Seeking Alpha

FDIC sues 16 banks for rigging Libor

  • Acting as receiver for 38 failed lenders, the FDIC  claims banks sitting on the U.S. Libor panel "fraudulently and collusively suppressed" the rate.
  • Among those sued: BAC, BCS, C, CS, DB, HSBC, JPM, RBS, UBS. Also named as a defendant is the British Bankers Association.
Comments (33)
  • psychological-dividends
    , contributor
    Comments (548) | Send Message
     
    Hm....that's bad.
    14 Mar, 03:10 PM Reply Like
  • MatchlessGlory
    , contributor
    Comments (36) | Send Message
     
    Sigh
    14 Mar, 03:21 PM Reply Like
  • DoowopDave
    , contributor
    Comments (204) | Send Message
     
    Knew this was coming. Will take a long time to settle. I've mentioned this when others were looking for a $24 stock price this year. Take heart. $24 is coming - it's just a couple more years away.
    14 Mar, 03:22 PM Reply Like
  • Tony Antenucci
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    This is not good.....
    14 Mar, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • Clayton Rulli
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    yeah so who will get the money? tell me who? HAHAHAHA
    14 Mar, 03:26 PM Reply Like
  • Roelf Turksema
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    Laywers, no one else.
    14 Mar, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • MarketLost
    , contributor
    Comments (808) | Send Message
     
    Forget about suing them, that just hurts the shareholders and clients. Put somebody in jail, that will fix the problem.
    14 Mar, 03:32 PM Reply Like
  • jackooo
    , contributor
    Comments (1484) | Send Message
     
    Talk to Obama about putting someone in jail. Don't have to dial, just lift the phone up and talk. He is listening.
    14 Mar, 04:18 PM Reply Like
  • Bernard Benson
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    Clearly right on point!
    14 Mar, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • Roelf Turksema
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    But he's not the only one listening......
    14 Mar, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • gwynfryn
    , contributor
    Comments (3883) | Send Message
     
    Better yet, make them pay the fines out of their bonus chest, having put a limit on it!
    15 Mar, 10:12 AM Reply Like
  • fromgorby
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    yikes and they deserve everything they get
    14 Mar, 03:51 PM Reply Like
  • rocback
    , contributor
    Comments (972) | Send Message
     
    i got some great rates on my loans back then. Do I have to pay my savings back?
    14 Mar, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12687) | Send Message
     
    More typical Government money grubbing.

     

    Here's an idea for the Administration:

     

    They can avoid all future tax increases and just conjure up some new pretense to sue all the taxpayers, instead. Just think, all that fresh work for their lawyer buddies and piles of settlement cash, too.

     

    (Maybe, it's a bad idea that they might read this.)
    14 Mar, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • The Long Tail of Finance
    , contributor
    Comments (695) | Send Message
     
    It's revenge of the regulators. What do they do with all the money they shake down from the banks? For example, I heard the CFTC and SEC were recently struggling for 2014 funding, yet there have been billions extracted thus far across the banks. Where is all that money going? Who's auditing the regulators to see where the money ultimately goes?
    14 Mar, 04:58 PM Reply Like
  • ote
    , contributor
    Comments (167) | Send Message
     
    Simply government extortion. Why do they rob banks? Populism and that's were the money is.
    14 Mar, 05:34 PM Reply Like
  • ote
    , contributor
    Comments (167) | Send Message
     
    Why don't they sue the IRS manager that takes the fifth. Sorry I should not comment when pissed.
    14 Mar, 05:37 PM Reply Like
  • Phr3d
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    LIBOR has been the elephant in the room for a long time - glad I took my fin sector profits, cuz this one will be a media-frenzy sheet-storm.

     

    manipulating markets is just bottom-feeder low, sorry. 'Everyone else is doing it' was the only response I ever heard..

     

    long WFC
    14 Mar, 07:06 PM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols
    , contributor
    Comments (5137) | Send Message
     
    JPM among those charged.

     

    Another feather in the cap of CEO Jamie Dimon.

     

    $30B+ in fines while Mr. Dimon has been in charge...and counting.
    14 Mar, 07:46 PM Reply Like
  • mcdonaldfive
    , contributor
    Comments (32) | Send Message
     
    I think this is more sound than fury. Interesting perspective that they 'supressed the rate' which would both lower the earned interest the banks would have to pay and also the interest they could collect from new loans originated at the suppressed rate. Some may have been harmed and others certainly benefited. The legal arguments are going to be interesting to hear.
    14 Mar, 07:53 PM Reply Like
  • gap123
    , contributor
    Comments (173) | Send Message
     
    Hard to blame the players, they're just takin cues from the fed! Lol

     

    Long WFC, MS, BAC... Will and have been adding to all
    14 Mar, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • KJP712
    , contributor
    Comments (437) | Send Message
     
    So when the FDIC " wins " the American. Taxpayers will get their cut of the settlement ? I want my check with a green background in honor of St.Patrick's Day..
    14 Mar, 08:41 PM Reply Like
  • TBV
    , contributor
    Comments (113) | Send Message
     
    This is an old news. BAC already went through a similar investigation led by UK regulators and others(DOJ) and found that BAC has no material responsibility when it comes to LIBOR fixing. In fact, BAC is not a market maker in many of LIBOR markets that were in question. Once again FDIC beating the neighborhood drums to gain political points. Enough already on bank harrassing.
    14 Mar, 08:52 PM Reply Like
  • The Long Tail of Finance
    , contributor
    Comments (695) | Send Message
     
    It's not really old news. Barclays paid its penalties a couple years ago in order to save money....hey pay us now and save 1/3!! Problem was, the FDIC was not involved in that payment. So it's open season on banks and liablity is apparently unlimited.
    15 Mar, 10:44 AM Reply Like
  • ronjamroz
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    nothing like ethics, Nothing
    15 Mar, 12:25 AM Reply Like
  • kata
    , contributor
    Comments (441) | Send Message
     
    Its just old fashioned extortion rearing its head again. They need the money and they don't care if it comes out of the available capital that would have been used to fund a startup business, or finance somebody's mortgage or invest in expanding jobs for the unemployed. Where do you think all those fines go? They don't go back into the General Treasury, they go straight to the Department that sued and they divide the booty up for themselves and their cronies.
    15 Mar, 11:09 PM Reply Like
  • timtagel
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
     
    Price fixing for profit is un-capitalistic, un-democratic, and seriously against the law. Proper regulation of the market is necessary for markets to exist at all. Folks gripe when regulatory agencies don't do the job that they are supposed to do; and gripe again when they do exactly what they are supposed to do. Let's wait to hear the facts at trial before calling this "extortion".
    17 Mar, 10:26 AM Reply Like
  • kata
    , contributor
    Comments (441) | Send Message
     
    Don't worry, they'll settle. There is no point. You just pay the cost of doing business and pass it along to your customers.
    17 Mar, 03:39 PM Reply Like
  • No1
    , contributor
    Comments (89) | Send Message
     
    The government is suing these banks for rigging LIBOR. Is that the same government that coludes with the banking cartel to rig short term interest rates? Seems to me that someone needs to get "tough on banks" headlines. Aren't any losses taken from corporate profits? If you really want to drive a message, do what another SA poster recommended, send them to jail.
    19 Mar, 02:17 AM Reply Like
  • Phr3d
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    apologies for double-post, but
    those commenting -did read- the FDIC link in the story, is that correct?
    I've been pretty loud in my disgust with NYC et al balancing their budgets on the backs of the fin sector, but this is a Completely different kettle, IMO.

     

    For instance (hypothetically, no specific offense intended or implied):
    JPM turns out to be a conspirator in setting rates that damaged competition, specifically WAMU, to the point of failure. JPM then buys WAMU for pennies on the dollar. terrific oversimplification, but..
    19 Mar, 02:57 AM Reply Like
  • kata
    , contributor
    Comments (441) | Send Message
     
    Is that the very same WAMU that Henry Paulsen and Ben Bernanke insisted JPM buy to help save the world from financial disaster? That WAMU? I don't care what they paid for it, that's not the point is it?

     

    Its still extortion and because the gov't is insatiable, they'll find another reason and another and another. After all, they get raises and bonuses every year and someone has to pay it. Why not you? At least private entities have to make it. Public ones only have to find excuses in the form of lawsuits and regulations and fines because they make nothing.
    19 Mar, 12:10 PM Reply Like
  • kata
    , contributor
    Comments (441) | Send Message
     
    Btw, sorry if the reply is a little strongly worded but really?
    19 Mar, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • Phr3d
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    -did read-
    and
    disgust
    and
    terrific oversimplification

     

    were points I made, as well as no offense, hypothetical..

     

    What I was trying to illustrate is that the rates, detrimental to competition, -could- result in a fire-sale purchase of said competitor..

     

    JPM's story was simply the easiest to remember. Citibank's attempt on Wachovia is in there too. The 'forced purchases' did occur for BAC, the others were assumed to be the same, but without the documenting evidence from Bernanke et al to support the conclusion.

     

    Again, LIBOR preceded the crash, there were already deep rumblings about the legalities of consistently mis-reporting results causing harm to competition in the form of higher rates. I only hope the results of the investigation aren't so slathered in legalese as to make them incomprehensible.. bad bidness by the accused, as in malice aforethought. Fines have already been levied on others.
    20 Mar, 11:47 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|