The U.S. government closes books on TARP with a $15.3 billion profit.

Frankcoins

If GM and Chrysler had gone under, it would have cost an estimated $39 billion to $105 billion in lost tax revenues as well as assistance to the unemployed, according to a study from the Center for Auto Research. And the government also would have been on the hook for billions in promised pension payments to autoworkers.

Link

MGLICKER

Have you included the cost of free government loans for over 6 years?

Do the math first and return with the real numbers!

BAJJERFAN

So for how many days will we be able to annoy ISIS with $15 bil?

derryb

According to whose accounting methods?

roadrunner

<< <i>Have you included the cost of free government loans for over 6 years?

Do the math first and return with the real numbers! >>




The real cost of TARP on the US economy was on the order $10TRILL to $15TRILL. Most of those bail outs were under the table and hidden in swaps, derivatives, buried accounts, and other opaque financial instruments.
How much money was lost in the housing markets on the failure of $5 TRILL in mortgage backed securities? Just the decline in housing prices must have cost taxpayers $1 TRILL in assets. Why would they even consider a
$15 BILL "gain" from TARP? How much money was lost on the failure of $30 TRILL in credit default swaps?

I laugh my butt off every time I see the media state that the govt made money on AIG/TARP. What a crock. Yeah, we should have a financial crisis every 6 years so the govt can make $15 BILL for the taxpayers.
I would suspect that the legal bills alone from 2008-2009 far exceeded $15 BILL. It's also said that the taxpayer made money on Fannie and Freddie....the dumping ground for TBTF bank's toxic assets yet to be uncovered.

The book really isn't closed on TARP. There's still $900 TRILL in otc interest rate derivatives out in the world that will be addressed when TARP 2 comes to a theater near you.

roadrunner

<< <i>According to whose accounting methods? >>



Why the FASB of course. They "decided" to shift derivative's accounting from mark to market.....to mark to model at the time of the last financial crisis. This allows each counter-party in an otc derivative's trade to value it
as they see fit. Both sides could easily value the same contract as a profit....much the way the IMF requires gold leasers and lessees to state both own the same gold as an asset. Creative accounting has solved the world's
problems. Would anyone say an obese 500 lbs heart patient was cured because they lost 5 lbs? The FASB would do that by redefining obese as anyone above 500 lbs.