In honor of the bank-bashing Dem debate (I didn't watch it but I
can imagine the content). And why is O'Malley still in the race (even
though he doesn't seem to be a half-bad politician)?
http://www.democracynow.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://www.democracynow.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
- To be clear, these penalties are barely felt by the banks, but it's better than nothing
- Goldman settled for $5B recently (on top of the $550MM they previous paid for related financial crisis fraud)
- Their Q3 2015 sales were $6.9B and net income $1.4B (quite the profit margin!)
- And banks are often able to pass along the penalties to their customers, which seems messed up to me (the laws should require that the $ comes out of dividends and/or exec/board comp - to incentivize better corp. governance)
- But unlike the S&L scandal of the '80s (1K convictions) and how some European nations handled the 2008 financial crisis, no one from the major US banks will go to jail
- So the deterrence effect is minor, as limitations in the evidence/laws make it hard to build a case for individual willful conspiracy to defraud
- Some of the money goes to victims/customers/investors depending on the nature of the charges, but it's rare
- And the rest goes to various gov't agencies: SEC, CFPB, Fed, etc., and they generally route the proceeds to their general funds or the Treasury
- The intention is to use that money to fund future investigations
- But if that is true, shouldn't the # of investigations and settlements go up over time?
- I'm not sure if that has been the case since 2008
- To me, it seems like a waste for the $ to go to Treasury, since it's a drop in the bucket vs. our debt/deficit
- And as agencies are under more funding pressure (and at the mercy of a GOP Congress), at least the $ could help them continue to execute their missions
