More

SEC Proposes Curbing Wall Street Bonuses

Reuters    
First Posted: 03/02/11 06:17 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:35 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. securities regulators issued a proposal on Wednesday to curb bonuses at brokerage and investment advisory firms over the objections of Republicans on the panel and even some doubts expressed by Chairman Mary Schapiro.

The Securities and Exchange Commission voted 3-2 to issue for comment a plan for the wealth management industry that is substantially similar to one proposed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp last month for banks.

The measures, required by last year's Dodd-Frank financial law, are aimed at reducing incentives for executives and other top employees to take excessive risks.

They require more disclosure of pay schemes and in some cases deferral of bonus money to later years.

Some SEC members were concerned by how the agency's pay proposal would affect the largest brokerage firms and financial advisory companies, which would include units of large banks such as Morgan Stanley and Bank of America.

The plan would also likely hit some advisers of large hedge funds as well, although the SEC did not elaborate on which particular companies might be impacted.

"Larger broker dealers and investment advisers may find it more difficult to recruit and retain quality personnel," Republican Commissioner Troy Paredes told the SEC meeting. "It is potentially compromising the competitiveness and capability of these financial institutions."
Nevertheless, the broader U.S. plan to limit financial services pay is markedly softer than the European Union, which in December set guidelines that top bankers be limited to receiving 20 percent of their annual bonuses upfront in cash, with some exceptions.

In other measures mandated by Dodd-Frank, the SEC on Wednesday proposed reducing money market fund reliance on credit-ratings and extended the comment period on a plan to restrict the voting power of large financial companies in derivatives clearinghouses.

WATCHING FOR "UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES"

One part of the SEC's proposal would target broker-dealers and investment advisers with proprietary assets over $1 billion. Any firm that meets that threshold would need to make disclosures to regulators about their pay structures.

Those firms would also generally be banned from creating pay schemes that may lead executives, directors or principal shareholders to take inappropriate risks or take actions that result in a material loss.

Those provisions are expected to affect around 132 brokerage companies and 70 investment advisory firms. But the SEC did not provide detail on which individuals at the firms may be impacted.

David Tittsworth, executive director of the Investment Adviser Association, doubted the proposal would affect a large number of advisers, expecting it would only apply to publicly traded firms, or those affiliated with a large bank or broker.

Danny Sarch, a brokerage industry recruiter based in White Plains, New York, said the SEC's proposal is misdirected, partly because brokers lost a lot of money during the financial crisis, showing their interests were tied to shareholders'.

"Retail brokers were not responsible for the financial meltdown," Sarch said.

Another piece of the rule, meanwhile, targets executive officers and the heads of major business lines who work at financial firms with $50 billion in proprietary assets. That part of the rule would require these firms to defer at least half of executives' bonus pay over a three-year period.

SEC staff and commissioners said they were keen to hear from the public about whether the proposed compensation structure was properly tailored to different business models, particularly investment advisers.

Schapiro said she was hoping in particular to receive comments about private fund advisers, "given how they often structure their compensation."

"This is an area where we want to be very attuned to unintended consequences," she said.

CREDIT RATINGS, CLEARINGHOUSES

The SEC on Wednesday also began to tackle the removal of credit-rating references in federal regulations affecting money market mutual funds.

Dodd-Frank requires federal agencies to help reduce reliance on them by markets, a response to criticism that raters gave glowing reviews to investments linked to sub-prime mortgages just ahead of the crisis.

In the area of over-the-counter derivatives, the SEC proposed new governance standards for clearinghouses and also reopened the public comment period on a contentious rule that would place limits on the voting power that financial firms can wield in derivatives clearinghouses and trading facilities.

The plan on voting caps has been widely opposed by big Wall Street banks, although the Justice Department's Antitrust Division has said it does not go far enough.

The governance and operations proposal addresses the financial resources that clearinghouses must hold to withstand defaults by members. It also includes provisions to prevent clearinghouses from denying memberships to smaller firms.

Major clearinghouses and trading platforms include LCH.Clearnet, IntercontinentalExchange's ICE Trust, and Tradeweb, a trading platform majority owned by Thomson Reuters and minority-owned by big banks.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch in Washington; Additional reporting by Helen Kearney in New York; editing by Tim Dobbyn)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. securities regulators issued a proposal on Wednesday to curb bonuses at brokerage and investment advisory firms over the objections of Republicans on the panel and even s...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. securities regulators issued a proposal on Wednesday to curb bonuses at brokerage and investment advisory firms over the objections of Republicans on the panel and even s...
Filed by Maxwell Strachan  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 41
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
James Fisher
09:53 AM on 03/06/2011
"Larger broker dealers and investment advisers may find it more difficult to recruit and retain quality personnel," Republican Commissioner Troy Paredes told the SEC meeting. "It is potentially compromising the competitiveness and capability of these financial institutions."

This excuse is gathering dust it is so old. It is insulting .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouiseM
One of the most cynical optimists you'll ever meet
10:19 PM on 03/05/2011
"Larger broker dealers and investment advisers may find it more difficult to recruit and retain quality personnel,' Republican Commissioner Troy Paredes told the SEC meeting. 'It is potentially compromising the competitiveness and capability of these financial institutions.'"

What a ridiculous pile of rhetorical claptrap. Where will these "quality personnel" go for employment if not your firms? Where are they going to earn as much money as they would working for these firms?

And why should these firms pay such top dollar for them, anyway? These are the guys that sold those pieces-of-junk REITs to their retail and investment clients *anyway*. Those toxic suckers blew up in their clients' faces - retirement and pension accounts, or college savings plan. These guys had such rotten judgment that they put this garbage into accounts that required genuine caution.
Their clients lost *huge* money. And you want to pay top dollar for these losers?

Oh! I didn't understand. You don't care about whether or not they lost money for the investors. You care about whether they can make a lot of money for *you.* This isn't about looking after your clients' interests. It's about looking after your own.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nypapajoe
12:02 PM on 03/05/2011
Yeah right! We have a better chance of collectively winning the state lotto before this happens!
01:56 PM on 03/04/2011
"Larger broker dealers and investment advisers may find it more difficult to recruit and retain quality personnel," Republican Commissioner Troy Paredes told the SEC meeting.

Does that mean the "best and brightest" may go into something more productive?
09:48 AM on 03/04/2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/magazine/06Muni-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print
Great article in the NY Times on the muni crisis
08:24 PM on 03/03/2011
The sec is an expensive joke.
NOSOCIALNETS
My bravestance against FACEBOOK
05:47 PM on 03/03/2011
Yes indeed, we better regulate that Wall St bonus money. Since we missed the boat on the financial mess that tanked all the middle class IRAs. And since we all need a job on Wall St when we are done with the SEC.....
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
02:35 PM on 03/03/2011
The SEC proposes curbing Wall Street bonuses? I demand curbing Wall Street bonuses! Come on SEC show us you care about the citizens and not Wall Street.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PaulCircharo
02:30 PM on 03/03/2011
lets not curb our enthusiasm on this, curb those bonuses baby all day
01:25 PM on 03/03/2011
they should also propose curbing rampant speculation in commodities. These geniuses on Wall Street and around the world, are creating a commodity crisis resulting in high food and oil prices. So there they go creating another crisis around the globe.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouiseM
One of the most cynical optimists you'll ever meet
10:24 PM on 03/05/2011
Which is exactly the point, right? Crises make them *money.* There is *nothing* that makes them more money than a bubble.

If it's a food crisis, there's a real upside - starvation of large, prolific populations. The world population explodes from 7 billion to 10 billion in the next generation. Cull that herd before it creates too much political demand!
12:23 PM on 03/03/2011
Well, that just makes me feel completely vindicated. Don't even feel the need to sue anyone or have anyone go to jail anymore!

Seriously. Why is there nothing ballsy coming out of the SEC? Like serious numbers of indictments? I understand the SEC lost much of its punch under the Bush administration, but the Obama administration has had 2 years to re-attach the SEC's cajones back on, but that hasn't happened, either.

I wonder if the Obama administration is afraid of lining up and prosecuting all of the bankers and everyone else responsible for all of the illegal and immoral shenanigans that went on in the financial sector after Bush got (ahem) "elected" and Glass-Stegal was dismantled. If they are, why? I don't think it would necessarily have some great destabilizing effect from an economic point of view. I just really don't understand why LOTS of people (in and out of banking) aren't being hunted down and prosecuted.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouiseM
One of the most cynical optimists you'll ever meet
10:35 PM on 03/05/2011
I wonder if the Obama administration is terrified, or being blackmailed, or in the bag.

Or perhaps it's a combination of #1 and #2. They are being threatened with world financial meltdown in they reveal just how criminal these guys are. If the economy collapses, it's going to be a lot more difficult for The President than it is for the top banskters. They just get on their private jet and fly away - and take their money with them.

If that is the case, Obama can't even make a national address to tell us about our new Goldman Sachs overlords. There might be a panic, or an armed rebellion. It would certainly lose billions of dollars for the overlords, who are pumping up new bubbles in equities and in farmland. There still are a few more pennies to be filched from the American pockets.

Not only that, but the long-term plan is to reduce America to a vassal state that manufacturers arms for the rest of the planet. Our government hasn't been completely hollowed out yet - that won't happen till 2014, after 2 years of the GOP President.

So, no, don't expect too much of anything from the SEC.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KyDude
My herd marched over the cliff.
12:16 PM on 03/03/2011
I can just imagine the flow of envelope bonuses already. "Hey Commissioner, let me renew that porn account for ya."
11:53 AM on 03/03/2011
There are good people that work on Wall Street, mid-level people that work long, long hours and on weekends that really deserve these bonuses. When the cuts come they will not come from the people they should be coming from but instead will come from the hard working mid to lower level employees.
02:38 PM on 03/03/2011
I am sure there are some nice low level workers on wall street Maria, however now I would like to know how you feel about republicans making teachers, firefighters, road crews the scapegoats for the financial situation?
02:51 PM on 03/03/2011
I have many close friends that work for the FDNY and NYPD and I think it is a shame to reduce the work force for many reasons. They put their lives on the line on a daily basis and the fact that they barely make enough to feed their families saddens me. I do, however, believe that they do enjoy a great pension and benefits when they retire after they put their 20 years in on the "force".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
builderman55
Featherless Biped
11:48 AM on 03/03/2011
Be careful--we have been warned that if we don't remunerate these people in proportion to their inflated egos, they might take their balls and go home (or to one of their many homes on multiple continents with their trophy wives and their servants...)