Will A $1.9 Billion Settlement Change Banks' Behavior? : Planet Money For punishments to work, they need to be both swift and meaningful. The HSBC settlement may be neither.
NPR logo

Will A $1.9 Billion Settlement Change Banks' Behavior?

  • Download
  • <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/167089673/167135807" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript
Will A $1.9 Billion Settlement Change Banks' Behavior?

Will A $1.9 Billion Settlement Change Banks' Behavior?

  • Download
  • <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/167089673/167135807" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript


When a bank does something shady and gets caught, prosecutors like to hit the bankers where it hurts: their pocketbook. This week the bank HSBC agreed to pay the U.S. a record $1.9 billion to settle allegations it ignored money laundering by Mexican drug dealers.

Robert Smith, from our Planet Money team, wonders whether the money alone is enough to teach banks a lesson.

ROBERT SMITH, BYLINE: If a kid does something naughty and you want to discipline the child - give him a time-out, say, or take away a toy - there's some basic principles that seem to work. The punishment needs to happen quickly right after the bad behavior. And it needs to be significant enough that the kid notices. But punishing a bank makes both of these things incredibly tricky.

In the case of HSBC, their dealings with Mexican drug dealers took place over a decade.

JOHN COFFEE: This is justice very much delayed, and that may be to a degree justice denied.

SMITH: John Coffee is a law professor at Columbia University and an expert in prosecuting white collar crime. He says that simply punishing the whole bank, the corporation, years after the crime may not send the message that you want.

COFFEE: The taking of billions of dollars in cash from Mexican drug cartels and funneling it into the U.S. into legitimate investments, that was done by individuals who knew what they were doing, and no one has been held accountable who is a flesh and blood human being.

SMITH: So that's the first problem in levying a fine against the bank. Who really has to pay the money at the end of the day? The corporation, or more specifically the shareholders - not exactly the specific wrongdoers getting what they deserved. Then there is the amount of the penalty. $1.9 billion is a lot of money, no doubt about it. But when you break it down, it's hard to know how much this really hurts a bank.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: These fines are large from the perspective of you and me, and from the perspective of the institution they are simply a cost of doing business.

SMITH: William K. Black is a former Federal regulator. He now teaches economics and law at the University of Missouri, Kansas City. He points out that HSBC makes a lot of money, and $1.9 billion works out to about a month's worth of profit for the bank, based on what they were pulling in at the beginning of the year.

Black says that the settlement was negotiated between the bank and federal prosecutors and it was important for both sides that it not be unbearably high.

BLACK: The government dramatically reduces from the beginning what its demand would be, because we don't want to put HSBC out of business, and so we're going to cap the demands from the very beginning.

SMITH: See, there was something that the federal government could have done to punish the bank that really would have hurt. They could have indicted HSBC for doing business with drug cartels, made it very difficult to operate in the United States. But Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department's criminal division, says they didn't want to punish all the innocent people who worked for the bank who would lose their jobs.

When he announced the settlement this week, he said that HSBC had cleaned house, they were agreeing to more oversight, and were cooperating.

LANNY BREUER: It's a fiction to suggest that this isn't a very robust result. We've gone after the cartels, we've gone after the traffickers. And in this particular case we have held a financial institution absolutely accountable.

SMITH: But is $1.9 billion enough of a punishment to make all the other banks take notice? Clearly, no institution wants this kind of bad publicity. But law professor John Coffee says in the past the lessons that really shook up entire industries usually involved criminal indictments, not just money. He points to Michael Milken in the 1980s. He was the king of the junk bonds until he was charged with insider trading.

Everyone knew him on Wall Street and when he eventually made a deal and went to jail...

COFFEE: That sent a message for a decade to Wall Street that this was very dangerous behavior, don't go anywhere near it. And I think that message was internalized.

SMITH: Coffee says the thing that made the lesson stick was the fact that Milken was this iconic figure who was personally humiliated. No Wall Street trader wanted to be in that guy's shoes. HSBC, they agreed to pay money, sure. But the settlement was over quickly and investors don't seem to mind. So far the stock price is holding steady. Robert Smith, NPR News, New York.

Copyright © 2012 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.