Bitte selber übersetzen; SEHR SEHR interessant
Large Green
Member Level
Re: None
Tuesday, September 20, 2022 3:02:27 PM
Post# of 695606
FROM Dmdmd1-Bankruptcy-Remoteness FACTS, True Sale, Non-consolidation
FDIC Presentation & CBA09 agree on ABS “bankruptcy remoteness”
« Reply #1 on: Today at 02:36:29 AM »
Quote
I thought it would be easier to access this very important piece of information by starting a new topic.
FDIC presentation on April 27, 2022:
https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/cfr/...nnual-5th/kayotte-sgaon.ppt.pptx
Slide 2:
“ Bankruptcy-Remoteness:
-True Sale
- Non-consolidation
“Structured financings are based on one central, core principle: a defined group of assets can be structurally isolated, and thus…[is] independent from the bankruptcy risks of the originator”
Committee on Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganizations of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York“
____________
Per CBA09 post on IHUB #457584:
“ CBA09
Wednesday, August 03, 2016 1:11:28 PM
Re: BBANBOB post# 457551
Post# of 687217 Go
Bob,
May be, just may be, the addressed assets in court were those within a "SPE". If designed via a specific manner those so called "hidden assets" would be protected from bankruptcy as follows:
The structured solution to the bankruptcy, true sale, and debt-for-tax issues varies by venue. For example, if a U.S. bank wants to securitize receivables, the structure requires two SPEs to avoid a federally taxable asset sale and to achieve off-balance-sheet financing and a bankruptcy remote structure. In the U.S. SPEs are usually organized as trusts (for tax reasons) under the laws of the state of Delaware or of New York. The first SPE is a wholly owned, bankruptcy remote subsidiary of the originator/seller, and the SPE buys the assets in a true sale. The assets are now beyond the reach both of the creditors of the originator/seller and the originator/seller. Wholly owned subsidiaries are consolidated with the originator/seller for U.S. federal tax purposes, so this achieves the debt-for-tax objective. The second SPE is the issuer of the debt (or ABS) and is entirely independent of the originator/seller. It is a bankruptcy remote entity.”
___________
Per CBA09 post on IHUB:
"CBA09 Tuesday, 12/05/17 07:34:44 AM
Re: hotmeat post# 498530
Post # of 505195
Ref: IMO, WMIIC ""owned/controlled"" these Trusts on behalf of and for the sole benefit of WMI and NOW the WMI Estate/Tracking Markers.
Comments:
SPE/Trust are designed for independent ownership. Not controlled by WMI nor WMIIC.
Yes these SPE's/Trust are the "Crown Jewel" of WMI in it's capacity of being the Parent. Also Facts of great importance:
1) The bankruptcy estate does not have jurisdiction over these SPE's/ Trusts. WMI in its capacity of equity interest does.
2) WMI abandoned it's stock as worthless on record with the Estate. The Estate in turn diverted all future benefits back to WMI. A clever astute move by WMI.
A Turnover action is routine Bankruptcy procedure to bring back to WMI estate what is considered estate assets. And SPE/Trust Income is not part of the estate assets.
We are all good here with the SPE's/Trusts of the Parent - WMI. "
___________
CBA09 Ihub Post#501056:
"CBA09
Tuesday, 12/19/17 08:57:53 AM
Re: TJ0512 post# 501009
0
Post # of 550816
Ref: Couple of questions for you.
In post #498826 you made the comment
WMIIC's role was two fold:
1) Provide / Solidify assets "MBS" as bankruptcy remote. By way of "WMB" (Originator) to WMIIC (Depositor) to Trust. In effect a TWO TIER protection. Totally taking WMB out of any risk of substantive consolidation.
2) WMIIC being the depositor would also be the provider of credit enhancement. Having what is referred to as residual interest. Holders of subordinate certificates & overcollaterized loans.
Are you making an assumption in your comments above?
Comment:
Yes, assumption. My Point / Big Picture - no matter who is the depositor - Material "Force and Effect" of two tier structures.
Ref: In all of the trusts listed in the DB lawsuit as well as numerous other trusts I have seen WMB or a sub of WMB has been the originator & depositor.
If WMI or WMIIC was neither the originator or depositor for the trusts how does that benefit the estate of WMI/WMIIC?
Comment:
Safe Harbor Assets are removed from the estate. Thus. Trustee / Creditors of WMB have no claim to them. WMI is the parent they do.
Example:
Principal Subsidiaries
• Washington Mutual Bank, FA, a federal savings association, all of the common stock of which is held by New American Capital, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and all of the preferred stock of which is held by Washington Mutual, Inc. New American Capital, Inc. is a wholly owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
• Washington Mutual Bank, a Washington state chartered stock savings bank, a wholly owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
• Washington Mutual Bank fsb, a federal savings bank, a wholly owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
• Long Beach Mortgage Company, a Delaware corporation, a wholly owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
Ref: Also, On a previous post #498722 you said:
2) WMI abandoned it's stock as worthless on record with the Estate. The Estate in turn diverted all future benefits back to WMI. A clever astute move by WMI.
Where are you seeing that WMI is receiving any future benefit from WMB with regard to the trusts or are you making an assumption?
Comment:
No assumption. First 1) WMI is the parent and rightful benefit to any / all future value of it's wholly owned subsidiaries. If you have any experience in PSA you will see that they are set up to ensure the "Retained Assets" are in fact retained within the SPE # 1 / SPE/Trust # 2.
I want to make this abundantly clear, sharing from my experience, generally the Parent's bank account is where the funds are first received from PSA accounts when the "Accounts Removable Provision" is triggered. Then the Parent has control and funnels whatever money's it deems necessary back to it's subsidiaries. The Parent's control part is the "Operative Word." As no expressed contract (s) are in force so as to direct the Parent as to distribution with funds received. This adds further protection to avoid substantive consolidation by the courts. "
_____________
IMO…conclusions as of April 30, 2022 @ 0230 EST:
1) ABS/MBS Trusts are bankruptcy remote
2) WMI (parent company) and old legacy WMI equity shareholders (Class 19 & 22) are the beneficiaries (via WMI beneficial interests) of the securitized loans in MBS Trusts created by WMI subsidiaries.
XXX
FROM POSTER EXO
FROM EXO
Scul why do you need someone to explain to you again? Let me explain.
In the chapter 11 bankruptcy there was the debtor in possession part and bankruptcy remote part. Are you following? 2 parts, not one, say it with me 2 parts. Good job baby girl. The debtors in possession paid their lawyers, business people $1,000,000,000.00 + during the course of the bankruptcy ( sorry the big number is 1 billion dollars plus). They paid off the debtors in order to close the bankruptcy...So now the debtor in possession part is now legally over, done, finished, past tense ect... Understand? Go back and read it all over if not..
The second part ( remember that from earlier) was bankruptcy remote!!! In other words not part of the bankruptcy, separate from, hence the second part. This is where we stand now going forward. Since this was a chapter 11 bankruptcy they get to reorganize and continue, stay alive, carry on business. There ARE ASSETS that the court could not use (look at, take, sell...because they were protected from the debtors hence bankruptcy remote. There were so many ASSETS the FDICR went to congress to change the law. Congress did but only GOING FORWARD!!! so those ASSETS still belong to the poor old old shareholder) So now we have all these ASSETS that we KNOW ARE THERE, but are protected in such a way that the company has not YET given back to their owners. No one can penetrate the corporate shield or the MANY TRUSTS that have those ASSETS. Following?
So only a few corporate or fiduciary people know how much money is in those trusts (or SPE's specialty purpose vehicles) and they have not told what is there!!! Reread the last sentence several times!!! Now do it again!!! Since they were protected they do not have to legally say we have XYZ.
Let me repeat, WE know there are ASSETS but they were protected from the debtors and for our benefit in such a way they do not need to say we have XYZ in this trust... That is why some can say 1/2 truths and cry... The funny part is old share holders should know the truth and still can not buy or sell any shares. So the lies do not affect the outcome of billions or hundreds of billions that old share holders will receive...If you think the FDIC cried 3 weeks after the theft of WAMU to CONGRESS and that was not a important FACT then go on with your belief that nothing is coming back, I just will not believe you but that is just me.
"Well, maybe LG at some day will explain to me, how a DST can exist without the WMILT *rofl*"
DST is Delaware Statuary Trust. Most all businesses use Delaware... To save time and effort look it up. ROLF There are many, many, many , many trusts because they structure them to protect them from predators or bankruptcy's as in this case.
WMILT Easy simple answer, something different that you should know or not know and it still will not affect the outcome...hahaha
Things happen behind closed doors, nonpublic information, trade secrets, Delaware trusts, Courts redact information all the time yet we live in a free society. Just because something does not make sense to you does not mean its not true. The Earth looks pretty flat to me when I was a kid but now I grew up. I learned, studied, saw pictures and now know... tadaaa the Earth is round hahahaha My opinions are mine and I share them freely.. Take them or trash them as you wish to help you understand even though I think you do but will not accept the truth because it does not fit your agenda. I have never been to space so the Earth is round... Here is another picture... That is not real boohoohoo Facts do not matter right???
I am stepping away. Those that know, know. Those who do not seek the truth will never find it!!!
Have a great day!!!
EXO
FROM Dmdmd1 on April 29 2022
Dmdmd1 Post Follows CSNY - Starts With IMO
Quote from: CSNY on April 29, 2022, 03:25:28 PM
The assets of the protective trusts WMB set up were never in the custody of the FDIC, in my opinion, although I believe the FDIC told the trustee not to disburse anything in those trusts (including income) until the FDIC said otherwise. (I think the FDIC threatened its avoidance powers and the trustee blinked, whatever its counsel said.)
I think that happened in 2021 when Mnuchin was headed out the door.
IMO...My conclusions as of April 29, 2022 @ 1725 EST:
Let's put this all into a simple big picture perspective.
1) If WMI old legacy holders (that were released in March 2012) owned beneficial interests in loans securitized into MBS Trusts ($101.9 billion)
2) assets of WMI were not conveyed by the FDIC (specifically MBS Trusts were bankruptcy-remote assets that were not under the jurisdiction of the FDIC) to any entities. So by simple deductive reasoning, the WMI assets (i.e. beneficial interests in bankruptcy remote MBS Trusts) were not conveyed by the FDIC to JPMC or any other entity. This means that the SPVs/DSTs owned the securitized loans in the MBS Trusts and not WMI, but WMI owned the beneficial interests to the MBS Trusts.
3) Per the "source" the value of WMI assets are valued at $625 billion ($25 billion in cash + $600 billion potentially in COOP stock).
If we assume:
Total in WMI assets in September 25, 2008 (seizure date) = $102 billion
What is the compounded annual interest rate if the total in WMI assets is currently worth $625 billion in 2021 (13 years)
IMO...my answer: approximately 15% annual interest x 13 years
Calculations: (use the simple compounded daily interest calculator from compouddaily.org) Make sure you mentally equate days into years on the calculator
$102 billion x 13 years x annual interest rate = $625 billion
annual interest rate = approximately 15%
4) IMO...ultimately, the WMI assets have grown 15% compounded annually for 13 years.
5) If all the Hedge Funds/big players like Bonderman et al and the underwriters can wait more than 13 years for the WMI recoveries, so can we (retail).
IMO...I concede that the Hedge Funds/Bonderman et al/the underwriters do not have control of the timing of the WMI recoveries. So all of the interested parties have to ask, who does control the timing of the WMI recoveries?
BITTE SELBER ÜBERSETZEN
MY answer, it isn't them, and it certainly isn't retail. So who is in control? The public will never know exactly, but we now know who isn't in control.
There is nothing for us retail to do other than to wait along with the "smart money".
IMO...For those who claim nothing is coming back, I just say that's your opinion, and I think that opinion is incongruent with the opinions of the Hedge Funds/Bonderman et al/the underwriters.
xxx
|
Thread abonnieren
