AIG was nationalized a few years after 2005 and the nationalization cost taxpayers some $180 billion.
Mostly false False in substance, right in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
What would count as true or false
Judge as of 2011-04-05. There are two parts: (a) the US government effectively nationalised AIG a few years after 2005, meaning it took majority control or ownership (e.g. the roughly 79.9% equity stake in September 2008); (b) this cost taxpayers some $180 billion. 'Cost' means the net cost to taxpayers. TRUE: (a) holds and official estimates available by April 2011 (Treasury, CBO, SIGTARP, GAO) put the net taxpayer cost or loss near $180 billion (within about ±10%). MOSTLY FALSE: (a) holds and about $180 billion was the total support committed or disbursed, but net-cost estimates available as of April 2011 were far smaller or projected substantial recovery. That is a real figure stated as a cost. MIXED: (a) holds but neither a net cost nor a commitment near $180 billion can be matched. FALSE: the government did not take control of AIG, or no taxpayer figure of roughly that size existed. A formal later correction of the figures for the same period governs. The final outcome after 2011 is otherwise later knowledge and does not count.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 AIG stock swap moves it closer to repaying federal bailout Los Angeles Times · 14 January 2011
“Treasury converted the preferred shares in AIG it received as part of the complex bailout into 1.655 billion shares of common stock, increasing the government’s ownership stake to 92% from 80%.”
-
E2 AIG stock swap moves it closer to repaying federal bailout Los Angeles Times · 14 January 2011
“In November, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the government would lose $14 billion of the $48 billion it gave AIG through the Troubled Asset Relief Program.”
-
E3 AIG, U.S. reach deal on bailout payback Los Angeles Times · 1 October 2010
“The Congressional Budget Office’s latest estimate, in March, was for a $36-billion loss.”
-
E4 AIG stock swap moves it closer to repaying federal bailout Los Angeles Times · 14 January 2011
“Altogether, AIG received federal aid commitments totaling $182 billion in a multistep bailout engineered by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve beginning in September 2008, when the company was near failure.”
Reasoning
Part (a) holds: the Treasury's stake in AIG rose from 80% to 92% in January 2011 (E1), following a multistep bailout that began in September 2008 (E4). The roughly $180 billion figure matches total federal aid commitments of $182 billion (E4), but that was money committed, not a net cost. The Congressional Budget Office's net-loss estimates available by April 2011 were far smaller: $36 billion in March 2010 (E3) and $14 billion on TARP funds in November 2010 (E2). Under the criteria, a real commitment figure stated as a cost makes this mostly false.
Cite this claim
Michael Burry, “AIG was nationalized a few years after 2005 and the nationalization cost taxpayers some $180 billion.” (said 5 April 2011). Verdict: mostly false. Reliability API, claim c_af1815ee515d, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_af1815ee515d
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Michael Burry
-
Mostly false
“The Superinvestors of Graham & Doddsville all lost money 3 years in a row during the mid-1970s.”
The Superinvestors of Graham & Doddsville all lost money three years in a row during the mid-1970s.
-
Mostly true
“It’s a perfect storm for Build-A-Bear (BBW), a one-of-one retailer now heavily shorted, 25% of the float, almost 9 days to cover.”
-
Resolved true
“Here is the link where I made the case last week that beneath the surface the October 6, 2026 record close in the S&P 500 looks more like the March 2000 top than any other record high since 1980.”
-
Mostly true
“October 6, 2026 stands head to head with March 2000 as the two most narrow, thin, soft new highs”
-
Mostly true
“Both stocks have retraced essentially all their gains since Trump’s election, and they put in a giant head-and-shoulders-and-elbows top for added emphasis.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.