Banking and Financial Institutions

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      How Consumers Can Protect Themselves With the CFPB on Pause

      by

      Rules on bank and credit card fees, medical debt and payment apps are in limbo. One thing you can do is carefully check your financial statements, one expert says.With the government seemingly stepping back from regulatory duties, consumers may have to act as their own financial watchdogs.The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the independent federal agency created after the 2008 financial crisis to shield people from fraud and abuse by lenders and financial firms, has been muzzled, at least temporarily.“Everything is on pause right now,” said Delicia Hand, senior director of digital marketplace with Consumer Reports. “So it’s back on consumers to be extra diligent.” Ms. Hand previously spent nearly a decade in a variety of roles at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, including overseeing complaints and consumer education, before departing in 2022.In early February, the Trump administration ordered the consumer bureau to mostly cease operations. It closed its Washington headquarters, fired some employees and put most of the rest of the staff on administrative leave, and opted not to seek funding for its activities. Several lawsuits are challenging the administration’s actions. On Feb. 14, a federal judge in Washington ordered the bureau to halt firing workers and not to delete data, pending a hearing scheduled for Monday.The administration, however, has already dialed back enforcement — dropping, for instance, a suit accusing an online lender of promoting free loans that actually carried high interest rates. On Thursday, the bureau dismissed a lawsuit that it had brought in January accusing Capital One of cheating customers out of some $2 billion in interest.It’s a stark change for an agency that had been energetic in adopting rules and filing lawsuits aimed at aiding consumers. Under the Biden administration, the bureau moved to reduce or eliminate various fees charged by banks and other financial firms and to remove unpaid medical debt from credit reports, and it fined a major credit reporting bureau for misleading consumers about credit freezes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Citigroup Makes (and Then Fixes) an $81 Trillion Mistake

      by

      The bank temporarily credited a customer’s account with trillions of dollars, adding to scrutiny of risk management systems after a series of errors.We all make mistakes on the job. But rarely do they involve moving funds that dwarf the gross domestic product of every country in the world.Citigroup accidentally credited a client’s account with $81 trillion when it meant to send only $280, the latest mistake at a bank that is struggling to repair its reputation after a string of errors in recent years.The massive transfer, which occurred last April and far exceeds Citi’s stock market value of about $150 billion, was initially missed by two employees and was caught 90 minutes after it was posted, The Financial Times first reported. No funds left the bank, and Citi told the Federal Reserve and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency about the error, calling it a “near miss.”The mistake was the latest in a string of glitches at the bank. In 2022, a Citi employee caused a crash in Europe by accidentally adding a zero to a trade, igniting a sell-off that at one point erased 300 billion euros, or about $322 billion, from European stocks. Last year, British regulators fined Citi 62 million pounds, about $78 million, for the incident.In 2020, Citigroup accidentally wired $900 million to a group of lenders locked in a bitter fight with Revlon, the beauty company.That year, U.S. regulators also fined Citi $400 million, saying the bank had failed to address issues in its risk management procedures and internal controls.Citi’s problems with technology and internal systems contributed to the departure of Michael Corbat as chief executive of the bank in 2021. Jane Fraser, who succeeded Mr. Corbat, has said improving risk and controls is a priority, but regulators fined Citi $136 million last year for not making enough progress in fixing its data-management issues.Citi said in a statement that its systems prevented the transfer from actually being made. “Despite the fact that a payment of this size could not actually have been executed, our detective controls promptly identified the inputting error between two Citi ledger accounts and we reversed the entry,” the company said.Isabella Kwai More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      The World Bank Pivoted to Climate. That Now May Be a Problem.

      by

      The Trump administration’s deep cuts to clean-energy programs are raising concerns about U.S. commitments to the lender.As the Trump administration imposes deep cuts on foreign aid and renewable energy programs, the World Bank, one of the most important financiers of energy projects in developing countries, is facing doubts over whether its biggest shareholder, the United States, will stay on board.While the Trump administration has voiced neither support nor antipathy for the bank, it has issued an executive order promising a review of U.S. involvement in all international organizations. And Project 2025, the right-wing blueprint for overhauling the federal government, has pressed for withdrawal from the World Bank.If the United States were to withdraw, the bank would lose its triple-A credit rating, two credit-rating companies warned in recent weeks. That could significantly reduce its ability to borrow money. Roughly 18 percent of the bank’s funding comes from the United States.In an interview, Ajay Banga, the bank’s president, said his institution was fundamentally different from the aid agencies, such as U.S.A.I.D., that the Trump administration has been cutting. And he used some of the administration’s own talking points to argue the case: Investment in natural gas and nuclear power is good, he said, and the development projects funded by the bank can help prevent migration.He also said that the bank makes money and shouldn’t be seen as charity from U.S. taxpayers.“The World Bank is profitable,” he said, noting that it more than covers its own administrative costs even if most of its projects are designed to yield slim returns. “It’s not as though we take money every year from taxpayers to subsidize us and our salaries.”The concern about the bank’s future is heightened as the second Trump administration doubles down on its repudiation of climate projects and promotes an accelerated expansion of U.S. oil and gas projects.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 213 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      So, You Want to Get Rid of the Penny. Do You Have a Plan for the Nickel?

      by

      President Trump’s plan to eliminate the penny could save the government money, but there’s no guarantee.President Trump recently ordered the U.S. Mint to stop producing pennies, for a simple-sounding reason. Each penny, he said, has “literally cost us more than 2 cents.”He’s right. Since 2006, the government has spent more money minting pennies than those pennies have been worth. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Which Interest Rate Should You Care About?

      by

      The Fed’s short-term rates matter, but the main action now is in the 10-year Treasury market, which influences mortgages, credit cards and much more, our columnist says.Watch out for interest rates.Not the short-term rates controlled by the Federal Reserve. Barring an unforeseen financial crisis, they’re not going anywhere, especially not after the jump in inflation reported by the government on Wednesday.Instead, pay attention to the 10-year Treasury yield, which has been bouncing around since the election from about 4.8 to 4.2 percent. That’s not an unreasonable level over the last century or so.But it’s much higher than the 2.9 percent average of the last 20 years, according to FactSet data. At its upper range, that 10-year yield may be high enough to dampen the enthusiasm of many entrepreneurs and stock investors and to restrain the stock market and the economy.That’s a problem for the Trump administration. So the new Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, has stated outright what is becoming an increasingly evident reality. “The president wants lower rates,” Mr. Bessent said in an interview with Fox Business. “He and I are focused on the 10-year Treasury.”Treasuries are the safe and steady core of many investment portfolios. They influence mortgages, credit cards, corporate debt and the exchange rate for the dollar. They are also the standard by which commercial, municipal and sovereign bonds around the world are priced.What’s moving those Treasury rates now is bond traders’ assessments of the economy — including the Trump administration’s on-again, off-again policies on tariffs, as well as its actions on immigration, taxes, spending and much more.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Banks Sell $4.7 Billion of X’s Debt, in a Sign of Investor Demand

      by

      The social media company is attracting investor interest because of Elon Musk’s close ties to President Trump and a recent jump in revenue.When Elon Musk bought X for $44 billion in 2022, more than a quarter of that was financed by loans from banks including Morgan Stanley. Banks normally quickly sell off such loans, but in this case they kept much of that debt because investors were reluctant to bet on the social media company’s floundering business.Mr. Musk’s newfound power in President Trump’s administration has helped change investors’ minds.On Thursday, the banks sold roughly $4.7 billion of X’s debt, according to two people familiar with the transaction, more than the $3 billion that they had originally intended to sell. Mr. Musk, who has become a close adviser to the president and is running a government efficiency initiative, has faced increasing questions about whether the companies he leads — including the electric automaker Tesla and the rocket company SpaceX — are benefiting from his position as Mr. Trump’s right-hand man.X has become a go-to platform for information on the administration’s plans, which Mr. Musk broadcasts to his account’s more than 217 million followers. Advertisers have returned in droves to X, people familiar with the deals said, fueling a boost in revenue. The company told investors that its revenue in December jumped 21 percent from a month earlier, a person with knowledge of the finances said.An X spokesman and Morgan Stanley declined to comment. Bloomberg previously reported the jump in revenue and details of the transaction.Selling the debt — which totaled $12.5 billion at the time of the acquisition — helps Mr. Musk and the banks, which have been saddled with it for two years. Just two months ago, investors were negotiating to buy that debt at a loss of 10 percent to 20 percent for the banks, one person involved in the discussions said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Stocks Drop After Hotter Than Expected Inflation Reading

      by

      Investors are now betting that the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates just once more this year, a drastic shift in expectations since late 2024.Stocks on Wall Street slumped at the start of trading on Wednesday, dragged lower by data that showed consumer prices rose more than expected in January, leaving the Federal Reserve little cause to lower interest rates again soon.The S&P 500 fell roughly 1 percent as trading got underway. The Nasdaq Composite index, which is chock-full of tech stocks that have come under pressure recently from rising global competition to develop the chips that will power the development of artificial intelligence, also fell around 1 percent.Fresh inflation data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Wednesday showed that prices rose 3 percent for the year through January, up from 2.9 percent in December. The “core” Consumer Price Index, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, rose 3.3 percent year-over-year.Signs of continuing price pressure is likely to encourage the Fed to refrain from further interest rate cuts in the coming months. For stock investors, higher interest rates means slower business activity, which can weigh on companies’ earnings and stock prices.The uptick in inflation in January “does not derail the longer-term downward trend in inflation,” said Kyle Chapman, a foreign exchange market analyst at Ballinger Group. But, he said, “it does reaffirm the consensus that cuts are going to come much more slowly than we had thought towards the end of last year.”Investors are now betting that the Federal Reserve will keep interest rates at their current level until December. It’s a drastic shift in expectations since last year, when traders were expecting as many as four cuts for 2025, and even just a few weeks ago investors expected the next cut in rates as soon as June.The two year Treasury yield, which is sensitive to changes in investors’ interest rate expectations, rose sharply after the inflation report, up 0.1 percentage points to 4.36 percent, close to its highest level of the year.Wednesday’s drop comes after a bumpy three weeks for traders, with whipsaw swings in stock prices reflecting investors’ struggle to parse the flurry of executive actions taken by President Trump since he returned to the White House for a second term.The S&P 500 has risen roughly 3 percent since the start of the year and has nudged up 1.2 percent since inauguration day, despite the volatility.Impending tariffs are adding to concern about an acceleration in inflation. On Monday, Mr. Trump announced tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum. He has already imposed a 10 percent tariff on Chinese goods, and broad 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico are set to take effect in March, after being delayed for a month.“Rising prices already appear to be a headwind, and the prospect of new trade barriers have the potential to further fuel inflationary pressures by increasing costs for businesses and consumers,” said Jason Pride, chief of investment strategy and research at Glenmede, a wealth management firm. More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      As Trump Attacks D.E.I., Wall Street Worries

      by

      Goldman Sachs will drop a demand that corporate boards of directors include women and members of minority groups as financial firms backpedal from D.E.I. promises.Wall Street has not typically been accused of doing too much for women and minority groups. The financial services industry, after all, is one in which more major banks are named after the Morgan family than led by a female chief executive.So it meant something over the past half-decade or so when the biggest names in finance said, over and over again, that they would pour dollars and effort into lending to, hiring, promoting and working with underserved communities.And it means something else now, as many of those much-promoted policies and practices are being scrubbed to be sure they don’t wind up in the cross hairs of the Trump administration’s campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion.The retreat includes white-collar investment banks, consultancies, mutual funds and stock exchanges. The latest was Goldman Sachs, which said on Tuesday that it would drop a quota that forced corporate boards of directors to include women and members of minority groups. Others on Wall Street are curtailing efforts to recruit Black and Latino employees.One international bank, BNP Paribas, even hit the brakes on programming new events for next month’s International Women’s Day.This pullback has thus far been less overt than, say, in the technology industry, whose executives have made public displays of their support for President Trump’s anti-diversity initiatives. And some financial firms had started to make changes long before the election — opening programs aimed at minority candidates to all, for example.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More