Some Fascinating Facts about the U.S. Financial Services Industry

The following are some interesting facts about the U.S. financial services industry from a research report published by The Financial Services Roundtable. I have included my comments for some of the events.

Year    Event

1782    Pennsylvania chartered the first bank in the U.S.

1790   The federal government refinanced all federal and state Revolutionary War debt, issuing $80

million in bonds. These bonds became the first major issues of publicly traded securities, marking

the birth of the U.S. investment markets.

1791   Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, established First Bank of the United States.

1792   Insurance Company of North America, first stock insurance company, established.The

Buttonwood  Agreement, pact between 24 brokers and merchants to trade securities on a

common commission basis, marked the origins of the New York Stock Exchange. Bank of

America(BAC) was first listed  stock.

1809  The first bank failure happened in Rhode Island. Bank failures continue to occur this day. To date

three banks have been shut down by the FDIC this year. These closures have become the Friday

Night Follies of this era. Bank of America (BAC) almost failed but exists in tact today as they

were  bailed out by the state.

1863   Office of the Comptroller of the Currency was established in the U.S. Treasury Department. The

agency was authorized to charter banks and issue national currency.

1875   American Express (AXP) established the first pension plan in the U.S. American Express exists

still today as a highly ranked player in the global credit card industry.

1909 St. Mary’s Cooperative, the first U.S. credit union, formed in New Hampshire. Today there are

7,535 credit unions serving 92 million customers in the country.

1913  The Federal Reserve was established to replace J.P. Morgan as lender of last resort. It is

interesting to see how one man was rich and powerful enough to bail out the whole economy in

those days. JP Morgan Chase (JPM) is one of the four US “super-banks”.

1924  First mutual funds established in Boston. As of 2010, there are a total of 7,581 funds in the U.S.

Despite the many crashes in the markets since 1924, the growth of the mutual fund industry is

simply astonishing.

1929 The stock market crashed. Nearly 10,000 U.S. banks failed across the land and millions of people

lost their savings.

1932 The Federal Home Loan Bank Act established Federal Home Loan Bank System to act as central

credit system for savings and loans institutions.

1933 The Glass-Steagall Act, separating banking and securities industries, passed by Congress. Much of

the restrictions placed by this law was repealed by President Clinton during the late 1990s.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, guaranteeing accounts up to $2,500, opened. At the height

of the credit crisis, this limit was raised to $250,000.

1955 First U.S.-based international mutual fund introduced. But even today most US funds are focused

on the US markets.

1970 The U.S. government introduced mortgage-related securities to increase liquidity. National Credit

Union Administration was created to charter and supervise federal credit unions.

1972 Money market mutual funds were introduced for the first time.

1974 Automated teller machines (ATMs) were widely introduced by banks.

1975 The SEC deregulated broker commissions by eliminating fixed commissions brokers charged for

all securities transactions. As a result, the U.S. has the lowest securities transaction costs in the

developed world.

1989 The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act was established, providing

government funds to insolvent savings and loan institutions (S&Ls) from the Resolution Trust

Corporation. Similar to the bailouts during of the credit crisis, tax payers footed the bill in the

earlier banking crisis as well.

1999 The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act allowed banks, insurance

companies and securities firms to affiliate and sell each other’s products.

2005 The Federal Bankruptcy Prevention and Consumer Protection Act was enacted to tighten rules

for personal bankruptcy.

2008 Failed lender Washington Mutual was taken over by JPMorgan Chase after it was shut down by

federal regulators, marking the largest failure in banking history. Confirming the failure of state

involvement in the free markets, the federal government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Securities giant Lehman Brothers also failed, marking the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history.To

prevent a total collapse of the financial system, the TARP was hastily established with a $700

billion rescue plan for the financial services industry.

2010 The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, landmark regulatory

overhaul of the financial services industry, was signed into law. After years of failing to protect

consumers, the federal government finally enacted laws providing some consumer protections

related to credit cards. President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,

requiring most U.S. citizens to have health insurance thus giving a bonanza to the healthcare

industry.

Source: The Financial Services Fact Book 2011, The Financial Services Roundtable

Disclosure: No Positions

Review: Constituents of the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index 2012

Standard & Poor’s publishes the widely followed S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. This index ” measures the performance of large cap, blue chip companies within the S&P 500 that have followed a policy of increasing dividends every year for at least 25 consecutive years.”

The index is composed of 51 companies and the five-year total return is a decent 4.50%.

The Components of the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index for 2012 are listed below:

[TABLE=1054]

Source: Standard & Poor’s

Some observations:

  • McDonald’s Corp (MCD), Procter & Gamble (PG), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Colgate-Palmolive Co (CL), Coca-Cola Co (KO), Abbott Laboratories (ABT), 3M Co (MMM), PepsiCo Inc(PEP) are some of the excellent companies with a strong presence in overseas markets.
  • Electric utility Consolidated Edison Inc (ED) and Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM) are two of the stingy dividend payers.
  • As robust economic growth is unlikely in the near future, firms such as McDonald’s Corp (MCD), Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) and Family Dollar Stores Inc (FDO) should continue to perform well.

Download: You can download the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index 2012 list in excel format by clicking here.

Disclosure: Long ED

Performance of Dividend Paying Stocks At Different Tax Rates

Last week I wrote an article discussing the dividend yields of U.S. and foreign stocks. To quote from that post:

Though it is commendable that U.S. companies are increasing their dividend payouts, they still lag when compared to the payouts of foreign companies. Relative to their overseas peers, U.S. firms hold over one Trillion $ in cash and equivalents on their balance sheets. So much higher payouts are possible.

Today Mr.Barry Ritholtz of The Big Picture blog has a post on dividends quoting a Barron’s piece. From the article:

“The benchmark Standard & Poor’s 500 index has a dividend yield of just 2%, one of the lowest of any major global market. European stocks yield an average of nearly 5%, and even the historically low-yielding Japanese stock market pays 2.5%.

American companies have the wherewithal to raise dividends because profits are at record levels and the payout ratio—the percentage of profits paid out in dividends—is near an all-time low at 28%. It has averaged 40% over the past 20 years.” (emphasis added)

Currently the US tax rates for dividends are very attractive for investors. The maximum tax rates for ordinary and qualified dividends are 35% and 15% respectively. However these rates are set to increase in 2013 unless Congress extends the current lower rates for more years. In 2013, the maximum rates for ordinary and qualified dividends will jump to 36% for investors in the 28% tax bracket and 39.6% for those in the higher brackets respectively.

So understandably some investors are worried about the impact of higher tax rates on dividends. They need not be concerned. History shows that dividend paying stocks have performed relatively well at different tax rates.

The chart below shows the performance of dividend and non-dividend payers in various tax environments since 1972:

Click to enlarge

Source: The case for Large cap dividend paying stocks, Sonia H. Mintun, Ancora Advisors, LLC

From 1972 to 1982, despite the dividend tax rate at 70% dividend payers vastly outperformed non-dividend payers. In other periods also dividend stocks performed well as shown above by the dark blue bars.

In summary, regardless of any changes in the dividend tax rates investors are better to stick with dividend paying stocks for reducing portfolio volatility and higher returns.

Related ETFs:

SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY)
iShares Dow Jones Select Dividend ETF (DVY)
SPDR Utilities Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLU)
Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (VIG)

Disclosure: No Positions

Should the U.S. Lower the Corporate and Income Tax Rates ?

As the U.S. election campaign picks up momentum one of the favorite topics that will be discussed by politicians from both the parties will be taxes. By default Republicans favor lowering taxes while the Democrats do not. However both parties may be wrong with their beliefs.

In general, where does the U.S. stand in terms of taxes when compared to other developed countries?

Total Taxes:
Taxes paid by individuals and corporations as a percentage of GDP is one of the meaningful ways to determine whether a country’s tax rates are high or low. Based on this metric, the U.S. has the third lowest taxes among OECD countries in 2009, the latest year for which data is available. The total U.S. state, local and federal taxes in 2009 was 22.6% of GDP. Only Chile and Mexico had lower taxes at 18.2% and 17.5% respectively.

Click to enlarge

Clearly total taxes is lower in the U.S. than most OECD countries. Lower tax collection is one reason the Federal budget is at record high levels.

Corporate Income Taxes:
The corporate tax rate in the U.S. is also too low. Based on 2009 data, the U.S. corporate taxes as a share of GDP was 1.9% with only Iceland having a lower rate among the OECD countries. Despite having the lowest corporate tax rate in the developed world, Iceland was one of the first countries to collapse during the global financial crisis. To put the current U.S. corporate tax rate in perspective, in 1965 it was at 4.0% of the GDP.

Personal Income Taxes:
Personal income taxes have also fallen in recent years. In 2000,  personal income taxes was 12.3% of the GDP. After former President George Bush cut personal income taxes primarily to benefit the “have-mores”, it plunged dramatically. In 2009 it stood at just 7.7% of the GDP.

Source: U.S. Is One of the Least Taxed Developed Countries, Citizens for Tax Justice

As U.S. tax rates are one of the lowest in the developed world, it appears that even the millionaires are feeling the guilt of paying lower taxes and would like the tax rates to be raised. From a recent Bloomberg article:

Millionaires support Warren Buffett’s view that the wealthiest should pay more in taxes, as long as it’s other rich Americans, according to a survey released today.

About 71 percent of millionaires surveyed said they agree with Buffett, chairman and chief executive officer of Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), that the very wealthy ought to pay more taxes and give more to charity. That included 49 percent who said that they’re “not in the same league” as Buffett and that the higher taxes shouldn’t apply to them personally, according to the survey from PNC Wealth Management, a unit of Pittsburgh-based PNC Financial Services Group Inc. (PNC).

Overall most people would agree that the current corporate and personal tax rates need not be lowered further. Instead of trying to reduce taxes, the U.S. should stimulate economic growth by using other measures. Though U.S. multinational companies are lobbying to reduce the current tax rates so that they can repatriate their cash piles held overseas, it is unlikely that they will invest and create jobs here. In fact, research shows that reducing corporate tax rates has not benefited the economy.

Related:

NY Times: Are Taxes in the U.S. High or Low?

Another Take on Why Dividend Matters

Dividend yield should be one of the important factors when selecting a stock for investment. Dividend payments come out of a company’s earnings and is usually a strong barometer of a firm’s financial health. Unlike other metrics cash dividends are not susceptible to accounting or other manipulations. Hence consistent dividend payers and growers are excellent options for investors seeking both growth and income. It is widely known that over the long-term dividend return account for a major portion of the total return of the S&P 500.

From a recent article on dividends in The Wall Street Journal:

Click to enlarge

Looking solely at prices, you’d be left believing small-capitalization stocks vastly outperformed more “sluggish” utilities. Data from FactSet Research Systems show that in the decade through Nov. 30, the iShares Russell 2000 Index exchange-traded fund, which tracks the shares of smaller companies, zipped up 61%, versus a more modest 29% gain for the Utilities Select Sector SPDR.

But that woefully misrepresents the returns of these two investments. When dividends are included, the utilities ETF returned 84% to investors over the same period versus 81% for the small-stock ETF. What’s more, over the period, the value of the Utilities Select Sector fund gyrated much less violently than that of the iShares Russell 2000.

In essence: The utilities fund gave higher returns for less risk. It’s something you’d never know unless you looked at the total-return data.

Source: Price Charts Can Mislead, The Wall Street Journal

A Bloomberg BusinessWeek article also discussed about investors’ preference for dividend paying stocks in the current environment. Last year the S&P 500 was flat based on only prices. However the total return was 2.2% when dividend yield is included. The article also noted this interesting fact:

The 10 highest-yielding stocks in the Dow Jones industrial average as of Jan. 1, 2011—the so-called Dogs of the Dow—returned 17.2 percent, dividends included, over the course of the year, 15 percentage points better than the broad market’s total return.

The article went to add:

In his most recent client letter, fund manager Jeremy Grantham credited his faith in well-capitalized, cash-rich large-cap stocks for the gains in his GMO Quality Fund (GQETX), which ended the year up 12 percent. “We would normally count on winning in this strategy in a big down year,” he wrote, “but in a nearly flat year this difference is a testimonial to how risk-averse investors have been at the U.S. stock level.”

Dividends offer more than safety: With interest rates at record lows, they also are one of the few attractive sources of income. While 10-year Treasury bonds closed the year yielding less than 2 percent, the average dividend yield for stocks in Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index was 2.08 percent at yearend, and the 10 highest yielders in the Dow averaged 3.96 percent. At the top of the list, AT&T (T) yielded 5.8 percent, while No. 10 Kraft (KFT) yielded 3.1 percent. Companies in the S&P 500 will raise dividends by 11.5 percent on average this year, according to a Bloomberg Dividends forecast. “All my high-net-worth clients are looking for nothing more than a stable cash flow,” says Joshua Scheinker, a senior vice-president with brokerage Janney Montgomery Scott. “They want a high-quality portfolio with a focus on ‘income, income, income.’ I will take P&G (PG), 3M (MMM), Pepsi (PEP), AT&T, and Intel (INTC) over fixed income any day.”

Source: Why the Bluest Blue Chips Rule This Market, Bloomberg BusinessWeek

In addition to domestic dividend stocks, long-term investors may also want to hold foreign dividend stocks in their portfolios for diversification. Ten foreign dividend paying stocks that have paid dividends every year since 2001 and in some cases have grown their annual dividend payments are listed below for consideration:

1.Company: Banco Santander – Chile (SAN)
Current Dividend Yield: 4.06%
Sector: Banking
Country: Chile

2.Company: Royal Bank of Canada (RY)
Current Dividend Yield: 4.01%
Sector: Banking
Country: Canada

3.Company:Telefonica SA (TEF)
Current Dividend Yield: 12.25%
Sector: Telecom
Country: Spain

4.Company: Enbridge Inc (ENB)
Current Dividend Yield: 3.08%
Sector:  Natural Gas utility
Country: Canada

5.Company: Administradora de Fondos de Pensiones Provida SA (PVD)
Current Dividend Yield: 9.39%
Sector:Investment Services
Country: Chile

6.Company:British American Tobacco PLC (BTI)
Current Dividend Yield: 4.22%
Sector: Tobacco
Country: UK

7.Company: France Telecom S.A.(FTE)
Current Dividend Yield: 12.29%
Sector: Telecom
Country: France

8.Company: EDP Energias de Portugal SA (EDPFY)
Current Dividend Yield: 8.12%
Sector: Electric Utility
Country: Portugal

9.Company: PetroChina Company Limited (PTR)
Current Dividend Yield: 3.67%
Sector: Oil & Gas Operations
Country: China

10.Company: Empresa Nacional de Electricida (EOC)
Current Dividend Yield: 5.80%
Sector: Electric Utility
Country: Chile

Disclosure: Long RY