It’s impossible to tell from this vantage point the fallout of the financial reform law, at least not until most of the rules get finalized. But while it doesn’t all point in a positive direction, we have some indication that the law will have a wider-ranging effect than at first thought.
First and most important, JPMorgan Chase, one of the nation’s largest banks, will reportedly close their proprietary trading desk:
JPMorgan Chase & Co. told traders who bet on commodities for the firm’s account that their unit will be closed as the company, the second-biggest U.S. bank by assets, starts to shut down all proprietary trading, according to a person briefed on the matter.
The bank eventually will close all in-house trading to comply with new U.S. curbs on investment banks, said the person, who asked not to be identified because New York-based JPMorgan’s decision hasn’t been made public.
Closing the proprietary trading desk for commodities affects fewer than 20 traders, one in the U.S. and the rest in the U.K., the person said. The unit is based in London, and traders there were given notice on Aug. 27 that their jobs were at risk as required by U.K. law, according to the person. Proprietary traders in fixed-income and equities, who account for 50 to 75 employees, will need to find jobs when those desks are shut down, this person said.
While we’ve heard a lot about investment banks moving their prop trading units into asset management companies or hedge funds, and taking on the same risk, it does look at first glance like JPM will get out of that game entirely. Furthermore, offloading the risk in a separate firm will make it easier for regulators to allow that firm to fail or put the burden on the shareholders and investors, if the risk consumes them. Severing the ties inside the investment bank makes it harder for them to assume the “too big to fail” pose.
This is just the hint that some of the risk in the system is being accounted for. But the more interesting developments come on the accountability side. For one, the SEC asserted the right to investigate and charge credit rating agencies for fraud perpretrated overseas. There’s a difference between having the right and using it, as can be seen by the SEC’s declining to charge Moody’s over their CDO ratings in 2007. But starting from a position of more accountability makes the threat real to the raters.
In addition, the new proxy access rules empower activists to shake up corporate boards:
Until last Wednesday, unions and activists who wanted to change corporate policy had to do it the old-fashioned way: lobby lawmakers, muster public pressure, and push for boycotts. But last week the Securities and Exchange Commission handed them a brand-new weapon to fight companies on social-justice and workers’ rights issues: the corporate ballot box. The new rule allows shareholders to field their own candidates for corporate boards and place them on the same ballot as management’s picks. Sought by advocates of corporate accountability for more than 30 years, it could change the way activists deal with corporations, allowing unions, for instance, to help elect a labor-friendly director on the board of Massey Energy, the company responsible for the deadliest mine disaster in 25 years, which workers regard as particularly unconcerned with safety. “This is a definite sea change,” said Simon Billenness, an Amnesty USA board member who works on shareholder advocacy for the organization. “With the SEC’s decision, power has shifted away from company management, and when we are talking with shareholders about possible actions, we have a new tool.”
Ultimately I think this could become the biggest tool in the shed to stop runaway greed on Wall Street.





6 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
The JPM action looks more like an administrative move, closing down a relatively small operation. The question is how big its client desks are since this is how they are mostly likely to funnel their future non-prop prop trading. Also JPM’s big business is in derivatives anyway.
Not hardly, they are just moving it off shore according to Zerohedge. http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-flight-mystery
Without Glass-Steagall, this is what you get. More games.
Not surprising. We’ve already heard a number of ways banks can skirt the ban: “JPMorgan to End Prop Trading” … “and call it something else.”
I think Amnesty is overly optimistic about what the SEC proxy ruling means. For one thing, you can’t build a “coalition” to reach the magic 3% of outstanding shares. Each individual shareholder must have that amount. When I checked Massey energy, that elite group includes mainly Blackrock and Fidelity. No public pension funds were in the top 20.
bmull is mistaken.
The new SEC rules on proxy access specifically allows shareholders to form coalition to reach the 3% threshold for nominating an independent candidate to a company’s board of directors.
Major institutional investors, such as public pension funds and union pension funds, already organize and form coalitions through the Council on Institutional Investors and Investors Network on Climate Risk. Expect coalitions with 3% or more shares to run insurgent director candidates over the next few years at companies whose directors failed to properly oversee fraudulent or grossly negligent management.
~Simon Billenness
I guess you’re right. I must have read wrong information or an early draft or something. Thanks for the correction.
The new SEC rule language is pretty dense. That’s understandable since it’s a regulation in a new and very contentious area. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is still threatening to sue the SEC to weaken or void the rule. Consequently, the SEC has written the rule and conducted the rule-making process very carefully to avoid any possible cause for litigation by the Chamber and its conservative allies, such as Steve Milloy.
For good analysis, check out the Council of Institutional Investors (CII) at http://ww.cii.org
CII press release here:
http://www.cii.org/UserFiles/file/news/08-25-2010ProxyAccessPressRelease.pdf
I also highly recommend the Social Investment Forum: http://www.socialinvest.org/
Thanks for your interest. I was little concerned that my commenting on your post might turn into a situation like that on the West Wing with the “Lemon Lymon” blog. I’m glad that isn’t the case here.
Cheers!