Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bloomberg)   The legal bills of the six largest US banks top 100 billion, which is more than all dividends paid over a five year period. Somebody deserves a bonus for creating all that shareholder value   (bloomberg.com) divider line 27
    More: Fail, U.S. Bancorp, U.S., Countrywide Financial Corp., Brian T. Moynihan, bank holding companies, credit derivatives, Vikram Pandit, total costs  
•       •       •

1204 clicks; posted to Business » on 28 Aug 2013 at 11:28 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



27 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-28 11:11:18 AM  
is that a typo? should it be bone-ass?
 
2013-08-28 11:33:19 AM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-08-28 11:36:08 AM  

impaler: [180x120 from http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pZnF5ooNZ2s/UXV-co-fw1I/AAAAAAAAACw/VeMCsFvF Pno/s180/GrumpyCatGOOD.jpg image 180x120]


really the disappointing thing is that nobody has gone to jail.
 
2013-08-28 11:46:19 AM  
They will figure out a way to pass the savings to us.
 
2013-08-28 11:49:47 AM  
This is good news, right? Banks are evil and anything that harms them will benefit the rest of us, or so I hear. I recall a few Fark threads where some posters wanted bankers imprisoned, assuming summary execution wasn't on the table.
 
2013-08-28 11:50:17 AM  
How does it compare to the bonuses and salaries paid out by those banks over that time period?
 
2013-08-28 11:52:06 AM  
imageshack.us
 
2013-08-28 11:52:09 AM  
Considering the large amount of new federal banking regulations passed in the last decade, as well as new homeowner protections passed at the state and local levels, this is not surprising. Financial law is insanely complicated and not many lawyers specialize in it (on the order of 1%), so they can charge a great deal of money.

Not that I oppose these regulations, it's just not surprising that some of the most vilified businesses of the past decade have high legal bills.
 
2013-08-28 11:55:05 AM  

jjorsett: This is good news, right? Banks are evil and anything that harms them will benefit the rest of us, or so I hear. I recall a few Fark threads where some posters wanted bankers imprisoned, assuming summary execution wasn't on the table.


JP Morgan and BoA have openly defrauded investors and stolen from customers but "no" you're right people are probably just over-reacting.
 
2013-08-28 11:56:22 AM  

jjorsett: This is good news, right? Banks are evil and anything that harms them will benefit the rest of us, or so I hear.


No, you didn't hear that. Maybe you've heard how some banks performed unethical and sometimes illegal practices, and they should be punished for that, and you just manipulated that in your head to what you just said. After all, I do have you tagged as "republican that can't understand euphemisms."
 
2013-08-28 12:18:38 PM  
So a bunch of rich bankers are giving a boatload of cash to a bunch of rich lawyers. I'm sure the little guy will come out of this on top somehow!
 
2013-08-28 12:19:24 PM  

ArkAngel: Considering the large amount of new federal banking regulations passed in the last decade, as well as new homeowner protections passed at the state and local levels, this is not surprising. Financial law is insanely complicated and not many lawyers specialize in it (on the order of 1%), so they can charge a great deal of money.

Not that I oppose these regulations, it's just not surprising that some of the most vilified businesses of the past decade have high legal bills.


This.  Legal is probably banking's top business expense (after the bankers themselves).  It's like blaming a builder for the fact that his building material costs exceeded profit from the construction.
 
2013-08-28 12:32:03 PM  
Curious how many people who were (correctly) outraged about bogus foreclosures and other such fails are also outraged at banks' spending money to avoid errors in legal paperwork.
 
2013-08-28 12:42:01 PM  
 
2013-08-28 12:54:49 PM  
So besides the lawyers, where is all this money going?  Where do the SEC or DOJ fines go to?  General government kitty?  Bolstering the budget of the regulatory body?
 
2013-08-28 01:57:10 PM  
The fines mean squat unless and until they all go to jail, have their assets seized and distributed to the homeless, and their yachts and cars burned in the center of town for all to see.
 
2013-08-28 02:12:48 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The fines mean squat unless and until they all go to jail, have their assets seized and distributed to the homeless, and their yachts and cars burned in the center of town for all to see.


Corporate imprisonment, where the company is prohibited from buying, selling and trading for a period of years, and every officer of the company has to out themselves as "FORMER OFFICER OF FELONIOUS COMPANY" on every resume they send out until the term is finished (as well as having to answer "asterisk-ed yes" for "have you ever been convicted of a felony?" ever more) - or better, nationalized (taken over by the state, not the Feds)?

I'm fine with that.
 
2013-08-28 03:11:56 PM  
A lot of those "legal bills" are paid to K Street lawfirms lobbying for banks interests

If bank assets were valued at FMV they would be insolvent
 
2013-08-28 03:33:25 PM  
the question is, how much $ did paying bank lawyers $100 Billion save the banks?  Like, did the lawyers who got paid $100 B save the banks $200 B?  If so, then they were worth it.  I guess.
 
2013-08-28 03:42:27 PM  
Work at one of the 75%.  Got a fat class action settlement from the bank screwing their own employees.  I generate enough revenue in two months to cover my annual salary, and they still screw me.

So yea, take it in stride.  At least they're screwing everyone.  Not sure if it's equally, but screwed none the less.
 
2013-08-29 12:57:46 AM  
If their legal bills were 100 billion... And they are still in business and making a profit... That tells me the fines were worth it and there's no way in hell they'll stop doing whatever the fark they were fined for because they made a hell of lot more than 100 billion doing it.
 
2013-08-29 06:39:11 AM  
This isn't about making profits, this is about enriching the guys at the top. Notice that they didn't get fired or lose their 7-digit bonuses. The general mindset among many on Wall Street is that if you aren't getting fined by the SEC you're not pushing the envelope enough for the sake of profits.
 
2013-08-29 07:25:21 AM  

JohnBigBootay: If their legal bills were 100 billion... And they are still in business and making a profit... That tells me the fines were worth it and there's no way in hell they'll stop doing whatever the fark they were fined for because they made a hell of lot more than 100 billion doing it.


It's rather difficult to say.  It's a safe bet the largest banks pay armies of lawyers to go over complex legislation line by line to hunt for loopholes (kind of takes a piss on the concept of "spirit of law", but that's par for a sociopath's course).  However, even if -- hypothetically speaking -- a bank was completely on the up-and-up, legal will still be one of their biggest expenses just to remain in compliance.  So out of the 100 billion, how much was spent on corruption?  10%?  50%?  90%?  I think it's impossible to know, because the insiders with that knowledge would be the ones least inclined to share that info with the public.
 
2013-08-29 08:03:40 AM  
 
2013-08-29 10:56:02 AM  

ArkAngel: Considering the large amount of new federal banking regulations passed in the last decade, as well as new homeowner protections passed at the state and local levels, this is not surprising. Financial law is insanely complicated and not many lawyers specialize in it (on the order of 1%), so they can charge a great deal of money.

Not that I oppose these regulations, it's just not surprising that some of the most vilified businesses of the past decade have high legal bills.


How much of those fees were spent on acquiring other banks and attempts to foreclose on people where the bank may or may not have held the paper?

IMO, it is right that they are the most vilified companies out there.
 
2013-08-29 12:31:17 PM  
It is not that they are bad, it is that they are over-regulated.

Your truly,
Ron Paul (and Rand)
 
2013-08-29 01:43:10 PM  
Hence why Rich Fairbank was the most overpaid CEO of 212
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report