3 ms·

US Regulators fine all banks in the US that they catch flagrantly breaking the law. They don't just fine European banks - have a look at how much they have fine

US Regulators fine all banks in the US that they catch flagrantly breaking the law. They don't just fine European banks - have a look at how much they have fined the likes of JPMorgan or BoA over the last few years. Likewise, regulators in Europe dish out fines a-plenty. The FSA certainly did over the LIBOR scandal recently. European banks could mitigate risk in the US by trading legally or by ceasing trading there at all. If they really think they can't trade legally then their business is not welcome.

ivanca 11y ago
...but you forgot a little detail, the US saves each of its banks if they get any close to becoming bankrupt. They don't save foreign banks if the same happens, at all.
- JetSetWilly 11y ago
  Entirely false. Foreign banks received plenty of US bailout funds for their US activities. See for example: http://www.newstatesman.com/2010/12/financial-british-money-fed http://www.newstatesman.com/2010/12/financial-british-money-... - british banks alone took 640 billion in aid from the fed. Multinationals just don't work like that.
  - _Codemonkeyism 11y ago
    With foreign banks you mean British banks based on the linked article? The "british banks alone" gives the wrong direction based on your source.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
zmb_ 11y ago
It's not the regulators, it's the prosecutors in New York, who have jurisdiction over the European banks since USD transactions are cleared there. The problem is that banks absolutely cannot afford to risk going to court, since losing a case could mean losing their ability to deal in USD, which would be the end for them. That means that the banks must settle any case brought by the prosecutors. The prosecutors in New York have used this leverage to squeeze billions in settlements from the European banks. The "justice"system has basically turned into what amounts to a protection racket.
- narrator 11y ago
  Which is why the Chinese are trying to get out from under all this influence by creating their own parallel version of various aspects of the western financial system[1][2]: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_UnionPay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_UnionPay [2] https://www.rt.com/business/239189-china-payment-system-ready/ https://www.rt.com/business/239189-china-payment-system-read...
- pizza234 11y ago
  With "protecting" you mean for example protecting the money laundering business in Mexico? Your perspective is too generalized, thus ultimately false. The case depends on the size of the bank. In the case of a famous British bank, the prosecution literally stated that they could not prosecute the bank because it would have been too much of a big impact on the economy. They got fined with the equivalent of a few weeks of profit, and who knows how much they ever profited from such illegal activities. Doesn't sound a protection racket to me.
- et2o 11y ago
  Won't someone think of the banks!? Your comment is farcical; it's been widely written about how lightly banks and other financial institutions get off following egregious violations of law.
_pmf_ 11y ago
> have a look at how much they have fined the likes of JPMorgan or BoA over the last few years. Pocket money they pay out of their bailout spoils.
cm2187 11y ago
Not all american banks. This example is pretty spectacular: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4988f704-40a4-11e2-aafa-00144feabdc0.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4988f704-40a4-11e2-aafa-00144feabd... This is a fraud nearly as bad as Kerviel, and happening at about the same time ($8bn unauthorised position), and where Goldman quietly fired the trader and did not report the fraud, which enabled the trader to work at another bank. And for that Goldman was given a mega-fine of..... $1.5m. It helps to have friends.

ivanca 11y ago

...but you forgot a little detail, the US saves each of its banks if they get any close to becoming bankrupt. They don't save foreign banks if the same happens, at all.

JetSetWilly 11y ago
Entirely false. Foreign banks received plenty of US bailout funds for their US activities. See for example: http://www.newstatesman.com/2010/12/financial-british-money-fed http://www.newstatesman.com/2010/12/financial-british-money-... - british banks alone took 640 billion in aid from the fed. Multinationals just don't work like that.
- _Codemonkeyism 11y ago
  With foreign banks you mean British banks based on the linked article? The "british banks alone" gives the wrong direction based on your source.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

zmb_ 11y ago

It's not the regulators, it's the prosecutors in New York, who have jurisdiction over the European banks since USD transactions are cleared there. The problem is that banks absolutely cannot afford to risk going to court, since losing a case could mean losing their ability to deal in USD, which would be the end for them. That means that the banks must settle any case brought by the prosecutors. The prosecutors in New York have used this leverage to squeeze billions in settlements from the European banks. The "justice"system has basically turned into what amounts to a protection racket.

narrator 11y ago
Which is why the Chinese are trying to get out from under all this influence by creating their own parallel version of various aspects of the western financial system[1][2]: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_UnionPay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_UnionPay [2] https://www.rt.com/business/239189-china-payment-system-ready/ https://www.rt.com/business/239189-china-payment-system-read...
pizza234 11y ago
With "protecting" you mean for example protecting the money laundering business in Mexico? Your perspective is too generalized, thus ultimately false. The case depends on the size of the bank. In the case of a famous British bank, the prosecution literally stated that they could not prosecute the bank because it would have been too much of a big impact on the economy. They got fined with the equivalent of a few weeks of profit, and who knows how much they ever profited from such illegal activities. Doesn't sound a protection racket to me.
et2o 11y ago
Won't someone think of the banks!? Your comment is farcical; it's been widely written about how lightly banks and other financial institutions get off following egregious violations of law.

_pmf_ 11y ago

> have a look at how much they have fined the likes of JPMorgan or BoA over the last few years. Pocket money they pay out of their bailout spoils.

cm2187 11y ago

Not all american banks. This example is pretty spectacular: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4988f704-40a4-11e2-aafa-00144feabdc0.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4988f704-40a4-11e2-aafa-00144feabd... This is a fraud nearly as bad as Kerviel, and happening at about the same time ($8bn unauthorised position), and where Goldman quietly fired the trader and did not report the fraud, which enabled the trader to work at another bank. And for that Goldman was given a mega-fine of..... $1.5m. It helps to have friends.