Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Helped UBS—and Then the Bank Funneled Millions to the Clintons [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)92. ''The only good bank is one that doesn't need to be bailed out.''
UBS: Bank Bailout Good Guy?
By Corbin Hiar
Mother Jones | Fri Jan. 29, 2010
EXCERPT...
UBS was one of eight large investment banks that benefited from the now-infamous backdoor bailout of AIGresulting in government cash infusions totaling $182.5 billionin the dark days of September 2008. At the hearing, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, Neil Barofsky, revealed to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that UBS was the only bank willing to settle its soured credit default swaps (CDS) contracts for less than their face value. Why did UBS play ball when all the other banks didn't? As the Washington Independent reported, "Barofsky speculated that the firm probably simply recognized that the American taxpayers 'had taken the global economy on its back.'"
SNIP...
At the time of the backdoor bailout, UBS was under scrutiny from both the Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission as a result of information disclosed to them by a whistleblowerone of their former bankers, Bradley Birkenfeld. As the Senate Subcommittee on Investigations reported in July 2008, UBS had hidden from American authorities "an estimated 19,000 accounts in Switzerland for US clients with assets valued at $18 billion." Half a year later, UBS would agree to pay a record-breaking $780 million penalty to the US government and turn over 4,500 client names to avoid an indictment that FINMA, the Swiss regulatory agency, said "would have threatened its existence."
Despite what some brazen Wall Street CEOs now claim, the credit crunch was an existential threat to every over-leveraged big bank. What's most shocking about the AIG bailoutbesides the dizzying amount of taxpayers' money involvedis that these endangered banks were able to extract such a sweet deal from the government. The banks were paid the full value of all the CDS contracts they had made with AIGincluding those mortgage-backed securities they had bought when it was clear the subprime market was collapsing. After the housing market took a nosedive, these contracts were, of course, worth a fraction of their original value on the open market: Similar CDSs issued by other insurers that were settled during the crisis paid out at 13 cents on the dollar. Talking about the AIG deal with New York magazine, a former state insurance commissioner described it as being able "to collect on an insurance policy without having the loss."
Why didn't the government push for a tougher deal? At the Oversight Committee hearing, Barofsky revealed that as the New York Fed negotiated with AIG's trading partners about how much they would receive for their CDSs, it only dealt with mid-level managers at the banks, not top executives. Barofsky asked, "Would it have made a difference if (then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and then-New York Fed chief Tim Geithner) talked to the CEOs? We'll never know because the effort was simply not taken."
Now, even the settlement the Department of Justice extracted from UBS looks to be in jeopardy. To avoid prosecution, UBS immediately paid its fine and disclosed 250 of the promised 4,500 names of holders of the hidden accounts. But the Swiss high court ruled that disclosure a violation of the country's banking secrecy laws. This could prevent the handover of the other secret accountsand could hinder the US government's efforts to collect the fines owed by their owners. And as it turns out, UBS' offer to accept a lower payout on its bad derivatives bets never came to anything in the end. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told the House panel that, even in its weakened state, UBS only offered to bargain "if everybody else would agree to equal concessions on their prices." The other banks that had traded with AIG declined to do so, and so UBS received full payment on its CDS contracts, just like the others.
CONTINUED...
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/01/ubs-good-bank-aig-bailout
By Corbin Hiar
Mother Jones | Fri Jan. 29, 2010
EXCERPT...
UBS was one of eight large investment banks that benefited from the now-infamous backdoor bailout of AIGresulting in government cash infusions totaling $182.5 billionin the dark days of September 2008. At the hearing, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, Neil Barofsky, revealed to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that UBS was the only bank willing to settle its soured credit default swaps (CDS) contracts for less than their face value. Why did UBS play ball when all the other banks didn't? As the Washington Independent reported, "Barofsky speculated that the firm probably simply recognized that the American taxpayers 'had taken the global economy on its back.'"
SNIP...
At the time of the backdoor bailout, UBS was under scrutiny from both the Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission as a result of information disclosed to them by a whistleblowerone of their former bankers, Bradley Birkenfeld. As the Senate Subcommittee on Investigations reported in July 2008, UBS had hidden from American authorities "an estimated 19,000 accounts in Switzerland for US clients with assets valued at $18 billion." Half a year later, UBS would agree to pay a record-breaking $780 million penalty to the US government and turn over 4,500 client names to avoid an indictment that FINMA, the Swiss regulatory agency, said "would have threatened its existence."
Despite what some brazen Wall Street CEOs now claim, the credit crunch was an existential threat to every over-leveraged big bank. What's most shocking about the AIG bailoutbesides the dizzying amount of taxpayers' money involvedis that these endangered banks were able to extract such a sweet deal from the government. The banks were paid the full value of all the CDS contracts they had made with AIGincluding those mortgage-backed securities they had bought when it was clear the subprime market was collapsing. After the housing market took a nosedive, these contracts were, of course, worth a fraction of their original value on the open market: Similar CDSs issued by other insurers that were settled during the crisis paid out at 13 cents on the dollar. Talking about the AIG deal with New York magazine, a former state insurance commissioner described it as being able "to collect on an insurance policy without having the loss."
Why didn't the government push for a tougher deal? At the Oversight Committee hearing, Barofsky revealed that as the New York Fed negotiated with AIG's trading partners about how much they would receive for their CDSs, it only dealt with mid-level managers at the banks, not top executives. Barofsky asked, "Would it have made a difference if (then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and then-New York Fed chief Tim Geithner) talked to the CEOs? We'll never know because the effort was simply not taken."
Now, even the settlement the Department of Justice extracted from UBS looks to be in jeopardy. To avoid prosecution, UBS immediately paid its fine and disclosed 250 of the promised 4,500 names of holders of the hidden accounts. But the Swiss high court ruled that disclosure a violation of the country's banking secrecy laws. This could prevent the handover of the other secret accountsand could hinder the US government's efforts to collect the fines owed by their owners. And as it turns out, UBS' offer to accept a lower payout on its bad derivatives bets never came to anything in the end. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told the House panel that, even in its weakened state, UBS only offered to bargain "if everybody else would agree to equal concessions on their prices." The other banks that had traded with AIG declined to do so, and so UBS received full payment on its CDS contracts, just like the others.
CONTINUED...
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/01/ubs-good-bank-aig-bailout
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
93 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Hillary Helped UBS—and Then the Bank Funneled Millions to the Clintons [View all]
Octafish
Feb 2016
OP
HSBC also stepped up to protect the right of US citizens to offshore their loot, er, fortunes.
Octafish
Feb 2016
#11
The thugs are all over these stories. If you ever wander out of DU to other political discussions
jillan
Feb 2016
#5
From POTUS all the way down to county district supervisors and school board members n/t
arcane1
Feb 2016
#45
Like listening to David Fry (last wacko to give up) at the Bundy game preserve takeover ...
ebayfool
Feb 2016
#63
The translation is pretty easy: It is perfectly OK for Hillary to be corrupt because
LondonReign2
Feb 2016
#54
Me too. If the Democratic Party ever hopes to be competitive we have got to recruit
Enthusiast
Feb 2016
#58
KR - Can we please elect a President who is not corrupt & compromised like the Clintons? nt
99th_Monkey
Feb 2016
#47
Until Ted Cruz, Phorclosure Phil was the most punchable face in corporo-Washington politics.
HughBeaumont
Feb 2016
#49
And Pres Clinton signed it and they both got richer. It's this corruption we are fighting. nm
rhett o rick
Feb 2016
#66
Exactly and while we are trying to lead our lives the Wealthy hire people to fight their
rhett o rick
Feb 2016
#70
Octafish, you & your posts are one of the prime reasons I have stuck to DU over the years!
ebayfool
Feb 2016
#65
I think it's important to note when right-wing Libertarian sources are used at DU...
SidDithers
Feb 2016
#87