Re: @ dimi Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement

verfasst von CRASH_GURU, 09.12.2004, 09:23

-->>>Was sind denn das für Gold certificates??
>Den Fed-Banken gehört seit den Dreißigern kein Gold mehr (Enteignung durch Roosevelt zugunsten des Schatzamts), wofür die Fed Zertifikate bekam (die keine vollwertigen Ansprüche sind).
>Gruß, Dimi

Würdest Du dazu bitte einen Kommentar abgeben:


In 1997 the CFS began valuing the US Gold Reserve at $42.22 instead of market value, which I think is a significant change for two reasons.

1) This change reduced the US government's net worth by the difference between the market value of the asset and the government's liability, i.e., the US Treasury Gold Certificates. Given that the US government has a multi-trillion dollar NEGATIVE net worth, there must be a very good reason for them to make that negative net worth even bigger in the CFS. This good reason is the second point.

2) This accounting change - made presumably because of GAAP rules - gives substance to the argument that as of September 30, 1997, the US Treasury owed 261.7 million ounces of gold to the Federal Reserve, and not 11 billion dollars. In other words, this accounting change made clear that the Treasury owes the entire US Gold Stock to the Federal Reserve.

This meaningful change in the quest for accurate accounting by the GAO really spurred my interest. The Federal Financial Management Act of 1994 apparently was having a positive impact on the accuracy of the CFS reports. So I thereupon began reading the CFS for recent years, and particularly the footnotes. One can learn a lot by reading the footnotes to financial statements, comparing them from one year to the next and then studying any changes. And there were indeed several interesting changes.

1) Beginning in 1997, the following statement was added to footnote #2:"Gold has been pledged as collateral for gold certificates issued to the Federal Reserve banks totaling $11.0 billion." As explained above, this change is a significant advancement, and points to the more accurate reporting being required by the GAO.

2) One other improvement for accuracy was made in 1997. The CFS began some basic reporting on the Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF), by recording some of its liabilities. The report said that the"Exchange Stabilization Fund includes SDR certificates issued to the Federal Reserve banks and allocations from the International Monetary Fund." That liability was $15.9 billion in 1997.

3) These weren't the only changes. The CFS more than doubled in length from 32 pages in 1995 to 68 pages by 1997, then jumping to 94 pages in 1998, 111 pages in 1999 and 142 pages in 2000.

4) Curious changes weren't happening just to the CFS. Spurred by what I was learning from the CFS, I began looking at the annual reports of the Federal Reserve. The 1998 annual report included a new footnote in a section entitled"Significant Accounting Policies" that states:"The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to issue gold certificates to the Reserve Banks to monetize gold held by the U.S. Treasury. Payment for the gold certificates by the Reserve Banks is made by crediting equivalent amounts in dollars into the account established for the U.S. Treasury. These gold certificates held by the Reserve Banks are required to be backed by the gold of the U.S. Treasury. The U.S. Treasury may reacquire the gold certificates at any time, and the Reserve Banks must deliver them to the U.S. Treasury."

By 1998 the intervention in the gold market was progressing to such an extent, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the Federal Reserve had become concerned about the eventual ramifications of these interventions and the Fed's involvement in it. This view acquires extra weight when considering that it was in 1998 when Alan Greenspan testified before Congress that"…central banks stand ready to lease [i.e., lend] gold in increasing quantities should the price rise." Was the Fed trying to build some safety net around itself so that it can reasonably blame the Treasury for all the gold market intervention in some future Congressional investigation? This conclusion is not unreasonable given the following change to the CFS.

5) In 1999 footnote #2 on the CFS said:"Gold was pledged as collateral for gold certificates issued to the FRBs totaling $11.0 billion." Beginning in 2000, this disclosure was changed to read:"Gold totaling $11.0 billion was pledged as collateral for gold certificates issued and authorized to the FRBs by the Secretary of the Treasury. Treasury may redeem the gold certificates at any time."

<ul> ~ http://www.fgmr.com/esfgold.htm</ul>

Thread gesperrt

 

gesamter Thread:

• @ dottore Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - CRASH_GURU, 30.11.2004, 08:56
  • Re: @ dottore Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - Dimi, 30.11.2004, 09:29
    • Re: @ dimi Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - CRASH_GURU, 09.12.2004, 09:23
      • Re: @ dimi Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - CRASH_GURU - Dimi, 09.12.2004, 13:04
        • Re: @ dimi Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - CRASH_GURU - CRASH_GURU, 09.12.2004, 14:00
          • Re: @ dimi Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - CRASH_GURU - Dimi, 09.12.2004, 17:09
            • Re: @ dimi Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - CRASH_GURU - CRASH_GURU, 10.12.2004, 06:35
  • Re: @ dottore Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet statement - dottore, 30.11.2004, 10:53
    • Kleine Korrektur... - fridolin, 30.11.2004, 13:39
      • Re: Richtig, Danke! Treasurer derzeit vakant (o.Text) - dottore, 30.11.2004, 17:45
    • Re: Zwei Fragen zum letzten FED Balance sheet - Danke für Alle Antworten - CRASH_GURU, 30.11.2004, 14:18