JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon reacted angrily when he found out that JPMorgan Chase's chief financial officer had given regulators data on JPMorgan's investment bank, one of those regulators alleged on Friday.
At a meeting in late 2011, Dimon raised his voice and admonished the CFO, Douglas Braunstein, that it was Dimon's decision whether or not to give regular profit-and-loss figures to regulators, Scott Waterhouse, an official with the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, said Friday.
Dimon also questioned whether regulators needed the data at all, allegedly telling Waterhouse: "I don't think you need this amount of detail, you can still do your supervision without it."
Waterhouse recalled the exchange in testimony at a hearing of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations about JPMorgan's $6 billion loss on credit derivatives by a trader in the bank's Chief Investment Office known as the London Whale.
In a 300-page report issued before the hearing, the subcommittee claimed that JPMorgan managers had tried to hide the Whale's losses from investors and regulators. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who led the hearing, cited the late-2011 incident as an example of the disdain JPMorgan regularly showed its regulators.
JPMorgan, in response, has repeatedly denied that its top executives tried to hide information about the losses from anyone.
A HuffPost email to JPMorgan seeking comment was not immediately returned.
In one such alleged instance, Dimon had ordered the bank to stop giving the OCC regular updates on the profits and losses of its investment bank because he didn't think the regulators needed that much information. JPMorgan officials testifying on Friday disputed that claim, saying the bank had briefly stopped giving the OCC the data because it was concerned that the numbers were being leaked somehow.
Waterhouse testified that, after a couple of weeks, CFO Braunstein started giving the OCC regular reports again, at the regulators' request. Dimon was not pleased when he found out, Waterhouse said.
"How did Dimon react?" asked Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who led Friday's hearing.
"We had the discussion of why the information was turned off," Waterhouse said. "When Mr. Dimon was saying why weren't going to get it, Mr. Braun said, 'Well, I've already started giving it to them again.' To which Mr. Dimon expressed his dismay and said it was his decision to be able to make that."
"As to whether to return to..." Levin began.
"To turn the reports back on to the OCC," Waterhouse said.
"So apparently he had decided to stop the reports?" Levin asked, referring to Dimon.
"I took it that way, yes, sir."
"So he would be the one to restore the flow," Levin said, again referring to Dimon.
"Did he raise his voice?"
"Did he say the OCC didn't need the info? What did he say?" Levin asked.
"Not in that part of the conversation," Waterhouse replied. "Earlier in the conversation he was pressing me as to why would you need this information, what good is it, what do you use it for? He said, 'I don't think you need this amount of detail, you can still do your supervision without it.'"
"Later in the conversation, that's when Dimon reacted angrily and said it's his decision, not Braunstein's, to do that," Levin prompted.
"That's correct, to the best of my recollection," Waterhouse said.
Anonymous sources close to the matter told The New York Times that they do not think such an outburst actually happened.
In any event, it was not Dimon's role to decide to stop giving information to regulators, Comptroller Thomas Curry said at the hearing.
"It's not the role of the bank to determine what information or records we have access to," Curry said.
Dimon was not asked to testify at the hearing.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.