In December, the US Treasury announced that it was going to sell all of its shares in General Motors within 12 to 15 months. The first tranche of the 500-million total shares was purchased by GM, which took 200 million of them at $27.50 per share. That price represents an eight-percent premium over the market price at the time. The remaining 300 million shares will be sold "through various means in an orderly fashion."

Of the $418 billion disbursed through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a report in Automotive News indicates that "about 93 percent" has been paid back, and the latest figures put Treasury's loss from the program overall at $55.58 billion. That's a $4.1 billion improvement on the last figure, when the expected red ink added up to $59.68 billion. The auto industry's portion of that loss is estimated to be $20.3 billion, a 16-percent drop from the earlier estimate of $24.3 billion.

The Treasury now owns 19 percent of GM, but if all goes well, there will be no more cause for anyone to utter "Government Motors" by the end of Q1 next year. A loss of some kind is still expected, however. Although GM's stock price is close to $29 at the time of this writing, that's still $4 below its IPO price and well below the $72 share price necessary for the government to come out even on its GM investment. On second thought, maybe the ribbing will continue.


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
  • 27 Comments
      OptimusPrimeRib
      • 1 Year Ago
      So that's less than $100 per person in America. It's not as costly as the needles Iraqi war and the $7.7 trillion Wallstreet bailout.
        FatManChew909
        • 1 Year Ago
        @OptimusPrimeRib
        So you only count the whole amount when it comes to Wall Street but don't include the amount that was paid back?
      Chris
      • 1 Year Ago
      WOW! What a great method of making money! Buy high, sell low! Only our esteemed government brainiacs could make us \"rich\" by doing it that way!
        thinkthis
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Chris
        Um, the GM corporate taxes, and employee taxes, and the employees and corporate taxes of GM suppliers that will exist for years to come and the taxes of the restaurants these people will eat at, and the taxes of the targets these people will shop at, and the property taxes of these people's homes...and so on and so on and so on... WILL MORE THAN MAKE THIS WORTH IT. We calculated this program was cost effective when it was estimated to "cost" us tens of billions more. The estimated cost of TARP has continued to drop since it was enacted, MAKING IT AN EVEN BETTER DEAL FOR THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER. THANKS GOOD BYE
      delsolo1
      • 1 Year Ago
      Hey fiscal conservatives Twenty billion dollars would not even make a down payment for the war in Iraq.
        sparrk
        • 1 Year Ago
        @delsolo1
        Yeah, but the Iraq war will pay for itself once you start exploiting the oil there, right ?
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        MAX
        • 1 Year Ago
        Laser is a reichwing ideologue who loves fundementalist capitalism and hates the actual America so much he supports foreign companies propped up by socialism out of spite.
        ndec08
        • 1 Year Ago
        You can't deny that the re-emergence of GM has had a positive overall effect on the US and global economy. The millions of Americans with ties to the auto industry are paying taxes, making purchases, and raising families; their contribution as employed citizens far outweighs whatever losses were incurred through the bailout. Don't forget the billions GM is reinvesting by hiring new workers and expanding production in areas that were especially hard hit during the recession. GM generated $150 billion in revenue in 2011 -- so $20.3 billion, $47 billion, however you want to spin it based on slanted political ideology...it was a worthwhile investment.
      MAX
      • 1 Year Ago
      Better than letting our auto industry be taken over by state sponsered zaiabtsus and chaebols like Toyota and Hyundai. A bargain by any realistic meaure.
        Val
        • 1 Year Ago
        @MAX
        How exactly is it any better? It's the workers that had to be "saved" after all, and workers at toyota and hyundai plants in north america are doing quite well. Guess it was a brilliant move when US auto industry expanded and swallowed whole the UK and swedish auto industry, that was capitalism, the 'merican way, the stronger prevails, but now, when push came to shove, it's a bad thing you see, and we won't have any of that. The usual liberal hypocrisy...
        Val
        • 1 Year Ago
        @MAX
        As is clearly seen by Fiat's overtake of chrysler, foreign companies owining american assests is very bad. Not because they laid off workers, or are running the company in the ground, no, on the contrary, chrysler has the best growth among the big three, and it's making a hefty profit again. But it'sbad because obama said so, he also said 1 million workers will be laid off, just like that, all those factories and people will just disappear. And all the restaurants will go bankrupt, and all the suppliers. Because that's what happens when a business closes, demand for cars disappears suddenly, and nobody would want to buy fully equipped factories with skilled workers nearby. Makes perfect sense!
      cruizin03
      • 1 Year Ago
      So between GM and Chrysler...who do you guys think used what they got from TARP smarter and are doing better? Even though Chrysler is alot smaller than GM, it seams to me like they are doing alot better turning themselves around than GM, though I'm sure alot of that has to do with Fiat. With the amount of money GM was given, it seams to me like they really arent trying all that hard....almost like a college student who moved back home and doesn't really try all that hard to get a job because they don't want to leave home.
        Sir Duke
        • 1 Year Ago
        @cruizin03
        I really don't like stupid people. So I am going to speak in terms that you could understand. If you had a speed boat and an oil tanker, guess which one is going to be easier to turn around? Chrysler was in such horrible shape, ANYTHING you did was an improvement over what they had. Just getting the creases out of the hood of the Sebring and changing the name was an improvement. The US government already made back all of the TARP (Auto loans) and then some. Only the stupid, blind and willfully dishonest can't, don't or won't see it.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        Jason Krumvieda
        • 1 Year Ago
        Didn't you already say that down below? You need to get a new line. How about this: Insurance Premiums = Up Spending = up Debt = Up Deficit = up Taxes = up Work force participation rate = down I don't think that is how it is supposed to work, maybe a different approach should be used.
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Jason Krumvieda
          [blocked]
          OptimusPrimeRib
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Jason Krumvieda
          Here's an article for you about spending. http://thecentristword.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/red-states-addiction-to-welfare-a-gop-dilema/
      ragtopdodge
      • 1 Year Ago
      Imagine how much it'd cost the government if GM was liquidated? Lost tax revenue, huge amounts of unemployment insurance needing to pay out. Good investment. Unlike the huge, trillions in tax cuts to the rich that hasn't created or saved one job.
      Avinash Machado
      • 1 Year Ago
      Is Laser off his meds again?
    • Load More Comments