Forget TARP, TALF and Government Aid: Credit Unions Can Fix Their Own Problems!

In converting the unneeded capital note at US Central, for which the entire system has already paid, into a revolving capital fund, the entire movement has access to positive options for correcting problems.

 

By

 

Periodically through the last nine months of the financial-economic crisis credit union spokespersons have called for government assistance for credit unions. NCUA Chair Mike Fryzel wrote former Treasury Secretary Paulson and current Secretary Geithner urging credit union access to TARP Funds. Both national trade groups as well as some state league Presidents have also spoken of the need for such assistance. A few credit unions, confronting severe housing downturns in their markets, have lobbied individually for external assistance.

A parallel thought process was behind the NCUA-industry support for HR 2351, authorizing NCUA to borrow an initial $6 billion for a Corporate Trust Fund within the NCUSIF, plus an additional $30 billion if required. The implication is that credit unions could not take care of their own capital and liquidity challenges with their own resources.

These premises are factually incorrect and dangerous to the cooperative self-help model. Moreover, suggestions that credit unions need outside governmental funds can only assist those who want to make credit unions a part of a revised regulatory scheme subject to the same constraints as those who created the problem.

Record Liquidity Levels-Excess Capital Notes

The March 31, 2009 consolidated financial data showed credit unions with the highest amount of liquidity ever, over $260 billion in investments. Over 62% was invested for less than one year; over $80 billion was in the corporate network, an increase of $21.8 billion from December 2008.

But the more important news, is that US Central, contrary to public statements made by NCUA on March 23 that the "credit losses . . . far exceed their (WesCorp and US Central's) capital," is indeed solvent with almost $1 Billion in membership capital shares--after all accounting adjustments. Additionally the capital note for $1 billion deposited in January is completely intact! This result was documented in a May 14 letter from US Central to its members.

Moreover, pending release of final audits, preliminary indications are that every corporate, except WesCorp, has positive capital at March 31, 2009.

Meanwhile credit unions, as directed in the Agency's January 28th analysis, have written off US Central's capital note. In fact the data at March 31 suggests that credit unions collectively have expenses over $6 billion of the total NCUSIF announced losses of approximately $7 billion. This total includes the $1.2 billion from the WesCorp capital write off plus the $5.9 collective NCUSIF insurance expenses. Instead of extending this expense recognition over five or seven years, the vast majority of credit unions elected to recognize these expenses now and move on.

But what about the $1 billion capital note?

Now that US Central is solvent and credit unions have fully expensed the capital note, that money is available for reallocation to natural person credit unions. This reallocation could assist the recovery of every credit union that reports a net worth ratio below 7%. Contributing capital to these problem situations has three significant advantages for the credit union system:

  1. It allows credit unions with strong franchises and capable teams to turn troubled situations around;
  2. It saves the insurance fund, when those turn-arounds occur, from the immediate costs of liquidation or merger;
  3. The potential for repayment of the funds means that the NCUSIF can actually recover losses originally expensed and reduce future costs of the fund.

How much would such an effort take of the $1 billion all of which has already been expensed?

At March 31, 184 credit unions with assets of $21.2 billion reported net worth ratios below 6%. To restore their net worth ratios to an adequately capitalized level would require capital notes of $329 million.

Another 292 credit unions reported net worth between 6-7%. Bringing this group with $94.0 billion in assets up to a well capitalized level would require notes totaling $390 million.

It should be recognized that most of these credit unions have fully funded allowance accounts for their delinquent loans, so that their capital levels are actually much higher than the net worth calculation used for PCA compliance. In fact, their collective coverage ratio is 82% an amount nearly equal to the industry average of 83%.

After all these actions, there would still be over $280 million of the original $1 billion capital note remaining!

Taking Care of Our Own-Willing a Legacy for the Future

Capital notes are a traditional form of NCUSIF assistance. They were widely used in the 1980's and 1990's along with 208 guarantees. Many of these credit union recipients are leaders today. For example SACU in San Antonio had a negative net worth of over $35 million (over -6% of assets) when Jeff Farver arrived in the early 1990's. Today the credit union with almost $2.8 billion in assets is a leader in manufactured housing finance in the United States as well as a credit union with an extraordinary record of innovation and support for collaborative efforts.

Not every credit union receiving notes may turn around, but this assistance can bring new life, hope and options, and at a minimum create more attractive merger partners if problems cannot be overcome. Today troubled credit unions are being forced to reduce their loans and shares to try to maintain net worth ratios, a process that undermines long term member relationships and destroys franchise value.

The Time to Act is Now

In converting the unneeded capital note at US Central, for which the entire system has already paid, into a revolving capital fund, the entire movement has access to positive options for correcting problems. In many instances the problems encountered could not have been prevented. That is what "systemic" risk means.

The funds are available now; the need is now; the precedents are there (US Central is the most recent!) and the examples are positive. Can those credit union leaders who were looking at the federal government as a solution, now turn their energy and voice to launching this recovery effort within the system?

The NCUSIF funds are credit union funds, not the federal government's. They are common capital collected for the well being of the credit union system. Creative and effective use of this capital pool is a critical responsibility to insure the future stability and soundness of the credit union system. Innovative and responsive leadership can make a decisive difference not just in individual credit union's recovery, but also in every credit union's confidence in the system's future.

Most importantly, it could begin to heal the rift that has occurred between NCUA and credit unions.

 

 

 

June 8, 2009


Comments

 
 
 
  • I have had a problem with NCUA since they caused Cap Corp to go under in the '90s. They have imaginary friends proposing imaginary worst case scenarios based on a less than 5 percent chance of occurring and use that to justify their postions of power liek every other bureaucrat. If the jerks at FASB hadn't brought back "Mark to Market" after almost 70 years of safety without it, the credit market wouldn't have dried up hleping to worsen the economic crisis. If NCUA hadn't used a company in the business of buying and trading risky investments to help rate the Corporates, perhaps we wouldn't have had to encumber an inordiante amount of regulatroy capital. It seems that almost all of the triggers can be traced back to some Government bureaucracy or program.
    Jay
     
     
     
  • Brian Clark wrote: Credit unions did not "elect to recognize the NCUSIF expenses and move on". Recognizing the expense was required by the NCUA.

    Absolutely correct, Brian.

    The question is, when will the NCUA be audited to find out who/what/why this was allowed to happen?

    Why should Credit Unions continue to accept the NCUA's accounting measures? OH, I guess we are REQUIRED TO and have NO CHOICE but to let the money-changers continue to defile the temple.

    mike
     
     
     
  • While I admire Chip's enthusiasm his grasp of accounting is poor at best and his presentation of the facts is sloppy. Credit unions did not "elect to recognize the NCUSIF expenses and move on". Recognizing the expense was required by the NCUA and I, among many, am waiting for the NCUA webcast so I can reverse the expense and defer over years. Deferring the expense will relieve the much of the net worth dilemma that the rest of the article addresses. Redefining net worth to include the allowance for loan losses is a nice sleight of hand but given the economy and the loan losses credit unions are looking at I think those reserves will be needed. Stating that the allowance is fully funded at credit unions may be the biggest leap he makes it the column. Who knows what fully funded is? It takes years for real estate losses to be finalized. There is great uncertainty in the loan loss reserves. To say that the loss of the $1 billion US Central note has been recognized by natural person credit unions and therefore we can simply move the dollars to another cause is simplistic. If the losses are less than originally anticipated the NCUA will invoice credit unions less than originally anticipated. Good news. The expense was taken from us and can be given back. Lastly, the NCUSIF is an insurance fund. If not needed it should be returned to the credit unions that overpaid into the fund.
    brian clarke
     
     
     
  • Chip - Maybe you can prevail upon former WesCorp CEO Bob Siravo to return some of that SERP he took down in 12-2008. If you recall the NCUA fired Bob on 3-20-2009 after taking WesCorp into conservatorship. We in fact need a revised regulatory scheme - the NCUA has failed us. NCUA has been on sight at USC & WesCorp full time for over 10 years - & look at the results. Besides firing Bob and Francis - did the NCUA fire anyone at the NCUA? I din't think so. Did they get promoted? I thought so.
    mariannecarpio
     
     
     
  • I think that NCUA will have to increase the NCUSIF reserves for natural person credit unions. The share insurance fund only has about $15 million in reserves for natural person credit union losses. The Eastern Finanical Credit Union merger with Space Coast proabably won't work without substantial NCUA assistance. I expect that there will be a long list of natural person credit unions that require assistance. I believe any over accrual for corporate credit union losses will likely end up being applied to natural person credit unions. We should also expect to see other corporate credit union problems that wil require NCUA assistance beyond just US Central and Wescorp. I think it is likley that credit unions will be assessed signficant additional share insurance premiums and special assessments before we are through this recession.
    Henry Wirz