breaking financial news...

[lagilman]

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Treasury Department will order failed insurance giant American International Group Inc. to repay the taxpayers up to $165 million that the company American International Group Inc (AIG) is giving employees as bonuses, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said Tuesday. In a letter to congressional leaders, Geithner said the government can't block the payments, which are being made under contracts signed before the government stepped in with $173 billion to prevent AIG from going bankrupt. Acknowledging "considerable outrage" about the bonus payments, Geithner said AIG will pay the Treasury an amount equal to the payments, and the Treasury will deduct that amount from the $30 billion in government assistance that will soon go to the company.

http://marketwatch.com/r.asp?g=146E125FE23A4409A90E74D4ED156FB3&d=bnbt

Me, I think any of these executives who ran the company into the ground and are now arguing for/accepting the bonus should first be tarred and feathered. But this will do to start, assuming they actually follow through and repay it.


EtA: new update:

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- American International Group Chief Executive Edward Liddy said Wednesday that he's asked some employees of the insurer's derivatives unit to return half of the bonuses they received recently. Those who received bonuses of $100,000 or more have been asked to return at least half of those payments, Liddy explained. Some staff have already offered to return all the money, he added.

(emphasis mine)

Considering that these are reportedly performance bonuses, I htink that's well within reason, since the company's performance has not been what you'd call reward-worthy...

[and yes, I do realize that this is a mere drop in the bucket. But if everyone actually took care of their own drops, the well might refill a bit faster, and with less thirst among the hapless taxpayers who got dragged into this after the fact. Now, have I tortured that metaphor enough?]

Comments

[tanaise.livejournal.com]

Hey now, that's unfair. One of my friends works at AIG. She is not to blame for her company's bad luck. She's very good at her job, works very hard, and deserved her bonus as much as anyone. I am sure she is not the only person at her company who is doing a good job, and I think it is wrong to blame all of the employees for the excesses of a few.

[lagilman]

Um, where did I say I was blaming "all the employees?"

*looks over post again*

We're not talking about Jane or Joe Employee getting a few thousand dollars extra in their paycheck. If your friend is accepting a $100,000+ bonus for running a company into the ground and then demanding the government bail them out,then yes, I hold her responsible for her behavior in the face of fiscal disaster. Otherwise, no.

[tanaise.livejournal.com]

That may be what you meant, but what you said was,

"Me, I think anyone arguing for/accepting the bonus should first be tarred and feathered. "

which is completely different.

[lagilman]

Point. I shall amend it to specify executives, who should be taking responsibility for for decision made that ran a company to the point where they had to be bailed out.

If we're arguing word choices, I don't call it 'bad luck' but bad management.

[jslinder.livejournal.com]

I call cowbleep.

Basically, these bonuses will be taken from AIG's next bailout package. So, now that the bailout package is however many millions short, they just tack a billion onto the next one...

[lagilman]

Yeah. But it beats AIG's previous stance of "our money now, neener-neener," and legally there wasn't anything the government could do about breaking those agreements. And I really wasn't sure that throwing heavier tax on them was the right way to go,as personally satisfying as it might have been to the rest of us whose taxes went to pay themm i the first place.

I just hope every person who cashes their bonus check puts it back into the economy.

[jslinder.livejournal.com]

From what I can tell, most of them are in the UK anyway...

[jhetley.livejournal.com]

Hey, tar and feathers are expensive. Good money after bad . . .

[lagilman]

I'd volunteer to pluck chickens -- we could put the bird in the communal pot, after.

The level of fury is not being overreported in the news, for once. Conversations in the street --even here in NYC,where we've been beaten unto death by Wall Street bonuses -- indicate that an AIG exec might be lucky to get away with feathers in his tar. It's not so much the money as the arrogance.

[jhetley.livejournal.com]

I may still have a bucket of roof-patch tar out in the garage. Older house, you know.

[6-penny.livejournal.com]

I'd just like to see a list posted of the names of the relevant managers, with their bonuses appended. - and photographs. Then let natural selection take its course.

[jryson.livejournal.com]

I think anyone who attacks one of these people should be subject to a 25$ fine.

[lagilman]

tempting, but...no. I might personally thing they should be deeply ashamed to take a performance bonus, considering their performance, but there are limits.

(and if we only publish names, what happens to everyone who shares that name? bad karma, that)

[6-penny.livejournal.com]

I was thinking more of giving one the chance of making sure that one does not trust ones savings to any new employers of these people. They really need to find some other line of work.

[tru2myart.livejournal.com]

I was listening to the news this morning and heard that Senator Charles Grassley insisted that the AIG execs either resign or commit suicide.

I'm completely against violence of any kind but I have to admit, I had to think about that for a long time....

[jryson.livejournal.com]

Let them commit Soduku!

[lagilman]

there's a reason Grassley really shouldn't be let out without a keeper. But I think maybe that's when the Good Folk at AIG realized how very very outraged the taxpayers are....

(and, seriously. contracts that can't be broken? From an insurance company that won't hesitate to deny or delay a claim from, y'know, you or me? More, from a near-bankrupt company that took bailout money to stay afloat? Why didn't they ask their own people to make a sacrifice before demanding it of us? I'd really like to hear a bonus-eligible executive come forward and talk about that....)

[wedschilde.livejournal.com]

you know what i find interesting....

i work for a capital management company. the investment teams' bonuses are tied to their performance. good performance and the bonus will be paid accordingly. i'm not sure how their legal department did up contracts that said... oh, no, you don't need ot have good performance. we give you money all the time! go go go! bankrupt us! it's all good! we give you more money.

sheesh.

[icedrake.livejournal.com]

On the one hand... 116,000 employees, $165M in bonuses. $1.42M *each* on average. Yeah, that's likely to happen.

On the other hand, I am somehow able to contain my excitement at getting a 0.95% refund on my hard-earned tax contribution.

[sizztheseed.livejournal.com]

I thought this article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/17/AR2009031703022.html?nav=hcmodule) on the WashPost had some interesting insight.

[fakefrenchie.livejournal.com]

Some people have no shame. And I agree with Grassley!