TPM Muckraker

« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Congress To Probe Geithner's "Special Purpose" Plan To Skirt Pay Caps On Bankers

Yesterday we puzzled over the mixed messages we were hearing from Obama officials over the veracity of a Washington Post report that it was using Enron-style "special purpose vehicles" to undermine executive pay restrictions on bailed out banks: senior adviser David Axelrod sheepishly defended the strategy on one Sunday talk show, while Tim Geithner denied it altogether on another. But newly-promoted House Oversight Chairman Ed Towns is getting to the bottom of it, reports the Post today, in a story that sheds some much-needed light on the conflicting stories: the strategy began with the Treasury Department's $1 trillion consumer and business lending initiative, which is in part an expansion of the Federal Reserve's Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, which is open to the American subsidiaries of foreign banks, which Treasury presumably wants to participate in the programs without having to deal with the added diplomatic headache of subjecting foreign bankers to rules designed to satisfy American voters. Unsurprisingly, not everyone in Congress is opposed to that.

A senior House aide said he agreed with the Treasury's policy and that he believed a recent vote by the House on another piece of executive compensation legislation showed that Congress did not intend the restrictions to apply to firms that did not receive direct capital injections. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment.
Oversight sees things differently, however.

But staff members of the House Oversight Committee rejected Geithner's argument and said hedge funds and other firms benefiting from taxpayer funds should be subject to pay limits. "I can't think of a single member on the committee who would agree with" Treasury's position, said another senior committee aide who also was not authorized to comment by name.
And that, we suppose, is why we have an Oversight Committee. (They'll need something to do while they're still waiting for the Justice Department to release the records of its longtime AIG fly on the wall James Cole.)

2 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

A key facet of the meltdown is that the American public no longer trusts what Larry Summers once described as "...sophisticated financial institutions that would appear to be eminently capable of protecting themselves from fraud and counterparty insolvencies and most of which are already subject to basic safety and soundness regulation under existing banking and securities laws."

Obama's people must get their stories straight before they're powdered up for TV. This doubletalk that we don't/do allow executive pay cap loopholes looks a lot like the opaque old days...

user-pic

TARP is not PPIP. No reason to force the same standards for both.

QED

PS - The problems with PPIP suggest it should not happen. Banks which need to sell assets to stay solvent should do that or be closed down. THEN and only THEN, should the FDIC consider subsidizing asset sales to bonafide third party bidders in a fashion similar to PPIP.

PIMCO needs to take its losses and grin, not take handouts and cry all the way to the bank.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe
Tip Line

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Zachary
Roth

Bio

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address