Actual finance blog

If Mitt Romney is elected president, he will have to make some tough choices about what to do with his personal fortune.

In order to avoid conflicts of interest and satisfy ethics watchdogs, soon-to-be presidents often sell assets or relinquish control of their investments to a trustee.

Romney, who has spent the better part of a month answering questions about his massive investment portfolio, would be one of the wealthiest presidents in history.

The former Massachusetts governor has a few options.

He could put his investments in a government-approved blind trust, convert some or all of his assets to cash, or possibly take advantage of an obscure tax break for executive branch officials.

Blind trust: Romney is no stranger to the concept of blind trusts.

After becoming governor of Massachusetts, Romney created a trust managed by Boston lawyer Bradford Malt. That’s where most of his assets, estimated to be between $85 and $264 million, are today.

But between federally required disclosure forms and the tax returns released by his campaign, the contents of Romney’s trust are easily accessible and have been widely scrutinized by the media.

It’s now far from blind.

As president, Romney would likely have to dissolve his current trust and create a new one. And this one, approved by the Office of Government Ethics, would require a truly independent trustee.

"Federal ethics guidelines for blind trusts are extremely strict," said Robert Kelner, a partner at Covington & Burling who has advised candidates and appointees on ethics. "Typically they are much stricter than what you find at the state level."

Rich, Gingrich and crazy rich

If Romney establishes a new trust, his communication with the trustee would be extremely limited, and he would not be informed of changes to his portfolio.

"He might learn the overall performance of his portfolio," Kelner said. "But he would not know anything about its particular holdings."

It’s a popular tactic.

Bill Clinton, both Bushes and Ronald Reagan put their money into a blind trust.

President George W. Bush told CNN at the end of his second term that he had "no earthly idea" what had become of his assets.

"I met the trustees eight years ago and I haven’t talked to them since," Bush said.

Unlike his immediate predecessors, Barack Obama does not have a government-approved blind trust.

Most of his assets are invested in U.S. Treasury bonds and bills, mutual funds and education savings plans for his children — hardly the kind of assets that present conflicts of interest.

Establishing blind trusts is not just popular with presidents. Other wealthy executive branch appointees have followed suit — sometimes with a little unease. Hank Paulson, who left the top job at Goldman Sachs to become Treasury Secretary, was one of them.

"Have you heard the joke, how do you make a small fortune?" Paulson quipped in 2009. "Give a large fortune to someone in a blind trust."

For Romney, who made his money by making savvy investments, relinquishing control might be particularly difficult.

"You’re turning your assets over to someone who is essentially a stranger," said Kenneth Gross, a partner at Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom. "I think some people would not be entirely happy with that situation."

The Romney campaign would not elaborate on the candidate’s plans for his wealth, but said in a statement that his "assets will be arranged in a manner that comports with all rules" should he become president.

Move to cash: Perhaps the simplest option would be for Romney to liquidate his holdings.

The Clintons converted their assets to cash in June 2007 as Hillary’s campaign for president entered its final stretch, according to the New York Times.

The family’s holdings had been in a blind trust, but — like Romney — those assets were disclosed in campaign filings required by the Federal Election Commission.

Instead of creating a new blind trust, the Clintons chose to liquidate.

Romney made $42.7 million in 2 years

There is a substantial downside to taking this route. The Clinton’s likely owed huge sums of money in capital gains.

A fire sale of Romney’s assets would likely create a similar tax burden.

It’s also possible Romney could choose to divest — or sell — a targeted group of assets that are likely to cause conflicts.

But that would be difficult considering the breadth of decisions the president makes, and the vast diversification of Romney’s holdings.

"Practically everything the president does could affect individual companies," Kelner said. "Romney might find that difficult to do."

A tax benefit? Members of the executive branch who have to sell specific assets to avoid conflicts of interest are sometimes granted what is called a "certificate of divestiture" by the Office of Government Ethics.

Obtaining the certificate allows appointees to divest while deferring the payment of capital gains, provided they invest the proceeds in an approved asset like a diversified mutual fund or government bond.

The provision is designed to incentivize wealthy individuals to accept posts in the executive branch without forcing them to take a tax hit.

A president has never applied for the tax break, but law experts consulted by CNNMoney said it is conceivable the Office of Government Ethics would grant one to a president with a portfolio like Romney’s.

"It would be unprecedented," Gross said. "But I don’t know why a president wouldn’t be entitled to the same deferral of tax if he felt there was a conflict."

The tax benefit for Romney would be huge.

"Oh my god," said Robert Willens, a tax expert and professor at Columbia Business School. "He’d be right in the sweet spot. This would save him millions or tens of millions." 

Source

cheap payday loans are easy to qualify for with no credit checks and no hassles. Get approved for your payday loan instantly!

On the day the Deepwater Horizon sank, BP officials warned in an internal memo that if the well was not protected by the blow-out preventer at the drill site, crude oil could burst into the Gulf of Mexico at a rate of 3.4 million gallons a day, an amount a million gallons higher than what the government later believed spilled daily from the site.

The email conversation, which BP agreed to release Friday as part of federal court proceedings, suggests BP managers recognized the potential of the disaster in its early hours, and company officials sought to make sure that the model-developed information wasn’t shared with outsiders. The emails also suggest BP was having heated discussions with Coast Guard officials over the potential of the oil spill.

The memo was released as part of the court proceedings to determine the division of responsibility for the nation’s worst offshore oil disaster, which began when the BP-leased Deepwater Horizon exploded April 20, 2010, killing 11 men about 50 miles southeast of the Louisiana coast. The first phase of the trial is set to start Feb. 27.

BP officials declined to comment on the emails late Friday.

The official amount of oil that flowed from the well was pegged at 206 million gallons from at least April 22 until the well was capped on July 15, a period of 85 days. That’s a daily flow rate of about 2.4 million gallons _ two-thirds of the way to BP’s projection of what could leak from the well if it was an “open hole.” BP has disputed the government’s estimates.

Having an accurate flow rate estimate is needed to determine how much in civil and criminal penalties BP and the other companies drilling the well face under the Clean Water Act.

In the memo, a BP official urges not to share the flow-rate projections and refers to the “difficult discussions” the company was having at the time with the Coast Guard guaranteed personal loan approval.

Gary Imm, a BP manager, told Rob Marshall, BP’s subsea manager in the Gulf, to tell the modeler doing the estimates “not to communicate to anyone on this.”

“A number of people have been looking at this we already have had difficult discussions with the USCG on the numbers,” Imm said in the email string, referring to the Coast Guard and flow estimates.

On April 23, 2010, the Coast Guard, relying on BP’s remotely operated vehicles, said no oil was leaking from the well a mile under the sea. A day later, Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry announced that oil was leaking an estimated rate of 42,000 gallons a day. The Coast Guard and BP did not divulge how they reached that figure.

In the second week after the spill, the official flow rate was increased to 210,000 gallons a day, an estimate the government continued to use until May 27.

On May 24, BP informed Congress they used an “undisclosed method to generate much higher figures” than the official estimates, according to a report from a presidential commission investigating the spill. BP estimated that the flow rates were between 210,000 gallons and 1.6 million gallons a day, the January 2011 report said.

As the spill grew into weeks and months, and soiled fishing grounds, beaches and coastal marshes, independent scientists questioned the official flow rates. Eventually, the federal government convened teams of government and independent scientists to determine how much oil leaked out of the well. They came up with an official estimate of about 2.4 million gallons of oil a day on average.

Source

Absolutely free credit score is very easy to access over the internet. There is really no excuse for not knowing what is on your credit report.

The U.S. economy is growing at 2-3 percent but still faces big challenges to repair damage wrought by the financial crisis, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on Friday.

“I think if you look at the Fed’s forecast and the consensus of private forecasters, people are pretty clustered in that area but it is still dependent how the world unfolds. We’re still repairing the damage done by the financial crisis,” Geithner told the World Economic Forum.

“On top of that we face a more challenging world. We have a lot of challenges ahead in the United States.”

Read more

Johnson & Johnson said Tuesday that fourth-quarter profit was barely a tenth what it made a year ago as a slew of charges for recalls, litigation and an acquisition dragged down income. But the health care giant’s revenue jumped last year, ending an unprecedented two-year decline.

After two tough years overshadowed by an embarrassing series of product recalls and other problems, the maker of Tylenol, prescription drugs and medical devices managed to beat Wall Street’s forecast for adjusted profit and came in just below its revenue forecast.

The company said net income was $218 million, or 8 cents per share, down from $1.94 billion, or 70 cents a share, a year earlier.

Excluding charges, net income was $3.13 billion, or $1.13 per share.

Revenue totaled $16.26 billion, up from $15.64 billion in 2010’s fourth quarter.

Analysts polled by FactSet, on average, expected earnings per share of $1.09 and revenue of $16.28 billion.

“We delivered solid results for 2011, built on the strong growth of our recently launched pharmaceutical products, and continued the steady momentum of new product approvals across all our businesses,” CEO Bill Weldon said in a statement.

Revenue fell 3.4 percent in the U.S., to $6.99 billion, but jumped 10.2 percent in foreign countries, to $9.27 billion. The U.S. decline was mostly due to an 8 percent drop in sales of prescription drugs.

J&J said it expects 2012 earnings of $5.05 to $5.15 per share, excluding special items. Analysts had expected $5.20 per share.

In morning trading, shares of the company rose 23 cents to $65.23.

Source

Consumers are demanding better service in unprecedented ways.

In the past several months, public outrage has helped beat back efforts by Bank of America, Netflix and Verizon to raise fees or significantly alter services. The victories come at a time when money is tight all around and consumers are tapping into social media to air their frustrations with like-minded individuals.

“In the past people would be angry, but they’d be all over the country talking to their neighbors,” said Kit Yarrow a professor of consumer psychology at Golden Gate University. “Now they can connect online and they have power.”

For example, petitions on Change.org were instrumental in convincing Bank of America and Verizon to drop plans for new fees. “Bank Transfer Day,” which sprang to life after Bank of America’s announcement, called on Facebook supporters to move their money to a credit union or community bank.

Not every issue demands a mass call to action. But consumers basking in their newfound sense of empowerment should keep their expectations high going into 2012. Here are some strategies for making sure you get the service you deserve.

_____

Work the chain of command

Before you switch into outrage mode, give a company a fair chance to right any wrongs. It may be that the issue can be easily resolved with a simple email or phone call to customer service.

But if the customary means aren’t helpful, one strategy is to reach out to the company CEO or another high-ranking officer. Most major companies have “executive resolution teams” that field correspondence from customers who take their complaints to the top, says Edgar Dworsky, founder of ConsumerWorld.org, which features news and tips on deals. And these teams generally have a lot more leeway to appease customers.

To get your message in the right hands, start by searching under the “About” section on the company’s website. Even if executive contact information isn’t listed, you can usually figure out their email addresses based on the contact information listed for other employees. Otherwise, try mailing a letter to the corporate headquarters.

“Really boil it down,” Dworsky said. “If it goes on and on, they’re not going to have the time or patience to read it. Put yourself in the shoes of the recipient of the letter.”

Make it easy for the company by quickly spelling out the resolution that you’re seeking. And don’t forget to include any relevant information, such as order numbers or purchase dates.

Reach out and tweet

You don’t have to be Alec Baldwin to have your complaints heard on Twitter.

Most major companies have a social media presence by now. And since they don’t want negative mentions turning up in search results, any reasonable question or complaint is likely to get a response.

Even if you don’t hear back from anyone, it’s likely that companies are taking note of any comments about them.

At JetBlue, for example, a few customers recently tweeted about a crowded gate that only had one agent. That triggered the airline’s social media team to contact staff at the airport to find out if any additional agents were available to help out, said Morgan Johnston, JetBlue’s social media strategist.

But he noted that Twitter is more commonly used to request time-sensitive information that can be conveyed in 140 characters _ such as connecting flight or gate numbers. The company monitors its Twitter account around the clock and tries to respond within a few minutes.

“It’s more of an information booth than a traditional customer service channel,” Johnston said.

Twitter isn’t only for basic information requests, however. Citibank also monitors the site and tries to respond to any questions within an hour, said Frank Eliason, who heads the bank’s social media strategy. If customers need to share personal account information, they’re sent a link to a private page on the bank’s website where they can continue the exchange in the same Twitter-like format.

Call for backup

If you’re not getting anywhere and feel your complaints are being brushed off, it can help to get a third-party involved.

If you paid with your credit card, you can always file a claim to have a charge removed from your account. Keep in mind that you need a concrete reason _ such as a product defect or missed delivery _ to make such claims. Your card issuer isn’t going to investigate a dispute just because you were unhappy with a rude waiter.

Another option is to file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau at www.bbb.org/complaint. The local BBB office will contact the company within two days and ask for a response to the complaint on your behalf. The vast majority of complaints are resolved this way, said spokeswoman Katherine Hutt. That’s because businesses know their ratings are affected by whether they respond to complaints.

For more serious situations where you suspect fraud or feel your rights were violated, consider filing a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission or your state attorney general’s office. You likely won’t get a speedy resolution but at least those agencies will be on notice in case other customers are reporting similar abuses.

Stay connected online

In rare situations, you may feel a company policy calls for a broader action. In the case of Bank of America and Verizon, online petitions were key in quantifying the public’s widespread distaste for new fees.

“It’s an incredibly efficient means of customer feedback that’s not controlled by the company,” said Ben Rattray, founder of the Change.org, which hosted the petitions against both companies. “It’s customer feedback that’s controlled by customers.”

Your issues don’t necessarily have to be with a big national company either. Change.org plans to roll out localized versions so users can voice concerns about businesses in their communities.

Source

Dropped calls and spotty service, particularly for iPhone owners, made AT&T the most hated wireless carrier in America. Here’s the surprise twist: widespread, under-the-radar improvements to the company’s network have quietly helped AT&T move past its infamous struggles.

The nation’s second-largest wireless carrier says it spent roughly $20 billion last year making 48,000 network enhancements across the country. That spending spree bought a 25% improvement in dropped-call performance on AT&T’s 3G network, plus added capacity and faster speeds.

In the process, the company turned on two new networks. Though both were confusingly labeled "4G," they each offer significant improvements over AT&T’s (, Fortune 500) existing 3G network: one new network has speeds of up to four times faster than 3G, and the other brings a ten-fold improvement in speed.

Yet consumers have been slow to change their opinion of AT&T.

"Satisfaction with our network performance has gone into a neutral state," said John Stankey, CEO of AT&T Wireless, at a telecommunications conference held in San Francisco by Citigroup (, Fortune 500) last week. "Our goal is to go from neutral to positive. We’ve made a lot of progress, but I don’t want to suggest we’re done."

A recent survey conducted by Consumer Reports ranked AT&T the worst carrier in America in terms of customer satisfaction. AT&T received the lowest possible rating on value and voice quality, and the second-lowest possible rating on data service.

That’s not particularly surprising. AT&T’s network woes have been very high-profile thanks to its four-year iPhone exclusivity deal with Apple (, Fortune 500). The wireless giant’s struggles were blasted and mocked everywhere from the mainstream news media to late-night comedy shows.

AT&T’s reputation wasn’t helped by dismal satisfaction with the company’s customer service, according to the Consumer Reports survey. AT&T also took a PR hit during its wildly unpopular T-Mobile takeover attempt.

Still, the mediocre perception of AT&T’s network quality lags behind the much-improved reality, according to wireless industry experts.

Frost & Sullivan, an influential telecommunications industry analysis firm, awarded AT&T its 2011 strategy award for the North American mobile network market, praising the company for its dual-network improvement strategy.

AT&T is gradually rolling out its ultra-fast 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE) network, which will be the mobile network standard of the future guaranteed fast personal loans. AT&T’s LTE network now covers 74 million Americans, which is about a quarter of the company’s 3G network coverage.

At the same time, AT&T is upgrading its 3G network — which operates on the older High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) standard — to what it calls "4G" HSPA+. The upgraded network is now available to more than 285 million Americans, AT&T Wireless CEO Stankey said last week.

Archrival Verizon (, Fortune 500), by contrast, quickly rolled out its LTE network to cover 200 million Americans by the end of last year. But Verizon’s 3G network is based on the Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) standard, which is essentially maxed out in terms of speed. Sprint’s (, Fortune 500) 3G CDMA network also can’t be upgraded significantly.

That’s potentially a huge advantage for AT&T, since it will take several years for LTE networks to reach the vast majority of Americans the way that 3G networks do today.

"As 4G LTE networks are rolled out nationwide, AT&T’s wireless network strategy will undoubtedly benefit its customers, who will have access to faster speeds, even when outside an LTE coverage area," said Peter Finalle, analyst at Frost & Sullivan.

What’s more, Verizon’s recent 4G struggles give AT&T an opportunity to flaunt its own rival strategy.

Though Verizon has been praised for rolling out its LTE network before any other wireless company even got started, its deployment speed was more out of necessity. It lacked the 3G upgrade option that AT&T has. Verizon is paying for that strategy now, suffering outage after outage: Verizon’s 4G network totaled five nationwide outages in 2011 and four in December alone.

Will customers notice? They haven’t yet. The alphabet soup — 4G, LTE, HSPA and so on — is confusing to most.

"AT&T advertises HSPA+ as ‘4G,’ so the average consumer will likely not think of the carrier as not being current with latest technology," said Ari Zoldan, CEO of Quantum Networks, a next-generation network supplier. "Having HSPA+ in areas outside of LTE markets is very smart and serves a niche for the carrier, and it’s still to be determined whether customers will put enough value on ‘true’ 4G."

AT&T’s network is getting better, and it’s better positioned for the long haul than any of its rivals. Now it just has to wait for perception to catch up to that reality. 

Source

Italy’s borrowing costs fell for a second day Thursday but the country’s new premier said his government has more to do before it convinces financial markets it can manage the heavy debts that have made it the focus of the eurozone crisis.

Mario Monti said he was encouraged by bond auctions at which interest costs demanded by bond investors eased. He said his government of technocrats, in office for just a month and a half following the resignation of Silvio Berlusconi, was preparing a package of measures to get the Italian economy moving again, including efforts to boost competition and liberalize the labor market.

“We absolutely don’t consider the market turbulence to be over,” he said at a news conference after the Italian treasury tapped investors for around euro7 billion ($9.2 billion).

The most keenly awaited result from Thursday’s batch of auctions was the euro2.5 billion ($3.3 billion) sale of ten-year bonds at an average yield of 6.98 percent.

That’s lower than the record 7.56 percent it had to pay at an equivalent auction last month, when investor concerns over the ability of the country to service its massive debts became particularly acute.

However, the country’s borrowing rate on the key 10-year bond remains uncomfortably close to the 7 percent level widely considered to be unsustainable in the long run. Greece, Ireland and Portugal all had to request financial bailouts after their 10-year bond yields pushed above 7 percent. In the secondary markets, Italy’s yield continues to hover around the 7 percent mark.

The 17 countries that use the euro are struggling with a crisis over heavy levels of government debt in several countries. Fears of default on those debts mean that bond investors demand ever higher interest. If a country can no longer borrow affordably to pay off bonds that are maturing, it winds up needing a bailout or defaulting.

Markets had grown fearful over the past few months over Italy’s massive debt burden of euro1.9 trillion ($2.5 trillion). Next year alone, the eurozone’s third largest economy has some euro330 billion ($431 bill.

That means Italy has far to go before it convinces markets it will avoid a disastrous default that could cause another banking crisis and sink the European and global economies.

Italy also sold euro2.54 billion ($3.3 billion) of 3 year bonds at an average interest rate of 5.62 percent, far lower than the 7.89 percent rate it had to pay last month. It also raised euro803 million ($1.05 billion) in the 7-year auction at a rate of 7.42 percent and euro1.18 billion ($1.54 billion) in nine-year bonds at a yield of 6.7 percent.

Thursday’s results come a day after Italy raised euro10.7 billion ($14 billion) in a pair of auctions, again at sharply lower rates than those it was forced to pay just a month ago.

The sharp decline in Italy’s borrowing costs over the past couple of days suggests that commercial banks from the 17 countries that use the euro may have diverted some money they tapped from emergency loans from the European Central Bank last week to buy the bonds of heavily indebted governments.

It may also suggest rising investor confidence in Italy’s recent efforts to reduce its long-term debt through tax increases, pension changes and spending cuts.

Monti’s technocratic government got parliamentary approval last week for more spending cuts and tax increases intended to save the country from financial disaster. One of the most controversial aspects of the austerity package is reform of Italy’s bloated pension system.

Economists say the long term problem is the country’s weak growth, since stronger growth both increases tax revenues and shrinks the size of debt relative to the economy. European Central Bank head Mario Draghi has said Italy must undertake deeper economic reforms to improve its economic performance.

Source

President Barack Obama will nominate Harvard economist Jeremy Stein and Jerome Powell, an investment banker and former Treasury official, to the two empty seats on the Federal Reserve’s policy-setting board of governors.

The White House’s pick of candidates, who have Democratic and Republican credentials respectively, may help speed their nomination through Congress amid a sluggish economic recovery that has failed to put a major dent in the unemployment rate, now at 8.6 percent.

While neither has laid out detailed views on monetary policy, Stein wrote a paper earlier this year suggesting he would back the Fed’s unconventional efforts to keep down long-term borrowing costs, which have been controversial in Washington. The Fed for over three years has adopted an array of radical measures to keep interest rates low and spur recovery.

Stein, who previously worked for the Obama administration as an adviser to the Treasury secretary and a National Economic Council staff member, specializes in stock price behavior, corporate investment and financing decisions, risk management and capital allocation inside firms. He declined to comment on his nomination.

The choice of Powell, who served at the Treasury during President George H. W. Bush’s term in the late 1980s and early 1990s, could be aimed at mollifying Senate Republicans. They blocked Peter Diamond, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist, saying the Nobel prize winner was not qualified for the job and was too sympathetic to government intervention in the economy.

Powell is a lawyer by training and worked at Dillon, Read and Bankers Trust Co. after leaving the senior Bush administration and before joining Carlyle Group. His knowledge of financial markets could help him fill the gap left by Kevin Warsh, a former Morgan Stanley executive who acted as Chairman Ben Bernanke’s point-man for crisis negotiations cash advance america.

FULL BOARD

However, Powell’s financial industry background may also be a source of criticism from analysts who already see the U.S. central bank as being too cozy with Wall Street.

Powell is currently a visiting scholar at the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington, focused on federal and state fiscal issues. He was not immediately available to comment. Both Stein and Powell had already been flagged in various press reports as likely nominees.

In response to a deep recession and financial crisis, the Fed slashed interest rates to near zero and sharply expanded its balance sheet to $2.8 trillion to keep the economy afloat. Some analysts worry the Fed’s asset purchases could make it harder for the central bank to tighten monetary policy when it decides the time is right.

If Powell and Stein are confirmed, it would be the first time since April 2006 that all seven seats on the Fed’s board are filled. The term currently filled by Elizabeth Duke, the last remaining George W. Bush appointee on the board, is to expire at the end of January, though governors can choose to stay in office until a successor is confirmed.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson, a Democrat, welcomed the most recent nominations.

“With the fragile state of the U.S. economy and a looming European debt crisis, Chairman Johnson believes it is imperative that our financial regulators operate at full strength,” his office said in a statement. “Chairman Johnson is committed to moving these nominations though the Banking Committee in a timely manner and is looking to schedule a hearing soon.”

Read more

Source

Asian stocks fell Wednesday after the U.S. government revised its economic growth estimate downward and climbing yields on Spanish bonds magnified worries over Europe’s debt load.

Hong Kong’s Hang Seng index fell 1.7 percent to 17,941.62. South Korea’s Kospi lost 1.7 percent to 1,795.81 and Australia’s S&P ASX 200 index lost 1.2 percent to 4,082.40.

Japanese stock markets were closed for a public holiday.

Stocks on Wall Street slipped Tuesday after a government report showed the U.S. economy grew at a 2 percent annual rate from July through September, down from an initial estimate of 2.5 percent. Economists had expected the figure to remain the same.

The Dow Jones industrial average lost 0.5 percent to close at 11,493.72. The Standard & Poor’s 500 fell 0.4 percent to 1,188.04. The Nasdaq composite fell 0.1 percent to 2,521.28.

Higher borrowing costs for Spain, meanwhile, renewed worries about Europe’s debt crisis. The higher rates suggest that investors are still skeptical that the country will get its budget under control despite a new government coming to power this week.

Investors have been worried that Spain could become the next country to need financial support from its European neighbors if its borrowing rates climb to unsustainable levels.

Greece was forced to seek relief from its lenders after its long-term borrowing rates rose above 7 percent on the bond market. The rate on Spain’s own benchmark 10-year bond is dangerously close to that level, 6.58 percent.

But fears of the debt crisis spreading elsewhere in Europe were allayed somewhat after the International Monetary Fund announced a plan to provide quick cash on flexible terms to countries facing sudden financial stress.

Concerns remain that Europe’s debt crisis is pushing the region toward recession, which would slow industrial activity in Europe and in countries around the world that export to Europe.

Benchmark oil for January delivery fell 65 cents to $97.36 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract rose $1.09 to finish at $98.01 per barrel on the Nymex on Tuesday.

In currency trading, the euro fell to $1.3466 from $1.3509 late Tuesday in New York. The dollar rose slightly to 76.99 yen from 76.97 yen.

Source