Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Pay czar chose not to go after $1.6B in bank pay

Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:00 AM EDT
business, politics, us, treasury-department, pay-czar
Daniel Wagner, AP Business Writer

FILE - In this Thursday, July 22, 2010 file photo, Kenneth Feinberg, administrator Gulf Coast Claims Facility, testifies in the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington Thursday, July 22, 2010. The Treasury Department's pay czar said Friday that 17 banks gave their top executives $1.6 billion in lavish payments while they were receiving billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded bailouts. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's pay czar said Friday that he did not try to recoup $1.6 billion in lavish compensation to top executives at bailed-out banks because he thought shaming the banks was punishment enough.

Kenneth Feinberg said 17 banks receiving taxpayer money from the $700 billion financial bailout made "ill-advised" payments to their executives. But he stopped short of calling them "contrary to the public interest" — language that would have signaled a fight to get the money back.

Feinberg couldn't force the banks to repay the money. But the law instructed him to negotiate with banks to return money if he determined that allowing them to keep it was not in the public interest.

He said such a fight could have exposed banks to lawsuits from shareholders trying to recapture the executives' money. Feinberg said his public shaming of the 17 banks was sufficient.

"I'm not suggesting we should blink, or turn the other cheek," Feinberg said in an interview with The Associated Press. "These 17 companies were singled out for obviously bad behavior. The question is, at what point are you piling on and going beyond what is warranted?"

By avoiding using the strongest language in his report, he could criticize the banks without endangering the weak economic recovery, Feinberg said.

"Certain aspects of the financial system still confront fragility," he said in an interview. "I'm not looking to compound that fragility beyond what I thought was necessary."

Among the companies he let go are two whose bailouts will cost taxpayers billions: American International Group Inc. and CIT Group Inc.

Rather than demanding they return the money, Feinberg invited the 17 banks to give their boards of directors more power to withhold pay during future crises. The request was voluntary.

Feinberg reviewed 419 companies that received bailout money before pay curbs were enacted by Congress in February 2009.

The review covered the period from October 2008 to February 2009. The starting point was when banks began receiving bailout money from the bailout, formally known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The ending point was when Congress enacted pay curbs on institutions receiving government support.

He determined that a total of $1.7 billion in payments were made during that period that would have violated the guidelines adopted later. And $1.6 billion of that amount was paid out by 17 of the country's largest financial institutions.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Daniel Wagner's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (11)
SmallTechBus

Bonuses for performance apparently doesn't stand for "good" performance.

  • 6 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:09 PM EDT
Nick46

The truth is that the "pay czar" has no authority over the banks. The bottom line is he can recommend but they don't have to listen.

    #1.1 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:38 PM EDT
    SmallTechBus

    The banks (public stock holder companies) should be accountable to stockholders for this. The "pay czar" ifluence is way too late in the process. Bonuses for dismal financial company performance should not happen in the first place.

    • 1 vote
    #1.2 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:09 PM EDT
    Reply
    onevoiceamongmany

    This is just one more example of the corrupt corporate culture that pervades into our society each and every day that "what's good for business is good for America" is propagated. It's time to end the fantasy and wake up to the reality that our representatives represent the corporate or special interest, not the US citizen.

    • 6 votes
    Reply#2 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:21 PM EDT
    upswing

    I wouldn't trust Kenneth Fienberg as far as I could throw him.

    His job -- per 9/11, the Gulf and as czar -- is to reduce public outrage, o as to appease corporate and banking discomfort, not to foster systemic improvements... As is evident in his statement that there is nothing that he can do about the recently past finanical crimes.

    • 4 votes
    Reply#3 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:46 PM EDT
    onevoiceamongmany

    I will have to admit I don't know much about Feinberg or his work relating to the 9/11 funds etc. I am reading up a tiny bit but if you have any really good source material I would always appreciate it.

    • 2 votes
    #3.1 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:54 PM EDT
    upswing

    onevoice:

    If I were you, I'd take a look at his recent presentation to the people of the Gulf. (I believe it is on C-Span.)

    His goal, in my opinion, is clearly primarily to shield BP fom crippling law suits.

    But this presentation can also support the opinion that he is a fair and impartial arbiter of claims.

    You can decide for yourself.

    During the 9/11 fund payots, those who sued privately receive more than $5 million each -- more than twice that received by those who accepted the 9/11 Don't Sue Us Fund payment.

    Why would a fund manager who has the victims' best interests at heart knowingly encourage people to accept half of what is otherwise available to them?

    • 3 votes
    #3.2 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:01 PM EDT
    onevoiceamongmany

    You bring up some good points. I will have to do some research on him. One of the many projects on my docket haha. Currently I am writing an article on the media and the left right divide.

    • 1 vote
    #3.3 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:12 PM EDT
    upswing

    onevoice:

    Currently I am writing an article on the media and the left right divide.

    For the Vine, I hope.

    I'm aleady looking forward to reading it! :-)

    • 2 votes
    #3.4 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:22 PM EDT
    onevoiceamongmany

    yes yes of course. It'll be up by 430 today I hope. In any case this will just stoke the populist fire more than anything that is already rampant in this country presently.

    • 2 votes
    #3.5 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:48 PM EDT
    Reply
    jordantoDeleted
    Samantha Joy

    But if the banks had any shame, then . . .

    Oh never mind.

    • 1 vote
    Reply#5 - Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:08 PM EDT
    Leave a Comment:
    You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
    You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
    (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
    Newsvine Privacy Statement
    As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
    FUN STUFF:
    • Leaderboard |
    • E-Mail Alerts |
    • Top of the Vine |
    • Newsvine Live |
    • Newsvine Archives |
    • The Greenhouse
    COMPANY STUFF:
    • Code of Honor |
    • Company Info |
    • Contact Us |
    • Jobs |
    • User Agreement |
    • Privacy Policy |
    • About our ads
    LEGAL STUFF:
    • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
    • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
    • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com