The Wall Street Journal released a report today, which indicated that the U.S. Treasury Department is unwilling to sell off its stake in General Motors, because to do so now would lead to a very large loss on the investment for the government.
GM proposed the buyback plan to the Treasury Department, earlier this year.

The Treasury currently holds a 26.5-percent stake in GM, or roughly 500 million shares. WSJ reported Friday that the government would stand to lose about $15 billion if it sold all of its GM stock for the roughly $24 the shares now command. Further, the share price would need to $53 before the Treasury would be able to break even on its investment in the automaker.

The newspaper did report that the Treasury might be willing to sell off its GM assets if the share price was in the $30-range.

Check out some more commentary about the situation from WSJ, in the video below.



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 59 Comments
      to your email L
      • 2 Years Ago
      I dunno what the whining is about jeez if you were an investor wanting to make some money wouldn't you do the same thing.....................I detect some hypocrisy here. Why should the government lose money on this??????
        Drakkon
        • 2 Years Ago
        @to your email L
        Because you force the government into making bad decisions, then turn around and talk about how government is a failure. Circular logic taken to a dangerous extreme.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      gop.hates.america
      • 2 Years Ago
      If you look at the big picture, $15 Billion is pocket change compared to much bigger government wastes. Here's some perspective for all the right wing whiners AFGHANISTAN WAR Cost: $4 Trillion (and counting) American lives lost: 2000 Return on Investment: None. When we eventually found and killed Bin Laden, all we needed were two choppers and a dozen navy seals. IRAQ WAR Cost: $3 Trillion + cost of supporting vets for rest of their lives American lives lost: 3000 Return on investment: None. WMDs never found BUSH TAX CUTS FOR "JOB CREATORS" Cost: $4 Trillion Return on investment: unemployment increased from 4% to 8% GM BAILOUT Cost: $0.015 Trillion Return on investment: 2 million jobs saved
        AngeloD
        • 2 Years Ago
        @gop.hates.america
        You forgot to mention Obama's $1.2 Trillion stimulus package back in 2008 that was going to fund "shovel ready" jobs and lower the unemployment rate below 6% by now. Of course, Obama's unemployment rate is now officially at 8.2% and rising. And really, since the U6 is a much better measure, Obama has actually given us 16% unemployment. Remember how Obama laughed when he admitted he lied about the "shovel ready" jobs just to get the stimulus package passed? Remember how Obama and Bernanke have spent about $2.6 Trillion on junk mortgage backed securities in order to bail out the big Obama campaign contributers at Goldman Sachs and J.P Morgan Banks? Obama...he's the best President that Wall Street money ever bought. Of course, none of this will register with you since its all about Republicans vs Democrats for people like you. Truth be dammed.
          4 String
          • 2 Years Ago
          @AngeloD
          AngeloD, the irony in your thoughtless blanket generalization is rich.
          AngeloD
          • 2 Years Ago
          @AngeloD
          You know, I almost ended my post with: "I eagerly await you response of "IT'S BUSH'S FAULT"". I halfway expected you to accuse me of being a racist for criticising Obama. That'll be your next retort I'm sure. Thanks for being such a predictable Liberal drone. It's always good for a laugh.
        gop.hates.america
        • 2 Years Ago
        @gop.hates.america
        This is why Rick Santorum said "smart people are never going to support us"
        cooker263
        • 2 Years Ago
        @gop.hates.america
        You're right about the foreign policy and dollar perspective... but you have to consider that there are real costs that you're ignoring for the bailout even outside of the book cost. The principle of the bailout mentality is pretty far-reaching.
        Drakkon
        • 2 Years Ago
        @gop.hates.america
        You forgot 'found bin Laden in the wrong country....' For Bush's sake, they should have captured him, taken back to Afghanistan and shot him there.
      RearDiff
      • 2 Years Ago
      I have no problem not buying a GM until those shares are sold. Signed, Car Buyer
        Fgergergrergr
        • 2 Years Ago
        @RearDiff
        Why do you want them to sell at a loss? My guess to tell Obama 'told you so'. Very smart and patriotic.
        Zoom
        • 2 Years Ago
        @RearDiff
        That's ok. You can take your money elsewhere. If you want a GM car, it's your loss for being intransigent.
          Weezle Eye
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Zoom
          I don't thinks RearDiff is missing out on much to be honest.
      Zoom
      • 2 Years Ago
      I have no problem holding on to the shares until the share price rises. Signed, Taxpayer
        visconti24
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        Exactly, Zoom: I have no problem waiting until GM itself or some other investor can sweeten the deal and buy all of part of the government held shares for a higher price. Above $50.00.
        Mike
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        who says GMs share price will ever recover to the price we the taxpaper were FORCED to buy it at?
          Zoom
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Mike
          And who's to say it won't ever recover? I'd rather wait. What do we have to lose? GM isn't going out of business now.
          RearDiff
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Mike
          AGREED!
          W. Gregory
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Mike
          Zoom, you misspelled the last word of your post...the correct spelling is "Yet"
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        [blocked]
        boardin85
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        The problem is it's hard to get the stock price up when everyone knows there is someone looking to dump 26% of the company's stock
          Weezle Eye
          • 2 Years Ago
          @boardin85
          Perhaps the US Gov will do a private placement with another auto builder that has the size to take that position down at a higher price. For example: Toyota?? What's good for the taxpayer might not be good for GM. Just saying
        MikeInNC
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        ...IF it rises.
      MAX
      • 2 Years Ago
      WSJ=Murdoch=Faux News
      gop.hates.america
      • 2 Years Ago
      Did you know - US has more than 800 military bases around the world (not counting the bases in Iraq and Afghanistan) and it costs $102 Billion a year to maintain them. I don't know much about Physics, but having a military base in Philippines is not going to stop terrorists from blowing up our buildings. With this much money, we could have bailed out GM 23 times between 2009 and 2012. So, if you are worried about government waste, you should start with these colossal cold war era relics.
        Timbo
        • 2 Years Ago
        @gop.hates.america
        Watch a documentary called "The World Without US." It explores what would happen if we did in fact pull back all of our troops and close our military bases world wide. Quite interesting and it brings to light many good points, sometimes obvious. In the news today: Do you think China would not be attacking Japan if we did not protect them?
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      William
      • 2 Years Ago
      This has the feel of election year antics, doesn't it? Obama can look like he's taking a tough stance to protect and save the taxpayers money. (What...a...laugh.) Not unlike what's going on in Chicago with Rahm Emanuel suddenly looking anti-union (rational) as union pals continue to sacrifice the school kids' educations. Call me cynical....but both have a strange smell to them.
      Level4
      • 2 Years Ago
      It's election year nothing will happen in till 2013
      wrestleprocbt
      • 2 Years Ago
      Obama may want to unload this stock now. I recently read an article in Forbes saying that GM will probably be in trouble again within the next 4 years and need help again. Once that article picks up steam, share should continue to drop and the loss to our (53% who do pay taxes) money will be even worse.
        • 2 Years Ago
        @wrestleprocbt
        [blocked]
        johnb
        • 2 Years Ago
        @wrestleprocbt
        Something like 93% of GM Buyers are subprime. If this economy continues to slow like it has been, GM could be in a lot of trouble next year, let alone the next 4 years. I doubt GM could survive a govt. stock dump right now, even though it would help with it's poor govt. controlled image.
          MAX
          • 2 Years Ago
          @johnb
          GM's percent of subprime buyers is considerably less than JapanInc's or Hyundai's. http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=d4eb1e6e-4e3e-4727-922c-9048bd1e021a
      yyz
      • 2 Years Ago
      If the administration were to sell now, they would have to admit to a loss +/- 30 billion loss for the American taxpayer. It goes against their whole "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive" mantra. And they can't have that.
    • Load More Comments