Dow
     -89.23
12801.23
-0.69%
|
     -9.31
1342.64
-0.69%
|
     -108.90
14000.51
-0.77%
|
     -23.35
2903.88
-0.80%
|
     -1.03
53.27
-1.90%
|
     +1.09
116.27
+0.95%
|
     +0.01
2.01
+0.42%
December 11, 2009 2:05 PM

Bank of America Repays $45B to Gov't

By
CBSNews
(AP)  Bank of America Corp. said Wednesday it has repaid the entire $45 billion it owed U.S. taxpayers as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Bank of America, which announced its agreement with the U.S. Treasury to repay TARP last week, funded the repayment through a combination of cash on hand and the sale of $19.29 billion of securities that would convert into common stock. The stock increase remains subject to shareholder approval.

In a prepared statement, CEO Ken Lewis said the company cleared a key hurdle in demonstrating the economy's broader health, and said the bank looks "forward to continuing to play a key role in the economic recovery."

Bank of America was among hundreds of banks that received government support through the government's TARP program. The bank received $25 billion as part of the initial round of investments when the credit crisis peaked last fall. It received an additional $20 billion in January shortly after it acquired Merrill Lynch in what was a heavily scrutinized deal.

Repayment of the funds frees the Charlotte, N.C.-based bank from the government restrictions that have hampered its search for a new CEO, including executive pay limitations.

Bank of America has been searching for a successor to Lewis since it announced in late September that he planned to retire on Dec. 31.

Bank of America's board met Tuesday to discuss potential replacements for Lewis, but no decision has been made. Bank of America spokesman Scott Silvestri said Wednesday that a decision will be made "in the near future."

Bank of America is considering both external and internal candidates to succeed Lewis.

BofA's Chief Risk Officer Gregory Curl and Brian Moynihan, the head of consumer banking, are among the top contenders. However, both men have been criticized by analysts as lacking experience or being too close to the Merrill deal.

Treasury said that with Bank of America's $45 billion repayment, the total amount of repaid TARP funds is now $116 billion. That's out of a total of $453 billion that the government has extended to banks, insurers, automakers and other companies under the program.

Treasury now estimates that total bank repayments could reach up to $175 billion by the end of 2010, the agency said in a release Wednesday. That would cut total taxpayer exposure to the banks by almost three-quarters from the peak. Total bank investments that were expected to cost $76 billion now are projected to bring a $19 billion profit, the agency said.

On Wednesday the government said it would extended the $700 billion financial bailout program until October. That sets up a conflict between Democrats, who want to use some of the leftover money to help generate jobs, and Republicans, who say it should be used to reduce budget deficits.

AP
Add a Comment See all 16 Comments
by gmcnally4 December 10, 2009 8:22 AM EST
The real culprit is fractional reserve lending. Allows banks to grow ridiculously wealthy as they create money from nothing and then charge us to borrow it.
MoneyMasters.com
MonetaryReformAct.com
Reply to this comment
by sean56v December 10, 2009 7:31 AM EST
Barack Obama should spend available cash on reducing the budget deficit. There is no reason to run the country with red ink. If he wants to fund a jobs program, he could invest money into training persons with Down Syndrome for gainful employment.
Reply to this comment
by ffoulkes-2009 December 10, 2009 8:21 AM EST
I like that idea...you know we owe China about 800 billion...If we gave them all the pay-backs, we might just be out from under that debt.
by Marc_1986 December 10, 2009 9:16 AM EST
@ffoulkes

China owns less than 10% of American debt. It would be nice to finally be able to get out from under China's thumb, but knocking off 10% is far from "being out from debt".
by bubbadubba December 10, 2009 7:29 AM EST
Well of course they are paying it off.
They cheated their customers and got the money so they could start giving those big bonuses and salaries.
Our so called government is still NOT regulating banks and Wall Street.
We have no government, we are controlled by the wealthy and their corporations.
Nothing has changed.
Reply to this comment
by Sky017 December 10, 2009 2:35 AM EST
In some respects, Credit Unions are better than banks.

Visit your preferred Credit Union and have a chat.

A credit-union is a co-operative. The customers/members are also OWNERS of the Credit Union.

Credit Unions CARE more. Banks?... we've seen their agenda.
Reply to this comment
by novamba December 10, 2009 9:30 AM EST
Absolutely, positively agree with you...I joined Navy Federal Credit Union while still in Boot camp in Parris Island, 19 years ago, and have never looked back.
by bradkt1 December 10, 2009 1:12 AM EST
Many critics were predicting that we wouldn't get the money back...that we were just flushing cash down the toilet. They were wrong. These banks were prevented from going under. In that narrow respect only, this program succeeded.

However, there is a criticism that is valid. What this program was also supposed to be about was to give the banks money so that they could loan it out to businesses, allowing them to meet their payrolls and to produce goods that could be sold. For the most part, the banks didn't do that. The banks didn't hold up their end of the bargain.

I agree with the poster who pointed out that now they are paying the money back to they can resume paying their CEOs and other bank officers outrageously high salaries so they can resume their privileged lifestyles. I can only conclude that while the financial services sector was prevented from going under, they still are not making loans and, as a result, credit is still way too tight.
Reply to this comment
by jtdev1 December 10, 2009 8:52 AM EST
The banks aren't paying it back like they got it. They are paying SOME in cash and the rest in shady deals like AIG selling it's failed divisions to the federal reserve because NO ONE on the open market would pay for them AT ALL!

Also where is the interest? They borrow 45 Billion and pay back (right!) 45 Billion...

If I "Borrow" money from the bank, you bet I'd be paying a pretty penny in Interest (Upfront) when I pay them back...

this whole thing is a joke, and we're paying for it all over the place.
by Marc_1986 December 10, 2009 9:14 AM EST
@bradkt1

We are going to lose a lot of TARP money... not every bank can afford to pay it back, and some have already taken TARP funds and defaulted.

The problem with TARP is that it was a waste to begin with. Big banks are going to find a way to survive on their own (as BoA did, sell securities) without the Gov't help. Giving them money did absolutely jack squat, as they aren't going to lend it out to consumers.

What Bush and the Dem Congress should have done is not give the banks any money, but increase the FDIC fund instead. This way the "big" banks can fail (but they wouldn't have) but the American consumer is still FDIC insured. Failed banks lose (forced to liquidate), consumers are little-affected (at least they are FDIC insured on some of their losses).
by OldTimeTruth December 9, 2009 10:59 PM EST
Here they go again. Pay off that Tax Payer Loan so they don't have to answer any questions and then they can pay a CEO millions. Hold tight to your wallet people. They are off and running and you know what they have already done and they sure haven't changed. Just read the CBS news on credit cards and home loans and all the new changes. I just moved what little money I had to a small local bank. They are the ones that took care of their customers. You sure didn't hear them asking for millions and billions in tax payer money. What a idea... I wonder what would happen if everyone did that one....... What would their million dollar CEO and Fat Cat board members do then?
Reply to this comment
by LCCLYDE December 9, 2009 10:03 PM EST
Ithink they was never really in that bad of shape.They seen the money was being handed out by the BUSH administration and jumped in to get some before it was gone.Ialso think they paid it back so fast as to get out from under the governments thumb nd be able to go back to doing business the way THEY want to with being watched.BofA is a crooked operation with all thier FEES.The Mafia is the only thing in comparison.Pay the VIG.
Reply to this comment
by jjj2000jjj December 9, 2009 9:21 PM EST
0% INTEREST? On $45 Billion?!?! Even my student loan is 6.25% -- what bank will give me a loan at 0% interest? If the gov't held banks to their own standards, this would have been at the credit card rate of 20% (or even higher), compounded daily! For just 6 months, that 20% rate would be a nice little $4.5 billion return on investment back to taxpayers!

Instead we give them 0% interest on $45,000,000,000 and a few cases of H1N1 vaccine for all those high-risk group bankers.

The banks and the insurance industry are no different than Tiger: screw everyone.
Reply to this comment
by ffoulkes-2009 December 10, 2009 12:47 AM EST
It would seem that since the banks were actually defaulting on defaulted loans, their credit should have taken a hit, thus raising their interest rate to that of your typical defaultee...oh...27% or so...
See all 16 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook