May 5, 2024

Greek Prime Minister Says Positive Economic Data Points to Austerity Easing

“Greece is turning the page,” Mr. Samaras told politicians and entrepreneurs at an annual international trade fair in the northern port of Thessaloniki, traditionally used by Greek prime ministers to outline their government’s economic policy for the coming year. “There will be no more austerity measures,” he said.

Citing figures released on Friday by the national statistics agency, Mr. Samaras said the Greek economy shrank 3.8 percent in the second quarter, significantly less than an estimate of 4.6 percent. It was the smallest contraction since 2010, when Greece signed its first multibillion-euro loan deal with its so-called troika of creditors — the European Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund. The improvement is largely the result of an unexpectedly strong rebound in the country’s crucial tourism sector, with a record 18 million foreign visitors expected this year, he said.

Equally encouraging are early indications that the country will achieve this year a primary surplus — a budget surplus not counting debt financing, Mr. Samaras said. He said this would be the “first decisive step toward exiting the policy of memorandums,” referring to Greece’s two loan agreements since 2010, which are worth a total of 240 billion euros ($315 billion) and have been meted out in installments in exchange for a series of austerity measures.

Mr. Samaras said achieving the surplus would open the way for two things, in line with an agreement with creditors — some form of debt relief for Greece, but also the chance to help citizens who have been hardest hit by austerity. It remains unclear how large the surplus will be; Mr. Samaras put it at 1.1 billion euros for the first seven months of the year. Mr. Samaras said 70 percent of the surplus would go toward “lightening the injustices” suffered by Greeks on low pensions and by members of the police, fire service and coast guard whose salaries have been slashed as part of public sector cutbacks.

Greece remains wracked by political and economic instability and may even need additional bailout money. The I.M.F. warned in a report at the end of July that a persistent recession, now in its sixth year, and the government’s failure to accelerate overhauls might create an 11 billion-euro hole in Greece’s finances over the next two years.

The monetary fund said Greece’s economy could return to growth as early as next year. But that forecast comes with a question mark, given that output has fallen 25 percent since its peak in 2007, while unemployment has surged to 27 percent — the highest in the euro zone — and youth joblessness has exceeded 60 percent.

Mindful that representatives of the country’s troika of foreign lenders are expected back in Athens later this month for a new audit, Mr. Samaras was vague on details about potential handouts, including a potential subsidy for heating oil, which saw an increase in taxation last year. He also promoted the benefits of an economic reform program that was bolstered by a write-down of privately held Greek debt last year and the suspension of interest payments on foreign loans, which together helped cut Greece’s debt by 145 billion euros. It now stands at 321 billion euros.

“We stopped the debt from ballooning,” he said, claiming that Greece could return to precrisis levels of prosperity by 2020 by exploiting the potential of its tourism and energy industries and by pushing a program of state privatizations. “Five or six years of difficulties cannot wipe out 3,000 years of glorious history.”

The premier lashed out at the main leftist opposition, Syriza, which opposes the terms of Greece’s foreign loan agreements, saying it “does not want to govern.” He claimed that the leftists were as extreme as “the neo-Nazis” of the ultraright, anti-immigrant party Golden Dawn, which has soared to third place in opinion polls, after Syriza and the premier’s conservative New Democracy, which leads the coalition government.

In a statement, Syriza accused the prime minister of “suffering from delirium,” saying, “Mr. Samaras sees unemployment slowing down even as 1.5 million of our fellow citizens don’t have work.”

Alexis Tsipras, the leader of Syriza, joined anti-austerity protests in Thessaloniki on Saturday evening, which were expected to draw thousands of disenchanted workers. About 4,000 police officers were being deployed to prevent the violence that has marred previous rallies organized by trade unions.

Unionists are planning to scale up their opposition to austerity in the coming weeks ahead of the scheduled return to Athens of troika inspectors after German federal elections on Sept. 22. The problem of Greek debt, and how to handle it, has featured prominently in campaigns for the German elections, whose outcome is expected to set the tone for tough negotiations between the Greek government and the troika. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has insisted there will be no second debt haircut for Greece but has suggested a third loan program, much smaller than the first two, might be extended to Athens to cover the anticipated 11 billion euros funding gap.

The gap is expected to be discussed in talks between Greek government and troika officials in Athens. Negotiations will also focus on a raft of tough proposed reforms that are sure to test the stability of Mr. Samaras’s fragile coalition. They include a lagging program aimed at selling off state assets, lax tax collection efforts, the progress of a system of forced transfers and layoffs in the Civil Service, the possible closure of state-owned defense companies that are running losses and a likely end to a moratorium on home foreclosures.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/business/global/greek-prime-minister-says-positive-economic-data-points-to-austerity-easing.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

In Turmoil, Greece and Italy Deepen Euro Crisis

The prospect of a new transitional, technocratic government in Greece, and new pressure on Silvio Berlusconi to resign after a parliamentary vote on Tuesday, did little to reassure investors that either country was prepared to grapple with the deep structural changes that investors are demanding to restore growth and reduce deficits.

In both places, it is not only the economy that is on trial, but also the ability of democratic government to make highly unpopular choices.

The crisis gripping Mr. Berlusconi’s government deepened as interest rates on the country’s debt rose on Tuesday to 6.74 percent, the highest since the introduction of the euro more than a decade ago and nearing levels that have led to bailouts elsewhere.

Financial markets advanced early Monday on word that the prime minister was negotiating his exit, but lost ground after he denied the reports. On Tuesday, Asian markets generally retreated but European markets rose in early trading after two days of declines.

In Greece, where political chaos last week threatened to plunge the euro zone into crisis, doubts remained about the capacity of the political class to form a coalition government to push through reforms it has agreed to in return for a financial lifeline. So strong is the distrust that Europe’s finance ministers refused to release the next $11 billion in aid for Greece until the two leading political parties signed a letter affirming their commitment to meeting the conditions of the loan deal reached last month with European lenders.

Greece and Italy have famously complex political cultures, but today they are both driven by a simple dynamic: no established parties want to assume the full political cost of pushing through unpopular austerity measures and changes to the labor market. And they are jockeying for positions in a new political constellation after eventual elections — as well as for greater bargaining power with the European Union.

“It’s a big mess,” said Roberto D’Alimonte, a political science professor at Luiss Guido Carli University in Rome. “I don’t think it’s that the markets are too strong, but that democracy is weak.”

Forceful leadership also now seems to be in short supply. In Greece, Prime Minister George A. Papandreou agreed to step down to make way for a new unity government after his proposal for a referendum on the debt deal cost him support within his own Socialist coalition (and with European leaders). In Italy, some members of Mr. Berlusconi’s center-right coalition would readily bring him down and replace him with a technocrat — Mario Monti, a former European commissioner, is commonly mentioned— but others want elections and a new political formation.

After denying reports about his imminent resignation, Mr. Berlusconi faced new pressure to quit after a vote on a state financing bill on Tuesday. Although he technically won the vote, many lawmakers declined to cast ballots, showing he had lost a majority that could potentially take down his government. The vote tally means there may be a confidence vote on austerity measures in coming days meant to quell market concerns about Italy.

With high debts, vast underground economies, low birth rates and more pensioners than workers, there is no doubt that Greece and Italy need structural changes to survive. But with deeply entrenched political patronage societies, governments in both countries have been unwilling or unable to carry out such changes, which would require striking the heart of their own constituencies.

Italy first proposed those austerity measures — including pension reform, changes to labor laws and privatization of state industry — in a letter to the European Central Bank the same day the European Union reached its debt deal with Greece and promised to pass them by Nov. 15. But the government has yet to draft the measures into a bill, let alone put the measure to Parliament.

Instead, it has been deadlocked for weeks, as the conflicting interest groups within Mr. Berlusconi’s center-right coalition refuse to budge. The powerful Northern League Party, for one, has opposed raising the retirement age to 67 from 65.

The center-left opposition ranges from neoliberals to former Communists opposed to changes in labor laws, making it difficult to imagine how it could push through structural changes in a future political order.

In Greece, Mr. Papandreou’s Socialist government has passed radical legislation aimed at cutting the public sector, but implementation has been slow, even as the economy shrinks under tax increases and wage cuts that are pushing the country to the brink.

Elisabetta Povoledo and Gaia Pianigiani contributed reporting from Rome, Stephen Castle from Brussels, and Alan Cowell from London.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/world/europe/in-turmoil-greece-and-italy-deepen-euro-crisis.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Freddie Mac’s Loan Deal With Bank of America Is Called Flawed

The faulty methodology significantly increased the probable losses in Freddie Mac’s portfolio of loans, according to the report, prepared by the inspector general of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees the company. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were taken over by the government in 2008 so additional losses would be shouldered by taxpayers.

The report also noted that the settlement with Bank of America in December was completed over the objections of a senior examiner at the agency. Freddie Mac officials did not want to jeopardize the company’s relationship with Bank of America, from which it continues to buy loans, the report concluded.

The agency official who questioned the loan review methodology contended that Freddie Mac’s analysis greatly underestimated the number of dubious loans bought from the Countrywide unit of Bank of America from 2005 to 2007. The deal between Freddie Mac and the bank resolved claims associated with 787,000 loans, some of which were repurchased by the bank, and cannot be rescinded.

“An effective mortgage repurchase process is critical in limiting the enterprises’, and ultimately, the taxpayers’ exposure to credit losses resulting from the financial crisis,” said Steve A. Linick, the inspector general who oversaw the report. “F.H.F.A. and Freddie Mac must do more to ensure that high-dollar settlements of repurchase claims are accurately estimated and in the best interests of taxpayers.”

When selling loans to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, Countrywide and other originators vouched that the mortgages met certain quality standards or characteristics, like accurately representing a borrower’s income or the appraised value of a property. These promises require mortgage originators to buy back at full value those loans that do not meet the standards.

Companies often review loans for possible buybacks after experiencing large numbers of defaults. Not all defaults, of course, occur after misrepresentations.

The inspector general’s report does not specify how much additional money Freddie Mac could have received from Bank of America had it used a more effective analysis. But the senior examiner who questioned the deal told the inspector general’s staff that Freddie Mac’s faulty process could cost the company “billions of dollars of losses.”

A Freddie Mac spokesman, Douglas Duvall, declined to comment, but said that it continued to believe its deal with Bank of America was “commercially reasonable based upon our internal evaluation and judgments.”

Because of the faulty methodology, Freddie Mac failed to review 100,000 loans from 2006 for possible irregularities, the report said. As of June 2010, some 93 percent of foreclosed mortgages from 2005 and 2006 had not been analyzed, eliminating “any chance to put ineligible loans back to the lenders for those years.”

The report also noted that 300,000 foreclosed loans originated from 2004 to 2007 and owned by Freddie Mac were not reviewed for possible claims. These loans have a combined unpaid principal balance exceeding $50 billion, the report said.

Freddie Mac’s review process was faulty, according to the report, because it did not change its analysis to account for new types of mortgages issued during the housing boom. These included mortgages that had rock-bottom interest rates initially — known as teaser rates — lasting three years to five years before adjusting upward.

The loan review analysis used by Freddie Mac focused on mortgages that went bad within two years, because historically that had been the period during which defaults related to possible loan improprieties were most likely to occur. Reasoning that the new types of mortgages with artificially low initial rates would probably lengthen the period before large numbers of defaults occurred, the senior agency examiner urged Freddie Mac’s management in June 2010 to review loans that experienced problems well after two years, the report said.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=6a29864d5067622db8d4302eaec3ea45