Sigrún Davíðsdóttir's Icelog

Jón Ásgeir Jóhannesson, Glitnir ex-CEO Lárus Welding and two other Glitnir employees have all been acquitted this morning in the Reykjavík District Court in the Aurum Case. The Prosecutor will no doubt appeal, sending the case to the Supreme Court.

It remains to be seen what the outcome will be but in the Exeter case, another financial fraud bank-related case, the Reykjavík District Court acquitted but the Supreme Court sentenced to 4 1/2 year prison term.

The verdict is not yet out on the Court website. Will read it later on.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

The Progressive Party staged a remarkable turn-around in Reykjavík, apparently because the top candidate spoke out against a planned mosque. Anti-immigrant discourse has so far not been part of the Icelandic political debate. The question is if this is now changing or if this topic will die out as quickly as flared up

After rush towards new parties in elections 2009 and 2010 the four old parties – or the “Four-Party” as Icelanders call them – got a solid outcome in the elections Saturday May 31. The Independence Party is still far from its glory of earlier decades, which ended in 2009, but the party leadership can sigh in relief that the party did make gains. The Progressive Party did not do as well but achieved nothing less than a miracle in Reykjavík: after opinion polls showing 0 seat, as has been the case since 2006 it won two seats, apparently because it questioned a planned mosque in Reykjavík.

The local elections only has an indirect effect on the government but the two coalition parties – the Progressives and the Independent Party can both interpret the outcome positively in spite of dismal polls lately: the Progressives will no doubt feel they are good at gauging the popular mood; the Independence Party might feel reassured that its bleakest hour are now firmly behind.

The social democrats gained votes and can feel mildly reassured of its outcome. It did not do quite as well in Reykjavík as opinion polls had indicated but it is the largest Reykjavík party. Its top candidate Dagur B. Eggertsson, who has de facto steered the Reykjavík Council under mayor Jón Gnarr, is likely to form a majority with Bright Future. That party ran for parliament last year, picking up some of its candidates from Jón Gnarr’s now defunct Best Party, though only a fraction of the Best Party popularity in Reykjavík. Left Green lost around the country but won a seat in Reykjavík and might very well be part of an Eggertsson led council.

The unexpected election topic in Reykjavík: a mosque

The issue of a plot of Reykjavík land for a mosque only flared up in the last few days, apparently almost by accident. The Progressives’ leading lady in Reykjavík Sveinbjörg B. Sveinbjörnsdóttir – who took the first seat a few weeks ago when the number one resigned in face of dismal opining polls – started airing her doubt about the planned mosque. She denies she took this up on her own accord but only responded to questions when meeting with voters.

Sveinbjörnsdóttir got a heavy beating from some in her own party for airing what some felt were intolerant views: the number five on the list disengaged from the party, Gunnar Bragi Sveinsson minister of foreign affairs spoke strongly against her views. Interestingly, prime minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson kept quiet about the issue and only spoken of his unease over the strong reaction Sveinbjörnsdóttir elicited from those who did not agree with her.

According to Icelandic law, faith communities can get a land free to build a house of worship. Needless to say, this law stems from the time when the Icelandic Lutheran community – almost entirely under the state church – was the only faith organisation building houses of worship. The Reykjavík council had given a plot of land to a Muslim community. The rumbling among the voters has been why this community should get land for free, if it should be in some other place, if the land was unreasonably big, that mosques were known to harbour terrorism and extremism and so forth.

The fact that Sveinbjörnsdóttir echoed the concern of many voters seems to have created a surge for the Progressives only over the last few days. Also it seems to have made a difference that the Progressives are in favour of keeping the Reykjavík airport whereas other parties want it moved in order to free up building land. Consequently, the party now has two members on the Reykjavík council, after having had none since 2006 – the most surprising outcome of the local elections.

Racism and intolerant views has had no following in Icelandic politics – so far

So far, racism and intolerant views towards foreigners or new foreign faith communities has had little public following in Iceland. And not entirely for lack of trying. One new party, which ran in the parliamentary elections last year preached some far right views, both on markets and foreigners but to no avail: this party got nowhere.

Earlier, the Progressives had dallied with anti-foreign view, but the same: there was no response from voters and by election time last year the party had abandoned these views. Anti-foreigners far right views simply did not seem to attract any interest. Until the issue of the mosque rose to the surface.

Immigrants in Iceland

Number of foreigners in Iceland has jumped up over the last decade. Immigrants came first to work in the fishing industry, later in the service industry. Apart from the fishing industry, hospitals and restaurants run on an immigrant workforce.

At the beginning of 2013 9.1% of the inhabitants in Iceland were immigrants. By far the largest foreign community in Iceland is the Polish community, ca. 9.400, in a country of 326.000 inhabitants, meaning the 3% of the inhabitants are Polish/of Polish origin. The highest ratio of immigrants vs Icelanders is in Western Iceland but two out of every three immigrants live in Reykjavík. Unemployment among the Polish community is 15% compared to 4% for born and bred Icelanders. The Poles have much revived the Catholic community in Iceland.

There are two Muslim communities in Iceland with a total of 645 members. An application for a plot of land to build a mosque was put forward already in 2000 and has been sloshing around in the system ever since. In the meantime, the Russian Orthodox community and the pagan community (Ásatrú, based on what is thought to have been the faith of the Vikings) got plots of land in 2007 and a Thai Temple was granted land in 2009.

The application for a mosque has surfaced in the Icelandic debate now and then but never with any particular fervour – until now.

If this indicates a surge of right wing anti-immigrant politics in Iceland remains to be seen. Judged from how these policies have fared so far it seems unlikely – but it is also possible, as often happens with these issues, that debate now might have granted these views a certain “legitimacy,” which others may feel they can now exploit: being anti-Muslim might pave the way for a further “them and us” discourse in Icelandic politics though there is nothing to indicate it except this flare around the mosque not yet built.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

The oral hearings in the Aurum case are now over and a verdict can be expected in the coming weeks. Those charged are Jón Ásgeir Jóhannesson, for  exerting undue influence on Glitnir CEO Lárus Welding, also charged, in addition to two Glitnir employees, Magnús Arnar Arngrímsson and Bjarni Jóhannesson who managed Glitnir’s business relations with Jóhannesson and his companies. The three Glitnir employees are charged for breach of fiduciary duty.

An intriguing sub-story, surfacing during the hearings, is that during the hearings Jóhannesson told the court that he had been able to obtain information on Fons, the company of his long-time business partner Pálmi Haraldsson. Jóhannesson told the court how he had requested and obtained this information. The interesting thing is that Jóhannesson had no formal relation with Fons and yet the bank handed over to him financial information on Fons. And it was quite interesting the Jóhannesson told this to the court as if this was the most natural thing in the world.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

Prime minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson has time and again said that the Winding up committees of Glitnir and Kaupthing have not yet presented any composition proposals to Icelandic authorities. Both estates have indeed done so long time ago, actually in 2012. Glitnir has earlier contested the prime minister’s words in the Icelandic media.

In a tv interview with Stöð 2 yesterday Gunnlaugsson yet again reiterated his earlier and by now oft repeated statements. Following the interview the Kaupthing Winding up committee sent out the following announcement:

In light of comments made by the Icelandic Prime Minister, in a news interview with Stöd 2, an Icelandic television station, released yesterday, where it was stated that Kaupthing’s composition proposal had not been presented to the Icelandic Authorities, Kaupthing wishes to reiterate the following:

On 24 October 2012, Kaupthing’s Winding-up Committee applied to the Central Bank of Iceland for an exemption from Iceland’s capital controls on the basis of provisions of the Icelandic Foreign Exchange Act. The application included a draft composition proposal. The purpose of the exemption application is to create the necessary basis for submitting a composition proposal to creditors and thereby concluding Kaupthing’s winding-up proceedings.

The exemption application is still under consideration at the Central Bank of Iceland.

It is not clear why the prime minister keeps on repeating something that is so obviously not correct. Glitnir has challenged him more than once on this. Now Kaupthing has done the same. It remains to be seen if the prime minister will stick to his version.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

Last December, Landsbankinn announced it would need to extend its two bonds of December 2009 with maturity 2018. On May 8, Landsbankinn and the LBI, the estate of old Landsbanki, reached an agreement to extend the final maturity from 2018 to 2026. In return, creditors want a pay-out of fx cash funds with the LBI, only possible with an exemption from the Central Bank of Iceland, CBI, with the blessing of the minister of finance. – With a time clause in the new agreement there is now pressure on the government to find the holistic solution to the estates both the CBI and ministers have talked. At stake is saving the state-owned Landsbankinn or the cataclysm of a failed state-owned bank. Judging from the debate in Iceland it seems that there are those who would either favour some turmoil or do not realise the risks involved in some special Icelandic solution.

The nature of the estates of the three biggest Icelandic banks, which all failed in October 2008, is not the same. This is also reflected in the ownership of the three new banks. On one hand there is Landsbanki, on the other Glitnir and Kaupthing.

Due to Icesave, priority-claim holders, i.e. deposit guarantee schemes of the UK and the Netherlands, will get ca. 90% of the Landsbanki estate, LBI. Not until December 2009 was the ownership of Landsbankinn, the new bank, in place: the state brought equity in addition to a loan from LBI, which due to imbalance between domestic and foreign assets, mostly had to be paid in fx.

The state now owns 98% of Landsbankinn with employees holding the rest. Instead, in Glitnir and Kaupthing creditors holding general claims, i.e. myriad of banks and other financial institutions, get the lion share of the estates. After the collapse in October 2008 creditors of these two estates agreed to fund the two new banks, now Íslandsbanki and Arion, taking a stake in them. The state owns 13% of Arion and 5% of Íslandsbanki.

It was clear from early on that Landsbankinn would not be able to meet the bonds’ payment schedule; the bank is not generating enough fx funds. At the time it seemed a solvable problem for another day, certainly the bank would gain market access before crunch time and be able to refinance. Now, with capital controls still in place etc., this is not about to happen meaning there was no other way but to negotiate with LBI.

Negotiations have been ongoing, on and off, for a year, at times in a rather frosty atmosphere. Already a year ago, the rumour was that an agreement would be reached before the end of the year; 2013 passed, no agreement – until now.

Agreement on extending the Landsbankinn bonds

Those two who negotiated were Landsbankinn, the payer of the two bonds and LBI, i.e. its Winding up Board as well as representatives of both the priority and general creditors.

According to the Landsbankinn press release “Interest rates will remain unchanged at 2.9% margin until October 2018. Thereafter, the margin steps up to 3.5% for the 2020 maturity, increasing up to 4.05% for the 2026 maturity. Each of the maturities between 2020 and 2026 will be equivalent to approximately 30 billion ISK.” – This is more or less what the other banks get offered. Improved conditions will help Landsbanki refinance.

The intriguing bit is this part of the press release: “The agreement is conditional upon the Winding up Board of LBI obtaining certain exemptions from the capital controls.”

The story here is that creditors know full well that saving a state-owned bank may be worth something. This “something” is not spelled out in the press release but it refers to the fact that LBI creditors want to make sure they will actually be paid out their assets in LBI. As it is now, they do not: LBI has i.a. not paid out ISK50bn, paid by Landsbankinn on the bond because the CBI has to grant exemptions to currency law and it has not.

In order to secure their interests, the new agreement states that conditions precedent to closing are that the CBI:

– grants existing exemption requests from the capital controls for Partial Payments to creditors,

– grants a permanent exemption to the capital controls for payments received on the Bonds, and

– grants exemption requests for future payments LBI receives on FX assets of LBI or to the extent such exemptions cannot be granted, a confirmation by the Central Bank that it will consider future exemption requests in good faith

In short, the relevant facts regarding the agreement are:

Outstanding part of the bonds is ISK226bn; eight years extension, from 2018 to 2026; tranches will be paid out every two years instead of every year; the bonds can be paid at a faster rate without any penalties; until current final maturity 2018 the interest rates are the same as earlier agreed, i.e. 290 basic points on Euribor/Libor, the 350bp 2020 ending in 406bp 2026; the agreement is made on condition that CBI grants exemptions.

From positive to negative

The first reception of the agreement was largely positive. After all, extended maturity of the Landsbankinn bonds seems broadly in accordance with CBI’s views in its financial stability reports: Landsbankinn has funds to pay the 2014 and 2015 instalments but the main burden on Icelandic balance of payment in 2016 stems from the two Landsbanki bonds. Once they are extended things will brighten up – which is just what has now been done in the new agreement, or rather the head of terms reached.

Major news regarding the estates and other matters close to the CBI has recently often been leaked to Morgunblaðið. The news of the agreement came fresh from Landsbankinn. Since the CBI position on the importance of extending the maturities was known this was reflected in the first news – a problem that needed to be solved and had been seeking a solution for a long time had indeed found a solution. Without taking a stand, Már Guðmundsson governor of the CBI said the bank would now analyse the agreement.

But after the first surprise of an agreement dissident voices were heard. Prime minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson has said that creditors must not be favoured over ordinary people and the new agreement must not be allowed to impair standard of living in Iceland. Other Progressive voices sounded the same warning. As often, minister of finance Bjarni Benediktsson was more cautious and Delphic.

The strongest and much noted criticism came from Heiðar Már Guðjónsson. In an article in Morgunblaðið Guðjónsson wrote that the new agreement smacks of Icesave, meaning it was too onerous for Iceland. He claims the problem is not solved with extending maturities since the interest rates are too high and that foreigners should not get an exemption from the currency laws until a holistic solution is found; in the end the Icelandic people will only pay the price for this.

Guðjónsson, introduced as an economist (he graduated from University of Iceland) in Morgunblaðið, is better known in Iceland as an investor. His family lives in Iceland but he himself is domiciled in Switzerland where he moved from London after working at Novator. Novator is the investment company owned by Björgólfur Thor Björgólfsson who with his father was Landsbanki’s largest shareholder from when they bought the bank in 2003 until the bank failed only five years later.

In 2010 Guðjónsson led a group of investors who wanted to buy the insurance company Sjóvá. He has later claimed that governor Guðmundsson personally intervened to prevent his offer being accepted. On the other side there are rumours that the CBI did not want to accept the offer because it was conditional on using offshore króna. Last year, Guðjónsson published a book about Iceland and the Artic and he has various investments in Iceland.

Interestingly, those who have sought financial power in Iceland have always sought to own/control a bank, an insurance company and a media – preferably all three. This was true in earlier decades and was still true after the privatisation of the banks.

Precedents and the glaring risk on Landsbankinn

For some reason, none of those who have opposed the new agreement mention the glaring risk that Landsbankinn – and its owner, the state – is facing by not being able to pay off the bonds in 2016. Also, the CBI has time and again called for a holistic solution.

The agreement has been said to constitute a dangerous precedent. The fact is that the LBI is still paying out to priority creditors whereas these have already been paid out in Glitnir and Kaupthing – in fx. In total, the priority creditors in the three banks have been paid out close to ISK1000bn (ca ISK700bn to LBI creditors, the rest to creditors of Glitnir and Kaupthing), amounting to more than half of 2013 Icelandic GDP. Obviously without upsetting the Icelandic economy since this has been paid from fx assets in the estates.

In total, LBI priority claims – mostly rising from Icesave – amount to ca. ISK1330bn. With extended maturity this will not have been paid out until towards the end of the extension. General creditors will most likely get ca. ISK200bn – but not until close to 2026.

Consequently, a pay-out from LBI does not set any precedent regarding pay-out to priority creditors since Glitnir and Kaupthing have already paid their priority creditors. Some people worry about the precedent it sets to give exemptions to pay-out in fx. The interesting thing here is again that this has already happened: as mentioned above the equivalent of ISK1000bn in fx has already left the country/or more likely, been paid out of accounts abroad since most of the fx is actually kept abroad.

A new and unexpected time limit for the government

What the government now faces is that the new agreement has a time limit: LBI and Landsbankinn commit to finalise documentation before June 12 and completion within three months from that time. This means that the government has a thing or two on its plate now.

The CBI grants exemptions but the minister of finance has to agree to exemptions of this magnitude. After seemingly having eternity to make up its mind as to how the estates should be wound up it now has… until September 12 (I have heard there might be a month or even three in grace period but according to a copy of the presentation of the head of terms the date is September 12).

At first glance, Landsbankinn and the LBI have no doubt had in mind to extend in line with the CBI balance of payment forecast. It is difficult to see that the agreement might threaten standard of life in Iceland as prime minister Gunnlaugsson has stated. What is however threatening Iceland are the capital controls.

The nature of capital controls is to give shelter from an imminent danger that cannot be solved imminently – in Iceland it was the situation after the collapse when more króna was seeking to be converted into fx than could be serviced without causing the króna to collapse. However, the danger is that with time the controls turn into a cosy shelter substituting the reforms and changes that need to be made to solve the original problem/danger. Exactly when this happens is difficult to estimate. With Iceland now well into the sixth year, business leaders in Iceland are smarting, complaining loudly about the lack of a credible plan to lift the controls without threatening financial stability.

The asset sale of the century

There are interesting times in Iceland. It is clear that two – and possibly three – banks will be for sale in Iceland in the foreseeable future. Ironically, an agreement on the Landsbanki bonds removes the largest obstacle for the state selling the bank, recovering its funds now tied in that bank.

The sale of two – Arion and Íslandsbanki – or even three banks will clearly be the largest asset sale in the history of Iceland. There might be foreign buyers and that is what the Winding up Boards of Kaupthing and Íslandsbanki are actively looking into, helped by creditors. Selling one or two of the banks would resolve the problem of converting the ISK assets of the Glitnir and Kaupthing into fx.

Some say that foreigners should not own any Icelandic banks, which in the light of the experience of home-run and –owned banks is a remarkably forgiving opinion.  And yes, there might also be Icelandic buyers.

There are the pension funds, which might very well be tempted/lured into (depending on the point of view) to buy a bank or two with their foreign assets. Interestingly, most major Icelandic investors, who got rich by being actively involved with the three banks in the five to eight years up to the collapse and who still have the urge to invest in Iceland, are all living abroad.

The political choice: negotiations or turmoil

The government has to make up its mind as to how to deal with the estates. It will now feel emboldened by having paved the way to debt relief – the two necessary Bills have been passed in Althing and the website for applications is up and running. The coming local elections in Iceland May 31 will most likely be bad news for the government though the successful introduction of the debt relief might pull some votes for the Progressive party in the election’s final spurt.

The debt relief, though carried out by the Ministry of finance, is the Progressive’s big project. Its realisation will greatly strengthen the party’s credibility in the eyes of the voters. It will also strengthen the party in government, which again might strengthen the party’s view on the estates. Its former views on money accruing to the state from the estates have not been heard much lately. It is however clear that some of the government’s local advisers are of the same view though it is safe to say that if this were an easy route it would already have been taken.

Anyone bringing fx to Iceland in order to buy assets now gets ca. 20% discount, compared to those with investors holding króna in Iceland. The rumours in Iceland are that if the government chooses some unconventional way in resolving the problems related to the bank estates, releasing legal action and other unforeseen consequences, the resulting turmoil might drive down prices in Iceland. Turmoil might benefit those intending to buy assets in Iceland but it will certainly not benefit the average Icelander who would yet again see the economy in jeopardy.

The CBI has preached the importance of keeping an eye on financial stability. The IMF still keeps an eye on Iceland and certainly has all the expertise needed to deal with the situation. Lately, some international advisors, specialised in sovereign debt issues have been visiting Iceland. If the government hires such advisors it might make it more likely that the route of negotiations will be chosen. By following the example of how other countries have escaped capital controls and how big financial estates are dealt with, the CBI goal of financial stability and market access might be within reach. Or as the CBI writes in its last financial stability report:

The next stages of the winding-up proceedings must safeguard financial stability and ensure that domestic entities have access to foreign credit markets. Finding a comprehensive solution to the estates’ affairs is a prerequisite for lifting of the capital controls.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

Last week, the Office of the Special Prosecutor initiated criminal proceedings against three Kaupthing managers for breach of fiduciary duty. The managers are Sigurður Einarsson formerly chairman of Kaupthing, its CEO Hreiðar Már Sigurðsson and Kaupthing Luxembourg managers Magnús Guðmundsson.

At stake are loans to four companies, in total €510m, owned by Ólafur Ólafsson, the bank’s largest shareholder, Conservative party donor and at one time a Kaupthing board member Tony Yerolemou and two big clients of the bank, Kevin Stanford and his ex-wife Karen Millen. The loans were used to fund two companies, which traded in Kaupthing’s CDS, in order to encourage a fall in the CDS and reduce the bank’s financing cost. These CDS deals were done in cooperation with Deutsche Bank. None of the clients nor Deutsche are under investigation at the OSP in relation to this scheme.

The loans were issued to BVI companies with little or no other assets than the financial assets, which were being funded. In some cases Kaupthing issued loans to these companies without the knowledge of their owners. According to the claims, the loans were not taken up in the bank’s credit committees nor were credit committees told of previous loans to these companies.

Although there are higher sums at stake in two large market manipulation cases against Kaupthing and Landsbanki managers – cases that consist of actions stretching over some time, this latest case is the largest single case so far and is likely to remain so. So far, all the OSP cases relating to the collapse of the banks are stories already known from the SIC report, published in April 2010 and this CDS case is no exception.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

In recent weeks Icelandic business leaders have voiced concern on the isolation of Icelandic businesses behind capital controls and by breaking off EU access negotiation. In order to lift the controls – or rather, start the process towards that goal – it is necessary to negotiate the payment schedule of the Landsbanki bond and the ISK assets of Glitnir and Kaupthing. Possible solutions are in sight but it is ultimately a political question and not about economics. So far, it is unclear if the government is seeking to lift the controls or if it also seeking to fatten the state coffers. Another – and in the long run possibly a more serious problem – is a short-term plan with no perspective on the future. As the CBI points out in its latest Financial Stability Report the solution has to be holistic, safeguard financial stability and pave the way for Icelandic public and private entities to international credit markets.

The word among those involved in the winding-up of the estates of Glitnir and Kaupthing is that these are by no means difficult cases but the weirdest process they have been involved in. The “weirdness” stems from the fact that although the minister of finance has the last word on the winding-up of the two estates, there is no one to negotiate with. One of those involved complained that they keep coming to Iceland, for meetings and presentation, but there is no one with a mandate to make any decisions.

The process has been rambling, with a committee that then was not really a committee and had no chairman. The prevailing assumption in Iceland seems to be that Iceland has all the good cards on its hand and can afford to wait as long as it pleases, “to make the creditors sweat” as some have been whispering. But that may be a slight misconception.

What should focus the mind of the government is first of all the growing and vocal irritation within the Icelandic business community on lack of credible plan to lift the controls. Also, 2016 is a crunch year when the new Landsbanki cannot pay (not for lack of liquidity but of foreign currency). Uncertainty on repayment is particularly unfortunate since the new bank is owned by the state. The third issue are legal risks. The fourth issue, somewhat hypothetical in terms of time but absolutely real in terms of effect, is the relative cohesion of the creditors, contrary to what it could later.

The process

The process of abolishing the capital controls has been rambling. Under the previous government the Central Bank was working on the payment-of-balance analysis and prognosis and published a report, only in Icelandic,* in March last year as well as reports on abolition plans. In early 2013 an ad hoc working group with members from the Icelandic government, EU Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF was set up to work on an interim report. However, when the present government announced it was putting EU accession talks on hold the EU Commission notified the government it would withdraw from the group, which then met its demise.

During the election campaign last year the Progressive party announced time and again that “unavoidably” the state would make money on the winding up the banks’ estate and these funds should be used for debt relief. When announced in November it came as a surprise that the debt relief was to be funded with a banking tax, also on the estates, not from money from the winding-up process. Much less has been heard of this fountain of funds, the winding up process, lately.

The new government announced it would appoint a “capital controls abolition director,” due to be appointed soon after the government took over. However, this position was never filled. End of November the government set up an “advisory group” with the task of making proposals on steps and overall plan of abolishing the capital controls. It was unclear if this was a committee or not (said by adversaries not to be a committee because a committee would be bound by law on gender equality) and it was too informal to have a chairman.

However, in a recent report on the abolition progress (after an Althing resolution last year a report on the abolition progress is published twice a year) Sigurbjörn Þorkelsson, a banker in London, is said to be its chairman. Other members were Eiríkur Svavarsson, Jón Helgi Egilsson, Jón Birgir Jónsson, Ragnar Árnason and Reimar Pétursson. Benedikt Árnason and Benedikt Gíslason, both from the Ministry of finance, assisted the group.

Its proposals have not been made public and the group seems to have come up with a smorgasbord of proposals but no overall plan, as far as is known. Also, there are rumours of differing opinions within the group. Recently, Benedikt Gíslason gave a presentation at Independence party’s head quarters but the scanty reporting did not indicate any firm view on the process and the immediate future. According to the rumour mill the members have been giving power-point presentation at various meetings; always the same slides but the interpretation varies according to who presents the slides.

This group has now been disbanded. It now seems it will be substituted with a new group. Also, it is rumours that international advisers of all types have been visiting the ministry of finance strutting their feathers. So far no names have been confirmed nor is it clear what the mandate will be.

The numbers

The capital controls stem from the fact that Iceland does not generate enough foreign currency, fx, to meet demand on converting ISK into fx. There are three main hurdles: pre-2008 foreign-owned ISK, mostly so-called “glacier bonds,” ISK327bn, €2.1bn – ISK assets in the estates of LBI (the Landsbanki estate), Glitnir and Kaupthing – and liabilities by Icelandic entities, such as Landsvirkjun and the state itself, in fx, directly and indirectly state-guaranteed. In a way, it makes sense to group the Landsbanki bond in this last group since new Landsbanki, shouldering these liabilities, is state-owned.

The combined assets of the three estates amount to ISK2,552bn, or 143% of Icelandic GDP. The ISK assets of the estates in Glitnir are ISK302, €1.94bn, in Kaupthing ISK148bn, €950m and in LBI ISK47bn, €300m, in total ISK497, €3.19bn. The largest part of the Glitnir and Kaupthing ISK assets are the new banks, respectively Íslandsbanki, valued at ISK132bn, €850m and Arion at ISK116bn, €750m (on latest numbers and stats see the CBI latest Financial Stability Report)

Contrary to the creditors of the three estates the foreign-owned ISK, the glacier bond-holders, are not an organised group. Some have estimated that a third, perhaps as much as half of them are indeed Icelanders. Whether this group will leave rapidly or not is difficult to say but there are indications that at least part of this money is happy to stay in the high-interest Icelandic economy.

The liabilities of indirectly/directly state-guaranteed liabilities are manageable, according to the CBI, for next year, partly because fx has been put aside against rainy days. The problem becomes insurmountable in 2016-2018 unless the new Landsbanki refinances/extends, in total ISK177bn, €1.14bn for these three years.

Composition or bankruptcy?

The major question, facing the government is whether to find a solution for winding up of the estates of Glitnir and Kaupthing, i.e. composition as creditors want – or opt for filing a petition for bankruptcy straight away. Bankruptcy gives less leeway to manage assets whereas composition gives creditors much better control over the assets, which might in the long run improve their recovery. Needless to say, the creditors favour composition.

For some reason, those who speak for the bankruptcy route, have added to it the so-called “ISK-isation” of all the assets, meaning that the fx assets, mostly held abroad, must be converted into ISK, paid out and then those foreigners with bucket-loads of króna would have to negotiate an exit, participate in auctions etc. I fail to see how this route could solve anything at all or be in the interest of Icelanders. To my mind, it is chaos and risk and no solution at all. In addition to lawsuits and other legal devilry it makes the process unpredictable, possibly prolonging unnecessarily the capital controls.

Both prime minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson and minister of finance Bjarni Benediktsson have repeatedly hinted at this possibility. Benediktsson has argued that the winding-up process is taking unduly long though not mentioning that both Glitnir and Kaupthing put forth a draft for a composition bill in late 2012. So far, Kaupthing has received no answer. Glitnir has been answered after which they put forth another draft, as yet without an answer.

The ministers have no doubt mentioned bankruptcy to scare the creditors who perceive they will lose a lot through bankruptcy with assets unavoidably going on fire sale with the usual consequences. However, that is only money, so to speak and losses for some financial institutions. The losses for Iceland is, from my point of view, much more serious: longer time under capital controls with ensuing direct and indirect cost, uncertainty and what could be seen from abroad as increased political risk, rising from instigating a process fraught with unforeseen consequences.

The legal risks

Most of the debate in Iceland regarding the capital controls and the two estates has focused on the evident balance-of-payment problem and the need to find a solution that does not put the country’s financial stability in jeopardy. The legal risks are hardly ever mentioned.

Some of those I have spoken to, advocating the bankruptcy route, claim there is no inherent legal risk in it. As a proof they refer to an ECJ ruling regarding a case against LBI in France in which Icelandic bankruptcy laws and the procedures was found to comply with EU regulations. However, this case only shows that so far Icelandic laws are in compliance. With a different route or deviation from this course the situation might be different.

So far, none of the fx assets have been paid out to creditors – it can only happen after priority claims have been paid out, as in Glitnir and Kaupthing (LBI will only finish that earliest in 2018) and either bankruptcy or composition chosen. Paying the fx would not harm Icelandic financial stability. One reason for postponing decision is rumoured to be that preventing the fx payout makes the creditors more amenable to leaving a large chunk of ISK assets to the government. From the legal point of view this might be questionable, to say the very least. By preventing payment the state can easily risk legal action.

Frustrated creditors could use Icelandic law to seek their rights. The notorious cases of creditors vs Argentina demonstrate the ample recourse creditors have internationally to seek justice. In addition to direct legal risks there is the risk that legal wrangling tends to take a long time, possibly adding years to capital controls in Iceland – again, a costly delay for Iceland.

Legal risks are well known from similar cases in other countries and it is a well-trodden path for creditors. If the creditors feel forced to take that route the consequences might be unpleasant for Icelanders and come as a surprise. However, in an international perspective there will most likely be few novelties.

The political risk

One risk assessment regarding countries is political risk. If the government keeps dithering, postponing a solution, the political risk increases. The priority claim-holders to LBI, the British and the Dutch government, no doubt have an eye on the political risk in weighing up possible actions.

For some reason media reports in Iceland on the Landsbanki bond ignore the fact that behind Landsbanki is its owner, the state. One source said to me that the state would not do whatever it takes to save the new bank. – Needless to say, letting Landsbanki fail would create quite some turmoil, to say the very least.

The Progressive party, the winner of the last elections, is now much weakened. Both the party and its leader muster little popularity and trust according to polls. A weakened party will either try to be more reasonable and responsible, in order to get re-elected. Or it can go all-out on demagogy and populism, knowing it will only get one term in power anyway so there is nothing to lose. It is still too early to tell what route the progressives will choose. So far, the prime minister has been very absent in the Althing debate, causing much speculation as to what makes him stay away.

Partly due to the prime minister’s absence Bjarni Benediktsson leader of the Independence party has at times appeared as both the minister of finance, as he is, and an acting prime minister. Within his party there is brewing discontent that the party has gone out on a limb to make the Progressives’ promises of debt relief come true. The two Althing bills needed to carry out the debt relief plan have not yet been through Althing and it is still unclear when it will happen. Icelanders have been promised that they can apply for the relief from mid-May.

The EU issue – to break off negotiation, as the Progressives insist on – has turned into a poisonous topic for the Independence party. Its leaders point at polls showing that its voters are in favour but the fact is that many of the more EU-friendly voters have already left the party. The party has now a much smaller following than ever in the past when it hovered around 40% while now hovering around and well under 30%. A new conservative EU-friendly party is still in the making but not yet born.

The feeling is that the cause of inaction regarding the estates of Glitnir and Kaupthing is due to differing views within the government. As long as the course is unclear political tension and the ensuing risk of inaction is in sight.

Ultimately, as pointed out on Icelog earlier, the controls will be decided in a political wrangling. Understanding that politics is a key issue here.

Possible solutions

The worst problem for Iceland is the Landsbanki bond since the liabilities are on Iceland, indirectly a sovereign problem since the new Landsbanki is state-owned. Theoretically, the solution is simple: extending the payment schedule, with adjusted interest rates. Although simple in theory, it is clearly not that simple in reality. Here, contrary to what seems to be generally understood in Iceland, the creditors have the upper hand. Nothing is really clear until the solution here is clear.

In addition, it is clear to everyone, including the creditors, that Iceland does not create enough fx to pay out, in the near future, ISK assets held by foreigners. With focus on the estates of Glitnir and Kaupthing the question is what to do about it.

There are of course the usual. One is extending payment etc but that is not very satisfactory for various reasons, i.a. risk rising from unforeseen circumstances etc. Haircut is another way. The CBI has been in favour of 75%; Arion bank analysts recently mentioned 55% as the necessary number.

However, the CBI has lately been advocating solving the problem within the framework of the estates, i.a. using domestic held fx, asset swaps etc. – 5.7% of the claims are owned by Icelanders, in total just over ISK100bn, mostly held by the Eignasafn Seðlabankans (the CBI asset-holding company).

The creditors have pointed out that selling the two banks, Arion and Íslandsbanki, to foreigners/for fx might be the solution. As pointed out in the 2014 report on capital controls: “Sale of the holdings for foreign currency to non- residents who intend to hold these assets for a longer term would avoid such negative effects, although there might be pressure over a longer period when the banks paid dividends to their foreign owners.” – However, also regarding dividend there are possible solutions.

As it is, everyone is losing out on inaction. Creditors lose around ISK100bn, €640m, a year because of lost interest. Icelandic businesses and ultimately the country are losing, as always happens when capital controls stay longer than necessary Icelandic businesses and ultimately the country are losing both money and opportunities.

Analysts at Arion Bank have done some calculations, pointing out that the only real problem is the Landsbanki bond. Here is their interesting overview.

The risky silence on long-term perspectives

The latest CBI financial stability report states: “The next stages of the winding-up proceed- ings must safeguards financial stability and ensures access of domestic entities to foreign credit markets. Finding a comprehensive solution to the estates’ affairs is a prerequisite for lifting of the capital controls.”

In addition to a missing comprehensive view and a holistic solution is missing a vision of the future after lifting the controls is nowhere in sight. How will Iceland cope on its own after the controls have been lifted? Can Iceland survive with no controls, will controls on inflows or outflows be needed, should the króna be pegged or not, another currency found? And is the EEA agreement enough for Iceland in the long run?

In September 2012, the CBI produced an extensive and informative report, Iceland’s currency and exchange rate policy options (only small part of it in English), inducing realism in an often lofty so as not to say wholly misleading debate, on the currency options. Instead of instigating a debate it more or less ended all debate without any ensuing policy.

As far as is known the government is not working on any comprehensive analysis of future options. Some say that politician are avoiding to discuss these wider issues and the government, or rather the Progressives, is hell-bent only on finding some clever way of fleecing foreigners. Yet, if there is only that policy once they are fleeced, what next?

The solution to lifting the capital controls needs to be coherent and comprehensive – but to back it up there also needs to be a clear plan for the future after the capital controls. That is what politics should be about. The EU debate shows that there is an ongoing battle for the soul of Iceland going on – whether to dare to engage with the outer world or to withdraw and isolate, letting the forces that have ruled Iceland for the last decades rule on.

*Sorry, this is of course wrong. Here is the report in English.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

The Independence party, the Icelandic conservative party, has mostly been the single right-of-centre party since its foundation in 1929. Now this hegemony seems threatened, induced by the party leadership wish to break off membership negotiations with the European Union. So far, history does not hold promises of a good fortune for this attempt – earlier break-out parties have been short-lived – but this time it might different. In addition, there is more than EU stance at stake.

Conservatives in Iceland have not only been conservative in outlook but also in its faithfulness to the only strong conservative option in Icelandic politics: Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn or the Independence party. While the Icelandic left wing has more or less been in constant flux since World War II, with new parties coming up, merging with others and then splitting, the right wing has been stable and steadfast. A new conservative party is colossal news in Icelandic politics – to say the least.

The only real right-wing contestant was former professional football player and businessman Albert Guðmundsson (1923-1994) who in 1987 was forced to resign due to a tax scandal. Feeling the party had not supported him he founded his own party, Borgaraflokkurinn or the Citizen party and won almost 11% in the following election. Guðmundsson left parliament and the party two years later to become the Icelandic ambassador in France and the party slowly faded.

What characterised Guðmundsson’s party and other disharmony within the Independence party has always been persons and not politics. Guðmundsson did lean towards populism, portraying himself as the only politician to stand up for the “little people” but he had done that within the party and would hardly have left the Icelandic GOP to form his own party had it not been for personal matters and the ensuing problems and bitterness.

This time it is, or might be, different – or so those who speak of a new party say: it is not about people but about politics. And though it springs from what some see as the party’s broken promises regarding the EU negotiations following the election a year ago this story, as often, goes back some time and to other issues. And it also not entirely unrelated to people, or rather to one person, Davíð Oddsson and, what some perceive, as his stronghold on the party leadership though Oddsson has no formal standing in the party except as a party member.

The Oddsson factor

Oddsson led a successful Icelandic membership of the European Economic Agreement in 1994, securing Iceland’s participation in the European single market. At the time, the leadership did seem positive towards at least contemplating Icelandic membership. That has changed. After being a much admired and longest serving prime minister 1991-2004, he became a governor of the Icelandic Central Bank, from where he watched the demise and later fall of the Icelandic financial system in October 2008. After demonstrations during the winter of 2008-2009 Oddsson was ousted from the bank by the left government that came to power in January 2009 (as a minority government, voted to power few months later).

The next career move was when Oddsson became the editor of Morgunblaðið, now owned 50-50 by companies connected to the Independence party and the Progressive party. The two parties came to power last year but it could be said that the coalition had already been tried and tested through the ownership of Morgunblaðið, overseen by Oddsson. It has often irritated his own party members how strongly the paper has endorsed progressive politicians. As an editor Oddsson has in particular had two themes running through his editorials: an anti-EU stance and rancour towards Rúv (the public broadcaster).

After losing power in early 2009, partly because the party was seen as being to blame for the collapse, the leadership of the Independence party set about to own up to the past and move on. This was formally done in a report written by an ad hoc party committee. However, when it came up at a party conference in spring 2009 Oddsson, unannounced, gave a speech where he singlehandedly ditched this “renaissance” report, which then was not discussed as had been intended. Many feel that this moment to face the past has ever since marred the party – and that Oddsson was to blame for this lost opportunity. Whatever view people have on this event it does show Oddsson’s grip on the party whose leadership he had left in 2005.

An echo from the business community

Oddsson has now been the talk of town the whole winter, both for his forceful writing and because many air the opinion that he exerts far too much influence on the present party leadership. People talk, also publicly, of a back-seat driver and a puppeteer. It was much noted last week when an email sent to many in the Icelandic business community written by Helgi Magnússon, former president of the Icelandic Federation of industries and very influential in the business community, was leaked by Kjarninn, a new Icelandic webzine. Magnússon wrote:

The soul of the former governor of the CBI is still scarred  from being ousted by the previous government after he had been instrumental in causing the bank’s (CBI) bankruptcy of ISK300bn (€1.93bn). Mbl (Morgunblaðið) has not written much on this bankruptcy and has not at all found it worthwhile to dedicate its front pages to such trivia. Which is why it needs to draw attention to other embarrassing matters at the bank. (This refers to Morgunblaðið’s extensive coverage of issues related to Már Guðmundsson’s salary and that the CBI paid cost related to him suing the bank for breach of salary contract; Guðmundsson lost).

Further, Magnússon writes of the widespread feeling of the political blame for the collapse:

The corrupt mentality of the progressives and Independence people, widely criticised and seen as part of the reasons for the collapse in 2008, is still there. The 50-50 moral (the concept generally used in Icelandic debate, referring to the sense that these two parties divide the goods between the two parties; most noticeably in the privatisation of the banks where people connected to Independence party bought ca. 40% of Landsbanki and those with progressive connections bought an equal stake in Kaupthing) is still in full force. And that’s where the CBI has a major role. The bank oversees a holding company that takes over assets rising from the winding up of bankrupt estates and other issues. What is ahead is that this holding company will absorb ISK assets from the estates of Kaupthing and Glitnir, i.a. shares in Arion and Íslandsbanki (the two new banks founded with deposits from respectively Kaupthing and Glitnir). Then it will be important that progressives get one bank at a very good price and trusted Independence people the other. Under such circumstances none other can be at the steering wheel of the CBI than “thoroughly honest” (Magnússon’s quotation marks) messengers of the party.

As most other prominent Icelandic business leaders Magnússon can hardly be seen as being part of the loony left. His clear-cut description of the state of things will be read by many with great attention.

Under the leadership of Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson the Progressive party is an anti-EU party and so are most of its voters. So as not to alienate its pro-EU voters Independence leader Benediktsson promised its voter – or so they understood – that the EU negotiations would not be broken off unless there was a referendum on this move. The progressives made the same promise but their voters are not as upset as Independence voters due to the different voter sentiment in these two parties. Then it turned out that this wasn’t really the meaning and Gunnar Bragi Sveinsson (progressive) minister of foreign affairs brusquely put forth a bill to end the negotiations. Since then there have been weekly protests every Saturday where plenty of people who have never protested against anything in public have shown up and even given speeches.

As can be gauged from Magnússon’s mail the anger does not only stem from the stance on EU. It seems that many Independence party voters simply do not trust the present leader to act independently. Though respected and generally well liked he is also seen as weak and far too close to Oddsson. And, as can also be read from Magnússon’s mail, the fear is that it will be politics and not economics that dictate decisions in the matter of capital controls: a huge worry within the Icelandic business community. In addition, many feel that the stance on capital controls is unclear, though both coalition leaders keep repeating that the controls could be abolished soon. Also the economic policy in general does not convince the business community and many others.

Only this week several business leaders have express grave worries as to the future for Icelandic industries within capital controls and aired the opinion that the only sensible policy is to move their companies abroad. Hilmar Veigar Pétursson CEO of the video game company CCP gave a speech recently at the annual conference of the Federation of Icelandic Industries. He pointed out there were only emotional reasons for keeping the CCP headquarters in Iceland. He asked if the only government policy was to keep the króna as currency, ending his speech with an echoing: is this the policy “for real?”

In his speech at the annual conference of the Confederation of Icelandic Employers this week Gunnlaugsson said:

The grand plan for the economy consists in believing in Iceland, in harnessing the forces found in the people, the country and the fishing grounds, believe in our selves and the opportunities we have, to have the discipline to take on good as well as bad time and to be, our selves, in control over our resources… (Icelanders should stop) dissing its land and its people.

 Viewing the discontent within the business community it seems that many find little faith in the grand plan.

A new party in the making?

Yesterday, at the weekly protest on Austurvöllur by the parliament, yet another unexpected speaker stood on the podium. Benedikt Jóhannesson is a successful and much respected business man who has long been a major force, though not publicly much in sight, within the Independence party. He is closely related to party leader Benediktsson – theirs is a closely knit family, connected for decades to Icelandic businesses and politics. Jóhannesson will not have taken the steps upon the podium without serious pondering.

Jóhannesson has over winter been airing his discontent with the party’s EU stance but always in the most subdued mild manner. That he has now stepped forward not only to speak at a demonstration rally but to air the possibility, in a radio interview, that there might be a new conservative party in the making indicates a truly seismic move among the core of prominent conservative voters.

The business community and many others are not only upset about breaking off the EU negotiations, in a move they see as isolating Iceland when little other is in sight. They are also upset that Iceland seems to be leaning towards China and Russia, led the Icelandic president. Formally the president has no power but he often airs his views abroad. Foreign media usually does not realise that these are only his private views and not the views of the Icelandic government. It keeps causing irritation on the right wing of Icelandic politics that the president, very close to China and Russia and fervently anti-EU, seems to be forming Icelandic foreign policy. Those who speak of a new party say it will not only be pro-EU but pro-Western values and not bound by the old “50-50 rule,” nepotism, cronyism and political patronage of businesses and resources.

Within those conservative quarters now airing the possibility of a new conservative party there is the fear that Iceland is isolating itself at a time when a strong alliance is needed, also to solve the problems underlying the capital controls. If a new party does indeed come into being it could well be said to be a belated reaction to a renaissance that never happened, or was prevented from happening, in 2009.

*Quotes above, in italics, are my own translations since these texts are only in Icelandic.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

Justice Renaud van Ruymbeke has today ruled in favour of former clients of Landsbanki Luxembourg, as already reported in Le Quotidien Luxembourg and the French La Tribune. Justice van Ruymbeke had previously charged three non-Icelandic former Landsbanki employees of fraud. Now he has ruled that Landsbanki Luxembourg cannot enforce collaterals placed against the equity release loans. If this turns out to be the end of the Landsbanki Luxembourg cases against those who placed French assets as collaterals this will surely be of huge interest to those with assets in Spain, where some former LL clients have managed to halt the enforcement by going to court.

The crux of the matter is that as some other foreign banks in Luxembourg Landsbanki used its Luxembourg operation to issue equity release loans, sold to clients in France and Spain on questionable grounds, where the client is effectively both a borrower and an investor: part of the loan is paid out in a lump sum, typically 20-25%, the rest was invested by the bank.

As Icelog has already written about several times there are grave questions unanswered regarding these loans: Icelog has seen documents that show there are good reasons to doubt the soundness of the issuance of the loans and of the investments done by Landsbanki Luxembourg before it collapsed. After the collapse the administrator has, contrary to i.a. Landsbanki administrators in Iceland, apparently been unwilling to scrutinise the Landsbanki Luxembourg operations although clients have come forward with well reasoned and well motivated arguments about the loans. In addition, information has been unclear, communication poor and clients have not been acknowledged as having been both debtors and investors.

An incredible part of this long saga is the fact that the Luxembourg state prosecutor issued a press release in favour of the administrator, without having at all investigated the matter. The fact that a state prosecutor can issue such statements is a scary indication of the state of justice in this tiny country that because of its monumentally, relative to population, big financial sector has become holden to the interests of this same sector.

The Landsbanki Luxembourg clients have been fighting a heroic battle. These loans were mostly sold to elderly people and sadly some of the clients have died during these years of battling an unyielding justice system in Luxembourg where even getting a lawyer in a case, non-favourable to the state and/or the financial sector, seems to be a hindrance to seeking justice. It therefore comes as no surprise that a step towards victory for the clients has been taken not in Luxembourg but abroad, in France.

PS Here is an article on the events today, from AFP but it concentrates on just one case, that of the singer Enrico Macias.

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

Last week started with a TV interview where prime minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson spent the best of half an hour arguing with the journalist, much to the dismay of many TV watchers. Then there was a report on Iceland and the EU, which led to the government deciding to break off EU membership negotiations, in spite of earlier promises to vote on continued negotiations; a decision ex prime minister Þorsteinn Pálsson called the greatest political betrayal in Icelandic history. And lastly, it was also last week that the government, at the 12^th hour, announced it was going to take time to set up a committee to ponder on changes, or not, at the Central Bank. This which means that the CBI will clearly not be taking any major decisions until new governor(s) are in place, which again must set some creditors thinking – and perhaps also some Icelanders.

For two days protesters have gathered outside the Icelandic Alþingi, parliament. It is not an angry mob, more like a crowd during an interval at a theatre waiting patiently for the second half. What started out as an awkward election promise is now a millstone around the neck of prime minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson but more seriously minister of finance and leader of Independence Bjarni Benediktsson. At the time, Benediktsson himself now against Icelandic membership of the European Union (but pro EU some years ago) but trying to avoid alienating pro-EU voters, eased out of anything final on the matter by promising a referendum on continuing the negotiations or not.

A history of broken promises

Both parties promised in no uncertain terms that they would not break off negotiations without a referendum but instead hold a referendum on whether to continue the membership negotiations. What the two parties had not foreseen was that there would be a clear majority for continuing.

Many voters now seem to feel that this promise has been broken in spite of the coalition parties offering various different version of actually-not-broken-promise. The government had said it would make up its mind on EU after a report it had promised already last autumn. Now that the report is out, a balanced overview of the negotiations and options, the government intends to skip earlier promise and instead break off the negotiations without any further ado. It even seemed to want to rush the matter through parliament last week, holding a parliamentary debate only a day after the 1000 pages report had been published thus giving MPs no time to study the report but it was forced to change its tempo and give more time.

This awkward promise of a referendum on continued negotiations now haunts the government. Benediktsson tries to spin it as being impossible to continue though he struggles to explain what should have changed since the promise was given. He did however say in a TV debate last night that he could “not completely” keep his promise.

This issue is particularly difficult for Benediktsson, less for Gunnlaugsson whose party is firmly against EU membership. Although opinion polls indicate that majority of Independence party voters are against EU membership the business elite, except for those with interests in the fishing industry, is for membership. This is turning into a major problem for the government. One Independence party member, Vilhjálmur Bjarnason, has said he will reflect the opinion of many party members and vote against breaking off the negotiation. The government’s majority is however still secure.

One who voices dismay in no uncertain terms is Benediktsson’s fellow party member ex prime minister Þorsteinn Pálsson who calls the change of course “the greatest political betrayal ever” in Icelandic politics. Pálsson is a respected commentator and many well-known Independence party members from the business community who side with him.

In addition, Iceland also now has its very own version of Sarah Palin. Last week, Progressive MP and chairman of the budgetary committee Vigdís Hauksdóttir stated during a radio debate: “There is famine in Europe now” and later said that Malta is “a self-governing zone within a larger country. It is not a country.” Before these remarkable statements her most memorable statement had been (during a TV interview on earlier promised action on the health service “at once” her party were in power) that the phrase “at once” was an “elastic concept” – a novel and highly creative interpretation that has now turned into a saying in Iceland.

CBI in limbo

By stepping in to make changes at the CBI the government has effectively kicked the CBI off the field of any major decisions regarding the estates of the collapsed banks and ultimately of the capital controls for some time, probably most of this year. This is seen a cause for worry in the business community tired of non-action on the capital controls. The bigger companies, often with foreign operations that ease the pain of the controls, find their way within the controls but smaller and medium sized companies are complaining loudly.

The first step towards changes is to set up a working group (no names yet) apparently to come up with suggestions as to what the changes should be. As pointed out earlier, it seems that the government was going to set all of this in motion at a later date but then realised, at the last moment, that by waiting it might have to pay the present governor Már Guðmundsson salary of the rest of his 5 year term, which would have been renewed automatically February 20 unless he had been notified. Which he then duly was, on that day. *

The situation now is of completely opacity as to the procedure. Also there is a complete lack of policy as to where the government is heading with the CBI. It is unclear who will come up with proposals, unclear what the government policy is (some indication that the FME, financial supervisory authority, might be put under the CBI as it was until 1998) and it is also unclear as to what the criteria will be for hiring a new governor and if there will be more than one governor. And obviously it is completely unclear as to how long all this will take and when new governor(s) might be in place.

Will the past replace the future?

Generally, countries where the government meddles in matters of the central bank do not fare well. Right now, it is not only the Icelandic government that is creating such headlines but also the governments in Hungary and Nigeria. Not exactly countries that Iceland has been comparing itself to over the years.

One of the more interesting remarks made by the prime minister in the TV interview a week ago was when he stated on CBI independence that “it would be good to have an independent central bank if we had a different government.”

The fact that the CBI had criticised the “correction” – debt write-down for borrowers who could afford their loans and consequently had not profited from earlier write-downs by the previous government – was obviously a matter of great irritation to the prime minister.

This ill-prepared intervention against the CBI has instigated a feeling in Iceland that the country is about to be steered back to the past where all public institutions and state-owned companies were carved up between the political powers. People were chosen to leading offices of power not according to merits but according to party affiliation. It came as a great surprise when Benediktsson recently appointed a young ex banker, Halla Sigrún Hjartardóttir. She has no previous experience of bank supervision but is an investor with rumoured connections to wheeling and dealing connected to the oil company Skeljungur. Not exactly a career similar to her opposite numbers in the neighbouring countries. The question is if this was only the first of similar nominations.

The question is if old politicians will now be put into power as once was the rule rather than the exception. Might ex prime minister Davíð Oddsson become the chairman of the board of Landsvirkjun? And will his successor as party leader and later prime minister Geir Haarde. So far, the rumours are utter speculations but they indicate a state of mind prepared to see the past turn into the future.

The past practices of the old banks live on (in hidden assets)

It remains to be seen if the strong feeling of the political past being projected into the future materialises. What clearly lives on from pre-collapse Iceland is the effect of the old banks’ operations, both its earlier practices and that most of the big borrowers still have access to considerable assets.

Post-crisis bankrupt companies with humongous debt and hardly any assets (left) shows how assets did migrate out of these companies to somewhere mostly out of sight and reach of administrators. Most of the well-known holding companies, supporting the ownership of the major shareholders of the banks have followed this pattern, i.a. Novator, Baugur, Exista, Fons etc. This alleged migration of wealth out of sight was facilitated by the banks’ lenient lending practices: the banks took all the risk, the favoured borrowers got covenant-light loans.

The clearest shift of risk took place during the winter of 2007 and 2008 when foreign banks, reacting to falling share price in the Icelandic banks, initiated margin calls affecting almost all of the big Icelandic bank shareholders who had placed their Icelandic bank shares as collaterals with foreign banks. The Icelandic banks, rather than seeing their shares flood the market evidently precipitating further falls in share price if not a total meltdown, stepped in and increased their lending to these shareholders. By Easter 2008, this shifting of risk and rapidly increased exposures was over and done with.

In only a few months these moves, well documented in the SIC report, hugely increased the Icelandic banks’ already considerable exposures to their largest shareholders and their business partners, in some cases going over legal limits (though in some cases the banks’ lending hovered under the legal limits by abstruse definition of “related parties”: i.a. Glitnir did not consider Jón Ásgeir Jóhannesson and his wife as related parties nor did Landsbanki classify Björgólfur Guðmundsson and his son Björgólfur Thor Björgólfsson as related parties).

Coming soon: transfer of wealth of historic magnitude

What is at stake in the coming months and years? The banks have amassed a great amount of assets that will be sold. Already, there is anecdotal evidence that the practice from the old banks, of issuing loans to favoured clients against shares with non-too punishing haircut, is abounding. After all, the banks do want to lend money and inside capital controls bad practices can fester.

The most prized assets, already for sale, are the two new banks, Íslandsbanki and Arion, owned by foreign creditors. Most likely these assets are highly coveted by certain forces in Iceland where banks have always bastions of political power and centres of handing out assets to favoured clients.

How the foreign-owned ISK assets of the estates – not only if Glitnir and Kaupthing but also of Straumur and Icebank – will be dealt with decides to a certain degree the price tag on Íslandsbanki and Arion. Any government action, affecting the price, such as converting all foreign assets into ISK/paying foreign cash out in ISK will be of huge interest to Icelanders with money and ambition to buy into Íslandsbanki and Arion.

It is no understatement that the sale of Arion and Íslandsbanki will greatly affect the business climate in Iceland in the coming years and possibly decades. If these assets could be sold on the cheap, aided by pension funds willing to act as silent owners by the side of active investors, the past might indeed be the future, not only in politics but also in the business community.

And now, over to creditors and mobile and educated Icelanders

By the end of 2012 both Glitnir and Kaupthing had presented the CBI with drafts of composition. The matter is still unsolved. Most of last year was lost to election and then a run-in time for the new government. That year went by without any bringing any clarity as to the abolition of the capital controls and the steps needed to solve the problem of the foreign-owned ISK assets.

Now the CBI is in limbo. What will creditors do when faced with an uncertain future of the CBI and an uncertain effect on how to resolve the problem of the ISK assets in Iceland? The creditors have various possibilities. Do they deem the government to be hindering access to the estates’ fx assets? If so, they could try to sue the Icelandic state abroad, i.a. in London. Argentina is the scare example of a country that for years has been kept under pressure from creditors. Not necessarily the Icelandic saga any time soon.

Some drama might come later. Then, on the other hand there will not necessarily be any big drama: some of the creditors might just silently choose to sell their claims. In troubled times the buyers are investors looking to recover their claims by litigating every penny, or in this case, every króna.

Ireland is now back in the market though the country is by no means on a safe ground yet. When will Iceland be in the market to refinance its debt? Judging from the government’s tendency to prolong problems instead of solving them it might take a while. Even a long while.

For Icelanders locked inside capital controls there is yet another “if”: if Iceland will be further isolated from other countries the effect of the growing income difference of the mobile and well educated classes compared to the neighbouring countries might take its toll. As counts for much in Iceland the changes are very gradual. Lost opportunities or loss of work force who does not return to Iceland after studies abroad is difficult to calculate.

* In his letter to CBI employees, Guðmundsson noted that he should have been alerted before midnight February 19. However, he was apparently not notified until evening of February 20. It remains to be seen if this will pose a problem for the government: if Guðmundsson will/cannot reapply, i.e. he could possibly claim that he should be paid for the rest of his term. Judging from his previous dealings regarding his salary, where Guðmundsson maintained earlier promises had been broken – he lost a court case on this issue – Guðmundsson will no doubt explore his position were he to lose his job.

See below for recent three blogs on power and politics in Iceland. The latest blog on capital controls is here. 

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.