Chrysler won’t repay $3.7 billion TARP loan

[The Northerner]

Source: MSNBC

NEW YORK - The U.S. Treasury will not recover any portion of the $3.7 billion still outstanding in loans it made to automaker Chrysler under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, according to the terms of a plan filed with bankruptcy court on Tuesday.

The U.S. government has filed proofs of claim for unpaid principal, interest, fees and expenses, but "will receive no recovery on account of such claim," according to court documents filed on behalf of Old Carco LLC, the units of Chrysler that remain under bankruptcy protection while they are liquidated.

The proposal was laid out in a disclosure statement filed with the New York bankruptcy court in Manhattan.

A disclosure statement is a comprehensive document sent to creditors before they vote on a plan of reorganization. The Old Carco plan also proposed repaying Class 1 priority claims in full.

The case is In re Old Carco LLC, US Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 09-50002.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34434831/ns/business-autos/

[Deja Q]

1. ...

:banghead:



Oops, wrong one, I mean:

:popcorn:

[WriteDown]

6. Haven't you said that before....

:)

[buckrogers1965]

44. Get the money back from the share holders and executives.

We should just confiscate all property and bank accounts from the large shareholders and the executives until we get the 3.7 billion dollars back.

[KansDem]

46. Forfeiture and seizure...

Originally conceived to battle piracy on the high seas. Sounds like it could work in this case!

If we can seize the assets of someone who is caught smoking a doobie, then we should be able to seize the assets of a deadbeat corporation like Chrysler.

What would happen if we didn't pay back our loans? Same for Chrysler...

[Psephos]

2. Our financial future is in the best of hands. n/t

[WriteDown]

7. Reminds me a bit of the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark....

Maj. Eaton: We have top men working on it now.
Indiana: Who?
Maj. Eaton: Top... men.

[Psephos]

11. you misheard the line...he said TARP men ;) n/t

[WriteDown]

16. Herr Geitner?

[Newsjock]

3. Individuals made this happen

And they have some (possibly large) part of that $3.7 billion. Go after them; screw corporate personhood.

[Deja Q]

4. Or let each person become his/her own corporation

:popcorn:

[Buenaventura]

17. "i'm changing my name to Chrysler ..."

(apologies - or thanks - to tom paxton)

[Zynx]

5. Small potatoes compared to the bank money.

We knew at the time that we made all of these interventions that some of money would not come back. This is a small loss compared to what people said we would lose on the banks. That, of course, did not happen.

[girl gone mad]

9. That's a disingenuous statement.

We stand to lose tens of billions on TARP, and the banks that have paid back TARP were only able to do so because of the Fed's various other bailout programs. Not exactly something you should be bragging about.

[Romulox]

36. This post is ridiculous in light of this morning's headlines re: Citi's NEW bailout.

What a difference a day makes! :rofl:

[Romulox]

8. Fiat brought no cash to the table to acquire Chrysler. It was a GIFT.

The taxpayers ate the debt. Just another gift to a foreign corp. :shrug:

[dipsydoodle]

13. Wasn't quite like that

Under the terms of the deal, Fiat will control 20% of Chrysler, while 68% will be owned by a union trust, and the two governments will share 12%.

>

Fiat is not paying anything for its 20% stake, which will give it access to the US car market. It has the option to increase its shareholding in Chrysler in the future.

In return, Chrysler will be able to take advantage of Fiat's expertise in making smaller, more fuel-efficient cars in its existing US factories.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8076472.stm

[Romulox]

21. Love how you say "wasn't quite like that" then post a quote that says it was JUST like that.

"Fiat is not paying anything for its 20% stake"

:hi:

[dipsydoodle]

40. Not cash - It was an exchange of technology.

:hi:

[Romulox]

41. Umm, an "exchange of technology" between WHOM precisely?

Chrysler, Fiat, and, uh...Fiat-Chrysler? Your spin is more embarrassing than the truth at some point. :hi:

[FarCenter]

18. Old Carco LLC doe not involve Fiat

Old Carco was spun off of Chrysler to hold the assets that were not viable. The new Chrysler contains only those parts that were considered to be of value following a rescue.

I think that this TARP money is part of the bridge loan that the Treasury made while it was dithering around deciding what to do with Chrysler and to see whether a buyer for all or part of the company could be found.

[Romulox]

22. "It doesn't involve" Fiat, becuase Obama gave Fiat Chryslers ASSETS

and the taxpayer ate the debt.

But to argue that the two aren't logically connected is ridicuous. :hi:

"The new Chrysler contains only those parts that were considered to be of value following a rescue."

Did you read the post you responded to before typing out this message? What part of what I wrote are you attempting to disagree with? :wtf:

[Purveyor]

10. Said early on the Chrysler bailout was a mistake. eom

[comtec]

12. WOO AMURIKAN CARS!!! USA USA USA

where are the US-automaker defenders?
they are awfully silent on this.

I'm all for saving American jobs... but that doesn't always mean an American car company.

[blue_onyx]

19. Silent in the same way...

all the recent negative Toyota news has been ignored by Toyota lovers?

Letting Chrysler go under would've been just as expensive, if not more expensive. Assisting GM and Chrysler was the correct move by the Obama administration.

[FarCenter]

20. Chrysler should have failed

It was the combination of every unsuccessful car company in the US. From American Motors to Willys-Overland.

[Romulox]

25. It's so silly to talk about the "free market" as if the Fed. gov't isn't picking the winners

and losers.

[blue_onyx]

32. Yes!

People who complain that the gov bailed out the US automakers ignore the fact that foreign companies often get "tax incentives" (a gov. handout by another name). The idea that the government is passive in our economy is absurd.

Some won't be happy until GM and Chrysler are gone, even if it's to their detriment.

[Romulox]

23. If your post weren't so incoherent, you'd likely get more responses...

:hi:

[comtec]

27. It's as coherant as the usa or die posts i see

so point made.

My main point is that this topic doesn't seem to have any of the us car-maker defenders coming out at all.

For another response, i have in fact criticized Toyota. I find their lack of a honest answer to all this unforgivable and the damage they will receive is completely earned.

[Romulox]

28. Ah...your incoherence makes sense because *somebody* at *some other time* was incoherent

You're not making this much better. :silly:

"My main point is that this topic doesn't seem to have any of the us car-maker defenders coming out at all."

That's because you've misunderstood the players here. This is for the 'bots to defend--this being the inevitable result of the Obama admin's "auto taskforce's" mishandling of this mess.

What exactly do you think the so-called "us car-maker defenders" have to defend here? This is yet another sweetheart deal for a foreign corporation, and it reeks of Timmy Geithner. :hi:

[blue_onyx]

33. Toyota's "lack of a honest answer"...

is the only problem you see? You don't have a problem with their quality issues? I would think Toyota recalling millions of vehicles would do quite a bit of damage too.

[high density]

31. Old Carco is rotting, plus new Chrysler is not going to be up and running for years

Many dates in Chrysler's plan are out in 2012. They are going to continue sucking for the next few years and I will be absolutely amazed if they survive it without even more handouts.

[TexasObserver]

14. No way. They should be zero stockholders equity if they don't repay TARP.

Recommend reading.

[Xicano]

15. No Problem. Now WE own Chrysler and I want my dividends.

eom

[Romulox]

24. Oh, tell it to Citi (and its BRAND NEW $38 B tax break), Mr. "fiscal conservative"

:eyes:

[high density]

30. No it seems we mostly own the corpse named Old Carco

The US government's holding in the "new" Chrysler is only 10%. Fiat took all the "good" stuff and left the crap they didn't want in Old Carco for us to pay for. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aBhumEPf5wbM

[Romulox]

34. Small correction: Fiat didn't "take" anything--the Obama admin. made a gift of Chrysler's assets

to Fiat.

As far as I know, Obama has never explained why he gave the assets of a US company to an Italian company while the US taxpayer retained the debt. It's apparent that a large portion of what Fiat wanted out of the deal with a dealership network for its Italian-made cars.

It's hard to believe that Tim Geithner didn't understand and anticipate this...

[superconnected]

26. Something tells me a large portion of that money went to bonus' for execs

and this is their way of not paying it back.

[coyote]

29. Can someone tell me how to get one of the TARP loans?

I know I am one of the little people. However, 3.7 billion loan and not have to pay it back? Certainly, they must be able to spare me a couple of thousand, no?

[Romulox]

35. Do you represent a Saudi sovereign wealth fund or a European HQed mutlinational corp?

No? Then we're going to have a problem.

[Blue_Tires]

37. wasn't that $$$$ used to help the FIAT merger go through??

[Romulox]

42. Nope. nt

[mbperrin]

38. Big deal. Citi got off the hook today for THIRTY EIGHT BILLION

dollars in taxes. This Chrysler deal is 10% of that, literally pennies on the dollar.

[dysfunctional press]

39. i wonder how many repug congressman THAT will get elected in 2010?

just. fucking. brilliant.

[Zhade]

43. "THANK GOD IT PASSED!"

Boy, what a dumbass that guy is.

[Blue_Tires]

45. Chrysler is still way behind the R+D curve...There better be some

kickass buzz-worthy products in the near-pipeline or it is over for them...

product is still king

[Romulox]

47. Chrysler is done. Fiat acquired a US dealership network, possibly a truck line.

Chrysler has no future.

[blue_onyx]

48. That's pretty much it

Jeep will probably be the only brand that remains recognizable. Chrysler and Dodge will just start selling Fiat.

I don't like the Fiat products anymore than I like the current Chrysler products. I just hope they produce the Fiat vehicles that they'll soon be selling as Chrysler in the US.

[Blue_Tires]

49. maybe sooner than we think:

Chrysler announces $179 million investment in Dundee plant to build Fiat Multiair engines

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/17/chrysler-announces-179-million-investment-in-dundee-plant-to-bu/