4 ms·
If nobody goes to jail, and the bank retains its licenses, then the fine is meaningless no matter how large. The fine is just seen as a poor investment, which
by binarymax 4y ago
If nobody goes to jail, and the bank retains its licenses, then the fine is meaningless no matter how large. The fine is just seen as a poor investment, which is common in finance. They lost money, and move on to the next investment.
People need to go to jail for these transgressions, otherwise there is little disincentive.
- mirekrusin 4y agoWho said poor investment? $1.9 billion is just small cut on return to pay, no?
- dan-robertson 4y agoWhat was their return here? It looks like they were mostly transmitting money and doing currency exchange on <$1B. They’d surely make at most few percent on that, so much less than the fine. Did I misunderstand what the numbers in the article meant? Maybe they are suspected to have facilitated much more laundering that couldn’t be proven, but that would need to be approaching $100B for them to break even. I guess the actual return was having a smaller compliance department (not gonna save you $2B though) and getting more business due to lax controls making onboarding easier (I find it hard to believe that the advantage would make them $2B though).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]