The underlying cause of GMAC’s failure was no different than so many other American financial institutions: giant bets on risky mortgages at the height of a real estate bubble. And though that error alone would have qualified GMAC for a bailout rescue along with the other failed banks, The WSJ reports that the ongoing support for GMAC is “reflects the troubled company’s importance to the revival of the auto industry.” And man, it had better be important. The GMAC bailout has been one of our least-favorite of the season, rewarding poor practices in auto and mortgage lending, and exposing taxpayers to inordinate risk. But, as TTAC warned back in the pre-bailout days, once the camel gets a nose into the tent, good luck getting it out. And so, GMAC will be receiving another $3.8b in TARP support, on top of the $12.5b it has already received. As a result, the US taxpayer’s stake in GMAC is expected to rise above the current 35 percent stake, just in time for more write-downs planned for the next week. The cash injection is said to prime GMAC for a profitable Q1 2010, erasing some giant losses in the bank’s ResCap mortgage unit. And of course the move will help GMAC continue to underwrite the leases that Chrysler and GM so desperately need, but can’t afford due to plummeting resales. GMAC’s bailout often doesn’t get marked up in the auto industry bailout tally, but at over $16b so far, it’s one of the crucial pieces keeping the zombie automakers shambling along. Now, about repayment…

The Washington Examiner reports that, having previously moved its lobbying efforts to an exclusively in-house arrangement, GM is now hiring outside lobbyists again [UPDATE: GM’s chief in-house lobbyist just retired]. GM has rehired its old lobbying firms the Duberstein Group and Greenberg Traurig, and has added GrayLoeffler to its K-Street roster. GM is also keeping the “well connected” Washington Tax Group on its lobbying payroll, having picked up the firm’s representation in 2007. From these firms, some 18 lobbyists have registered as GM representatives, including a list of what the Wasington Examiner calls “well-connected revolving-door players from both parties.”

Former Reps. William Gray III, D-Pa., and Jim Bacchus, R-Fla., are both on GM retainer, as are fabled Republican and Democratic operatives Ken Duberstein (White House chief of staff under Ronald Reagan) and Michael Berman (counsel to Vice President Walter Mondale and campaign aide to every Democratic presidential nominee since LBJ).

Heading GM’s lobbying push for expanded R&D tax credits is the Washington Tax Group’s Gregory Nickerson, formerly the top lawyer at the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee and the staff director of the Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures. Nickerson’s partner is Mary Ellen McCarthy, formerly the top lawyer at the Senate’s tax-writing Finance Committee.

(Read More…)

“We intend to pay the debt,” GM’s CEO Ed Whitacre told reporters yesterday. “We’ll be finished by June.” Except that nothing has changed since we determined that GM is “taking taxpayers for a ride.” Here’s what he should have said:

By June we intend to return a small percentage of the taxpayer assistance that rescued this company from sure liquidation. GM will need to achieve an unprecedented market cap valuation at an eventual IPO in order to truly repay taxpayers for this second chance, and I will not rest until we clearly and honestly achieve that goal. Until that day comes, please refrain from printing misleading headlines like ‘GM To Repay Loan By June,’ as these imply that we are able to make the taxpayers whole when, as an unprofitable company, we have no such ability. Thank you.

In a NY Times Op-Ed a few weeks back, I laid into the Obama administration for allowing GM to pretend that its $6.7b planned payback is even in the ballpark of what it owes the taxpayers. “If tens of billions in lost tax dollars is simply the inescapable price of preventing a systemic economic collapse, the White House should tell us so,” I wrote. Well, it appears that the White House agrees. Sort of. In an interview with the Detroit News, Gene Sperling, the senior counsel to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner admitted

The real news is the projected loss [from the $82b+ auto sector bailout] came down to $30 billion from $44 billion

Well, halle-frickin-lujah. Now show us how we’re really going to get $50b out of GM and Chrysler.

(Read More…)

Compared to the tens of billions of dollars in lost taxpayer investments in GM and Chrysler, the lawyer bills for the twin bankruptcies are relatively inexpensive. The Freep reports that legal and consulting fees have already exceeded $120m, with another $3m pending for September and October, and more to come. According to court records, Chrysler’s chief financial advisors during its bankruptcy, Capstone Advisory Group, has received $17m in taxpayer money, with some $10m going directly to the firm’s Executive Director Robert Manzo. Chrysler’s lead counsel, Day Jones, received $40m through last August, and estimates place the firm’s eventual tab to total somewhere around $115m. GM’s bankruptcy advisors AlixPartners and Evercore Partners received $26m and $13m respectively, while its head lawyers, Weil, Gotshal & Manges received nearly $72m. And with the liquidations of Old GM and Chrysler far from over, the legal bills will continue to mount, likely past 2010.

No, General Motors is not paying back the taxpayers, nor will it ever fully… it’s more like a partial refund. That’s not exactly fresh news around here, but the Grey Lady called wanting the breakdown. So here it is. Just don’t ask how they misspelled the byline.

This according to the National Taxpayer’s Union report “The Auto Bailout: A Taxpayer Quagmire,” authored by Rochester Institute of Technology Professor of Economics, Thomas D. Hopkins. That number includes the $52.9b taxpayer “investment” in General Motors, as well as GM’s portion of the GMAC bailout, which brings GM’s taxpayer tab to over $60b. Chrysler’s GMAC-inclusive bailout bill totals $17.4b, or $7,600 per vehicle, based on estimated 2009/2010 sales. Don’t believe that GM or Chrysler will match their projections over the next twelve months? The NTU estimates that total government support for the auto industry comes out to $800 per taxpaying American family. These numbers do not include the Cash for Clunkers program, likely future bailouts of GMAC (projected at a further $2b), or Department of Energy retooling loans (ATVML). These numbers also do not reflect the very real possibility that GM, Chrysler and GMAC could continue to drain taxpayer money post-2010. “For each year of survival beyond 2010,” the report warns, “the burden per vehicle would decline [Ed: but not disappear] – so long as no additional government funding is provided.”

(Read More…)

Ron Bloom, the defacto head of the government’s auto restructuring task force (or what’s left of it), tells Reuters that the government wants to hurry up a GM IPO in order to get out of the “investment” as soon as possible. And as we’ve predicted, this means taxpayers will be getting the fuzzy end of the lollypop.

Private markets would like to see us exit this investment, and I think they will be more comfortable if we’re on a sustained path out the door than if they think we’re going to try to market time it to maximize return.

And really, why would taxpayers expect any kind of a return from $50b dumped into one of the most prolific wealth destruction machines in recent economic history? So when will this IPO/giveaway take place?

(Read More…)

According to GM’s 3rd Quarter financial results announcement:

GM plans to repay the United States, Canadian and Ontario government loans in quarterly installments from escrowed funds, beginning next month with an initial $1.2 billion payment to be made in December ($1.0 billion to the UST and $192 million to the EDC), followed by quarterly payments. Any escrowed funds available as of June 30, 2010 would be used to repay the UST and EDC loans unless the escrowed funds were extended one year by the UST. Any balance of funds would be released to GM after the repayment of the UST and EDC loans.

Though this sounds like positive news, don’t let it fool you. GM’s financials only acknowledge $6.7b in government debt, a sum that barely scratches the surface of the taxpayer “investment” in The General (let’s use $52b as a baseline). The escrow fund in question contains $13.6b of the final $30b GM was given as it exited bankruptcy. Having burned through nearly half of that princely sum, GM now plans on using at least part of the rest to pay off the “outstanding $6.7b.” The escrow account expires in June 2010, at which point whatever is left unpaid of the $6.7b will be returned to the government, and GM will keep the rest. GM will then declare victory and pretend like it has squared up with the tax paying public, when in fact the public will have merely paid itself back a paltry fraction of what GM actually owes. This “repayment” will then be dutifully reported without question by the mainstream media, and the stain of bailout will be symbolically lifted. Except, of course, it won’t. GM and the government are playing a classic shell game, taking advantage of the public’s inability to keep the billions straight. Shameful.

More new information from today’s GAO post:

Moreover, whether enough time has passed for the impact of the structural changes to be seen is unlikely, especially given that the automakers have not completed restructuring, the economy is still recovering, and new vehicle purchases remain at low levels. For instance, although the federal Car Allowance Rebate System program resulted in a sales spike in August,16 September sales returned to historically low levels. These and other challenges are likely to delay the companies’ recovery beyond what it would be under more favorable economic circumstances.

As TTAC noted last Friday, “finding a real, sustainable bottom of the market from which to grow is not made easier by erratic bursts of stimulus frenzy.”

From the just-released GAO report (PDF) on the auto bailout:

Chrysler’s shareholders, including Treasury, have agreed that  Fiat’s equity stake in Chrysler will increase if Chrysler meets certain benchmarks, such as producing a vehicle that achieves a fuel economy of 40 miles per gallon or producing a new engine in the United States. Treasury officials stated that they established such up-front conditions not solely to protect Treasury’s financial interests as a creditor and equity owner but also to reflect the Administration’s views on responsibly utilizing taxpayer resources for these companies. While Treasury has stated it does not plan to manage its stake in Chrysler or GM to achieve social policy goals, these requirements and covenants to which the companies are subject indicate the challenges Treasury has faced and likely will face in balancing its roles.