AIG CEO says employees starting to return bonuses

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - AIG CEO says employees starting to return bonuses stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

JIM KUHNHENN and TOM RAUM | March 18, 2009 09:28 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
AIG Chairmen Edward Liddy testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, March 18,2009, before the House Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises subcommittee. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

WASHINGTON — Under intense pressure from the Obama administration and Congress, the head of bailed-out insurance giant AIG declared Wednesday that some of the firm's executives have begun returning all or part of bonuses totaling $165 million. Edward Liddy offered no details, and lawmakers were in no mood to wait.

He was still fielding their questions when House Democratic leaders announced plans for a vote Thursday on legislation to tax away 90 percent of the extra pay for executives at AIG and many other bailed-out firms.

Liddy, brought in last year to oversee a company that has received $182 billion in federal bailout money, said he, too, was angry about the bonuses. But he did not respond directly when advised in pungent terms to pay to the Treasury all the money handed out last weekend in "retention payments."

"Eat it now. Take it out of your profits down the road. It's a lot sweeter now than it's gonna be later," said Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.

Liddy slid into the witness chair at a congressional hearing as President Barack Obama sought anew to quell a furor that has bedeviled his administration since word of the bonuses surfaced over the weekend.

Obama, who took office just under two months ago, told reporters his administration was not responsible for a lack of federal supervision of AIG that preceded the company's demise, nor for the decision made last year to pay what he called "outrageous bonuses."

Still, he said, "The buck stops with me." He said that "my goal is to make sure that we never put ourselves in this kind of position again," and he disclosed the administration was consulting with Congress on the possibility of creating a new agency to govern the meltdown of large financial institutions such as AIG.

He also gave a strong vote of confidence to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who has been the target of growing Republican criticism.

Story continues below
advertisement

Later, at a town hall meeting in Costa Mesa, Calif., Obama said that while his administration was addressing the AIG bonuses specifically, he said he wanted to "make sure we dont find ourselves in this situation again, where taxpayers are on the hook for losses in bad times and all the wealth generated in good times goes to those at the very top."

Obama spoke as congressional Democrats worked on legislation designed to recoup most or all of the $165 million by exposing it to new taxes.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said the new 90 percent tax would apply to bonus money paid to employees earning more than $250,000 at firms that have received more than $5 billion in federal bailout funds. Mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are covered under the proposal.

Liddy said that on Tuesday, he had "asked those who have received retention payments in excess of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments." Some have "already stepped forward and returned 100 percent," he added.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House bill would be voted on under rules requiring a two-thirds majority for passage. Democrats are in comfortable control of the House but do not control two-thirds of the seats, meaning the outcome of the vote would probably be determined by tax-averse Republicans.

Republicans raised pointed questions about the extent of Geithner's advance knowledge of the bonuses, and stressed they had been locked out of discussions earlier this year when Democrats decided to jettison a provision from legislation that could have revoked the payments.

"The fact is that the bill the president signed, which protected the AIG bonuses and others, was written behind closed doors by Democratic leaders of the House and Senate. There was no transparency," said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee.

On Wednesday, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, acknowledged that his staff agreed to dilute an executive compensation provision that would have applied retroactively to recipients of federal aid. Dodd told CNN the request came from officials at the Treasury Department whom he did not identify.

While the House and Senate reconciled their stimulus bills last month, the Treasury Department expressed concern with a Senate restriction on bonuses, noting that if it applied to existing compensation contracts it could face a legal challenge.

"The alternative was losing, in my view, the entire section on executive excessive compensation," Dodd told CNN. "Given a choice _ this is not an uncommon occurrence here _ I agreed to a modification in the legislation, reluctantly."

The legislation does include a provision that allows the Treasury Department to examine past compensation payments to determine whether they were "contrary to the public interest." Geithner on Tuesday said he was using that provision to review AIG's bonuses.

Liddy's presence in a congressional hearing room was evidence of a bipartisan opposition to the bonuses, although his status as a $1-a-year CEO called out of retirement last year to try and untangle AIG's financial mess made him a less-than-easy target for expressions of outrage.

"No one knows better than I that AIG has been the recipient of generous amounts of government financial aid," he said. "We have been the beneficiary of the American people's forbearance and patience," he added, acknowledging the patience was wearing thin.

Asked by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., whether he would turn over the names of individuals who received the bonuses, as well as the amounts, Liddy said he would do so only if assured the information not be made public.

When Frank said he might seek a subpoena, Liddy said he was concerned about the safety of the employees and their families, and read aloud from a death threat received by one of them.

Frank said he would be guided in part by security considerations, but Ackerman later noted that Andrew Cuomo, the New York attorney general, was already seeking the names with a subpoena.

Liddy said he had not yet complied, sidestepped several times when asked whether he would, and finally said "it would be our intent" to do so.

Cuomo swiftly issued a statement saying Liddy's pledge was "simply too little, too late. ... Rather than take half-measures, AIG should immediately turn over the list, which we have subpoenaed, of who got what and when."

Separately, a New York state judge ordered Bank of America Corp. to disclose information about bonuses given to employees at Merrill Lynch & Co. just before the bank bought the brokerage company. Cuomo, who has been sparring with the bank over release of the information, said the decision "will now lift the shroud of secrecy surrounding the $3.6 billion in premature bonuses Merrill Lynch rushed out in early December."

"AIG should take heed and immediately turn over the list of bonus recipients we have subpoenaed," he said. "The deadline for responding to our subpoena is tomorrow. "

AIG spokesman Mark Herr said he could not say how many executives had turned back the money. "Bear in mind, these bonuses were only just paid," he said.

In Wilton, Conn., headquarters of AIG Financial Products Corp., police chief Edward Kulhawik said his department had not received any reports from the company of threats to employees but was in contact with the company and keeping "a special eye on that whole office complex."

Liddy said the Federal Reserve knew long in advance of the bonus payments and acquiesced in them, noting that officials from the independent agency attend key company meetings. But he said the same was not true of Geithner, adding, "We do our work with the Federal Reserve."

Liddy gave skeptical committee members what amounted to a tutorial in the practice of paying retention bonuses _ he did not call them that _ to executives.

He said the money was offered to executives in AIG's financial products section, where risky investments finally became the entire company's undoing. He said each executive was offered money to dispose of his "business book," meaning the transactions he had been in charge of handling, and thus far, the company's financial derivatives had been reduced from $2.7 trillion to $1.6 trillion.

He had decided it was worth paying the money to retain the services of executives who knew the business best, he said. And he had received legal advice that there were valid contracts requiring the payments.

"I know 165 million is a very large number. It's a very large number. In the context of 1.6 trillion ... we thought it was a good trade," he said.

Liddy added there was still a risk of financial catastrophe if the remaining $1.6 trillion in financial instruments were not disposed of properly.

But Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., angrily told the witness the contract read like "the captain and the crew of the ship reserving the lifeboats."

Liddy replied that he was not at the firm when the contracts were negotiated, and said, as he has before, that he would not have approved them.

Lynch said the terms had been put in place in December, after Liddy arrived at AIG.

But Liddy disputed that. "I take offense, Sir," he said.

"Well you take it rightly. Offense was intended," shot back Lynch.

___

Associated Press writers Jim Kuhnhenn, Jennifer Loven and Stevenson Jacobs contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Under intense pressure from the Obama administration and Congress, the head of bailed-out insurance giant AIG declared Wednesday that some of the firm's executives have begun return...
WASHINGTON — Under intense pressure from the Obama administration and Congress, the head of bailed-out insurance giant AIG declared Wednesday that some of the firm's executives have begun return...
 
Comments
1236
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (29 pages total)
- AN2009 I'm a Fan of AN2009 4 fans permalink

AIG claims that its employees are "starting" to return their bonuses, but no details were given. I suspect another ruse. Do these clowns honestly expect the public to trust them again?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 03/21/2009
- Geria I'm a Fan of Geria 10 fans permalink

Why aren't Americans marching? Why weren't there even one protester in front of AIG, or Citigroup, or Goldman Sachs? " Afraid of what? We must make Congress and the Financials more scared of us! But we must avoid violence; they're just waiting for violence to declare martial law. What all this adds up to is this: it is the financial sector that actually runs the country; not Congress or the Executive. Our elected representatives are only figureheads without real power, that is, power they are going to use to save the country!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:21 PM on 03/19/2009
- Geria I'm a Fan of Geria 10 fans permalink

Now wait a minute. Does the government own 80% of AIG or does it not? Why is Edward Liddy still there if the government has the authority to sack him? Why are the 400 of AIG's Financial Instruments Division, responsible for the collapse of AIG, still in their jobs? Do we need an agency to manage AIG, or can somebody with morals take over from Liddy? I don't get why the government can't assert itself as owner in the AIG case. If Geithner, Summers and the rest are getting in the way, Obama should show them the door. Their appointments were a mistake anyhow.

There is a recent case of bank regulators working with middle management to reorganize a bank; you don't need executives. Don't replace this class of pirates, let's do without.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:09 PM on 03/19/2009

I'll beleive it when I find out which AIG execs have followed Senator Grassley's advice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:01 PM on 03/19/2009
- cyrano1 I'm a Fan of cyrano1 96 fans permalink
photo

So many of just wish that the political "cover your butt" posturing around the bonuses would quickly lead to solving the real problems behind it all.

It's satisfying to vent our rage on the bonus babies and we revel in getting a view of Madoff's current residence, but underneath it all we know we should save most of our rage for the real process of breaking-up and reforming our financial institutions. That long slogging process of dueling with the political and financial players involved will take constant pressure and vigilance from us "main streeters".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:09 PM on 03/19/2009
- Geria I'm a Fan of Geria 10 fans permalink

Sadly, Washington is a real expert at getting around the real issues. Bonuses are trivial compared to the need for breaking up these financial firms that are "too big to fail."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:12 PM on 03/19/2009
- newyorkid I'm a Fan of newyorkid 40 fans permalink
photo

What does some mean? 1% of the money? 99% of the money?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:49 PM on 03/19/2009
photo

I believe there is still more behind the story. Why would Treasury officials demand the loophole to allow these bonuses to begin with? Why would AIG write bonus contracts for what amounts to "unearned income"?

I am wondering if it is some sort of hush-money, to insure the AIG Financial Products employees will not go public with information about the extent of their derivatives contracts, or when they were actually written, or why.

I've been trying to make sense of AIG's 10-K Annual Reports, and I am troubled to find that the "Credit Default Swaps", which are purported to be at the heart of AIG's problems, were not listed under AIGFP's derivatives obligations until 2007. If they are in the earlier reports - I can't locate them.

Does anyone have information about this? I am quite curious about how, and why, these toxic assets "suddenly" appeared in AIG's financials. If they existed prior to 2007, where were they located in the previous 10-K’s?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:12 PM on 03/19/2009
- lb458 I'm a Fan of lb458 3 fans permalink

Chris Dodd and any other Senator or Congressman who knew about the bonus loophole had a duty to their constituency to let the people know about this. They could have leaked the information to the Press and the provision against the bonuses would not have been secretly dropped as it was. This issue could have been taken care of months ago instead of now.

This is clearly another example of our elected representatives not representing the people. We had enough of that the last 8 years and the last election was supposed to fix that. Obviously our Government has not gotten the message!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 PM on 03/19/2009

The point people seem to miss is that these banks and insurance companies NEED to pay out these huge bonuses every hear to hide the ludicrous amounts of money they are making.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 PM on 03/19/2009
- maxfax I'm a Fan of maxfax 18 fans permalink

Funny how this happens. Here is a guy as head of Allstate who declined to honor policyholders' contractual agreements on auto policies, but more flagrantly following Hurricane Katrina along the Gulf Coast.

"He's always disregarded contracts to maximize profits."

"It's rather ironic that Ed Liddy is espousing the sanctity of contracts when it serves the interests of the insurance company, but when the sanctity of contracts is violated from the homeowners' perspective, there's no obligation and it's up to the homeowners or the courts to enforce it, " said Johnny Denenea,

"Bilking American taxpayers is what insurance companies do. Why is anyone surprised?!" Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., said in a news release Wednesday

http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/aig_chief_didnt_always_defend.html

Some how, his current defense of bonus contracts rings hollow.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 03/19/2009
- JTHC75 I'm a Fan of JTHC75 2 fans permalink

I don't know why people are bashing Liddy. The guy came out of retirement at the gov't's request and is being paid $1 to unwind AIG's mess, only to get bashed by a committee of hypocrites in Congress. Either he has some secret deal to get paid when this is done or he's the most patriotic guy in the country right now.

I'd like to know when Dodd, Obama, McCain, Clinton, Romney, et al. are going to return their AIG campaign contributions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 PM on 03/19/2009

All this news about AIG and ML bonuses has inspired me to pay my bonus back...to three non-profits in my community. I chose 3 non-profits that serve the homeless in LA, home of the homeless. There are so many people in our local communities that are in great need. I work for one of those financial institutions that received TARP funds. (My job is unrelated to any activity associated with the economic crisis.) As a mid level manager, my bonus is usually a substantial part of my compensation but has never been over $100,000. This year my bonus was 70% lower than last year's. But I still have a job that I love, and work with clients and colleagues that I enjoy. For that I am very grateful. I am not flush with funds. This is a real stretch financially but I want to pay it forward by paying it back.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 AM on 03/19/2009
- wrrock I'm a Fan of wrrock 2 fans permalink

If you thought it couldn’t get any worse than Bush. The dems are spending more and making grossly incompetent mistakes. Here is the latest (quite shocking) of their trillion dollar blunders:

Cap Schmap:
http://www.butasforme.com/2009/03/17/obamas-stimulus-bill-explicitly-grants-aig-the-legal-right-to-hand-out-bonuses/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 AM on 03/19/2009
- jazkiljok I'm a Fan of jazkiljok 3 fans permalink

the curiosity here remains-- how is it that all these "need to retain" financial pros have so many great job offers and options waiting for them out there in the job market that they MUST be paid a fortune to retain? Aren't there an army of out of work Wall Streeters who for a mere few hundred $K a year ready to seize those jobs? These "complex" toxic securities with their burrito wrap, chili on top, slice and dice method of valuation might need a few good minds to unravel but i'm willing to bet we could put an army of young academics to work with some gov't funding, pair them with a few of those out of work Wall Streeters in need of the paycheck and get the work done required with more earnest and unbiased oversight than keeping well fed the thieves who created the problem.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 AM on 03/19/2009

What a boon for the media! We will be reading and hearing opinions as to who , and when until the next crisis. Forget " who shot John" tax'em, get the money back ,and move on. The US ship is sinking!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 03/19/2009
photo

Instead of being shamed into needing to ask for half these bonuses back, the recipients should have been told that, due to circumstances, there would be no bonuses until further notice.

My husband's job has postponed annual salary review raises this year.....w­hy not for all these fat cats on Wall Street. Yes, I'm pi$$ed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 AM on 03/19/2009

No kidding. My husband was about a week away from finishing a professional certification that was supposed to mean a sizeable raise...On­ly to have his company freeze salaries for this year, for all employees. Why should these jerks get their huge bonuses, when those of us who work for a living are tightening our belts and getting by with less? Disgusting.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:07 PM on 03/19/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (29 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect