Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Donald Trump - Business and tax stories

Its called preaching to your market.
mick
On the holiest day of the Christian calendar? I'd call it something else.

And...

20240331_073246.jpg
 
On the holiest day of the Christian calendar? I'd call it something else.

And...

View attachment 173770
Exactly,
Fundamentalist Christians will vote for Trump, never for Biden.
Biden is preaching to his "progressive" base.
Its all in the politics.
Beliefs, ethics or morals (assuming they have any of the above), will always take second place to the politics.
Mick
 
Biden isn't doing anything, lights on nobody's home....









Just to refresh everyones memories....





But CNN said the 2020 Election was the most secure in history™
 
Mr Litinsky and Mr Moss originally filed a complaint in February in the Delaware Court of Chancery, seeking to prevent Mr Trump from taking steps the two said would sharply reduce their combined 8.6 per cent stake in TMGT.

The pair claimed that they own the stake through a 2021 agreement Mr Trump signed with their company United Atlantic Ventures.
 
Mr Litinsky and Mr Moss originally filed a complaint in February in the Delaware Court of Chancery, seeking to prevent Mr Trump from taking steps the two said would sharply reduce their combined 8.6 per cent stake in TMGT.

The pair claimed that they own the stake through a 2021 agreement Mr Trump signed with their company United Atlantic Ventures.
Rule no.1 Don't go into business with Trump.
 
Now that the New York DA and its democrat jusdges have indicted and convicted Trump of Fraud because of his overstating the value of realestate, I wonder if those same legal eagles will go after the big banks??
It seems that two profs in Accounting have found evidence that the big banks have been consistently overstating the value of loans on their book.
Who nwould thunk it.

From Wall Street On Parade
The paper was authored by John Griffin, Professor of Finance at McCombs School of Business at the University of Texas, Austin and Alex Priest, Assistant Professor of Finance at the Simon Business School at the University of Rochester.

The paper takes a forensic look – from an exhaustive number of perspectives – at why the income stream on Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (CMBS) is being consistently overstated by 5 percent or more when sold to investors by certain originators of these loans.

The largest participants in this overstatement of income are the same Wall Street mega banks that were bailed out by the U.S. taxpayer after they blew up Wall Street in 2008 with their subprime residential mortgage scams and then received trillions of dollars in secret revolving loans from the Fed for more than two years at below-market interest rates in order to resuscitate themselves.

The authors find that more than 40 percent of CMBS loans originated by UBS and Goldman Sachs have income overstatements of more than 5 percent, while between 30 and 40 percent of loans originated by Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America feature such overstatement. (Smaller players are included as well in the study.)

The authors write:

“Underwritten net operating income (NOI) is the most important input for a commercial loan as it largely determines a loan’s debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio. As such, there are rigorous and conservative guidelines for calculating underwritten income. Nevertheless, to sell a loan at a higher valuation and maximize profits, originators have a strong incentive to overstate underwritten income, at the expense of longer-term reputational and monitoring concerns.”

Among the key findings in the study are the following:

Income overstatement above 5% in loans that were not guaranteed by a government sponsored enterprise (GSE) grew from 36 percent in 2013 to 43 percent in 2019;

Loans with income overstatement in the first year continued to exhibit income short-falls in the next four years;

The study found no evidence that end investors are compensated for income overstatement. [Translation, they’re being ripped off in a fashion reminiscent of the 2008 financial crisis.]

Excluding loans that were already in distress at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, the authors found that “in every vintage from 2014 to 2019, CMBS loans from the worst originators are more than twice as likely to experience distress,” with the correlation occurring across commercial property types.

The most shocking finding for most Americans is likely to be that the much touted “risk retention” rule enacted under the Dodd-Frank financial “reform” legislation of 2010, where the banks had to hold 5 percent of their securitized loans in order to have “skin in the game,” thus ostensibly deterring them from peddling toxic deals to customers with no harm to themselves, has been effectively obliterated. (For how the Dodd-Frank derivatives rule was similarly obliterated, see our report: Meet the Two Congressmen Who Facilitated Today’s Derivatives Nightmare at Wall Street’s Mega Banks.)

Griffin and Priest explain that the rule didn’t even become effective until 2016 and now “risk retention by the originator is rare.” That’s because deal sponsors can get around the rule by selling the risk retention piece to up to two unaffiliated buyers.

A major question left unanswered in the academic study is if Wall Street mega banks are shorting the CMBS market to profit further on their inside information of their income overstatement, as they did on their toxic subprime paper in the lead up to the 2008 financial collapse.

Mick
 
Now that the New York DA and its democrat jusdges have indicted and convicted Trump of Fraud because of his overstating the value of realestate, I wonder if those same legal eagles will go after the big banks??
It seems that two profs in Accounting have found evidence that the big banks have been consistently overstating the value of loans on their book.
Who nwould thunk it.

From Wall Street On Parade


Mick


Doubt it the banks have money...
 
Pretty damning makes you wonder why anyone would support Trump.

"The next payment went to “Woman 1”, Karen McDougal, the 1998 Playmate of the Year, whom Trump had met at a pool party at the Playboy Mansion in June 2006, three months after his wife Melania had given birth to their son. Trump and McDougal had an affair that lasted for 10 months. Ronan Farrow of the New Yorker reported her note on that initial encounter: “We talked for a couple hours – then, it was ‘ON’! We got naked + had sex. He offered me money. I looked at him (+ felt sad) + said, ‘No thanks–I’m not ‘that girl.’ I slept w/you because I like you–NOT for money’–He told me ‘you are special.’”
 
MAGA folk know he's no ascetic philosopher-king type fellow. In the past, before #MeToo, he's done what most rich and powerful guys do: basically "sleep" with maximum hot chicks. Regardless of all that, he's standing up against the leftist, woke agendas. There is no currently better alternative. The left harping on about his indiscretions probably only shows you is a playa hater, and firms up support among black men.

 
Pretty damning makes you wonder why anyone would support Trump.

"The next payment went to “Woman 1”, Karen McDougal, the 1998 Playmate of the Year, whom Trump had met at a pool party at the Playboy Mansion in June 2006, three months after his wife Melania had given birth to their son. Trump and McDougal had an affair that lasted for 10 months. Ronan Farrow of the New Yorker reported her note on that initial encounter: “We talked for a couple hours – then, it was ‘ON’! We got naked + had sex. He offered me money. I looked at him (+ felt sad) + said, ‘No thanks–I’m not ‘that girl.’ I slept w/you because I like you–NOT for money’–He told me ‘you are special.’”
Yet the left wants to keep an addled nonce who allegedly messed with his own daughter?
 
MAGA folk know he's no ascetic philosopher-king type fellow. In the past, before #MeToo, he's done what most rich and powerful guys do: basically "sleep" with maximum hot chicks. Regardless of all that, he's standing up against the leftist, woke agendas. There is no currently better alternative. The left harping on about his indiscretions probably only shows you is a playa hater, and firms up support among black men.


They are not harping on about his indiscretions Stocky. Your right. No one should give a xuck about what a xootrat Trump is. After all it's a free country. As he said, "when your rich and famous you can do anything to women and get away with it".:)

Trump is in on trial for systematic criminal cover ups of hush money he paid to keep these stories away from the public in 2016 when he was running for President. As per Richard Nixon the original issue has been swamped by the criminal cover ups Trump constructed. That was the crux of the story.
 
Top