Money
Laundering At Truist Ignored in
House After Federal Reserve
Withheld 133 Pages Gave 1 To
Inner City Press
By Matthew R.
Lee, FOIA
docs, BB&T
denial
NEW YORK CITY,
July 27 – When
BB&T
announced a
$66 billion
proposal to
take over
Suntrust
Bank, to form
a subsequently
named Truist, many
linked it to
deregulatory
moves in
Washington. Then two
days after
Federal
Reserve Governor
Lael Brainard
was asked
by Inner
City Press
about the
Fed's lax
review of previous
mergers,
including WSFS
on which the
Fed still
hasn't ruled
on the bank's
withholding of
information
after rubber
stamping the
deal, the Fed
announced
public
hearings. But
the fix it
seems it still
in. On
April 18,
conveniently,
the Fed "announce[d]
termination of
enforcement
action with
BB&T
Corporation" for
money
laundering. So
there's a
public comment
period on the
merger, but
none on the
Fed's dubious
move while the
application is
pending. Meanwhile
as Inner City
Press has
exclusively reported,
BB&T has
been named in
connection
with sleazy
debt
collections in
a case
in the SDNY
- more on all
this to come.
On April 29,
Inner City
Press
submitted a
FOIA request
about the
dubious termination of
enforcement
action, and a
comment to the
Fed and
FDIC, below.
Yet at
the July 24
House hearing
about the
merger, "U.S.
Rep. Bill
Huizenga,
R-Mich., said
the banks’
domestic focus
and lack of
international
banking
exposure gives
him confidence
that a
combined
Truist would
meet its
socio-economic
obligations
within its
territory." What
about the
dubious record
on money
laundering,
and too
convenient
termination of
enforcement in
order to
approve the
merger, then
withholding
of all
documents?
On the
afternoon of
May 2, before
seeking to
close the comment
period on
BB&T - Suntrust
on May 3, the
Federal
Reserve wrote
to Inner City
Press that
only ONE PAGE
about its
BB&T money
laundering enforcement
termination
would be
provided, and
133 pages withheld in
full, no even
subject to the
type of
partial
redaction that
is required
under FOIA. FRB 99%
denial letter
here.
The
one page is
not even from
the Federal
Reserve: it is
from the North
Carolina
regulator.
Now on July 18
after Inner
City Press' appeal
the Fed - not
even a
Governor, as
in the past,
but Secretary
Ann E.
Misback, has upheld
the failure to
provide
information,
expect for one
additional page,
an approval
letter to
BB&T's
Board of
Directors. Secretary
Misback writes: "Dear
Mr. Lee:
This is in
response to
your email
message dated
May 3, 2019,
and received
by the Board's
Information
Disclosure
Section on May
6, in which
you appeal,
pursuant to 12
C.F .R. § 26
l. l 3(i), the
decision of
the Deputy
Secretary of
the Board
("Deputy
Secretary") to
deny your
request for
information
under the
Freedom
oflnformation
Act ("FOIA"),
5 U.S.C. §
552.
Background
By email
message dated
and received
by the Board's
Information
Disclosure
Section on
April 29,
2019, you
requested
records
regarding "the
18 April 2019
termination of
the money
laundering [
enforcement]
action against
BB&T."
By letter
dated May 2,
2019, the
Deputy
Secretary
infonned you
that staff
searched Board
records and
located
information
responsive to
your request.
The Deputy
Secretary
advised that
the majority
of the
responsive
records
consist of
internal and
inter-agency
pre-decisional
deliberations
and
recommendations
as well as
confidential
supervisory
infonnation
related to the
supervision
and
examination of
a Federal
Reserve-regulated
financial
institution.
The Deputy
Secretary
further
advised that
this
information is
exempt and
would be
withheld from
you under the
authority of
exemptions 5
and 8 of the
FOIA, 5 U.S.C.
§§ 552(b)(5)
and (b)(8),
respectively.
The Deputy
Secretary
explained that
the records
had been
reviewed under
the
requirements
of subsection
(b) of the
FOIA, 5 U.S.C.
§ 552(b), and
all reasonably
segregable
nonexempt
infonnation
would be made
available to
you. The
Deputy
Secretary
advised that
approximately
one" - page,
and now only
one more. Outrageous.
And
there is a request to
the FDIC about
three pages. Just
after the
Federal
Reserve's FOIA
"response,"
the FDIC wrote
to Inner City
Press to say
its comment
period would
closed on May
3, and has not
responded how it
and the Fed's
May 3 public
meeting,
replete with
singing for
supper, can be
viewed. On May
3 before 5 pm
Inner City
Press raised
the bogus FOIA
response to
the Fed
governors and
FDIC: "Dear
Chair Powell,
Secretary
Misback and
others in the
FRS:
This is a
timely second
comment
opposing and
requesting an
extension of
the FRB's
public comment
period on the
Application by
BB&T
Corporation to
merge with
SunTrust
Banks, Inc.
and indirectly
acquire
SunTrust Bank
Holding
Company,
Orlando, FL,
and SunTrust
Bank.
As Fair
Finance Watch
was reviewing
the Home
Mortgage
Disclosure Act
(HMDA) and
other data of
the banks with
an eye toward
commenting or
not commenting
by the current
May 3
expiration of
comment period
on this
proposed
mega-merger,
it and Inner
City Press
were shocked
to see the
Federal
Reserve
Board's
cynical April
18 termination
of the
enforcement
action against
BB&T for
money
laundering.
Money
laundering is,
along with
redlining, one
of the most
serious crimes
a bank can
engage in. For
example
currently in
the SDNY there
are numerous
AML
prosecutions,
resulting for
example in the
conviction of
CEFC's Ho for
UN-related
bribery. Even
the Fed had
historically
acknowledged
the primacy of
full AML
compliance
over the rush
toward
corporate
combination,
for example in
connection
with M&T
Bank.
Yet here, for
the
convenience of
and in
collusion with
a proposed
mega merger,
the Fed
without
transparency
has terminated
the BB&T
AML
enforcement
action during
the public
comment period
on the merger,
without taking
any public
comment on
it.
Inner City
Press has
submitted a
Freedom of
Information
Act request to
the Federal
Reserve for
records
related to
this troubling
de-regulatory
action. It
requested
expedited
treatment and
formally
requests that
the comment
period be kept
open until the
FRB has made
these records
available.
Cynically, the
Fed responded
just before
deadline with
one page,
withholding
133 pages in
full in
contravention
of FOIA. Inner
City Press has
timely
appealed:
an mmediate
FOIA appeal of
FRB absurd
denial by
providing only
one page and
withhold 133
pages in full
- in response
to Inner City
Press' FOIA
request
regarding the
FRB's decision
to terminate
the money
laundering
enforcement
action against
BB&T
during the
pendency of
its
application to
acquire
Suntrust.
As you must
know, agencies
are request to
provided all
reasonably
segregable
information
and are not
allow mass
withhold, as
here, over 99%
of responsive
pages, in
full.
Troublingly,
just as the
Fed acquiesced
to BB&T
and lifted the
enforcement
action to
facilitate
this merger,
now it provide
a shameful
FOIA (non
response), to
claim it is
legitimate to
close its
comment period
on this, the
largest merger
proposal since
2008.
This is a
demand that on
this record
the comment
period must be
extended.
Inner City
Press also
timely notes
that it asked
the FDIC how
to view
today's public
meeting and
was told it is
only live
streamed
INSIDE the
Federal
Reserve Bank.
This should be
explained - it
is far from
the best
practice, of
smaller
regulators, on
smaller
proposed
mergers.
Something is
dreadfully
wrong here -
the comment
period must be
extended.
Again, Fair
Finance Watch
has reviewed
BB&T's
HMDA data for
2017, the most
recent year
for which such
disclosure
data is
available, and
for now note
that for
example in the
Houston Texas
MSA in 2017,
BB&T made
56
conventional
home purchase
loans to
whites and
only four to
African
Americans and
only six to
Latinos. In
the New York
City MSA in
2017, BB&T
made four such
loans to
whites and
none at all to
people of
color. In
Charleston, WV
in 2017 it
made 57 such
loans to
whites and
none to people
of color. From
the first of
what should
now be more
than two
public
meetings, in
West Virginia,
SunTrust has
already closed
all of its
branches; over
the past four
years,
BB&T has
closed more
than 10
branches in
the
state.
We note on the
FDIC's web
page no sign
of an
application
for this
merger. The
Federal
Reserve should
not rule until
the FDIC board
is full, and
to coordinate
its review
with such a
full FDIC
board.
On the current
record,
BB&T's
applications
should be
denied." We'll
have more on
this.
Watch this
site.
Recent deregulatory moves
include an
assault on the
Community
Reinvestment Act, being
led by
Comptroller of
the Currency
Joseph Otting,
who
while at OneWest Bank led
a false
commenting
process to
push through a
merger with
CIT Group.
(Otting is
trying to
change the
OCC's practices
on FOIA fee
waivers and is
even refusing
to consider
comments on some Business
Combinations.
But this
BB&T
proposal will
go to the
Fed whose Jerome Powell
has vowed,
credibly or
not, to
conduct a full
review.
And so consider
this:
BB&T has
been ordered to
return $5.2
million to
investors,
according to
the Securities
and Exchange
Commission,
over charges it
it acquired
misled clients
about the cost
of advisory
services.
The SEC said
the firm that
BB&T
acquired with
Susquehanna
Bancshares, known
then as Valley
Forge Asset
Management,
misled about
1,200 clients
into believing
they were
receiving full
service
brokerage
services at a
discount.
We'll have
more on this.
Fair
Finance Watch,
which has
been tracking
BB&T as
well as
Otting's and
the Federal
Reserve's
anti-CRA
moves, finds
that for
example in the
Atlanta
Metropolitan
Statistical
Area in 2017
BB&T
denied the
home purchase
mortgage
applications
of African
Americans 2.2
times more
frequently than
whites, while
making only 50
such loans to
African
Americans, and
23 to Latinos,
compared to
458 to whites,
all more
disparate that
other lenders
in the
market.
While
some portray
the proposed
merger as a
fait accompli,
the Fed
and OCC must
hold public
comment
periods and
consider the
banks' CRA records,
even as they
race to
undermine the
law. Inner
City Press will submit
requests under
the Freedom of
Information
Act,
as it has
on OneWest - CIT
and now for
Otting's
schedule as
Comptroller.
On
January 16 Inner
City Press asked
the OCC on the
expedited basis
for records to
disclose
Otting's
meetings with
the banking
industry and
others: "Dear
OCC FOIA Officer: Inner City
Press / Fair Finance Watch (ICP)
makes this request for records
pursuant to the Freedom of
Information Act (“FOIA”), 5
U.S.C. § 552, and OCC
regulations. ICP requests copies
of records sufficient to show
all of Comptroller Otting's
scheduled meetings,
appointments, and scheduled
events from the date he became
Comptroller to the date of your
response including but not
limited to Outlook calendar
entries and daily briefing books
for Comptroller Otting on those
dates... ICP requests that you
expedite the processing of this
request. There is media interest
and there exist possible
questions concerning the OCC's
integrity, which affect public
confidence. See e.g. this
article and the CRA ANPR since."
We'll have more on this.
Bigger
picture, or on the club BB&T
is trying to join, Otting's
OneWest colleague and now boss,
US Treasury Department Steve
Mnuchin on December 22 from Cabo
called six big US banks: "Brian
Moynihan, Bank of America;
Michael Corbat, Citi; David
Solomon, Goldman Sachs; Jamie
Dimon, JP Morgan Chase, James
Gorman, Morgan Stanley; Tim
Sloan, Wells Fargo. The CEOs
confirmed that they have ample
liquidity available for lending
to consumer, business markets,
and all other market
operations... Here are some of the documents,
for (still) free download on Patreon.
On October
1 Inner City Press / Fair
Finance Watch
submitted the documents
obtained under FOIA into the record
before the OCC, stating that
"These documents, which must
be considered as part of this
ANPR and any subsequent formal
rulemaking, show that
fraudulent comments supporting
Otting's OneWest were
submitted to the OCC -
presumptively attributable to
Otting.
The documents show that the
OCC sought an explanation from
Otting's / OneWest's outside
counsel - and the OCC's and
Justice Department's response
to date reflect that no such
explanation was ever provided.
The OCC nevertheless approved
the merger and even gave
weight to the fraudulent
comments. On this record we
again insist that Otting be
recused from this ANPR and any
related rulemaking or
proceedings. We have other
substantive concerns about
this ANPR but view the
question of Mr Otting's
recusal (and of with whom he
has met, on which Inner City
Press has another long-pending
FOIA request) as threshold
matter than must be addressed
as quickly as possible."
The FOIA
document as provided by the
OCC and US Department of
Justice reflect that the OCC
never followed up on its lone
(and wan) question to Otting's
counsel as Sullivan &
Cromwell to explain the
fraudulent comments. Nor did
this counsel respond to
questions from The Intercept's
David Dayen, who reports:
"AFTER A YEARLONG effort to
obtain the information, which
included ongoing litigation,
the OCC made available 15
pages. They contain emails to
and from David Finnegan, an
OCC senior licensing analyst
who was a point of contact for
public comment on the merger.
Four individuals contended in
emails to Finnegan that they
never sent the comment letters
supporting the merger. “This
is to bring to your attention
that I received an email from
the office of OCC regarding a
subject I am completely
unaware of,” wrote one
individual (the OCC redacted
the emailers’ identifying
information). “I DID NOT send
the email below that you
responded to. This is a
fraudulent use of my email
account.” The other three sent
similar complaints.
The letter of support
attributed to these
individuals was identical to
the letter posted at the
OneWest Bank website.
Matthew Lee of Inner City
Press expressed outrage at the
fake comments. “There’s
nothing more offensive of
speech rights than
artificially presenting
someone as saying something
you don’t believe,” Lee said.
“You have the right to be
silent. It’s so beyond the
pale.”
FOIA
Finds: OneWest CIT Ban... by on
Scribd
Finnegan
responded to these emailers, thanking them
for letting him know. He also sent two
emails to Stephen Salley, an attorney with
Sullivan & Cromwell, who was
representing OneWest in the merger. “FYI
and review. We would appreciate any
information you can provide regarding this
submission,” Finnegan wrote to Salley on
both occasions.
Presumably, Finnegan reached out to
OneWest’s lawyer about the fake comments
because they featured the same form letter
that OneWest had written to encourage
public support. But the two emails are the
only record that OCC did any investigation
of the fake comments. There is no reply
from Salley or Sullivan & Cromwell to
the OCC, at least not in written form. “By
reaching out to the attorneys immediately,
it suggests something serious, and yet
there’s no follow-up that’s apparent
whatsoever,” said Kevin Stein of the
California Reinvestment Coalition...Olivia
Weiss, a spokesperson for CIT, forwarded a
request for comment to her colleague Gina
Proia, who declined to comment. Salley did
not respond when asked whether he or his
law firm responded to the OCC.... In his
public comment for Inner City Press, Lee
asked for Otting to recuse himself from
the new rule-making, highlighting the fake
comment controversy. “Public participation
is key to CRA, on performance evaluations
and crucially on bank merger and expansion
applications,” Lee wrote. He added that
it’s unclear whether the OCC has improved
its processes to prevent fake comments
from being submitted again in the CRA
rule-making.
We'll have
more on this - watch this site.
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Mount Carmel Station, Box 580188,
Bronx NY 10458
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|