THE HILL
 

General Motors promises to repay federal loans early despite large losses

By Michael O’Brien - 11/16/09 08:03 PM ET

The company said it would begin paying back $6.7 billion in debt to the government in billion-dollar quarterly installments, starting in December. The pace would allow the carmaker to finish repaying its loans four years earlier than expected.

GM borrowed nearly $50 billion from the federal government over the past year. Of that, $6.7 billion remains on the restructured company’s balance sheet in the form of loans; the rest was converted to stock held by the Treasury Department.


 Republicans seized on GM’s quarterly losses to criticize President Barack Obama for his handling of the economy and his administration for the way it has structured bailouts and bankruptcies for troubled companies.

 “Today’s release of General Motors’ financial results is further proof that President Obama’s economic experiments are wrong for America,” Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said in a statement. “Sadly, GM has not only failed to turn a profit since the president poured $50 billion of the taxpayers’ dollars into GM’s bankruptcy restructuring, but it has actually lost $1.2 billion.”

 Democrats emphasized the positive elements of the GM announcement and accused Republicans of wanting the company and the nation to fail.

 “Republicans will politicize anything — even good news — and have no problem cheering against America,” said Brad Woodhouse, communications director for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), in an e-mail to reporters.

 “This morning, GM announced that they are making progress in turning an iconic and vital American company around — and that they would repay government loans four years early — something even the most cynical of the president’s political opponents could cheer — unless you’re Michael Steele and the Republican Party,” he added.

 GM’s own top official steered clear of politics, however, emphasizing only that his company expects to have to do more to turn its fortunes around.

 “We have significantly more work to do, but today’s results provide evidence of the solid foundation we’re building for the new GM,” CEO Fritz Henderson said in a statement. “With a healthier balance sheet and a competitive cost structure, our focus is on driving top line performance.”

 GM emerged from bankruptcy and restructuring in July and posted a loss of $1.15 billion between July 10 and Sept. 30, when the quarter ended.

 The company boasted an improved cash flow and improved year-over-year sales.

 Despite the heightened pace of its repayments of loans, the government maintains a 61 percent stake in the company, an issue that could hang over the Obama administration’s and lawmakers’ heads until the middle of 2010, the earliest point at which the new GM is expected to make an initial public offering.

 In a related development, Alvaro de Molina resigned Monday as chief executive of GMAC FinancialServices, GM’s financial arm, at the request of its board of directors, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.

Adding to the political dimension of the bailouts are Chrysler’s outstanding debts to the U.S., for which there is no clear timetable as of yet for repayment.

 Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who opposed the bailouts for the automakers, suggested this past weekend that he doesn’t expect Chrysler, which partnered with Italian automaker Fiat during its government-backed restructuring, to survive.

“It was all about the unions,” McCain said during remarks in Phoenix, where he served Sunday as the grand marshal of a NASCAR race.

“The unions didn’t want to have their very generous contracts renegotiated, so we put $80 billion into both General Motors and Chrysler, and anybody [who] believes that Chrysler is going to survive, I’d like to meet them,” the Arizona senator added, as reported by The Detroit News.

 Steele on Monday seized on the unpopularity of the auto bailouts, which polled poorly at the time of their installation, to blast other aspects of the Democratic agenda, including the push to overhaul healthcare with a government-run insurance program.

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/68027-general-motors-vows-to-repay-loans-early-despite-large-losses

Comments (11)

Someone call Michael Skilling and chanel Ken Lay. This is the type of book keeping Enron practiced. Take over $50 billion in loans but only book $6.7 billion as a loan and show the rest as stock. This is beyond pathetic. America got shafted so that Obama could pay off the unions.BY Brian Goettl on 11/16/2009 at 23:02
No one is going to buy Government Motors vehicles. No one wants Government Health either. The free market does it best when it isn't over regulated by government and twisted by unions. My Ford stock is through the roof. I got it when it was $1.98.BY Pete on 11/17/2009 at 05:00
Let me get this straight. GM lost over $1 billion last quarter and that was with the "Cash for Clunkers" program in effect which purportedly boosted their sales. Now they lost over $1 billion but in December they are planning on paying back $1 billion of the "loan" provided by Obama?Now I'm no economist nor am I a financial genius, but this makes no sense. What are they going to do? Borrow more Federal funds to make this payment? Where, exactly is the money going to come from, their non-existent "profits?" Cash flow and profits are two entirely different animals. You can improve your cash flow, but all that means is you have money coming in (not necessarily profits) and you are sending it right back out to pay bills. Eventually this "innovative" strategy catches up with you especially when your debts far exceed your income. If I'm wrong, perhaps someone out there can explain this. Please keep it simple, I'm blonde.Get ready for Obama to bail these jokers out again.BY 2Confused on 11/17/2009 at 09:02
It can now be hoped that this will all be clear to everyone. Obama, via his surrogates, is in charge of Government Motors. GM is losing money. They are not turning a profit. No worries. They will start to repay a the amount technically owed even while operating in the red. A feat only "The Government" is worthy of.This is the face of Government. This is Obama. The manchild who never in his pathetic life ran anything. He does not understand free enterprise. Never in his life did he ever have to sweat making a payroll. He is a child playing at tyrant. An aspiring Marxist dictator.Politics is at the heart of this charade. This is an attempt to clear the decks of one very distasteful and much loathed, by the unwashed masses, abuse of power by our tin pot dictator. Look for more such public relations bandaids coming up as elections draw closer.BY Casual Observer on 11/17/2009 at 09:33
Nag nag nag. Everywhere you go, it's jobs jobs jobs and why the government isn't doing anything. Here they saved some iconic truely american companies (and in the process saved (not created :) thousands of jobs). And what happens? Nag nag nag.It's so easy to talk trash, republicans proof that time and time again.BY politics4me on 11/17/2009 at 10:50
I for one, will not buy a GM product while the government owns it. The bailout is to save the unions a**. This piece of crap called government healthcare is the same. The middle class taxpayer is going to get killed. I will admit one thing, they sure have saved GM at a billion dollars per quarter cost to the taxpayer.BY PL on 11/17/2009 at 11:08
I'm with Pete. Bought Ford stock and will continue to do so when possible. Wouldn't touch GM or Chrysler. It's a pity that people are so naive or intellectually lazy that they don't recognize this news for the numbers game it is.BY glennis on 11/17/2009 at 11:43
Oh Golly Pete—- this is like a scene from Memento. You're SERIOUSLY pushing the crap that the market works best with absolute de-regulation? What—- feeling sorry that we only got the BRINK of total worldwide economic meltdown—- you wanna go vaulting over the side on a pogo stick?BY Honest Abe on 11/17/2009 at 12:39
Come on, Honest Abe; Pete didn't call for complete de-regulation. What he actually said was "over regulation". We have gone so far beyond anything reasonable, not to mention comprehensible, that I sometimes think we'd be off better starting all over. With better written and less vague and convuluted laws, we'd have a better shot at reasonable regulation. But then, every two bit legislator wouldn't be able to tack on all sorts of nonsense and looipholes that cause agencies to resort to overkill in writing regulations that cover all the bases. And add in those agency heads who think they simply must insert their personal agendas, relevant or not. If you don't believe that our current regulatory maze adds bllions to the cost of doing business in this country, you're naive at best. Government has run amok!BY Glennis on 11/17/2009 at 13:02
Please refer to GM by the correct name, "Govmint Motors". just like Govmint skools.BY Howard on 11/17/2009 at 13:02

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.