Two Reasons the LIBOR Scandal Matters (and one reason it doesn't)

I’ll be appearing live on the New York Times website, talking about the LIBOR Scandal with Peter Lattman, at 10am.  You’ll be able to watch it live here:

In the meantime, I want to just crystallize what I believe to be the two reasons this all matters and then the one reason why, in the end, it will probably not.

1.  This is perhaps the biggest case of market manipulation in world history.  The WSJ has calculated that LIBOR rates affect some $800 trillion in loans, agreements, financings and other financial transactions around the globe.  Eighteen of the world’s largest banks (including Citi, BAC and JPM) submit numbers that go into the LIBOR rate calculation and then billions of people, governments, municipalities and corporations directly or indirectly transact business based on that (ie: Yes, Mr. Jones, we can lend you the money at LIBOR + 3%).  In other words, the systemic quicksand the world’s financial system rests upon is still in force when such a small group of people can mess with a rate that affects so many.

2.  The culture of unmitigated greed and deceitfulness is alive and well, no one has learned anything.  There were two types of manipulation and potential fraud happening with LIBOR:

The first involved individual traders, at Barclays for example, asking the bank’s rate information submitters to fudge the numbers in order to reap immediate gains in whichever particular investment strategy or holding they were working with at the moment – and it was brazen, the emails contained collegial “done for you, big boy” backslaps and promises like “I’m opening a bottle of Bollinger for you” from the traders to the submitters.  Nice.

The second type of manipulation is significantly more shocking and it has already brought down three top executives at Barclays.  It involves the bank knowingly manipulating the rate so as to create the appearance that the institution was healthier than current interbank lending activity would actually display during the dark days of 2007 and 2008.  LIBOR, unlike the NYFR version in New York, is not anonymously submitted – so it behooves the banks to manipulate it lower in times of stress because the higher the rate, the more unwilling to lend the banks appear to be.  The most disturbing part of this is that there are emails from politicians and regulators turning up in which it is hinted that Whitehall (the British government) would like to see Barclays not quite report in such a way as to make rates look too high.  Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone likens these requests to a proper British gentleman attempting to secure the services of a prostitute without actually using any dirty words.  And if the British government and banking/regulatory authorities were winking toward this activity by Barclays in the heat of the maelstrom, how likely is it that our banks and their overseers weren’t doing the exact same thing?

OK, so that’s why this is a very big deal.  Now let me tell you why it probably won’t mean anything:

3.  It may not be going anywhere after all.

Barclays may have been the worst offender and it has already acccepted decapitation (Diamond resigned), disgorgement (Diamond walked with $3 million instead of his owed $31 million bonus) and penalty (Barclays paid $450 million to settle with authorities).  In other words, the regulators may have already gotten their big fish after only a few years of investigation.

Also, everyone was probably doing this amongst the big banks to varying degrees.  How do we know?  The smoking gun is this chart from the Washington Post:

The chart above shows the difference between the anonymous rate setting done by the NYFR versus the dressed-up version being carried out at LIBOR, in which banks BS their way to lower rates during the crisis.  WaPo calls it a smoking gun and I agree.

Also, there is a great deal of evidence that by manipulating rates lower, the big banks may have inadvertently did everyone a huge favor by keeping the borrowing costs of municipalities, home buyers, students and commercial interests artificially low.  How ferociously will they be prosecuted for that in the court of public opinion?  Exactly – it’s manipulation but “the good kind” so let’s let sleeping dogs lie.  That way Americans can go back to their Kardashian Sundaes with whipped cream and Bieber sprinkles on top.

Mark Gongloff makes the case that the furor over LIBOR is so subdued because understanding it involves math, and people hate that shit.  I think he’s right.

Anyway, join me at the NY Times site at 10 am for my rant.






This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Bitcoin Era Review 2020 commented on Oct 01

    … [Trackback]

    […] Here you can find 12021 more Information to that Topic: […]

  2. marijuana for sale commented on Oct 13

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Info here to that Topic: […]

  3. buy marijuana online commented on Nov 21

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information on that Topic: […]

  4. fake used rolex day date commented on Dec 08

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More here on that Topic: […]

  5. influencer marketing strategy commented on Dec 12

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on on that Topic: […]

  6. easyweb td commented on Dec 13

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information to that Topic: […]

  7. hotel compare price commented on Dec 16

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Information here to that Topic: […]

  8. soul reading secrets commented on Jan 01

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on on that Topic: […]

  9. DevOps Services commented on Jan 12

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you will find 71952 more Info on that Topic: […]

  10. tangerine business account sign in commented on Jan 21

    … [Trackback]

    […] Here you can find 17486 additional Info to that Topic: […]

  11. Airco commented on Jan 30

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More here on that Topic: […]