Azernews.Az

By Bloomberg

Wall Street banks and other financial firms should pay new fees to bankroll their own government oversight, according to a member of the top U.S. derivatives regulator.

Sharon Y. Bowen, a Democrat on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, said Congress should let the agency set fees on banks and other companies that trade derivatives. Fees on firms that register with the CFTC and on specific trades would help the agency -- which says its $250 million budget is inadequate -- respond faster to industry requests, she said in testimony at a House Agriculture subcommittee hearing Tuesday.

Bowen said the agency’s lack of resources is hampering its ability to function.

CFTC Chairman Timothy Massad, Bowen and Commissioner Mark Wetjen, a fellow Democrat, have said the agency needs more money to handle new oversight duties granted after the 2008 financial crisis. While President Barack Obama’s administration has backed fees to finance the agency, Congress has yet to take up legislation and any effort would face stiff opposition from Republicans and the financial industry.

Terrence Duffy, executive chairman of CME Group Inc., told the agriculture committee at a March 25 hearing that fees on the industry would raise trading costs and encourage business to go overseas.

Compliance Policy

Brokers Selling IRAs Face Tougher Rules in Obama-Backed Plan

Brokers and insurance agents providing retirement-savings advice would have to put clients’ interests ahead of their own under an Obama administration plan that will face stiff opposition from Wall Street and Republican lawmakers.

The Labor Department proposal announced Tuesday is a win for Democrats and consumer advocates, and a setback for bankers who had angled for a standard to be set by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which oversees a broader range of investment activities. Adoption of a final rule could take six months or longer, according to RBC Capital Markets, providing plenty of time for congressional scrutiny and industry lobbying.

Under the plan, brokers would have a legal duty to put clients’ interests first, a shift that could reshape how they steer clients and collect fees, and potentially create winners and losers among mutual funds and other products. The changes would extend protections to the $7.4 trillion held in IRA accounts, a common vehicle for retirement savings.

President Barack Obama endorsed Labor’s plan in February. It’s also backed by Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Democrat who has scolded banks over their treatment of consumers.

Wall Street has spent more than four years lobbying against Labor’s effort. Led by banks such as Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo Advisors, the industry has argued that costlier regulations could take away options for smaller investors.

For more, click here.

Compliance Action

Swiss Banks Urge Clients to Disclose in U.S. Tax-Evasion Endgame

Swiss banks, for decades the bastions of secrecy, are pressuring U.S. clients to disclose their accounts, in an effort to head off billions of dollars in potential fines for helping Americans evade taxes.

Faced with the threat of penalties that could bankrupt some of them, almost 100 of the country’s banks are calling thousands of U.S. clients in an 11th-hour push to get them to disclose any offshore accounts they may be hiding. Customers are being asked to prove they have paid any taxes due, according to a dozen lawyers for banks or their customers. Some have even had their accounts partially blocked to force them to comply, according to the Swiss banking ombudsman.

As the U.S. government’s largest crackdown on offshore tax evasion enters its final stretch, the banks are trying to reduce any fines they face. Under the amnesty program, if banks can’t show clients paid any taxes owed, the government will assume they didn’t -- and fines will be larger.

The U.S. wants to conclude all cases this year, Acting Assistant U.S. Attorney General Caroline Ciraolo said when she announced a deal with a Swiss bank earlier this year.

Several banks are using tactics clients view as strong- arming, such as blocking funds or threatening to reveal names, said Thierry Boitelle, a lawyer with Bonnard Lawson in Geneva. He has advised U.S. taxpayers and Swiss private banks involved in the program.

For more, click here.

Clydesdale Gets Record $30 Million FCA Fine for PPI Failings

Clydesdale Bank Plc was fined a record 20.7 million pounds ($30 million) by the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority for serious failings in how it handled clients’ complaints over payment protection insurance.

Clydesdale mishandled PPI grievances, and of the 126,600 decided from May 2011 to July 2013, almost 75 percent may have been rejected unfairly or been paid less than they deserved, according to the FCA. It also misrepresented its policies when asked about the redress process, the FCA said Tuesday.

U.K. banks have spent years reimbursing clients who’d been sold PPI they didn’t want or need. The Clydesdale penalty, which was reduced because the bank agreed to settle early, dwarfs past fines for mishandling PPI redress.

“In 2011 we introduced changes to our policies and procedures that were designed to help us respond to PPI complaints,” Debbie Crosbie, acting chief executive officer at Clydesdale, said in an e-mailed statement. “A number of these changes were inappropriate and have disadvantaged some of our customers. We got this wrong and I am sorry for that.”

For more, click here.

Courts

JPMorgan Loses Bid to Renew Security of $1.5 Billion GM Loan

JPMorgan Chase & Co. lost another bid to reclaim security it gave up by mistake on a $1.5 billion loan to General Motors Co.’s bankrupt predecessor.

A federal appeals court Monday declined to reconsider a ruling that the bank had forfeited its collateral. In the long- running case, JPMorgan argued its lawyers gave up rights to most of GM’s assets when they accidentally terminated the security on the $1.5 billion financing while dealing with a payoff on a separate $300 million loan.

Joseph Evangelisti, a JPMorgan spokesman, declined to comment on the latest decision.

JPMorgan might fight the decision, or try to recover losses from lawyers and fellow lenders.

The appeals court case is Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Motors Liquidation Co. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, 13-2187, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Manhattan). The bankruptcy is In re Motors Liquidation Co., 09- bk-50026, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). The switch suits are In re General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, 14-md-02543, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).