Pages

Friday, November 29, 2013

Fat cats getting fatter? Bankers’ bonus culture


Fat cats getting fatter? Bankers’ bonus culture lives on as millionaires’ club tops 2,700


Figure is 12 times more than any other country in the EU



Read more http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/fat-cats-getting-fatter-bankers-bonus-culture-lives-on-as-millionaires-club-tops-2700-8972757.html
--------------

EU’s Highest-Paid Bankers in U.K. as Bonus Awards Exceed Cap
By Ben Moshinsky and Jim Brunsden  Nov 29, 2013 11:52 AM GMT
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-29/eu-s-highest-paid-bankers-in-u-k-as-bonuses-exceed-planned-caps.html




Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg

Britain was home to 2,188 investment bankers earning more than 1 million euros in 2012, the highest amount in the European Union, while Spain had 37, the EBA said in a survey.

Top U.K. investment bankers were paid an average of 1.95 million euros ($2.65 million) in 2012, as bonuses continued to exceed caps set to take effect next year, according to the European Union banking regulator.
The highest-paid bankers in the U.K. had an average bonus-to-salary ratio of 370 percent, according to the European Banking Authority survey of EU finance workers who earn more than 1 million euros a year. In France, the ratio was 495 percent.
The EU brokered a deal in February to outlaw banker bonuses that are more than twice fixed pay, a move lawmakers said would prevent excessive payouts and curb irresponsible risk-taking. The U.K. government challenged the caps at the EU’s highest court in September, saying they were illegal.
“Self-regulation does not work and the report illustrates why the European Parliament took the unprecedented step of inserting a hard bonus cap in the absence of action by the industry,” Arlene McCarthy, a U.K. lawmaker in the European Parliament’s Socialist group, and lead legislator on a previous round of EU bonus rules, said in an e-mail.
Britain was home to 2,188 investment bankers earning more than 1 million euros in 2012, the highest amount in the EU, while Spain had 37, the London-based EBA, set up in 2011 to harmonize banking rules in the EU, said in the survey. France and Germany had 117 and 100.

Capping Bonuses

The EBA said in May that any banker paid more than 500,000 euros should be covered by the new rules capping bonuses. The watchdog also targeted the best-paid 0.3 percent of staff in a bank, and some bankers with bonuses higher than 75,000 euros.
The boost to fixed pay means “less alignment between performance and pay,” Syed Kamall, a U.K. Conservative party lawmaker who represents London in the European Parliament, said in an interview.
Senior retail bankers in Spain were better paid than their investment banking colleagues, and were the highest-earning in Europe in 2012, making an average of 2.2 million euros a year, according to the report. That’s compared to 1.7 million euros for investment bankers there.

Investment Bankers

In France and Germany, the top investment bankers earned about 1.5 million euros each on average, while the 47 bankers in Italy that qualified for the study made around 1.6 million euros a year.
Lenders have said they will increase salaries to offset the EU cap on bonuses. About half of 150 human resources employees surveyed by Towers Watson & Co. in June said they planned to boost fixed pay.
U.K. bankers may get as much as 500 million pounds ($817 million) more in salary to compensate, Andrew Bailey, Britain’s chief banking supervisor and a deputy governor of the Bank of England, told U.K. lawmakers in March.
“Rather than being concerned about salary ratios, the EBA should be far more concerned that banks are already pushing up basic salaries in response to the rule,” said Kamall, an opponent of the EU measure limiting bonuses to twice fixed pay.
Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem said this week that he would seek banker bonus curbs in the Netherlands that are even tougher than the EU standards.
His proposals, made in a letter to the Dutch parliament, would limit bonuses to a fifth of wages, with those working outside the country exempted.
To contact the reporters on this story: Ben Moshinsky in London atbmoshinsky@bloomberg.net; Jim Brunsden in Brussels atjbrunsden@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Anthony Aarons ataaarons@bloomberg.net

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

UK citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing

US and UK struck secret deal to allow NSA to 'unmask' Britons' personal data

• 2007 deal allows NSA to store previously restricted material
• UK citizens not suspected of wrongdoing caught up in dragnet
• Separate draft memo proposes US spying on 'Five-Eyes' allies
nsatear1460View larger picture
The memo explains that the US and UK 'worked together to come up with a new policy that expands the use of incidentally collected unminimized UK data.'
The phone, internet and email records of UK citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing have been analysed and stored by America's National Security Agency under a secret deal that was approved by British intelligence officials, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
In the first explicit confirmation that UK citizens have been caught up in US mass surveillance programs, an NSA memo describes how in 2007 an agreement was reached that allowed the agency to "unmask" and hold on to personal data about Britons that had previously been off limits.
The memo, published in a joint investigation by the Guardian and Britain's Channel 4 News, says the material is being put in databases where it can be made available to other members of the US intelligence and military community.
Britain and the US are the main two partners in the 'Five-Eyes' intelligence-sharing alliance, which also includes Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Until now, it had been generally understood that the citizens of each country were protected from surveillance by any of the others.
But the Snowden material reveals that:
• In 2007, the rules were changed to allow the NSA to analyse and retain any British citizens' mobile phone and fax numbers, emails and IP addresses swept up by its dragnet. Previously, this data had been stripped out of NSA databases – "minimized", in intelligence agency parlance – under rules agreed between the two countries.
• These communications were "incidentally collected" by the NSA, meaning the individuals were not the initial targets of surveillance operations and therefore were not suspected of wrongdoing.
• The NSA has been using the UK data to conduct so-called "pattern of life" or "contact-chaining" analyses, under which the agency can look up to three "hops" away from a target of interest – examining the communications of a friend of a friend of a friend.Guardian analysis suggests three hops for a typical Facebook user could pull the data of more than 5 million people into the dragnet.
• A separate draft memo, marked top-secret and dated from 2005, reveals a proposed NSA procedure for spying on the citizens of the UK and other Five-Eyes nations, even where the partner government has explicitly denied the US permission to do so. The memo makes clear that partner countries must not be informed about this surveillance, or even the procedure itself.
The 2007 briefing was sent out to all analysts in the NSA's Signals Intelligence Directorate (SID), which is responsible for collecting, processing, and sharing information gleaned from US surveillance programs.
Up to this point, the Americans had only been allowed to retain the details of British landline phone numbers that had been collected incidentally in any of their trawls.
But the memo explains there was a fundamental change in policy that allowed the US to look at and store vast amounts of personal data that would previously have been discarded.
It states: "Sigint [signals intelligence] policy … and the UK Liaison Office here at NSAW [NSA Washington] worked together to come up with a new policy that expands the use of incidentally collected unminimized UK data in Sigint analysis.
"The new policy expands the previous memo issued in 2004 that only allowed the unminimizing of incidentally collected UK phone numbers for use in analysis.
"Now SID analysts can unminimize all incidentally collected UK contact identifiers, including IP and email addresses, fax and cell phone numbers, for use in analysis."
The memo also set out in more detail what the NSA could and could not do.
The agency was, for example, still barred from making any UK citizen a target of surveillance programs that would look at the content of their communications without getting a warrant. However, they now:
• "Are authorized to unmask UK contact identifiers resulting from incidental collection."
• "May utilize the UK contact identifiers in Sigint development contact chaining analysis."
• "May retain unminimized UK contact identifiers incidentally collected under this authority within content and metadata stores and provided to follow-on USSS (US Sigint System) applications."
The document does not say whether the UK Liaison Office, which is operated by GCHQ, discussed this rule change with government ministers in London before granting approval, nor who within the intelligence agencies would have been responsible for the decision.
The Guardian contacted GCHQ and the Cabinet Office on Thursday November 7 to ask for clarification, but despite repeated requests since then, neither has been prepared to comment.
Since the signing in 1946 of the UKUSA Signals Intelligence Agreement, which first established the Five-Eyes partnership, it has been a convention that the allied intelligence agencies do not monitor one another's citizens without permission – an agreement often referred to publicly by officials across the Five-Eyes nations.
However, a draft 2005 directive in the name of the NSA's director of signals intelligence reveals the NSA prepared policies enabling its staff to spy on Five-Eyes citizens, even where the partner country has refused permission to do so.
nsatear2
The document, titled 'Collection, Processing and Dissemination of Allied Communications', has separate classifications from paragraph to paragraph. Some are cleared to be shared with America's allies, while others – marked "NF", for No Foreign – are to be kept strictly within the agency. The NSA refers to its Five-Eyes partners as "second party" countries.
The memo states that the Five-Eyes agreement "has evolved to include a common understanding that both governments will not target each other's citizens/persons".
But the next sentence – classified as not to be shared with foreign partners – states that governments "reserved the right" to conduct intelligence operations against each other's citizens "when it is in the best interests of each nation".
"Therefore," the draft memo continues, "under certain circumstances, it may be advisable and allowable to target second party persons and second party communications systems unilaterally, when it is in the best interests of the US and necessary for US national security."
The draft directive states who can approve the surveillance, and stresses the need for secrecy.
NSAtear4
"When sharing the planned targeting information with a second party would be contrary to US interests, or when the second party declines a collaboration proposal, the proposed targeting must be presented to the signals intelligence director for approval with justification for the criticality of the proposed collection.
"If approved, any collection, processing and dissemination of the second party information must be maintained in NoForn channels."
The document does not reveal whether such operations had been authorized in the past, nor whether the NSA believes its Five-Eyes partners conduct operations against US citizens.
The other sections of the document, cleared for sharing with the UK and other partners, strike a different tone, emphasising that spying on each other's citizens is a collaborative affair that is most commonly achieved "when the proposed target is associated with a global problem such as weapons proliferation, terrorism, drug trafficking or organised crime activities."
It states, for example: "There are circumstances when targeting of second party persons and communications systems, with the full knowledge and co-operation of one or more second parties, is allowed when it is in the best interests of both nations."
NSAtear3
The memo says the circumstances might include "targeting a UK citizen located in London using a British telephone system"; "targeting a UK person located in London using an internet service provider (ISP) in France; or "targeting a Pakistani person located in the UK using a UK ISP."
A spokeswoman for the NSA declined to answer questions from the Guardian on whether the draft directive had been implemented and, if so, when. The NSA and the White House also refused to comment on the agency's 2007 agreement with the UK to store and analyze data on British citizens.
The British foreign secretary in 2005 was Jack Straw, and in 2007 it was Margaret Beckett. The Guardian approached both of them to ask if they knew about or sanctioned a change in policy. Both declined to comment.
The Five-Eyes nations have, so far, steered clear of the diplomatic upheavals, which have emerged as a result of revelations of the NSA spying on its allies.
France, Germany and Spain have all recently summoned their respective US ambassadors to discuss surveillance within their borders, while earlier this month the UK ambassador to Germany was invited to discuss alleged eavesdropping from the UK embassy in Berlin.

Britain's Personal debt £££££££££££££££££££1 430 000 000 000.00

£1,430,000,000,000: Britain's personal debt timebomb

http://www.independent.co.uk/money/loans-credit/1430000000000-britains-personal-debt-timebomb-8950372.html

Average household debt is now £54,000 - double the level a decade ago, despite record low interest rates, and ministers fear that failure to pay back loans and credit will leave thousands at risk of losing their home


  



Britain faces a timebomb as the cost of living crisis forces more people into crippling debt they will not be able to repay, according to a major study published today.

The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) think tank, founded by Iain Duncan Smith in 2004, warned that two of the flagship policies he is implementing as Work and Pensions Secretary - the “bedroom tax”  and universal credit - could plunge more people into debt. It revealed that more than 5,000 people are already being made homeless each year because they cannot pay their mortgage or rent.

The study, “Maxed Out,” said that despite the return to economic growth, personal debt in the UK totals £1.43 trillion, close to its all-time high. Average household debt stands at £54,000 - almost twice the level a decade ago. Although much of it stems from mortgages, the report warned that poor people were hit hardest as unsecured consumer debt almost tripled in the last 20 years to nearly £160bn.

According to the CSJ,  households owe the equivalent of 94 per cent of the UK's economic output last year. Only Ireland has a higher ratio of personal debt to GDP amongst European countries.

Privately, ministers are worried that, while interest rates have been held at a record low of 0.5 per cent, less personal debt has been repaid in the UK than countries like the United States. The Bank of England will consider raising rates when unemployment falls from its current 7.6 per cent rate to 7 per cent, triggering a rise in mortgage rates for millions of home-buyers.

The CSJ said more than 26,000 UK households have been classed as “homeless” by local authorities in the past five years, and warned that the number could increase if interest rates rises. Some 3.9m families do not have enough savings to cover their rent or mortgage for more than a month.

Another timebomb is the number of people retiring before they have paid off their mortgage.  About 40,000 interest-only mortgages are due to mature each year between 2017 and 2032 where the householder will be over 65. Between now and 2020, a third of the shortfalls on endowment mortgages will amount to more than £50,000.

Although the CSJ backed the principle of the “bedroom tax” imposed on tenants in public housing, it said the “spare room subsidy” should not have been removed unless they had refused a “reasonable offer” to “downsize” or work longer hours. It warned there had been “genuine confusion” about the impact of the change and discovered that some local authorities are failing to fully allocate their share of the £25m set aside for discretionary housing payments.

“The potential short-term impact of removing the spare room subsidy on rent arrears is concern in relation to the threat of problem debt,” said the report. There was evidence of some “property swaps” being put on hold until tenants had paid off all their rent arrears, which risked more debts piling up.

 
The CSJ, which originally proposed the merging of benefits into a universal credit, expressed concern that switching to monthly payments might fuel debt problems. Pilot schemes found that 17 per cent of tenants got behind with their rent and the CSJ warned: “Unnecessary and unmanageable debt would severely undermine the important principle behind this welfare change.”

Christian Guy, the CSJ's director, said problem debt has “taken root in the mainstream of British society.” He added: “Years of increased borrowing, rising living costs and struggling to save has forced many families into a debt trap that is proving very difficult to escape.  Some of the poorest people in Britain are cut off from mainstream banking and have no choice now but to turn to loan sharks and high-cost lenders.”

Today's study found that payday lenders have grown their business from £900m in 2008-09 to more than £2bn. The number of people using illegal loan sharks has risen to more than 310,000 each year. “Their use of violence and intimidation terrorises people and communities, enforcing a 'veil of silence' that allows them to escape detection,” said the report.

Warning that debt is rising “at an alarming rate”, the CSJ concluded: “Unless proactive steps are taken, problem debt in the UK will continue to grow unabated. The current levels of debt are worrying because they not only have severe financial implications,but also more wide-ranging impacts on people's mental health, family stability, and ability to work. These are especially pronounced amongst low-income households and the vulnerable.”

Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, said yesterday that food banks will “not go away any time soon” amid a “new and terrible” rise in poverty.  He told the General Synod of the Church of England that the number of people being admitted to hospital with malnutrition is a “dark stain on our consciences.”The Independent revealed on Monday that the number of cases treated at NHS hospitals has almost doubled since the economic downturn.

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

JPMorgan to pay $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$13 000 000 000 for beautiful lies

JPMorgan Reaches Record $13 Billion Mortgage Settlement

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) will pay a record $13 billion to resolve U.S. Justice Department probes into the bank’s sale of mortgage bonds that officials said helped feed the financial chaos of 2008.
The accord settles allegations that JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. lender by assets, misled investors and the public when it sold bonds backed by faulty residential mortgages, according to Justice Department statement today. U.S. and state officials blamed the bank’s actions in the statement for helping to cause the credit crisis, and said the settlement doesn’t shield JPMorgan or its employees from criminal charges.
“Without a doubt, the conduct uncovered in this investigation helped sow the seeds of the mortgage meltdown,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in the statement. “JPMorgan was not the only financial institution during this period to knowingly bundle toxic loans and sell them to unsuspecting investors, but that is no excuse for the firm’s behavior.”
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan’s chief executive officer, said in a separate statement that the settlement resolves a significant portion of claims tied to mortgage-backed securities issued by the lender and two firms it bought during the credit crisis, Bear Stearns Cos. and Washington Mutual Inc.’s bank unit. The sum is covered by reserves, and JPMorgan is cooperating with the Justice Department’s criminal case, the bank said.

Misleading Investors

JPMorgan rose 0.7 percent to $56.15 today in New York. The stock returned 79 percent including dividends since the start of 2012, outpacing the 68 percent total return for the 81-company Standard & Poor’s 500 Financials Index and 37 percent for the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Related News:
JPMorgan misled investors by regularly misrepresenting that the mortgage loans in various securities complied with underwriting guidelines, according to the Justice Department statement. Employees knew the loans didn’t meet standards and let the sales proceed anyway, according to the agency.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said the bank acknowledged “serious, material misrepresentations to the public.” Chief Financial Officer Marianne Lake disputed that idea when questioned during a conference call with analysts.
“We didn’t say that we acknowledge serious misrepresentation of facts,” Lake said. “We do acknowledge the statement of facts but obviously don’t admit to any violation of law.”

Payment Terms

Terms call for JPMorgan to pay $9 billion for federal and state claims, with $2 billion to the Justice Department, $1.4 billion to the National Credit Union Administration and $515.4 million to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.
The state of New York will receive $613.8 million, California will get $298.9 million, Illinoiswill get $100 million, Delaware will get $19.7 million and Massachusetts will receive $34.4 million, according to the Justice Department’s statement.
The agreement includes a previously disclosed accord to end a 2011 Federal Housing Finance Agency lawsuit. The bank will devote $4 billion to consumer relief for affected homeowners, including principal forgiveness, loan modifications and efforts to reduce blight, according to the statement.
The bank also agreed not to pursue reimbursement from the FDIC for bad loans issued by WaMu. The FDIC and JPMorgan have wrangled about who should pay claims tied to faulty mortgages issued by Seattle-based WaMu, which ranked among the biggest providers of subprime home loans before it collapsed during the financial crisis. The FDIC seized WaMu’s banking operations and sold them to JPMorgan for $1.9 billion.

Dimon’s Stance

JPMorgan still faces probes by the Justice Department that include its energy-trading business, recruiting practices in Asia and its relationship with convicted Ponzi scheme operator Bernard Madoff. Legal bills drove the bank to its first quarterly loss under Dimon, and he has told investors the clashes probably will continue. Before that, Dimon had led the company to three years of record earnings, including a $21 billion profit for 2012.
“Our preference is always to resolve it,” Dimon told investors during a conference call last month to discuss the New York-based bank’s $380 million third-quarter loss. “It is very hard to fight with your regulators or the federal government, but we want them to be fair and reasonable.”
Dimon, 57, negotiated outlines of the deal in a call with Holder last month following a Washington meeting on Sept. 26, people familiar with the matter said at the time. The bank is trying to bundle costs for as many legal cases as possible into the second half of this year, one of the people said.

Levin Reacts

The six biggest U.S. banks, led by JPMorgan and Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America Corp., have piled up more than $100 billion in legal costs since the financial crisis, a figure that exceeds all of the dividends paid to shareholders in the past five years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who leads the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, called the JPMorgan accord “a step toward accountability for the Wall Street recklessness and excessive greed that devastated our economy.” Levin’s panel wrote a 2011 report on the origins of the 2008 credit crisis.
Schneiderman, New York’s attorney general, said at a news conference the settlement is “a major step in restoring confidence in our financial system,” and the first of more such agreements with other banks.
Further cases will follow the settlement with JPMorgan, said Tony West, a U.S. associate attorney general, said in an interview today with Bloomberg Television. The group of state and federal officials investigating misconduct in the securitization of mortgage loans is looking at “a number of institutions and a number of deals,” West said. The common thread is that banks haven’t disclosed the risky nature of the loans, he said.
To contact the reporters on this story: Dawn Kopecki in New York atdkopecki@bloomberg.net; Tom Schoenberg in Washington attschoenberg@bloomberg.net; Laurie Asseo in Washington at lasseo1@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net; Peter Eichenbaum at peichenbaum@bloomberg.net