Anger as Bank of America withholds bonuses after $4 billion Merrill payout
Merrill Lynch under investigation by New York attorney general over its $4 billion bonus payout
NEW YORK & CHARLOTTE, NC - News that Bank of America (BofA) will withhold bonus payments of more than $50,000 to investment bank employees has inflamed the tension between BofA staff and those of Merrill Lynch, who were paid $4 billion in early bonuses, only days before BofA completed its purchase of Merrill Lynch on January 1.
Bank of America employees that were to receive bonuses of more than $50,000 will not get a year-end bonus for 2008, but will receive the deferred payments in one-third increments in 2010, 2011 and 2012, according to a report in the Financial Times.
New York attorney-general Andrew Cuomo is already investigating Merrill Lynch chief executive John Thain's decision to accelerate the payment of $4 billion in bonuses before the BofA takeover, the deal for which was completed in principle in September 2008. Merrill then passed the buck for $15.8 billion in 2008 losses over to BofA, which has since been forced to seek a $20 billion US government recapitalisation as well as Treasury guarantees for $118 billion in bad debts.
Part of that bailout package restricts BofA from paying out bonuses to its employees - remuneration restrictions from which Merrill was immune during its final days of independence. Cuomo already issued a subpoena on January 27 and is keen to grill Thain over the bank's rushed $4 billion payout.
Bank of America boss Ken Lewis described the Merrill takeover as "the deal of a lifetime" when initially struck last September. It is understood Lewis paid close to $20 billion to acquire Merrill Lynch - once Wall Street's largest brokerage.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive
Fed to move tailored-capital goalposts soon, says Bowman
Banks hope agencies will index triggers for harsher capital rules to economic growth
Will SEC reporting proposal supercharge alt data providers?
Move that would allow companies to opt out of quarterly reporting disclosures welcomed
EU lawmaker calls for review of Luxembourg’s cross-border rules
Grand Duchy accused of side-stepping rules aimed at prising away banking business from London
Un-American or un-JPM? Surcharge rethink divides G-Sibs
Some see sense in rethink to funding indicator, others call for a backtrack