CITI and Wells call legal hiatus over Wachovia
NEW YORK, SAN FRANSISCO, CA & CHARLOTTE, NC - The two rival bidders for Wachovia have called a temporary ceasefire in their legal struggle, after Wells Fargo announced it had won the competition for the troubled US bank. Citigroup had been reported as the preferred bidder and gained approval from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) until the surprise $15.1 billion deal between Wells and Wachovia.
Citi has promised legal action against the other two banks involved.
The FDIC-approved deal with Citi was for Wachovia's banking business but excluded the bank's securities brokerage and mutual funds units.
It is understood the deal with Wells was favoured by Wachovia because it covered all operations, allowing the bank's structure to remain intact.
Ongoing talks with the Federal Reserve have since resulted in separate statements from both Wells and Citi claiming a "litigation standstill" over the future of Wachovia's assets.
Wells has said it expects to incur merger integration costs of $10 billion with Wachovia, which has itself reported a $23.9 billion Q3 loss. The legal ceasefire agreement seems confirmation of a necessary compromise deal between the two rivals.
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
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion
Iosco chief sees no need for CCPs to hold more capital
CCPs have shown resilience in volatile times without extra skin-in-the-game, says Buenaventura
Banks urge EBA to delay risk benchmarking amid Iran conflict
Risk managers say hypothetical portfolio exercise clashes with severe market turbulence
EU officials tamp down hopes for bank capital relief
Capital cuts are not a done deal in EC’s review of competitiveness, despite US deregulation
EU regulators clash over ceding supervision to Esma
Belgian and Spanish regulators differ on drive for centralised oversight of cross-border firms
Why Trump’s latest Truth should make TradFi twitchy
Wall Street is becoming the villain in US president’s crypto movie
EBA guidance prompts banks to rethink CSRBB perimeters
Banks will likely have to expand their credit spread risk coverage following recommendations