Showing posts with label Goldman Sachs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Goldman Sachs. Show all posts

Thursday, June 21, 2018

Some young bright minds leaving financial establishment firms to work in crypto area

Some bright young minds in financial establishment firms are moving to the cryptocurrency area after already making enough money in the crypto market in their spare time to leave their present jobs.

Many in the Wall Street establishment debate whether cryptocurrencies will become a profit center or a legal liability but meanwhile some of their employees have grown wealthy by investing in the area in their spare time. For them the argument is over as they turn down promising jobs at top firms to move over to the growing cryptocurrency market. They are leaving high and rising monthly salaries for the risky crypto area where they have already amassed enough to abandon their jobs. They are ardent believers in the new blockchain technology behind coins such as bitcoin and are starting their own businesses.
Asim Ahmad
Asim Ahmad worked at BlackRock advising pension funds on investments in alternative assets and hedge funds. He invested in cryptocurrencies in his spare time. BlackRock is an American global management company with headquarters in New York. The company is the world's largest asset manager. It has a whopping $6.3 trillion under management as of December 2017. The company operates globally with 70 offices in 30 countries but with clients in 100 countries. BlackRock has been called the world's largest shadow bank.
Ahmad said: “I’m in a position where it doesn’t make sense to work at BlackRock anymore. The one-day volatility of my portfolio is higher than my salary, so if I get a few investments right then I’ll have made the same as my yearly wage and everything else on top is a bonus.”
Ahmad now helps run a fund that invests in blockchain ventures that have a positive social or environmental impact.
Adrian Xinli Zhang
Zhang was rising up in the ranks of Deutsche Bank AG in New York but after he discovered bitcoin the 29-year old made enough trading in digital currencies that he decided to leave the bank a month after he had just been promoted as a director. Zhang was formerly a trader at the centralized risk desk at the bank. Zhang is said to have traded more than $1 million in crypto assets.
Deutsche Bank AG 
is a Germany-based investment bank that also provides investment services. It is has headquarters in Frankfurt Germany but has offices elsewhere including New York. It is present in 58 countries. As of December last year Deutsche Bank was the 17th largest bank in the world by assets. It is a component of Euro Stoxx 50 and DAX stock market indices.
Goldman Sachs also has seen at least three front office employees leave the company including Jonathan Cheesman 36 and Justin Saslaw 29 after making profits from cryptocurrencies.
Wall Street opinion on cryptocurrencies is mixed
Adam Grimsley, a former Blackrock fixed-income specialist who has co-founded a crypto hedge fund in London, said: “You’ve seen a bifurcation internally at many larger houses where senior managers are very skeptical about crypto, while graduates and younger team members are very positive. The youngsters may have less intellectual baggage and may be more open-minded, but they also have less responsibility for managing risk and working out the practicalities of bolting on crypto to the existing business.”
Many who support the block chain technology are at the same time skeptical of the value of the associated cryptocurrencies.
Chris Matta, just 28, said that the crypto market was definitely taking talent away from financial services. Matta left Goldman Sachs' money management unit in 2017 to co-found an invest firm for digital currencies.
Previously published in Digital Journal

Tuesday, May 2, 2017

Former head of Goldman Sachs gains power in Trump adminisration

Wall Street winning out over populism as Trump makes Gary Cohn former CEO of Goldman Sachs from 2006 to 2017 more powerful within the Trump administration.

Cohn is a registered Democrat although he has donated money often to the Republican party. Cohn has been able to win over Trump to business-friendly economic policies at the expense of more populist, nationalist, policies of Steve Bannon. Unlike Bannon, Cohn did not even work on Trumps' campaign and has only come to know him since after he was elected last November. His rise within the Trump administration has angered some conservatives.
Trump refers to Cohn who is director of the National Economic Council (NEC) as "one of my geniuses" according to a source close to Cohn. What is certain is that Cohn is now a new denizen of the Washington Swamp and part of the establishment that Trump campaigned against. The Trump administration has many former Wall Street employees and also many retired military officials. The Trump administration is becoming more mainstream right-wing Republican and will put the military-financial-industrial complex first and America second. The protectionist trade views of strategists such as Bannon have receded into the background if not disappeared altogether. Bannon is correct in tagging Cohn as a globalist.
According to White House sources Cohn will take the lead on formulating Trump tax reform, infrastructure, and deregulation policies. Orin Snyder of the law firm Gibson Dunn, a long-time friend of Cohn said: "Gary's singular focus is tax reform and he's working to try and get that done in 2017. He is working to implement the president's twin goals of economic growth and job creation. The tax plan will also include a reduction in the corporate rate, but also tax relief for middle- and low-income Americans."
Some conservatives would like to see more emphasis on focusing on businesses and entrepreneurs, including Adam Brandon, president of Freedomworks who would prefer that Trump went ahead with the plan Trump unveiled last year that was shaped by Stephen Moore of the Heritage Foundation think tank. Conservatives worry that the new plan could be overly complicated as well. Brandon said that Trump should not have scrapped the plan and started over.
Cohn and Trump have apparently developed a close bond. Cohn is loyal, direct, and assertive, characteristics that Trump appreciates. Also, Cohn has the trust of Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and adviser as well as his daughter Ivanka Trump.
John Paulson, a billionaire hedge fund manager, said:"Gary is a huge asset to the Trump administration. He'll be of great help in eliminating unnecessary regulation, stimulating growth and reforming the tax code." Paulson knows Cohn from his Wall street days. It should be clear whose interests Trump's policies will benefit. It will not be the many workers from US rust belts who voted for him.
Kushner was at Goldman Sachs when he first met Cohn. Kushner was instrumental in having Cohn meet the president. During the campaign Trump had frequently described investment banks as modern-day robber barons. This talk is no longer operative once Trump became president. The same is true of NATO being obsolete and many other issues. As some comic said: Trump eats his words three times a day. So now a robber-baron is made head of Trump's NEC. Trump also changed his stance on China as a currency manipulator for now, and also Janet Yellen as Federal Reserve chair.
Cohn and Kushner successfully pushed for Wall Street lawyer Jay Clayton as head of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His name will go to Senate for a vote. Cohn will also play a leading role in developing the promised Trump infrastructure plan to rebuild airports, roads, and bridges. A main problem will be how to finance the cost that Trump estimates at $1 trillion.
As with many other members of the Trump administration, Cohn is hardly poor. Cohn's salary at Goldman Sachs in 2014 was $22 million and $21 million in 2015. His severance package amounted to $285 million. As well, Cohn sold off his stake in the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China worth $16 million.
Cohn is a prominent member of the "Democratic" faction among Trump aides led by Jared Kushner and opposed by the "nationalist" faction led by Steve Bannon. While many supporters of Cohn claim he is competent and efficient, Bannon holds Cohn mainly responsible for the failure of the Trump health care bill while Bannon took much of the blame. Rush Limbaugh the conservative radio commentator calls Cohn " a very ideological liberal Democrat." Former Trump adviser, Sam Nunberg said: “Gary Cohn would be too liberal for the Obama administration. I don’t know what he’s doing in a Republican White House.” He is no doubt drafting policies that will be accepted by the Republican Congress but who knows he may also find Democratic support for some of his policies. Alternatively, he could find himself out of favor as Trump changes his mind again.


Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Trump gives Wall Street some gifts before Valentine's day

(February 3) This week the U.S. Dow Jones Index of stock prices had begun to show signs of investor unease with Trump's actions as it dropped back below its record 20,000 but now Trump is delivering on deregulation and the index has again moved over 20,000 today.

While Trump is supposed to be anti-establishment he has many prominent former Wall Street figures in his administration. Since he was president-elect U.S. stock markets have been enjoying what has been called the Trump rally. However, the rally faltered earlier this week. Today it continued its journey upward as Trump began to undo regulations that had been put in place to ensure another financial crisis took place. The restrictions also led to less avenues for banks to make profits. According to Bloomberg: "Among the targets are rules that guard against predatory lenders, force brokers to lower fees for retirees and ban proprietary trading — protections that consumer advocates vowed to defend." Instead of protecting those who voted for him and saw him taking on the power of the big banks to protect their interests, Trump is doing the exact opposite. No doubt he will sing a song about a smaller more efficient government and less red tape creating more jobs and a fatter paycheck as the much bigger pie trickles down more crumbs. There will be no warning about future bubbles and financial crashes.
Lloyd Blankfein CEO of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan and Chase have long been pushing for changes in the 2010 Dodd Frank Act. They have argued that industry is too constrained by the system. Gary Cohn, the director of the White House National Economic Council and a former Goldman Sachs president said in an interview: “We’re going to attack all aspects of Dodd-Frank.” He said the Trump administration could do quite a bit on its own but would need help from Congress to deal with some parts of the law. For all to see you have the banking establishment at work ensuring that anti-establishment Trump meets the needs and demands of the Wall Street establishment. The House Republicans, led by Jeb Hensarling, Financial Services Committee Chair plan to roll out a bill to replace Dodd-Frank in the coming weeks. The rise of the DJI above the record 20,000 mark was led by Financial Stocks. Goldman Sachs rose 4.3 percent and Morgan Stanley 5.6 percent the largest gain since the day after the U.S. election on November 9.
One aspect of the Dodd-Frank Act is the stress testing mechanism that checks whether banks have sufficient capital to weather an economic downturn. The process is complex but Christopher Wheeler, a bank analyst claims the process has ensured that the system has made the U.S. banking system one of the strongest in the world. He wondered if Trump would tamper with this system.
A likely focus will be the Volcker Rule. Investopedia describes the rule as follows:A federal regulation that prohibits banks from conducting certain investment activities with their own accounts, and limits their ownership of and relationship with hedge funds and private equity funds, also called covered funds. The Volcker Rule’s purpose is to prevent banks from making certain types of speculative investments that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis.This rule restricts banks from operating in areas where they formerly made large profits. Just to make sure that no one gets the idea that Trump is interested in protecting consumers, he is expected to sign an executive memorandum that will direct the Department of Labor to review and stall the fiduciary rule. This rule set to come into effect in April was supposed to protect millions of retirees from being led into inappropriate investments that would generate larger profits for brokers but are quite risky, according to the Obama administration.
The Trump moves led to an advance in stocks such as that of Lincoln National Corp. Voya Financial, Prudential Financial, Metlfe Inc. and American International Group. The last three were listed as important non-bank financial institutions that could come under some Dodd-Frank restrictions.
A key critic of Trump's moves will be Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren who claims that Trump will use his power to benefit wealthy friends: “The Wall Street bankers and lobbyists whose greed and recklessness nearly destroyed this country may be toasting each other with champagne, but the American people have not forgotten the 2008 financial crisis — and they will not forget what happened today.”


Thursday, December 1, 2016

Trump victory brings an early Xmas rally to US stock markets

(Novewmber 17) Trump's campaign was in partly based on anti-establishment populism, including opposition to lobbyists and to the power of Wall Street. Much media attention has been focused on Trump's misogyny, racism and negative attitudes towards Muslims.

1 of 2 
However, stock markets reacted positively after Trump's election. While some Trump policies, such as his opposition to trade policies such as the TPP and NAFTA, may cause concern among some business people, overall, Trump's actions and appointments so far show an administration and transition team full of people linked to Wall Street. They are often establishment figures especially some within the Republican Party. As a recent article puts it: "A populist candidate who railed against shady financial interests on the campaign trail is now putting together an administration that looks like an investment banker’s dream."
One of the leading candidates for Treasury Secretary is Steven Mnuchin. Mnuchin worked for years at Goldman Sachs where he amassed a fortune of over $40 million. He supported Mitt Romney in the last election. In May of this year, he was made chair of the Trump election campaign. He lives in a $26.5 million dollar house in Bel Air.
A candidate for head of the Commerce Department is the billionaire investor Wilbur Ross. Even though he supports Trump he was at one time a Democrat and worked with BIll Clinton: "Ross in earlier years was a registered Democrat, served as an officer of the New York State Democratic Party and held fundraisers for Democratic candidates at his apartment in New York City." Wilbur specializes in leveraged buyouts and purchasing distressed businesses. Forbes lists him as having a net worth of $2.9 billion.
Steve Bannon is best known for being executive chairman of Breitbart news, a right-wing news outlet for the alt-right. The outlet often features anti-Islamic articles, and Brietibart has been accused of being prejudiced against Jews and also misogynist. However, he is also another Wall Street alumnus having worked at Goldman Sachs and even had his own investment bank. He also was acting director of the Arizona research project Biosphere 2 in Oracle Arizona. He left in 1995. Bannon was chosen by Trump to be his chief strategist and Senior Counselor.
Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase appears to be still in the running as a possible Treasury Secretary. In the past, Dimon has given mostly to the Democrats and has links to the Obama administration. Obama defended him during the financial crisis: ".JP Morgan is one of the best managed banks there is. Jamie Dimon, the head of it, is one of the smartest bankers we've got." There are conflicting reports about Dimon becoming Treasury Secretary. He may take on some type of advisory role.
Charles Geisst, a Wall Street historian at Manhattan College noted: “You would have to go back to the 1920s to see so much Wall Street influence coming to Washington. It’s the most dramatic turnaround one could imagine. That’s the truly astonishing part.” Richard Hunt head of the Consumer Bankers Association said that the group is relieved that it is not going to be subpoenaed every week.
Banks stocks are up, as deregulation is expected, along with higher interest rates and significant deficit spending. Also expected are massive tax cuts, elimination of the estate tax and more tax reductions for top earners. CNN notes that in order to shape his administration Trump is drawing heavily upon lobbyists and other denizens of the swamp he pledged to drain. A Salon article notes that Trump's transition team is rich in lobbyists plus a climate-change denier. An article in the Intercept claims that Trump's transition team is " preparing to hand his administration over to a cozy clique of corporate lobbyists and Republican power brokers." Trump has two prominent slogans: "Down with the Establishment" and "Long live the Establishment". The first slogan was operative just during the election campaign.

Saturday, October 22, 2016

Libyan Investment Authority loses court case against Goldman Sachs

A United Kingdom court has ruled in favor of Goldman Sachs in a $1.2 billion dollar case brought by the the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) regarding nine disputed equity derivatives trades, according to a spokesperson for Goldman Sachs.
+ Add Image 1 of 2 
The LIA said that it was disappointed in the decision by Judge Vivien Rose, saying in response: "Time will be needed fully to digest the judgment and all options are being considered at this time." Some sources said that an appeal should be expected.
The trial had run for seven weeks in London's High Court over the summer. The LIA had argued that the trades were secured through "undue influence" and "unconscionable bargaining". The LIA also argued that its members were too unsophisticated to understand what it was they were buying and Goldman had abused its position as a trusted adviser by taking advantage of this inexperience. The members of the LIA had been appointed by the Gadaffi regime, and not on the basis of merit or qualifications, it was argued. Goldman Sachs blamed the "unforeseen financial depression" of 2008 for the LIA losses, and not any wrongdoing by the bank. It described the suit against it as "buyer's remorse". The trades were between January and April of 2008.
Some of the "undue influence" employed by Goldman Sachs is described in a Guardian article: "Goldman Sachs bankers paid for prostitutes, private jets and five-star hotels and held business meetings on yachts to win business from a Libyan investment fund set up under Gaddafi regime, the high court in London was told yesterday." While LIA lost almost all its investment through the trades, Goldman Sachs generated profits of over $200 million through them, according to Roger Masefield a lawyer to the LIA. As shown on the appended video, Goldman Sachs already was hit with a $5 billion dollar fine by the US justice department in April this year for misleading investors.
The LIA is pursuing a separate case as well against the French investment bank Societe General. The suit is for $2.1 billion US in relation to another group of trades between 2007 and 2009. The bank is contesting the case which is not expected to come to trial until April of next year.

Monday, November 24, 2014

Elizabeth Warren helps convince liberals to stay in Democratic Party

The United States is a two-party system consisting of Republicans and Democrats. While other parties exist, and independents as well, they do not have sufficient funds or support to challenge the two main parties.



The Democrats are supported by most in the US who consider themselves liberal or leftist. Most of these supporters are well aware of the fact that Wall Street has a huge influence on policy through donations and lobbying even when the Democrats are in power. Many liberal policies were not implemented even when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, for example the long-promised closure of Guantanamo Bay. In order to prevent liberals and leftists from leaving the Democrat fold, shepherds or shepherdesses are needed to herd them back into the fold rather than leaving and perhaps even forming another party. Elizabeth Warren can be seen as playing this role and doing an excellent job.
 In a recent article in the Huffington Post, "Enough is Enough, The President's Latest Wall Street Nominee", Warren lambastes Obama's choice of Antonio Weiss as his nominee to serve as Under Secretary for Domestic Finance within the Treasury Department. He would be responsible for overseeing Dodd-Frank implementation, and also a wide range of banking and economic policy-making, including protection of consumers. Warren points out that Weiss is head of global investment banking at the large financial institution Lazard. Weiss has worked most of his two decades with Lazard on international mergers and acquisitions. Indeed he spent 8 years living in Paris. Warren claims his experience is in no way related to domestic finance, regulatory issues, or consumer protection.
 Warren points out also the Weiss has been involved through Lazard in corporate inversions whereby foreign companies. As Warren puts it: Basically, a bunch of companies have decided that all the regular tax loopholes they get to exploit aren't enough, so they have begun taking advantage of an even bigger loophole that allows them to maintain their operations in America but claim foreign citizenship and cut their U.S. taxes even more. No one is fooled by the bland words "corporate inversion." These companies renounce their American citizenship and turn their backs on this country simply to boost their profits. Warren claims that Lazard has been involved in three of the four last major corporate inversions. Weiss worked on the deal which saw Burger King purchase Tim Horton's and then moving the headquarters to Canada to claim Canadian ownership and cut its tax bill. Lazard even moved its own headquarters to Bermuda in 2005 to take advantage of a tax loophole. The loophole was closed shortly afterwards. Even officials at the Treasury Dept. during the Bush administration found what Lazard was doing objectionable.
The White House has said that Mr. Weiss was not involved in the tax side of the Burger King deal. Warren rightly replies surely when she claims that the entire deal was designed to improve Burger King's tax situation. The White House also claims that Weiss is personally opposed to inversions. This has never caused him to criticize Lazard for what they have done or to refuse to help them with inversions.
While Wall Street frets about Obama's policies Warren points out that the Obama administration has been filled with many representatives of large financial institutions, including Citigroup. Three of the last four Treasury secretaries serving under Democratic presidents held high-paying jobs at Citigroup before joining the government including former CEO Robert Rubin. As Warren points out, the influence of Goldman Sachs in Washington is well documented: It seems that every few weeks, another Goldman Sachs executive goes to work for a government agency, with bankers landing in positions of power at the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, and pulling the levers of the massive trillion-dollar federal bailout. At the same time, the bank, which announced on Tuesday that it was hiring former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Arthur Levitt, has received $10 billion in TARP funds.
 Warren also notes the huge number of lobbyists working for just the six largest US banks: According to a report by the Institute for America's Future, by the following year, the six biggest banks employed 243 lobbyists who once worked in the federal government, including 33 who had worked as chiefs of staff for members of Congress and 54 who had worked as staffers for the banking oversight committees in the Senate or the House. Warren's criticisms are quite apt. However, so far, she has refused to run herself to be the Democrat nominee for president. Instead she has long favored Hillary Clinton who arguably has a lot cosier relationship with Wall Street than Obama has at present.
 In an interview Warren said: "All all of the women — Democratic women I should say — of the Senate urged Hillary Clinton to run, and I hope she does. Hillary is terrific." Warren also one among several senators who signed a letter urging Clinton to run in 2016. Warren has the right rhetoric but makes the wrong move by supporting Hillary unless the aim is simply to act as a shepherdess to steer liberal and left support behind Hillary.
 Hillary herself has praised and at times even adopted Warren populist rhetoric: “I love watching Elizabeth give it to those who deserve it,” Clinton said to cheers. But then, awkwardly, she appeared to try to out-Warren Warren—and perhaps build a bridge too far to the left—by uttering words she clearly did not believe: “Don’t let anyone tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs,” Clinton said, erroneously echoing a meme Warren made famous during an August 2011 speech at a home in Andover, Massachusetts. “You know that old theory, trickle-down economics? That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.” She later noted that she had gone a bit overboard in claiming that corporations and businesses do not create jobs. Of course they not only create jobs if they think they will create more profit, they get rid of them for the same reason.
 Speaking to plutocrats for some reason Hillary changes her tune and tone:"But Clinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, according to accounts offered by several attendees, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish. Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, in effect: We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it."

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Why I am leaving Goldman Sachs



Unfortunately it is not actually me that is leaving Goldman Sachs. If I were I would probably be better off financially than I am.

Greg Smith in a NY TIMES article with the above title explains why he is resigning as an executive director. He was also head of the firm's U.S. equity derivatives business.

Smith worked for Goldman Sachs for almost twelve years. His fundamental reason for resigning is that he can no longer tolerate the culture of the firm. He says the culture of the firm is as toxic and destructive as he has ever seen it. Apparently the financial crisis and its aftermath has done nothing to improve the corporate culture.

According to Smith at one time Goldman Sachs took pride in making sure it put the interests of its clients at the forefront. The firm dealt with clients with integrity and on the up and up. Now Smith claims the culture is to make money for the firm as much and as quickly as possible. He describes some of the techniques used but I recommend reading his whole article. The firm has its own special terms that show the corrupt character of the operation that Smith is rejecting.

Workers talk about "axes". These are stocks or other financial products that Goldman-Sachs wants to unload since they are seen as lemons not likely to produce much profit. One should Hunt Elephants that is get clients to trade whatever will make the most profit for Goldman-Sachs. In both these cases if you do these sort of things and make a lot of money for Goldman-Sachs you will advance in the company. For Smith this is plain wrong since the company as he sees it should make money because it provides good service for its clients.

This is just a sample of what Smith has to say. His account of how the company operates certainly verifies what many critics have said. I suppose one could fault Smith for not bailing out earlier. But better late than never. See the full article here.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Goldman Sachs charged with helping Eurozone government hide debts

As the article points out although Washington may choose to ignore what Goldman Sachs has done in Europe there may be investigations of Goldman Sachs' actions and ultimately the company could suffer and even be blacklisted. This is from baselinescenario.


The Baseline ScenarioWhat happened to the global economy and what we can do about it
Goldman Goes Rogue –
....
We now learn – from Der Spiegel last week and today’s NYT – that Goldman Sachs has not only helped or encouraged some European governments to hide a large part of their debts, but it also endeavored to do so for Greece as recently as last November. These actions are fundamentally destabilizing to the global financial system, as they undermine: the eurozone area; all attempts to bring greater transparency to government accounting; and the most basic principles that underlie well-functioning markets. When the data are all lies, the outcomes are all bad – see the subprime mortgage crisis for further detail.

A single rogue trader can bring down a bank – remember the case of Barings. But a single rogue bank can bring down the world’s financial system.

Goldman will dismiss this as “business as usual” and, to be sure, a few phone calls around Washington will help ensure that Goldman’s primary supervisor – now the Fed – looks the other way.

But the affair is now out of Ben Bernanke’s hands, and quite far from people who are easily swayed by the White House. It goes immediately to the European Commission, which has jurisdiction over eurozone budget issues. Faced with enormous pressure from those eurozone countries now on the hook for saving Greece, the Commission will surely launch a special audit of Goldman and all its European clients.
This audit should focus on ten sets of questions.

1.Which eurozone governments have worked with Goldman, and on what basis, over the past decade? All actions prior to and after the introduction of the euro need to be thoroughly reexamined.
2.What transactions has Goldman facilitated and how has that affected the reporting of European government debt? (Under the Maastricht Treaty, eurozone government debt is not supposed to exceed 60 percent of GDP.)
3.In the case of Greece, the accusation is that Goldman deliberately and in a premeditated manner conspired to hide the true degree of government debt. Is this true, and to what extent has Goldman helped other countries engage in similar transactions, e.g., countries now seeking entry to the eurozone?
4.What is the full extent of Greek and other government liabilities, if these are accounted for properly? Without this reckoning, it is impossible to design a proper level of European Union (or any other) support for weaker eurozone countries.
5.Are there non-eurozone countries that have also been aided and abetted by Goldman in this fashion? For example, are the UK and Switzerland implicated – and thus endangered?
6.Has Goldman extolled the virtues of government debt in Greece, or other countries, while at the same time helping to deceive investors on the true risks inherent in those debts? What were Goldman’s own holdings of these securities?
7.Is there evidence that Goldman has structured similar transactions for the private sector – enabling companies to conceal the level of their true indebtedness? Have securities issued by such firms also been endorsed by Goldman to the buying public?
8.Were Goldman’s US-based supervisors aware of Goldman’s activities in Greece and other eurozone countries? Did they condone activities that undermine the integrity of the European Union?
9.Where was the European Central Bank while all of this was happening? Has the ECB become dangerously enraptured with the new Wall Street and its “techniques”?
10.Did any responsible official really think that what Goldman was constructing was really some sort of productivity-enhancing financial innovation – as opposed to a sophisticated form of scam?
The Federal Reserve must cooperate fully with this investigation. Ordinarily, the Fed might be tempted to sit on useful information, but they can now feel themselves in Senator Bob Corker’s crosshairs. Republican Senator Corker is willing to cooperate with Senator Dodd on financial sector reform, opening up the possibility of legislation that will pass the Senate, but he wants the Fed to lose its supervisory powers. If the Fed refuses to help – willingly and fully - the European Commission with bringing Goldman to account, that will just strengthen the hand of Senator Corker and his allies.

If the Federal Reserve were an effective supervisor, it would have the political will sufficient to determine that Goldman Sachs has not been acting in accordance with its banking license. But any meaningful action from this direction seems unlikely.

Instead, Goldman will probably be blacklisted from working with eurozone governments for the foreseeable future; as was the case with Salomon Brothers 20 years ago, Goldman may be on its way to be banned from some government securities markets altogether. If it is to be allowed back into this arena, it will have to address the inherent conflicts of interest between advising a government on how to put (deceptive levels of) lipstick on a pig and cajoling investors into buying livestock at inflated prices.

And the US government, at the highest levels, has to ask a fundamental question: For how long does it wish to be intimately associated with Goldman Sachs and this kind of destabilizing action? What is the priority here - a sustainable recovery and a viable financial system, or one particular set of investment bankers?

To preserve Goldman, on incredibly generous terms, in the name of saving the financial system was and is hard to defend – but that is where we are. To allow the current government-backed (massive) Goldman to behave recklessly and with complete disregard to the basic tenets of international financial stability is utterly indefensible.

The credibility of the Federal Reserve, already at an all-time low, has just suffered another crippling blow; the ECB is also now in the line of fire. Goldman Sachs has a lot to answer for.

By Simon Johnson

US will bank Tik Tok unless it sells off its US operations

  US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said during a CNBC interview that the Trump administration has decided that the Chinese internet app ...