Blog

Discover more from TaxProf Blog

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading