Archive for the 'Economy' Category

Advance Notice of Out of Business Sale

Tuesday, September 4th, 2007

Dear

It is true, we are going out of business!

My wife and I have decided that now that the children
are grown, we are going to do some of things we could
only dream about for so many years.

So, starting on [date] , everything in our store
which includes our merchandise, our racks, our fixtures,
our showcases and even our delivery truck will be up for
sale and prices that are too good to be true.

As a good and valuable customer of ours, we thought you
would be interested in this advance notice of sale that
we are sending out today.

We will look forward to seeing you on the [date]

Acknowledgement Of Correspondence Indicating Postal Delay

Tuesday, September 4th, 2007

Dear

Thank you for your order. At this time we cannot fill your
order due to an unexpected shipment delay from our overseas
suppliers.

We will hold your order for arrival of the merchandise, and
ship shortly thereafter. Unfortunately, we cannot provide
you with a specific shipping date at this time.

Thank you for your anticipated patience in this matter.

Greece Export and Import

Monday, August 27th, 2007

Greece Export and Import Structure
One of Greece’s important export sectors is the sale of international shipping services, which are a crucial source of foreign exchange. Having reached an historic high of US$1.8 billion in 1980-81, these earnings then declined to US$1 billion by 1986 before recovering and approaching the US$2 billion level in 1992. In 1992 the foreign exchange earned by shipping equaled one-third the value of Greek merchandise exports and about 13 percent of total exports of goods and services.

In 1992 two-thirds of foreign-exchange earnings from shipping came from shipowners’ remittances. The share of sailors’ remittances has declined consistently, however, because of increasing utilization of cheaper foreign labor on Greek-owned vessels. Chronic stagnation of the Greek shipping industry in the late 1980s and early 1990s has prevented additional earnings from this source.

Besides shipping, between 1991 and 1993, the largest contributions by invisibles to goods and service export income came from two services: tourism contributed 19 percent, and emigrant remittances added 14 percent. Even before World War I, remittances from the large Greek émigré community began to make a significant contribution to Greece’s foreign-exchange earnings. From that time until the mid-1990s, they remained a significant source of foreign currency. Net receipts from various programs of the EC, which averaged US$4 billion per year between 1991 and 1993, amounted to 25 percent of invisibles. The largest types of expenditures recorded under invisible payments were interest, profits, and dividends transferred abroad, amounting to over US$2 billion and representing about 20 percent of all invisible payments; and expenses for Greek tourism abroad which averaged US$1 billion in 1991-93, or 10 percent of invisible payments.

Data as of December 1994
Greek exports to Russia mark significant increase, according to data:
Greek exports to Russia have increased, according to recent data by the National Statistics Service for the January-May 2007 period.

The data was sent to the Greek Embassy in Moscow.

According to the Greek embassy’s Economic and Commercial Department, the bulk of bilateral trade marked a 0.41% increase, from 1.530 billion euros in 2006 1.536 billion euros in 2007. The deficit against Greece retreated by 13.45% from 1.35 billion euros in 2006 to 1.17 billion euros in 2007.

Specifically, Greek exports to Russia marked a most significant increase by 106.6% from 88.3 million euros in 2006 to 182.4 million in 2007. The total of Greek exports to Russia increased by 60% against 2005.

Russian exports to Greece declined by 6.1% from 1.44 billion euros in 2006 to 1.35 billion euros in 2007.

Russia is the major supplier to Greece of natural gas, covering 85% of the country’s needs and among the third major suppliers of crude oil.

Bank Liquidity

Thursday, June 14th, 2007

By the liquidity of a bank is meant its capacity to meet promptly demands that it pay its obligations. As noted earlier, commercial banks must pay more attention to liquidity than must many other types of financial institutions, such as life insurance companies. This results from the very high ratio of their debt liabilities. A large part of the gross outpayments by a bank is met from current gross receipts of funds in the normal course of business. We have already noted that deposit withdrawals are expected to be offset, at least in large part, by inflows of new deposits. A bank also receives inflows of funds as income on its assets, as repayment of principal on maturing assets, and as weekly or monthly repayments on installment loans. In many cases, such gross inflows are at least sufficient to meet gross payments by a bank. Nevertheless, each bank must be prepared to make net payments of two types: (1) payments to meet net withdrawals of currency into circulation, and (2) payments to cover adverse clearing balances with other banks.

Some of these are of such a regular seasonal or other cyclical nature that they can be predicted with fair accuracy and prepared against. Others are more erratic and less predictable. Inability to meet these drains promptly means failure or at least an impairment of confidence in the bank.

A bank could, of course, elect to “play it safe” and remain completely liquid by holding cash equal to all its liabilities. But the effects on its income would be disastrous. At the other extreme, the bank could select assets solely with an eye to income, ignoring liquidity. This, too, can lead to disaster, perhaps to sudden death rather than slow starvation. Thus, in determining its portfolio composition a bank must balance its desire for income against its desire for liquidity. And it usually tries to buy any given amount of liquidity at the lowest possible cost in terms of sacrifice of net earnings. An individual bank has two principal sources of liquidity: borrowings from others and sales out of its asset-holdings.

How much liquidity a bank will seek in its asset-holdings depends in part on the availability and cost of borrowings. If a bank is assured that it can borrow large amounts at any time without onus and at a low interest cost relative to yields on its assets, it may rely largely on this source for liquidity and hold few liquid assets. But if the availability of borrowings is uncertain or if borrowing carries an onus or if borrowing costs are high relative to yields on the bank’s assets, the bank will seek more liquidity in its asset portfolio. We shall explore these two alternative sources more fully when we examine in detail the assets and liabilities of commercial banks.

DEVELOPMENTS IN REAL ESTATE FINANCING

Monday, May 14th, 2007

Over the past decade there have been several major changes in real estate financing. The industry is currently undergoing a traumatic transition, particularly in the area of housing finance. The end result will likely be a dramatically altered way of doing business, for both the borrower and the lender. Government policies toward home ownership, lender attitudes toward mortgage investments, and the methods used to finance housing will all undergo changes. This section briefly explains several of the changes so that the reader can better understand the changing environment in which financing decisions are made.

Tax Aspects

Friday, May 11th, 2007

Tax Aspects HUD-FHA loans on properties that are not low-income have no unique tax aspects. However, on approved low-income properties, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 creates three tax credits available for the following projects: construction and rehabilitation of existing housing without federal subsidies construction, rehabilitation of existing housing financed by federal subsidies, and acquisition costs for existing buildings.

In order for the low-income housing (LIH) credit—9 percent per year for 10 years for construction and rehabilitation of existing housing without federal subsidies, and 4 percent per year for 10 years for construction and rehabilitation of existing housing financed by federal subsidies, and acquisition costs for existing buildings—to be granted, the following requirements must be met:

1 Rehabilitation costs for previously owned buildings must be $2,000 per rental unit and must be incurred within 2 years of the start of the project.

2 Newly acquired buildings must have been in service for more than 10 years and not substantially improved during that time period.

3 Twenty percent of the units must be rented to tenants with income less than 50 percent of the community’s median income, or 40 percent of the units must be rented to tenants with income less than 60 percent of the community’s median income. Tenant incomes are adjusted for family size.

4 Gross rent must be less than 30 percent of the tenants’ qualifying income.

5 Low-income housing does not include transient housing.

6 Rental units must remain low-income for 15 years.

7 For investor incomes less than $250,000, a portion of the credits may offset nonpassive income—for investor incomes less than $100,000, up to $25,000 may be used against nonpassive income; the amount of credit to be used against nonpassive income is reduced by 50 percent of the amount over $100,000.

How Much Debt?

Wednesday, May 9th, 2007

The difficult questions facing the borrower is the optimal amount of debt to use in financing the investment. In our previous example, we saw that the use of debt increased the return on equity from 8.78 to 9.20 percent. And we noted that the equity position is also subject to more risk with the use of debt. Is there any “net” benefit to the use of debt?

Let us return to our example. If, with the use of debt, the borrower’s required rate of return increases from 8.78 to 9.20 percent, there is no benefit. At a required rate of return of 8.78 percent without debt, the net present value is zero. At a required rate of return of 9.20 percent with the use of debt, the net present value is still zero. Thus, there would be no “net” benefit.

Suppose, however, that with the use of debt the investor decides that the required rate of return with debt is 9 percent. In this case, there is a net benefit since at this rate the net present value will be positive. If all investors, however, used this required rate of return, they would bid up the value of the real estate, thus forcing the net present value back to zero.

The moral is that if you want the benefits, you have to pay the price. The increased equity return is possible only because of the greater risk to which the equity position is exposed.

Analyzing Tax Impacts:Overview

Tuesday, May 8th, 2007

There is a five-step procedure for analyzing the tax impacts on the investment:

1 Determine the investment’s tax classification.

2 Determine the investor’s tax status (i.e., form of business organization).

3 Estimate the investor’s marginal tax rate.

4 Forecast the taxable income resulting from operations and from the disposition (sale) of the investment

5 Using the investor’s marginal tax rate and the taxable income figures, compute the estimated taxes.

Mortized Financing Costs

Monday, May 7th, 2007

Another deductible item in computing taxable income from operations is amortized financing costs. Financing costs are those incurred when obtaining financing, such as lender appraisal fees, loan discounts, lender’s title insurance policies, and loan-origination fees. When the property is classified as trade or business (Section 1231), these costs are not deductible as expense items when incurred at the beginning of the loan; they must be amortized in equal amounts over the term (number of years) of the mortgage. If the loan is paid off before maturity, the unamortized portion of the financing costs can be deducted in the year the loan is paid off.

To illustrate this concept, let us return to the apartment building example, with the following assumptions:

Mortgage amount: $112,000

Financing costs: 2 percent of loan amount ($2,240)

Term of loan: 25 years

Holding period: 5 years

To compute the amount deductible each year, we divide the $2,240 cost by the term of the loan, 25 years. Therefore, $90 per year is deductible as amortized financing costs. Note, however, that we expect to hold the property for only 5 years, disposing of (selling) the property at the end of the fifth year and (presumably) paying off the mortgage. The entire unamortized portion of the financing costs, $1,890, is deductible in year 5, the year the loan will be paid off.

After Tax Cash Flows

Friday, May 4th, 2007

Once the tax consequences of the investment have been determined, they may be added to (in the case of a tax savings) or deducted from (in the case of a tax due) the before-tax cash flows (BTCFs) from operations and sale to derive the after tax cash flows (ATCFs) and after-tax equity reversion (ATER), respectively. To illustrate, we return to our apartment building example.

The ATCFs are of greatest interest to the investor because they are the actual net cash amounts the investor expects to receive after paying all expenses, including taxes.