Bank of America said to cut 3 managing directors, 12 directors
Wang Bing, Patrick Steinemann among senior bankers leaving
Bank of America Corp. fired at least 15 senior bankers at its investment-banking unit in Asia this week as it pares jobs globally, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
Among those let go by the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank were three managing directors and 12 directors, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing confidential information. Bank of America also eliminated junior positions and back-office jobs, they said without providing details on those cuts.
Wang Bing, a managing director in the China investment-banking business, and Patrick Steinemann, co-head of Asia industrials banking, are among executives leaving the bank, the people said. Most of the cuts came in Hong Kong, along with reductions in Singapore and Australia, the people said. Andrew Brown, a managing director responsible for coverage of top clients, also left, they said.
Investment banks worldwide have been cutting jobs in recent months as stock-market turmoil and a slowing Chinese economy put the brakes on dealmaking and trading.Citigroup Inc. this week forecast first-quarter revenue from investment banking will tumble 25 percent, and Deutsche Bank AG on Friday announced steep cuts in bonuses.
HSBC is hosed…
HSBC has lost its latest bid to keep some portions ofa potentially explosive report about its anti-money-laundering efforts from being made public.
A Brooklyn federal judge nixed many of the UK bank giant’s requests to black out parts of the 250-page report produced by an outside monitor in the wake of HSBC’s $1.9 billion settlement with the Department of Justice.
Judge John Gleeson — who has already rejected requests from the Justice Department and HSBC to keep the January 2015 report sealed — said many of HSBC’s proposed redactions were “over-inclusive.”
Foreign banks including HSBC Holdings Plc and Deutsche Bank AG are pushing back against the Federal Reserve’s proposals on implementing rules designed to end too-big-to-fail, saying they are burdensome and unfair to the U.S. units of the world’s biggest lenders.
Under the Fed’s proposals, U.S. units of foreign banks affected would need an extra layer of debt available to be wiped out in a crisis, on top of securities qualifying as total loss-absorbing capacity, or TLAC. Both layers of debt deemed “readily available for bail-in” would have to be sold to the parent companies, rather than third-party investors, according to the draft rules, which were released for comment Oct. 30.
The rules are unfair because similar-sized domestic U.S. lenders aren’t subject to the same requirements, banks and lobby groups including Banco Santander SA and the Institute of International Bankers say in their comments. In addition, the requirement to push losses up to parents runs counter to resolution plans designed to stop contagion.
“In our view, the proposed rules would impose excessive costs” on the affected banks’ U.S. units and “lead to competitive disparities and unfair treatment in international banking without commensurate benefits to resolvability or U.S. financial stability,” the IIB said in its response to the Fed’s proposals.
Here’s the full break down of the Wall Street Journal analyzed:
- A huge chunk, $49 billion of the funds are with the Treasury Department. The agency initially received $14.5 billion from settlements, though other government agencies, including $34 billion from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other government-charted housing associations, later funneled money to the department.
- $45 billion was put aside for consumer relief.
- $10 billion was set aside to be used for housing-related federal agencies and to whistleblowers who called banks out. Some of the funds were also go back to the Treasury.
- $5.3 billion went to states, which appeared to use the money as they saw fit, including directing the money to pension plans which were hit hard by the fallout from mortgage-back securities.
- $447 million was given to the Justice Department, which had a role negotiating with banks.
- Some $1.2 billion could not be tracked down or is unaccounted for.
An arbitration panel awarded an ex-advisor more than $1.7 million from Wells Fargo for wrongful termination and other misconduct.
At the same time, the panel also rejected the firm’s claims for damages related to a breach of a promissory note.
The arbitration dispute started after advisor Bruce H. Tuchman was discharged in June 2013 for allegedly failing to follow Wells Fargo’s policy with regard to “contacting customers prior to entering orders,” according to a note in his BrokerCheck file.
African-American led organizations shut out from administering Black business loan fund supported by JPMorgan Chase
SACRAMENTO (CBM) — In October 2015, JPMorgan Chase & Co. announced the launch of an African-American initiative aimed at helping Black borrowers secure financing. The move was prompted by findings from a study highlighting the difficulties Black businesses face in obtaining capital.
JPMorgan Chase partnered with San Fernando Valley based and Latino led non-profit Valley Economic Development Center(VEDC), a California 501(c)3 Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI), to create The National African-American Small Business Loan Fund in an effort to boost economic opportunity for Black-owned businesses in Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York. VEDC’s goal is to create a $30 million loan fund to which JPMorgan has committed $3 million so far.
“In particular, technical assistance and access to affordable capital are real barriers for African-American owned businesses,” said Diedra Porche, market manager for Business Banking at JPMorgan Chase in Los Angeles.
Small businesses can receive loans between $35,000 and $250,000 in the program. In order to qualify the business must be more than two years old, 51 percent owned or controlled by one or more African-Americans, and have 1 to 200 employees with $2 million in revenue.
Some African-American financial experts and business leaders like Aubry Stone, President and CEO of the California Black Chamber of Commerce, applaud the efforts of JPMorgan Chase to solve this problem. Stone is very critical and concerned that African-American led organizations were not enlisted or invited to help administer the financing.
“If this fund is set up to help African-American businesses, would it not benefit the community if an African-American-led organization like the Nehemiah Corporation or others were chosen to lead this effort?” Stone asked. “That’s a clear win-win situation helping to achieve the goal of the initiative and strengthen our communities’ financial infrastructure.”
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
On July 25, these superdelegates will cast votes at the Democratic National Convention for whomever they want, regardless of primary and caucus outcomes. Democrats like to describe superdelegates as mostly elected officials and prominent party members, including President Obama and former Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter.
But this group, which consists of 21 governors, 40 senators and 193 representatives, only makes up about a third of the superdelegates. Many of the remaining 463 convention delegates are establishment insiders who get their status after years of donations and service to the party. Dozens of the 437 delegates in the DNC member category are registered federal and state lobbyists, according to an ABC News analysis.
In fact, when you remove elected officials from the superdelegate pool, at least one in seven of the rest are former or current lobbyists registered on the federal and state level, according to lobbying disclosure records.
– From the ABC News article: The Reason Why Dozens of Lobbyists Will Be Democratic Presidential Delegates
In HUD’s latest mortgagee letter, the agency outlined a new conveyance condition standard for default properties that significantly impacts the scope of work for mortgage servicers and their vendors.
In the new mortgagee letter, HUD mandates that servicers repair properties with insurable damages to the insurance adjuster’s scope of loss, a stricter requirement than many companies historically met when conveying HUD properties.
In the past, many mortgage servicers would file a hazard claim and wait to remediate the damage to a property until issues with tenancy and title were resolved. Now, however, this approach will likely increase the servicer’s risk in several areas.
First, waiting to remediate the damage means that servicers must focus on document retention and distribution to a number of affected parties.
“The departments responsible for property preservation and property condition must have access and understanding of the insurer’s claim documents, particularly the insurance adjuster’s scope of loss, and be able to communicate what is needed at the property to their field network,” said Patrick Nackley, director of marketing and business development at Superior Home Services. “So if the department filing the hazard claim is not the department managing property preservation and remediation, the mortgage servicer must have a strong focus on inter-office communication and document sharing.”