AIG/Regulators Pay Taxpayers Back, One Flight at a Time

Article Submitted by: Sean Riskowitz
The Economy


Regulators are hell-bent on getting taxpayer money back and preventing another financial crisis in the future. However, haggling about personal aircraft use and committee hearing agendas doesn't really solve the problem.

 

Submitted: Jan 27, 2010    Views: 200    Comments: 2    Likes: 4   


 

American International Group, or AIG, has been in the news a lot recently. Not only for the $180bn “bailout” the company received from the government, but also for the fact that half that money was paid out to AIG creditors at par, or 100 cents on the dollar. Particularly strange was that creditors of other companies “bailed out” by the government did not receive par value for their claims, but walked away with usually between 10 and 30 cents per dollar. Many creditors got nothing.

This impasse is currently being investigated by the House Oversight Committee in hugely entertaining public hearings. Today I watched as the Committee deliberated whether or not to allow Tim Geithner, current Treasury Secretary, to cut into time allocated to former Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson. The Committee spent a full twenty minutes debating the merits of shafting Paulson to ask Geithner more pressing and direct questions.

“We have a set agenda and strategy”, said the Chairman of the Committee. “We do things a certain way here and we can’t go around messing with the schedule”. Members of the Panel argued in vain that Geithner was in fact the one they wanted to talk to, in particular about the AIG creditor situation. But the Chairman refused, compromising by giving two minutes to each side to raise further questions before Paulson was brought in.

To make matters worse when Paulson came in, he read a prepared statement which clearly explained he had nothing to do with the AIG creditor payments (they were authorized after he had left his post), and that was the crux of his answers going forward. Treasury 1 House Oversight Committee 0. Or am I being generous to the Committee?

But back to AIG. You may be interested to know that the company and the SEC have been hard at work figuring out how AIG is going to recover the billions of taxpayer money it has lost. In a recent SEC filing, it was revealed that AIG Chief Executive Robert Benmosche has signed an aircraft time-sharing agreement covering the rules for when he may take a company jet on “personal detours” from primary business use.

The agreement is explained as the “Luxury Expenditure Policy” and basically allows the CEO personal use of private aircraft only if that use "is incidental to a business trip and the incremental cost is paid by the AIG CEO". It goes to say, then, that personal use that is not “incidental to a business trip” is prohibited.

Some of the expenses Mr. Benmosche must cover if he uses the jet for personal use include ground transportation and accommodation for crew to in-flight food and beverages.

Apparently the filing is in relation to a dispute between regulators and board members who appointed Benmosche as CEO of the company. He was, according to reports, initially promised personal use of the aircraft as long as he reimbursed the company.

However regulators disagreed with the board and forced Benmosche the ignominy of using regular commercial aircraft. This new deal was put in place after Benmosche missed a family occasion after being forced to fly commercial. Have you ever heard of such a humiliation?

In summary: Mr. Benmosche will not be allowed to use the jet for any personal activity, but will be allowed to use it if he needs to be at a family function where a potential client might show up. For this he will be billed the costs of the flight, the crew and the Coke/Jack Daniels he consumed.

So this new arrangement will probably save the company at most $200,000 per personal flight. Mr. Benmosche, by implication, would then have to make about 400,000 personal flights in order to cover the hole left by the “bail out”.

The somewhat farcical issues I highlighted above go a long way to explaining why effective increased regulation and political oversight of financial institutions and markets is a wild goose chase. It’s a good primer for anyone who believes that politicians can regulate markets efficiently and put aside partisan politics, self-interests and trivial pursuits.

I mean, you can’t make the boss of a government-owned entity fly commercial, if you’re also the boss of a government-owned entity, now can you?

 


Sponsor Updates and Offers

Sign up for Zions Direct’s free weekly newsletter.

Get market information, CD and Bond auction updates, new-issue alerts and more.




4

Email this story Email to someone | Print Story Print Content | Add to reading list

Comments Received:

Government regulation is necessary because the bankers can't police themselves. The wolves can't guard the hen house. But it works best when the regulation is broad and simple. As much as it's derided, Glass-Steagal was one example of good regulation. Broad legislation and prevented certain key institutions from engaging in risky behavior. Once govenmeent starts to micro-manage though, it's all downhill.

Posted: Jan 27, 2010

If this is not micro-managing then I don't know what is!
Messrs. Glass and Steagal were right - why can't we just keep it at that?

Posted: Jan 27, 2010



Add Your Comments:

Your Name:

Spam protection control:


© Copyright 2010 Sean Riskowitz All rights reserved. Sean Riskowitz has granted BestCashCow.com, LLC non-exclusive rights to display this work on Bestcashcow.com.

Financial products of all nature bear inherent risks and this website is not a financial advisory service; it is a forum for users to share and to compare notes and observations on financial publications. The website provides, free of charge, the technical and logistical apparatus and the medium for users to share and to publish financial information and to comment on publications. As such, the website's operator can not and does not take responsibility for information, observations or opinions of any sort or nature provided by third parties with whom it is not affiliated who use the website to publish, to comment or as a means of solicitation. Users are specifically warned against following any advice related to specific instruments, including, but not limited to, equity securities, that may be provided by other users directly on this site or on web pages to which other users have provided links on this site. BestCashCow.com can not and does not check or verify the qualifications and credentials of users who publish or comment on this site or on linked pages. Users should seek personalized advice from qualified professionals regarding all personal financial issues and evaluate the risks and applicability to their own circumstances of each financial product discussed regardless of who the publisher is or purports to be. Should you, through your use of this site, identify an individual or organization purporting to offer personalized advice, you bear all responsibility to ensure that the individual or organization has the qualifications that they may represent on the website, and that their advice is appropriate for your circumstances. On certain webpages, BestCashCow.com provides information related to rates on US-based savings accounts, CDs, short-term government bonds, and other US cash equivalent securities, also free of charge to internet users for their independent use. The accuracy of this information is not guaranteed, and the information, like all other information on this website, should not be construed to provide investment advice, nor to endorse a financial product of any sort.

© 2010 BestCashCow.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.