Ambac Rocky Balboa oder chapter 11

January 08, 2011 ) FAIRLESS HILLS, Pa. -- Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., published Issue No. 8 of AMBAC BANKRUPTCY NEWS today. The 12-page newsletter contains stories with these headlines:

[00087] DEBTOR'S MOTION TO FIX MARCH 2 AS CLAIMS BAR DATE
[00088] DEBTOR'S MOTION TO EXTEND ACTION REMOVAL PERIOD
[00089] DEBTOR'S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLY WITH SEC. 345
[00090] DEBTOR'S MOTION TO EMPLOY ORDINARY COURSE PROFESSIONALS
[00091] DEBTOR'S APPLICATION TO EMPLOY KPMG AS TAX CONSULTANT
[00092] ADVERSARY PROCEEDING -- Ambac Financial Group vs. IRS
[00093] K. VEERA'S MOTION TO LIFT STAY TO PURSUE CLASS ACTION
[00094] RULE 2019 STATEMENT -- Bank of New York Mellon
[00095] AFG TOPS LIST OF BIGGEST BANKRUPTCY FILINGS IN 2010

http://www.thefirstreporter.com/press-releases/...uptcy-news-issue-8/

 

Ein Urteil mit weitreichenden Folgen: In den USA hat das Bundesgericht gegen die Finanzinstitute und für die Hausbesitzer entschieden. Zwei Räumungen müssen rückgängig gemacht werden. Anleger reagieren prompt.



In einem Rechtsstreit mit Hausbesitzern um zwei Zwangsräumungen hat der Oberste Gerichtshof des Bundestaates Massachusetts einstimmig gegen die amerikanischen Banken US Bancorp und Wells Fargo entschieden. Es bestätigte damit die Entscheidung aus erster Instanz. Das Urteil gilt als richtungweisend für ähnliche Prozesse. Nach Veröffentlichung des Urteilsspruchs gingen die Aktienmärkte in den USA auf Talfahrt.

Die Richter des höchsten Gerichts in dem Bundesstaat machten mit ihrem Urteil zwei Zwangräumungen rückgängig. Die Banken hätten nicht nachweisen können, dass sie zum Zeitpunkt der Räumungen Eigentümer der Hypotheken gewesen seien, lautete die Begründung. Damit ist die Möglichkeit eröffnet, weitere Zwangsräumungen ebenfalls für ungültig zu erklären. Auch die Bündelung und der Weiterverkauf von Hypotheken an Investoren könnte infrage stehen.

Im Oktober 2010 wurde der Verdacht laut, einige der größten US-Banken hätten Eigenheimbesitzer widerrechtlich aus ihren Häusern vertrieben. Der Skandal belastete sowohl die Geldhäuser als auch den Immobilienmarkt schwer. Den Instituten wurde vorgeworfen, sogenannte Robosigner eingesetzt zu haben, die Tausende von Zwangsvollstreckungsdokumente täglich unterschrieben ohne dabei die Details zu überprüfen.

Nach der Veröffentlichung des Arbeitsmarktberichts hielten sich die New Yorker Börsen nur knapp über Vortagesschluss. Im Dezember wurden weniger Stellen als erwartet geschaffen. Das nährte Sorgen um die Erholung der Konjunktur. Gleichzeitig ging die Arbeitslosenquote aber deutlich zurück.

Der KBW-Bank-Index lag eineinhalb Stunden vor Handelsschluss 0,9 Prozent im Minus. In der Spitze hatte er 1,9 Prozent eingebüßt. Wells-Fargo-Papiere fielen bis zu 1,5 Prozent, US Bancorp verlor bis zu 0,6 Prozent. Der Dow Jones wurde auf 11.600 Punkte nach unten gedrückt, erholte sich später aber wieder etwas.  JP Morgan war schwächster Standardwert mit einem Abschlag von 1,3 Prozent und kostete den Dow Jones alleine zehn Indexpunkte.  Bank of America verlor 0,3 Prozent.

http://www.boerse-online.de/maerkte/nachrichten/...Banken/620473.html  

A Guide to Profiting from Meredith Whitney’s Muni Meltdown Scenario

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/trading/...ys-muni-meltdown-scenario.html

 

erklärung?  

das teil ist seit monaten überverkauft - das ist die erklärung  für die schon längst mal
fällige gegenreaktion. mehr nicht  

Die Forderung von RMBS Put buyback wird  für die einigen top Banken aber richtig grosse Problem werden. Nach dem US Risk Analytics Christopher Whalen "These claims could kill some of the top banks. "

Warten wir mal ab!

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41002801

You are always looking ahead of the  headlines, in fact you often predict them. What are you watching right  now that others have failed to noticed?

CW:  The MA decision is misunderstood. Homeowners are unlikely to win loan  forgiveness as the result of errors in recording the lien on their home.  

But investors in  RMBS are facing hundreds of billions of dollars in losses on securities  where the note was either not delivered or done so in a haphazard and  negligent fashion. These claims could kill some of the top banks. But we  should also remember that if the housing market continues to sink as we  have predicted, then credit expenses will start to rise again. That is  what Wall Street does not expect.

 

http://www.bondbuyer.com/issues/120_7/ambac_irs-1021972-1.html

Ambac Assurance’s bid to protect its municipal bond insurance book from the Internal Revenue Service faces a daunting hurdle in federal court as the U.S. government argues it has every right to collect taxes it is owed regardless of how the company structures itself.

The IRS claims Ambac Assurance — which had $312.8 million of cash in the middle of 2010 — may owe more than $700 million in taxes. Its parent company is bankrupt.

A move by federal authorities to seize Ambac’s assets to satisfy tax claims could detonate a catastrophic chain of events for the company: state regulators could assume control of Ambac Assurance, causing a technical default that would trigger a $3 billion payment to terminate swap policies. Any resources the company has to pay claims on municipal bond policies would be trampled.

The solution was to shunt the potential tax liability into a segregated account currently under the control of Wisconsin regulators and beyond the purview of federal authorities.

Wisconsin’s Department of Insurance argues the federal government does not have the sovereignty to seize assets the state controls.

The IRS, though, contends that a reshuffling of assets and liabilities cannot change the fact that the company owes taxes. While the IRS acknowledges it cannot place a lien on assets controlled by a state, the insurer itself is not controlled by a state.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, in Rehabilitation of Segregated Account of Ambac Assurance Corp. v. United States of America, will decide.

Once the second-biggest bond insurer, Ambac ran into serious trouble in late 2007 because of decaying credit quality in its structured finance policies, which included contracts guaranteeing to cover losses on mortgage bonds and credit default swaps.

Sean Dilweg, who served as the Wisconsin insurance commissioner from January 2007 until last week, enacted a plan in March last year to prevent claims in a $114.7 billion structured ­finance insurance book from ­overwhelming the company’s capital and ruining policies in its $223.2 billion muni insurance book.

Wisconsin placed about 1,000 of ­Ambac’s riskiest policies, with about $60 billion par value, in a walled-off account. Claims in the separate account were ­temporarily frozen to stop Ambac from hemorrhaging more than $150 million a month. The account includes policies on bonds with names like Residential ­Funding Corp., GMACM Home Loan Trust, Residential Asset Mortgage ­Products, and the infamous Las Vegas Monorail — a muni credit.

Dilweg proposed a rehabilitation plan in October which would give segregated account policyholders a quarter of their claims in cash and 75% in notes backed by the company’s surplus.

Ambac issued a $2 billion note to the segregated account, which remains its only asset. Payments on claims would come from the cash flows generated by the note.

The segregated account already faces more than $1 billion in unpaid claims.

Nothing in this rehabilitation of the segregated account was expected to impair the municipal insurance book — that is, until Oct. 28, when the IRS sent the company a “mild request.”

Ambac Assurance had submitted for and received a $700 million tax refund based on accounting methods the IRS was now questioning.

The dispute centers on how Ambac recorded losses on its credit-default swap policies.

Ambac was losing money on its ­mortgage CDS policies, and paying out to its counterparties as mortgage quality eroded. The company booked these losses as “ordinary losses,” which are deducted from taxable ­income. Thus, its taxable income was ­reduced by ordinary losses on the CDS.

The IRS has never prevailed on how exactly to record CDS gains or losses, but it holds out the possibility that they should be booked not as ordinary losses but as “capital losses.” Capital losses can only be deducted from other capital gains — not from total taxable income.

In short, Ambac might have to pay back the $700 million refund it collected because its CDS losses shouldn’t have been deducted from taxable income.

By the time of the IRS inquiry, Ambac’s parent company, Ambac Financial Group, was on the verge of defaulting on its $1.6 billion of debt. It was unable to raise capital and already was headed for bankruptcy.

But the IRS inquiry raised an uncomfortable prospect. If the IRS determines Ambac Assurance owes and cannot pay $700 million in taxes, the government can declare a “deficiency,” under which it places a levy on the company’s liquid assets to satisfy the tax obligation.

That in turn would most likely prompt the Wisconsin insurance department to rehabilitate the entirety of Ambac Assurance — not just the segregated account — to protect resources devoted to paying claims to muni bond policyholders.

A rehabilitation of Ambac Assurance would trigger a technical default under many of its CDS contracts, and force the company to close out the swaps and pay whatever it owes. As of its parent company’s bankruptcy filing in October, that amount was $3 billion.

Dilweg promptly ordered any IRS claims into the segregated account, where they would be treated like any other claim: part in cash, part in IOU.

Ambac Financial Group promptly filed for bankruptcy. Dilweg obtained a state court injunction prohibiting the IRS from “commencing or prosecuting any actions, claims, lawsuits or other formal legal proceedings ... in any state, federal or foreign court.”

The prohibition extended to Ambac Assurance, the segregated account, any subsidiary, and the rehabilitator. The state court then claimed “exclusive jurisdiction” over any such claims.

Wisconsin and the IRS will fight this out in federal court. The Wisconsin ­regulators rely on the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which stipulates that states have the authority to regulate insurance businesses without ­interference from most federal regulations.

Dilweg, citing state insurance law, treats the IRS claim as subordinate to ­policyholders claims. He says the IRS is attempting to “jump the line” to receive its allocation, and by doing so it violates state law and causes a “massive disruption” to the efforts of rehabilitation.

“Permitting the IRS to levy or attach on assets based on a disputed tax liability would circumvent the state insurance priority statute because it would allow the United States to get paid in full, ahead of policyholders,” Dilweg argued in federal court.

The IRS acknowledges it has no ­authority to disrupt state insurance rehabilitations, and no access to the assets ­under Wisconsin’s custody. However, Ambac Assurance isn’t in Wisconsin’s custody.

Wisconsin is rehabilitating the ­segregated account — not the hundreds of ­billions of dollars in the rest of Ambac Assurance.

“Simply put, they wish to have their cake — keep the Ambac general account out of rehabilitation — and eat it too — consign the Ambac general account’s potential federal tax liability out of rehabilitation,” the IRS said in a court document filed Jan. 7.

The IRS argues this is not an insurance dispute, but a tax one. It points out that Ambac’s “tentative” tax refund was granted before the segregated account was ­created, and a corporate restructuring ­cannot escape its repayment.

The regulator’s arguments about the integrity of the rehab proceeding, the IRS argues, “obscure the indisputable fact that the Ambac general account is neither under the custody of the rehabilitation court nor subject to the Wisconsin insolvency statutes.”  

 

OCI wird die Forderungen von Policyholder aus dem General konto zahlen, weil das Generalkonto einzige Geld Quelle für das Rehabilitationprozess ist. Das Geld kommt dahin aus den Muni book

IRS weiss genau, Trotzdem sie fordern 700 mil. dolar Steuer unfassbar! Gegen ihre Forderungen blockieren sie sogar mit den komischen und unakzeptaplen Argumante den NOLs ( Steuerrückerstatung). Das ist eigentlich der wahre Hintergrund der  NOLs Blockade .IRS kennt( akzeptiert ) weder Reh. prozess vom Staat-Wisconsin noch die Funktion vom General Konto. Sie glaubt an die Macht der Regierung oder federal Staat. Typische Beamten Mentalität, wie kann man so stur sein

- Laut Steuergesetz oder Akt McCarran-Ferguson ( Priorität Regel) muss von den vorhandenen Resourcen( z.B: aus dem General konto) erst an die Claims von Policyholder dann an den Staat oder IRS zahlen. D.h. IRS darf so wild und eigenständig kein Steuer vom General Konto forden, der von den Muni book kommt.

 

- und noch, wie kann man von einer Firma den Steuer anforden, deren Tochterfirma ( Eine Teil davon) geraden auf dem Reh. Prozess und sich selbst in dem Insolvenzprozess befindet. Es ist unfassbar!

In dieser Problematik sehe ich OCI und ambac vollkommen recht. 

Am Mittwoch fängt mündliche Verhörung bei dem Reh. Prozess an.

 

 

Gegen Argumente von OCI

http://ambacpolicyholders.com/storage/...ngs/01072011/oci%20reply.pdf

the IRS’s premise is based on a misunderstanding of Wisconsin law and the relationship between the Segregated Account
rehabilitation and the claims-paying resources designated to fund the Plan.

The purpose of the IRS’s removal and its accompanying motion to dissolve the
Supplemental Injunction is to seize over $708 million in tax refunds, in violation of the
McCarran-Ferguson Act, U.S. Department of the Treasury v. Fabe, 508 U.S. 491 (1993), and the
Wisconsin insurance priority statute, which subordinates the payment of federal government
claims behind policyholder loss claims

Finally, the Commissioner addresses an IRS argument that relates to its motion to
dissolve the Supplemental Injunction rather than the issue of remand. (See IRS Opp’n at 2-8.)
The IRS argues that, because its power to tax derives from the Constitution, the McCarran-
Ferguson Act does not preempt the tax collection statutes it seeks to invoke. The IRS is
mistaken. Because McCarran-Ferguson applies to every “Act of Congress” irrespective of its
constitutional derivation, and because the tax collection statutes at issue are “Act[s] of
Congress,” the IRS cannot avoid reverse-preemption under McCarran-Ferguson by cloaking itself in an alleged “Constitutional prerogative” to tax.

--------------------------------------------------

Gegen Argument vom ambac

the IRS seeks to do so here because
of one of the unusual -- yet essential -- features of this rehabilitation: only the Segregated
Account is in rehabilitation, but the claims-paying assets are held in Ambac's General
Account. In fact, this arrangement provides enormous benefits for all of Ambac's
policyholders and creditors, including the IRS, and if the IRS were to upset it by taking
steps to subject Ambac's assets to liens and levies, the Commissioner might feel
compelled to plunge all of Ambac into rehabilitation to defend Wisconsin's priority
statute against the IRS's effort to override it by obtaining payment ahead of
policyholders. But a full rehabilitation of all of Ambac, as opposed to the more surgical
Segregated Account rehabilitation chosen by the Commissioner, could dramatically
reduce any chance the IRS had to recover anything from Ambac, assuming that it even
has a claim, which the IRS has not yet established or even asserted, but is merely
considering.

Ambac und OCI hatte möglichkeit gehabt, dass komplette ambac assets das General konto rehabilitieren. Bei diesem Fall hätte die Anforderungen von IRS minimiert oder irgendeine recovery  von ambac ist  fast null gewesen.

 

 

http://goldnews.bullionvault.com/municipal_bonds_011120115

Ambac’s Latest Problem Is the IRS

Feds Say Insurer May Owe $700M

By Patrick McGee, Dan Seymour | Jan 11

Ambac Assurance’s bid to protect its municipal bond insurance book from the Internal Revenue Service faces a daunting hurdle in federal court as the U.S. government argues it has every right to collect taxes it is owed regardless of how the company structures itself.

http://www.bondbuyer.com/

 

 

Es geht schlagartig aufwärts.

 

Wer hat Infos ? Da geht gerade was ab in Amiland!

 

genau die gleiche inszenierung ,hatten wir anfang letzter woche auch gehabt.  

Jemand hier Profit draus geschlagen?  

 

MBIAs restructuring plan wurde vom New Yorker Gericht akzeptiert . D.h. Der Plan von den Banken ist abgelehnt.

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41022287

A divided New York appeals court handed bond insurer MBIA Inc a crucial win in the legal battle over its restructuring plan, dismissing a 2009 challenge to the plan by a group of banks.         The banks sued MBIA, arguing the plan left MBIA Insurance Corp undercapitalized and potentially unable to pay out on the banks' claims.         MBIA moved to dismiss the suit, arguing in part that the banks should have instead challenged the restructuring in an administrative proceeding since it had been approved by New York's insurance superintendent.         A lower court dismissed MBIA's motion. The appeals court on Tuesday reversed the lower court. The appeals court ordered that the motion be granted and the banks' suit dismissed.         MBIA shares rose 12.4 percent to $13.80 in midday trading. Earlier in the session they rose as high $14.86, their best level since September 2008

 

http://research.tdameritrade.com/public/markets/...FCBVF&clauses=

Angestellten von AMBAC mit.  

Ambac Assurance’s bid to protect its municipal bond insurance book from the Internal Revenue Service faces a daunting hurdle in federal court as the U.S. government argues it has every right to collect taxes it is owed regardless of how the company structures itself...

...Ambac Assurance had submitted for and received a $700 million tax refund based on accounting methods the IRS was now questioning.

The dispute centers on how Ambac recorded losses on its credit-default swap policies.

Ambac was losing money on its ­mortgage CDS policies, and paying out to its counterparties as mortgage quality eroded. The company booked these losses as “ordinary losses,” which are deducted from taxable ­income. Thus, its taxable income was reduced by ordinary losses on the CDS...

Please read the full article on The Bond Buyer
http://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/.../ambacs-latest-problem-irs

•MBIA Abweisungen für die Herausforderung der Umstrukturierung.

Ein NY State Berufungsgericht wies 2009 ein Herausforderung Bindung Versicherer MBIA's ( MBI ) Umstrukturierungsplan von einer Gruppe von Banken, die Einheit wurde in Handarbeit Finanzierung der Gesellschaft schützen kommunalen Bindung Geschäft von der Risiken für die strukturierte, eine Schwachstelle, die klar wurde, wenn Bindung Versicherer Ambac Konkurs für im November. Banken argumentierten die Spaltung seiner linken MBIA Insurance Corporation Tochtergesellschaft unterkapitalisiert und möglicherweise nicht in der Lage, Ansprüche zu bezahlen Banken. Das Berufungsgericht vorgelegt wird höchste Gericht sein überdacht von der New York State Court of Appeals, des Staates. MBIA Aktie stieg um 10,2% gestern.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/...ll-street-breakfast-must-know-news

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article25531.html

Allgemeine Marktübersicht
http://www.examiner.com/...e-in-monroe/general-market-overview-review  

Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (NYSE: ABK [FREE Stock Trend Analysis]) has been around for a long time. Some consider it risky so can it survive? Only time will tell.

http://www.benzinga.com/press-releases/11/01/...sco-abk-siri-ctic-rad


Auf Versicherer und Banken setzen ! :-)
http://www.deraktionaer.de/datagateway/flashvideo/981810  

Nicht nur das der Vorstand die Pansionskasse aus nur einem Bestand von AMBAC-Aktien für seine Mitarbeiter aufgebaut hat, er hat auch 2007 jede andere Form von Pansionskassenaufbau abgelehnt. Die Angestellten fürchten um ihre Pansionen und sind nun mit im Boot, sie verklagen ihren eigenen Vorstand. Der Vorstand hat nun nur noch eine Chance nicht in den Knast zu wandern, in dem die Aktien mit einem gewissen Wert immer weiter bestehen werden oder die Firma so liquidiert das die Aktien eine Ausschütung erhalten. Bei jeden anderen Weg steht der Vorstand mit einem Bein jetzt schon im Knast.  

Ich bin für die Sonderausschütung von 3$ pro Aktie & der Vorstand geht trotzdem in den Knast ! :-)
Ähhhh..... und der Aktienwert bleibt ebenfalls bestehen !

Wann könnte eine Entscheidung fallen....?  

Am besten schon Gestern ;-)

der Vorstand geht trotzdem in den Knast !  

Guck mal, es gibt das
Eigenkapital
das Fremdkapital
und bei einer Versicherung die statutische Einlage, wird diese nach Loss-Frequency-Analyse unterschritten gibt es ein Moratorium und die Versicherungbehörde entscheidet mit über Auflösung oder Sanierung.

Warum sollen wir auf einen Rebound hoffen, wenn abzüglich aller Kredite 5 Mrd an statutischen Kapital auf die Aktionäre ausgeschüttet werden muß?

Zum Vergleich FGIC hat -1,7 Mrd an statutischen Kapital ist dadurch Pleite.

Ich würde die Frage mal anders stellen: Warum sollte der Vorstand nicht die Firma auflösen wollen und so Klagen gegen sich entgehen?  

die höhe der ausschüttung an? ja, wie sieht es dann mit meinen papieren in meinem depot aus, in solch einem falle? anteile ausgebucht und z.b. 1 $ oder meinetwegen auch 3 $ pro anteil eingebucht und gut ist? habe sowas noch nicht mitgemacht. deshalb frage ich. danke schon vorab.  

Ausschüttung, statuistisches Kapital, Loss-Frequency Analyse, Rebound, Pensionskasse, Knast ....

Klingt ja alles ganz lustig und auch so als ob schon alles klar wäre. Könnte mal jemand in normalen Worten erklärten warum der Kurs steht wo er steht?