Mike Larson - Weiss Research expert on housing, interest rates, mortgages, and consumer finance.

IMF credit crisis loss estimate heading to $4 trillion?

by Mike Larson on April 7, 2009

in General

It seems like every so often, the “bidding” on the level of total global credit losses goes higher. Some economist somewhere re-runs his or her models and throws out a gigantic number — which is then topped by yet another astronomical number published by someone else a few weeks or months later. Only this time, it’s the International Monetary Fund that’s doing the talking (or that will do so shortly, according to a report in the Times of London).

The Times says the IMF is set to jack up its estimate of losses from the credit crisis to $4 trillion globally, in a report due out April 21. That compares to the IMF’s January estimate of $2.2 trillion. The kicker? Financial firms have only acknowledged $1.29 trillion in losses to date, implying that we are not even a third of the way through the loss-recognizing process. Sobering stuff to be sure, if the IMF figures eventually prove accurate.


Related posts:
  1. The latest “solution” to the banking crisis The banking stocks recently suffered another mini-crash. So it’s no surprise Washington is responding with yet another “solution” to the...
  2. Ben Bernanke on the economy, credit markets, and more Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke just released some comments on the economy, the lending industry, and the credit markets.The first...
  3. What’s $1.75 trillion among friends, right? The Obama administration has released its big-picture budget outlook for 2009 and beyond. The big headline: The U.S. government is...

{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

I agree to the Terms and Conditions of this blog.

Previous post: The latest on employment

Next post: The endless bailout line gets longer — and why we’re going about this the wrong way