Kekhawatiran global menyusul ambruknya raksasa finansial di Amerika ditulis dengan tajam di New York Times kemarin. Beberapa hari setelah rencana bail out $ 700 milyar yang disetujui ternyata hal ini seperti melempar batu kecil saja kedalam lautan short selling yang melanda seluruh dunia.

hen the White House brought out its $700 billion rescue plan two weeks ago, its sheer size was meant to soothe the global financial system, restoring trust and confidence. Three days after the plan was approved, it looks like a pebble tossed into a churning sea. The crisis that began as a made-in-America subprime lending problem and radiated across the world is now circling back home, where it pummeled stock and credit markets on Monday.
While the Bush administration’s bailout package offers help to foreign banks, it seems to have done little to reassure investors, particularly in Europe, where banks are failing and countries are racing to stave off panicky withdrawals after first playing down the depth of the crisis.

Far from being the cure for the world’s ills, economists said, the rescue plan might end up being a stopgap for the United States alone. With Europe showing few signs of developing a coordinated response to the crisis, there is very little on the horizon to calm rattled investors.
The vertiginous drop in stock markets on both sides of the Atlantic on Monday reflected not only those fears, experts said, but also a growing belief that the crisis could tip the world into a global recession.

Indeed, the ripple effects from Europe and the United States were amplified as they spread to stock markets in Russia, Brazil, Indonesia and the Middle East. These countries had little to do with the subprime crisis but were vulnerable to a sudden halt in the flow of money. They lack even the veneer of national or regional cooperation that protects Europe and the United States. Stock markets in emerging economies recorded their worst one-day decline in 21 years on Monday, with trading in Russia and Brazil halted to stem an investor panic.

“It looks pretty ugly down the road,” said Simon Johnson, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund who specializes in financial crises. “Everybody is going to get caught up in this.”

The global nature of the crisis and its growing collateral damage ought to galvanize countries to work together to fashion a concerted response, Mr. Johnson said. There is a chance to do that this week, with dozens of finance ministers and central bankers converging on Washington for the annual meetings of the I.M.F. and the World Bank.
The trouble is, these institutions no longer have the resources or authority to lead such an effort. The I.M.F., which played a central role in the Asian crisis, has been relegated to the sidelines this time — its credibility tarnished by that episode and its skills ill-suited to a crisis in advanced economies. These days, it mainly issues lonely warnings about the impact on developing countries.
The Group of 7, which once functioned as a sort of command center for the global economy, is similarly depleted, according to critics. It no longer represents the world’s economic drivers, they said, and badly needs to be expanded to include rising powers like China and India.

“The globalization of the crisis means we need a globalization of responses,” said C. Fred Bergsten, the director of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “But most of the responses will be national. For all the institutions we have, we don’t have the right institutions to do this.”

That is particularly true in Europe, which has an effective central bank but lacks a unified legislature or treasury to coordinate or finance a rescue of the banking system. So far, economists say, Europe’s response to the crisis in its banks has been mostly marked by denial and dissension.
From London to Berlin, governments are clinging to a piecemeal approach. The British and the Germans have resisted a broader solution, because they fear they will end up rescuing their neighbors.

A weekend meeting of European leaders in Paris, called by President Nicolas Sarkozy, ended with a pledge that Europe would not countenance a bank failure like that of Lehman Brothers, but little else.
Part of the problem, experts said, is the nature of this crisis: bailouts of banks are costly and unpopular with taxpayers — even more so, as in Europe, where burden sharing is a perennial sore point.

“Taxpayers won’t agree to bail out the banking system of other countries,” said Thomas Mayer, the chief European economist at Deutsche Bank in London. “Not even in Europe, where you have a neutral framework, could you get people to cooperate on a joint effort.”

As the problems in Europe have worsened, the crisis has taken on an “every country for itself” quality. When Ireland placed a guarantee on all bank deposits and debt last week, it angered neighbors, who feared capital would flee their banks to the safer haven of Dublin. Now, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Austria have all pledged to guarantee deposits.

“If you do this one by one, it destabilizes people’s deposits in other countries,” Mr. Johnson said. “It’s mind-boggling that the Europeans have coordinated so little up until this point.”

With Europe and the United States deep in crisis, economists said, the rest of the world could not help but suffer. Robert B. Zoellick, the president of the World Bank, warned that the crisis could be a “tipping point” for the developing world.

“A drop in exports, as well as capital inflow, will trigger a falloff in investments,” Mr. Zoellick said in a speech on Monday. “Deceleration of growth and deteriorating financial conditions, combined with monetary tightening, will trigger business failures and possibly banking emergencies.”

The immediate danger, economists say, are countries in Eastern and Central Europe, like Bulgaria and Estonia, which run steep trade deficits and are vulnerable to a sudden flight of foreign capital.
Iceland, with an overheated economy and suffocating foreign debt, may prove to be the first national casualty of the crisis. On Monday, threatened by a wholesale financial collapse, the government in Reykjavik assumed sweeping powers to intervene in its banking industry.

“We were faced with the real possibility that the national economy would be sucked into the global banking swell and end in national bankruptcy,” Prime Minister Geir H. Haarde said on Monday.

But with global growth slowing sharply, the problems could spread to larger emerging markets, even China, which has a hefty current account surplus and immense foreign reserves.

“Where is China going to sell its exports?” Mr. Johnson of M.I.T. said. “Everyone is going into recession at the same time.”

This week, the focus will be on the Group of 7, whose finance ministers and central bankers are scheduled to meet on Friday at the Treasury Department. The group issued a perfunctory statement of support for the United States, after the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., briefed members about the rescue plan in a conference call two weeks ago.

But European finance ministers, notably Peer Steinbrück of Germany, noted that the crisis began in the United States, and played down the need for a systemic European response.
Mr. Zoellick, in his speech, said flatly that the Group of 7 “is not working.” He advocates expanding the group — which includes the United States, Canada, Britain, Italy, France, Germany and Japan — to include emerging economies like Brazil, China, India and Saudi Arabia.

The urgency of the moment, experts said, demands a bolder response from the Group of 7. Mr. Bergsten said the group should commit to a coordinated stimulus plan to stave off a recession.
“Just as the U.S. rescue plan may not be enough,” he said, “a U.S. stimulus plan by itself will not be enough.”

(source : New York Times 6 Oct 2008)


Senin sore (kemudian disebut Black Monday) lalu sekelompok lawyer dari law firm besar di AS menuju Pengadilan Kepailitan Federal New York. Mereka mengajukan permonan (motion) kepailitan kliennya Lehman Brothers, bisnis yang berusia 158 tahun, raksasa keuangan terbesar ke empat di A.S. Peristiwa ini mengguncang dunia. Terjangan ombaknya akan sampai ke negeri ini. Yang jelas pertama, berbagai perusahaan finansial yang terkait dengan Lehman akan pasang kuda-kuda. Investasi menurun dan ekspor kita ke AS akan turun, dan entah apa lagi.

Kuasa para pemohon pailit berdesakan di ruang sidang yang dipimpin Hakim James B.Peck. Lawyernya Lehman dari law firm Weil, Gostshal & Manges, dari lawyer JP Morgan dari Wachtel, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, lawyer Bank of New York and Melon dari Dewey & Leboueuf. Ada lagi lawyer Chevron, Citibank dll. Suasana tegang.

Bisa dilihat transkrip pembicaraan lawyer nya Lehman Brothers dan Pengadilan dibawah ini.lehmanmotion_transcript


Dalam kejahatan valuta asing (valas) setidaknya dikenal 5 modus kejahatan yang terjadi yaitu dengan cara :

1. Jual beli valas

2. Bank membeli valas dengan fasilitas KLBI

3. Transaksi fiktip valas

4. Transaksi margin trading

5. Konversi langsung deposito dolar dan rupiah antar nasabah


Fasilitas kredit atau overdraft diberikan kepada pengurus/pemilik/pihak terkait yang digunakan untuk kegiatan jual beli valas. Disini jual beli valas dilakukan dengan :

    1. Transaksi Spot, dengan penetapan kurs yang tidak wajar (kurs jual lebih rendah dari kurs beli), membatalkan transaksi atau melakukan transaksi lawan kalau dilihat pergerakan kurs menimbulkan kerugian bagi yang bersangkutan.
    2. Transaksi Forward, transaksi berjangka diperpanjang beberapa kali dengan kurs tetap padahal mestinya berdasarkan kurs pasar. Juga dengan membatalkan transaksi atau melakukan transaksi lawan apabila pergerakan kurs menimbulkan kerugian bagi yang bersangkutan.
    3. Transaksi Swap dengan menggunakan kurs spot yang tidak wajar yang tidak sesuai dengan patokan kurs dari counterparty.
    4. Transaksi Option dengan penetapan strike price yang selalu menguntungkan pihak terkait, penetapan premi yang tidak wajar yang tidak sebanding dengan nilai transaksi, tidak melakukan pass on sehingga seluruh risiko ditanggung oleh bank.
    5. Arbitrase dan Spot

Bank melakukan transaksi jual beli valas pada hari yang sama dengan bank lain(arbitrase) dan mendapatkan margin keuntungan dari transaksi tersebut. Tetapi selanjutnya keuntungan tersebut dialihkan kepada nasabah dengan cara seolah-olah bank melakukan transaksi jual beli valuta asing (spot) dengan nasabah yang selalu menguntungkan nasabah.


Setelah PVA malkukan transfer valas untuk untung bank, maka bukti transfer disampaikan kepada bank dan selanjutnya bank menandatangani aplikasi transfer untuk membayar PVA. Selanjutnya atas dasar bukti transfer dan aplikasi transfer kepada PVA tersebut, bank menerbitkan nota kliring (LLG) antar bank untuk untung bank (nota kredit)dan sekaligus nota debet untuk membayar PVA atas beban giro bank di Bank Indonesia sehingga bersaldo debet.


Pengurus bank untuk kepentingan pribadi melakukan transaksi jual beli valas, apabila untung dinikmati oleh yang bersangkutan tetapi apabila rugi dibebankan kepada bank dengan melakukan rekayasa pembukuan.


Pengurus bank menyalahgunakan wewenang dengan cara yang bersangkutan secara pribadi ikut melakukan transaksi margin trading dengan menggunakan fasilitas bank, yaitu apabila rugi dibebankan kepada margin deposit bank, tetapi apabila untung dimasukkan untuk menambah margin deposit atas nama pengurus.


Konversi deposito dolar ke rupiah dari seorang nasabah dibukukan langsung ke rekening giro seorang Pengurus bank. Keesokan harinya pengurus tersebut menjual valas tersebut kepada bank dengan memperoleh keuntungan. Cara pembukuan tersebut tidak lazim dalam praktek perbankan; seharusnya hasil konversi dari nasabah tersebut masuk ke rekening neraca bank dengan kurs beli. Selanjutnya apabila Pengurus akan membeli dilakukan melalui transaksi (kurs jual) dengan bank.