Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by notafraudster 1194 days ago
It looks like since 1/1/2014 (convenient stopping point for my scrape), FDIC takeovers resulted in an average of 76% of what's owed paid out (range 0%-98%). My guess is the <50% payouts were mostly fraud rather than a situation like this where it's a more traditional liquidity event, so I'd suspect it'll be above average, probably in the 80-90% range.
1 comments

That's disappointingly low. 0% is what you'd expect from an entirely unregulated "bank" which failed, so regulators were completely ineffective. Does the US just not bother actually having and enforcing capital requirements on banks?
That’s a bit of a grim take. There’s been multiple instances of otherwise well regulated banks being blind sided by deliberate concealed fraud by its employees.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barings_Bank

Leeson is an example of a bank completely failing to use controls whose purpose is to prevent exactly what happened. The bank should have another employee who is in effect marking Leeson's homework, and instead he was allowed to mark his own, so when he was down a million dollars he could say he was up a million dollars, and keep his job. And of course it's quickly not just one million. This isn't hindsight, these were normal controls, but Barings just didn't bother.
The tragic part of this story is that none of those who should have been responsible for implementing such controls faced any kind of legal action.