NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL (Catherine Cortez Masto) TO FILE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST WELLS FARGO FOR FORGERY

“WE’VE GOT THEM COLD.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: We have all said what they did was criminal, now it is becoming official. And before you naysayers start complaining, let me point out that this has actually followed an orderly progression and you will see it many times over in the coming months.

• First we started with the deductive logic and investigation, and allegations by borrowers in court. They were not taken seriously until the number of such complaints reached a crescendo, but that is the way our system works.
• Then the regulators, who had turned a deaf ear to anyone writing a letter complaining about the servicing of their loan or the behavior of a pretender lender, turned themselves around and entered a slew of cease and desist, consent orders and those orders have teeth and can be used by borrowers in discovery and in their pleadings. The agency findings of misbehavior are presumptively correct.
• Now the justice system is getting involved, because building criminal cases takes a lot longer than civil cases or even administrative cases against the banks. Remember they have to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt — not merely on innuendo or they “must have done it” or anything but that they did do it, they knew they did it and they did it with criminal intent.

Well now Moody’s has gone and done it.

They just hit BAC, C and WFC with downgrades, saying that the government is “more likely” to allow a large bank to fail if they get in trouble.

This belies the truth, which is that the government doesn’t have the capacity to bail out a trillion-dollar boondoggle any more.  There’s no way to get another TARP through Congress and there’s no back-door way to fund it either.

So Moody’s is correct, in a round-about sort of fashion.  Let’s not conflate desire with capacity, eh?

The entire banking sector took an instant dive on that, with BAC now down more than 5% and Wells, which was up, back to even.

Bank of America’s insular, CEO-blowing board needs to do some firing in the executive suite.  May I suggest a Howitzer for the means of that “firing”?

Frankly I’m not sure it matters at this point.  Countrywide was a monstrous mistake, and a very expensive one on top of it. Tangelo should have been peeled in 2008 if not before rather than riding off into the sunset with a civil penalty that Bank of America paid a huge chunk of. Nobody seems to care much about the fact that all of these banks have been implicated in various schemes and frauds related to foreclosures – not that this is new, of course, in that they did the same thing on the way up with appraisals and similar, blacklisting honest appraisers and essentially demanding overvaluations to “support” their reckless lending.

Now let’s add to that: Nevada is apparently preparing to criminally charge some of these institutions.  That’s not sue, it’s prosecute.  We don’t yet know who the targets are but this will mark the first actual criminal indictments of note should they actually appear.  For my part I’m not going to believe it until I see it, considering how overdue such an action is in the context of anything even lightly-related to the concept of ”justice.”

Are we finally going to “Stop the looting and start prosecuting”?  Hope springs eternal.

Here’s the rub, when you get down to it:  Every one of these institutions should have been a zero in 2008 and the executives should have been brought up on indictments.  As such the alleged “value” in these firms is nothing more than government support for the same sort of business model as Full Tilt Poker is accused of – that is, claiming value in assets that does not in fact exist, relying on the belief that everyone will not show up and demand their money at the same time.  Proof of this is readily available every day in the market in that these firms are selling at a fraction of their claimed book value; if there was anyone who believed that the accounting was honest they’d instantly buy the firm in question as that would be fastest and most-certain money ever made in M&A.

That it hasn’t happened is all the proof you need that the accounting is absolute and utter crap.

Oh Mr. Buffett?  How’s your position in BAC working out?

So Where Are The Cops Again?

Gee, what have I been talking about for a couple of years now?

WASHINGTON — A set of confidential federal audits accuse the nation’s five largest mortgage companies of defrauding taxpayers in their handling of foreclosures on homes purchased with government-backed loans, four officials briefed on the findings told The Huffington Post.

No, really?

And if you remember, I and others have talked about FHA guaranteed loan performance not being exactly honestly reported either…..

The resulting reports read like veritable indictments of major lenders, the sources said. State officials are now wielding the documents as leverage in their ongoing talks with mortgage companies aimed at forcing the firms to agree to pay fines to resolve allegations of routine violations in their handling of foreclosures.

Oh yeah, fines.  Rip people off, pay a fine.  We’re just going to continue what we’ve been doing, right?  Make it perfectly ok – a business practice.  Commit 100 felonies, get caught committing 10 of them and say “Oh gee, I’m sorry, here have that back.”

But you get to keep the fruits of the other ninety!

Justice officials will soon meet with the largest servicers and walk them through the allegations and potential liability each of them face, the sources said.

I’ll believe it when I see filed charges.

Rather than punishing banks for misdeeds, the administration is now focused on helping troubled borrowers in the hope that it will stanch the flood of foreclosures and increase consumer confidence, officials involved in the negotiations said.

Right – breaking the law is just fine if you’re a bankster.

You know damn well the government isn’t going to do jack about this, and you also know damn well that the State AGs will kneel before the banskters rather than sue or prosecute as well.

It’s all they’d done thus far.

We’re all rendered nothing more than maids servicing these jackasses – by force – in their expensive hotel suites.

The Market-Ticker

The last bank, and arguably the one that has the most to lose, Wells Fargo, which up until now has fervently denied it engaged in robosigning and thus refused to halt foreclosures, has just been caught red-handed by the FT. In a sworn deposition, which will certainly lead to a foreclosure halt by Warren Buffett’s pet bank, and confirmation that WFC was merely lying like everyone else on Wall Street, the Financial Times has obtained legal documents that prove Wells was merely one of many. Per the FT: “Legal documents obtained by the Financial Times suggest that Wells Fargo, the second-largest US mortgage servicer, also used a “robo signer”. Unlike its rivals, Wells Fargo has not halted foreclosures. The San Francisco-based bank said on Tuesday it was reviewing some pending cases, but it has maintained that it has checks and balances designed to prevent serious procedural lapses.” Now that Wells’ checks and balances end up neither checking nor balancing, perhaps it is time for Charlie Munger to tell the shareholders of Wells to “suck it in“, as the bank is about to be faced with a rather simple dilemma: beg for TARP 2 (and confirm that Munger, and his partner, are nothing but a bunch of pathetic senile hypocrites) and thus more taxpayer bailouts, or see a huge portion of its shareholder value (and thus Charlie Munger’s precious, precious money) about to be wiped out.

In a sworn deposition on March 9 seen by the FT, Xee Moua, identified in court documents as a vice-president of loan documentation for Wells, said she signed as many as 500 foreclosure-related papers a day on behalf of the bank.

Ms Moua, who was deposed as part of a foreclosure lawsuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, said that the only information she verified was whether her name and title appeared correctly, according to the document.

Asked whether she checked the accuracy of the principal and interest that Wells claimed the borrower owed – a crucial step in banks’ legal actions to repossess homes – Ms Moua said: “I do not.”

Ms Moua nevertheless signed affidavits that said she had “personal knowledge of the facts regarding the sums of money which are due and owing to Wells Fargo”. The affidavits were used by the bank in foreclosure proceedings.

Ms Moua added that before reaching her desk, it was her understanding that the foreclosure documents had been reviewed by outside lawyers.

Wells declined to comment on the deposition but said its records show its “foreclosure affidavits are accurate”. The bank added: “When we find team members who do not follow procedure, we fix what is done incorrectly. Until this case is resolved, we should keep in mind that a deposition does not suggest a wrongful foreclosure.”

And with that, the foreclosure moratorium which TurboTaxing Tim so had hoped to avoid, becomes a self-imposed reality…Or is it: to our big surprise we read in the News-Press.com, that despite the banks’ self-imposed moratorium, the foreclosures are, in fact, continuing:

But in Lee County, court records show both of those banks have continued to get court judgments allowing the sale of mortgages on foreclosed houses at public auction.

That’s despite statements from both banks that they stopped doing that about two weeks ago.

April Charney, a Jacksonville-area legal aid attorney who’s an expert on foreclosure issues, said she’s hearing similar reports from around the country.
She scoffed at the banks’ protests that they didn’t intend for the judgments to be issued.

“It’s a farce,” she said. “We’re all being played.”

JP Morgan spokesman Tom Kelly said Tuesday he didn’t know the bank’s attorneys were continuing to get judgments allowing them to go forward with auctions.

Twelve judgments have been issued in Lee for JPMorgan since Oct. 2, the latest on Tuesday, according to court records.

“We reached out to our local foreclosure counsel and asked them to ask the courts not to enter judgments,” Kelly said. “I don’t know what happened there.”

At this point we wonder: will Wall Street ever stop lying to the American public (no), and even when it pretends to do so, will it at least be true to its word for at least a few days. Ultimately, these two questions are far more imporant than whether or not a bunch of documents were filed properly and reside where needed. If 99% of the American population can not have any faith and trust in those who truly rule the country (Wall Street for those who may be confused) then America is one food crisis away (and thanks to Bernanke’s liquidity laxatives we give that a few months at most) from outright social unrest.

ZeroHedge

Two Top Banks Likely To Be Spared From Federal Taxes

By CHRISTINA REXRODE
MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — This tax season will be kind to Bank of America and Wells Fargo: It appears that neither bank will have to pay federal income taxes for 2009.

Bank of America probably won’t pay federal taxes because it lost money in the U.S. for the year. Wells Fargo was profitable, but can write down its tax bill because of losses at Wachovia, which it rescued from a near collapse.

The idea of the country’s No. 1 and No. 4 banks not paying federal income taxes may be anathema to millions of Americans who are grumbling as they fill out their own tax forms this month. But tax experts say the banks’ situation is hardly unique.

“Oh, yeah, this happens all the time,” said Robert Willens, an expert on tax accounting who runs a New York firm with the same name. “Especially now, with companies suffering such severe losses.”

Bob McIntyre, at Citizens for Tax Justice, said he opposes the government giving corporations such a break.

“If you go out and try to make money and you don’t do it, why should the government pay you for your losses?” McIntyre said. “It’s as simple as that.”

For 2009, Bank of America netted a $2.3 billion benefit related to income taxes, according to its annual report: It had a benefit of $3.6 billion from the federal government, and an expense of $1.3 billion that it paid to different state and foreign governments.

It’s not unusual for a company’s debt to the federal government to vary widely from its debt to state governments, as appears to be the case with Bank of America, said Douglas Shackelford, a tax professor at University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

Confidential returns

The federal government often offers more tax deductions than the states; for example, Bank of America wrote down its federal taxable income with credits from low-income housing and losses on foreign subsidiary stock.

Company tax returns aren’t public, so it’s difficult to say for certain how much a company pays to, or receives from, tax coffers in any year.

The bank’s $3.6 billion current federal tax benefit for 2009 came in a year when it lost $1 billion in the U.S., according to its latest annual report. For the previous year, when the bank had profits of $3.3 billion in the U.S., it listed a current federal tax expense of $5.1 billion.

Wells Fargo was profitable in 2009, with $8 billion in earnings applicable to common shareholders. But its tax payments were reduced because of Wachovia’s losses.

Wells netted an overall tax benefit of $4.1 billion in 2009. It got a benefit worth nearly $4 billion from the federal government, and another worth $334 million from state governments. It had an expense of $164 million in foreign taxes. Wells did record an overall income tax expense of $5.3 billion, but that was offset by the tax benefits of the Wachovia losses.

The topic of corporate tax breaks has gained buzz recently because of a provision in the 2009 stimulus bill, which allows companies to “carry back” their losses for 2008 and 2009 to the previous five years, instead of just the previous two years. Homebuilders and other industries that suffered big losses in 2008 and 2009, but made a lot of money in the years before that, stand to gain billions in refunds. However, the stimulus bill provision does not apply for Bank of America and Wells Fargo, because companies that received TARP loans are ineligible.

‘Arbitrary’ time period

UNC’s Shackelford said the argument for carrybacks stems from the belief that it’s “arbitrary” that taxes are collected on an annual basis.

“There’s no reason we couldn’t collect them on a monthly basis or a two-year basis. Then your losses and gains would be offset over the period,” he said. “The carryback enables you to not be penalized because your losses got bunched in a different year from your gains.”

Help from Congress

The stimulus bill provision, he said, was helped by business lobbying. “There’s an awful lot of companies that paid a lot of taxes in the 2004 period, then they lost a lot of money, and they went to their legislators and said, ‘Please help us,’?” Shackelford said.

McIntyre, at Citizens for Tax Justice, co-authored a report in 2004 related to carrybacks, after the Bush administration expanded many corporate tax breaks. The report examined 275 of the country’s largest companies and found that nearly one-third paid no federal income taxes in at least one year from 2001 to 2003. The companies overall were profitable in those years, but took advantage of tax breaks.

“If you or I lose money in the stock market, we don’t get to carry back our losses to any significant degree,” said McIntyre. His group works on closing tax breaks for corporations.

“Getting a refund from the past, that’s just weird,” he added.

Posted by Karl Denninger

Posted by Karl Denninger