Federal Reserve and SEC investigate Goldman Sachs’ actions in Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse

TL;DR Breakdown

  • FED and SEC team up to investigate Goldman Sachs’ over the acquisition of Silicon Valley Bank’s securities portfolio before its failure. 
  • Goldman Sachs allegedly suggested to SVB executives that they “sell part or all of its securities portfolio” to establish the need for funds before raising capital.

The Federal Reserve and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are investigating Goldman Sachs for its participation in the unsuccessful capital raise and acquisition of Silicon Valley Bank’s securities portfolio before its failure. The Justice Department has issued a warrant, and the authorities are looking into possible inappropriate interactions and Goldman Sachs’ dual status as buyer and consultant. Goldman Sachs has acknowledged that it is helping with the inquiries.

Justice Department subpoenas Goldman Sachs in SVB investigation

Both regulatory organizations are looking into what Goldman Sachs did during the botched capital raise that preceded Silicon Valley Bank’s demise.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Goldman Sachs is currently under investigation by the Federal Reserve and SEC over its role in acquiring Silicon Valley Bank’s securities portfolio before the bank’s collapse.

Both agencies are looking into what Goldman Sachs did during its unsuccessful capital raise before SVB’s collapse. According to reports, the Justice Department has subpoenaed Goldman Sachs as part of its inquiry into SVB.

Insiders claim that the Federal Reserve and SEC are particularly interested in collecting papers about Goldman Sachs’ dual roles as the consultant for the bank’s capital raising and the buyer of SVB’s securities portfolio. However, the agencies are looking into possible unlawful communications about the portfolio sale between Goldman’s trading operation and investment banking division. Goldman has responded by stating it is:

cooperating with and providing information to various governmental bodies in connection with their investigations and inquiries into SVB, including the firm’s business with SVB in or around March 2023.

Goldman Sachs

SVB, a well-known financial lender that serves venture capital firms and IT companies, contacted Goldman Sachs to help the bank raise cash in the last few days before it collapsed. At the same time, its trading branch bought “SVB’s $21 billion portfolio of available-for-sale debt securities at a discount.” 

According to sources with knowledge of the situation, Goldman Sachs allegedly suggested to SVB executives that they “sell part or all of its securities portfolio” to establish the need for funds before raising capital. Greg Becker, the former CEO of SVB, reaffirmed this counsel while testifying before the Senate Banking Committee.

A representative for Goldman Sachs responded to the accusations by saying: 

[Goldman] informed SVB in writing that we would not act as their adviser on the sale, and that SVB should not rely on any advice from the bank in this regard, but instead hire a third-party financial adviser.

Goldman Sachs

Silicon Valley Bank was shut down by California regulators on March 10 in an unusual move. With assets of more than $212 billion before its liquidation, SVB ranked as the 16th-largest bank in the United States. 

After the occurrence, SVB Financial Group filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on March 17. The voluntary petition aimed to make a court-supervised reorganization procedure possible to maintain the company’s worth.

Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse: Largest since the Great Recession

The fall of Silicon Valley Bank in March was the largest bank failure since the beginning of the Great Recession 15 years prior. The Santa Clara, California-based company’s collapse occurred due to its debt investments, including U.S. Treasuries and securities, losing value due to the Federal Reserve raising interest rates to battle increasing inflation. The bank saw a quick bank run days before it failed when depositors withdrew their money.

After the bank quickly raised capital and began searching for a potential buyer by selling $21 billion in securities while it lost $1.8 billion in the process, shares fell sharply. The reasons for its failure, which was the first of several weeks, including those of Signature Bank and Silvergate Capital, include the following.

Democrats attributed it to the relaxation of banking rules by Congressional Republicans in 2018. However, significant Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, have refuted that claim, with Trump’s spokesperson Steven Cheung accusing Democrats of trying to “gaslight the public to evade responsibility.”

Was SVB’s collapse linked to the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes?

According to reports, Jerome Powell, the chairman of the US Federal Reserve, acknowledged that despite being in charge of the institution, his regulator was surprised by the rapid demise of Silicon Valley Bank.

When the bank closed on March 10, Powell stated that he immediately recognized that an internal probe was required in a press conference conducted right after the Federal Open Market Committee meeting on March 22. Powell added:

I realized right away that there was going to be a need for a review. I mean, the question we were all asking ourselves over that first weekend was, ‘how did this happen?

Jerome Powell

On March 13, the Federal Reserve announced the beginning of an internal inquiry to examine the circumstances surrounding SVB’s failure and how the Fed “supervised and regulated” the bank. Vice Chairman Michael Barr would serve as the probe’s principal investigator.

Disclaimer. The information provided is not trading advice. Cryptopolitan.com holds no liability for any investments made based on the information provided on this page. We strongly recommend independent research and/or consultation with a qualified professional before making any investment decision.

文章来源于互联网:Federal Reserve and SEC investigate Goldman Sachs’ actions in Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse

Disclaimers:

1. You are solely responsible for your investment decisions and this info is not liable for any losses you may incur.

2. The copyright of this article belongs to the writer, it represents the writer's opinions only, not represents the site's ones. Not financial advice.

Previous 2023年6月19日 03:54
Next 2023年6月19日 05:18

Related articles

  • The new Grayscale scam showcases the dangers of Elon’s blue mark on X

    TL;DR Breakdown The recent crypto scam involving Grayscale has brought the light on the dangers of the Blue check mark on X formerly Twitter. The most recent crypto scam on X is the purported $25 million giveaway from a Grayscale verified page. Due to the ongoing menace x may lose credibility in giving accurate information because anyone can get a blue check, confusing vulnerable and unsuspecting users. The real Grayscale account has a gold mark reserved for corporations; users on X need to identify these changes to avoid getting fooled by the scammers.  Description Grayscale is presently under a scam threat. In recent times, the influence of social media on financial markets has never been more palpable. One central figure in this evolving landscape is Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, among other ventures.  Users rely on Twitter (X) for accurate news and updates from verified pages. However, … Read more Grayscale is presently under a scam threat. In recent times, the influence of social media on financial markets has never been more palpable. One central figure in this…

    Article 2023年9月10日
  • Best Twitter threads of the day – August 28th

    Description Top 5 alpha tweets on crypto Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary’s Prediction on Crypto and Web3 U.S. put forward measures for crypto taxation Top 5 alpha tweets on crypto Twitter is an alpha gold mine if you know where to look. I compiled the top 5 alpha tweets I read this week for your convenience.👇 — Miles Deutscher (@milesdeutscher) August 27, 2023 1. Banger post by @CryptoCred on funding rates and how they work. https://t.co/yIcK1AZtv0 — Miles Deutscher (@milesdeutscher) August 27, 2023 2. Great observation regarding the current state of the market. Eloquently sums up how a lot of us are feeling (and why). https://t.co/OQ7o68xWrm — Miles Deutscher (@milesdeutscher) August 27, 2023 3. Very interesting and well-put together thread. Highlights the importance of on-chain wallet tracking. https://t.co/kZCJd9WY2L — Miles Deutscher (@milesdeutscher) August 27, 2023 4. Why thinking in first principles is a crucial skill. https://t.co/KqtKEbPdGB — Miles Deutscher (@milesdeutscher) August 27, 2023 5. Amazing master thread on the top crypto airdrops. https://t.co/4aJFCgSwYR — Miles Deutscher (@milesdeutscher) August 27, 2023 Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary’s Prediction on Crypto and Web3 🚨 BREAKING:…

    Article 2023年8月29日
  • EU officials push for transparency in AI-generated content to combat disinformation

    TL;DR Breakdown European Union officials are advocating for transparency in AI-generated content to combat disinformation. Companies deploying generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT and Bard, should label their content and implement safeguards against the spread of disinformation. EU tech industry signatories, including Google and Microsoft, are expected to report on their safeguards for AI-generated content, while Twitter’s actions will face increased regulatory scrutiny. European Union (EU) officials advocate for additional measures to promote transparency in artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT, to tackle the spread of disinformation. Vera Jourova, the vice president for values and transparency at the European Commission, emphasized the need for companies deploying generative AI tools to label their content and implement safeguards against disseminating AI-generated disinformation. Jourova called for signatories, including major tech companies such as Microsoft and Google, to recognize the potential of generative AI to generate disinformation and take steps to label such content clearly. This move empowers users to differentiate between genuine and potentially misleading information. The EU’s existing “Code of Practice on Disinformation,” established in 2018, serves as a self-regulatory standard…

    Article 2023年6月10日
  • South Korea implements new accounting rules for cryptocurrency sector

    TL;DR Breakdown South Korea introduces new regulations to increase transparency and investor confidence in cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency issuers in South Korea are required to disclose detailed information in financial statements. Revenue recognition rules clarified for cryptocurrency sales under new regulations. Description South Korea’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) has unveiled new regulations to increase transparency and bolster investor confidence in the cryptocurrency market. Starting in January 2024, corporations that issue or hold cryptocurrencies must disclose comprehensive information in their financial statements. Under the new rules, cryptocurrency issuers must publicly disclose details regarding the quantity and characteristics of … Read more South Korea’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) has unveiled new regulations to increase transparency and bolster investor confidence in the cryptocurrency market. Starting in January 2024, corporations that issue or hold cryptocurrencies must disclose comprehensive information in their financial statements. Under the new rules, cryptocurrency issuers must publicly disclose details regarding the quantity and characteristics of their crypto tokens and their business models and internal accounting policies related to the sale of cryptocurrencies and associated profits. Furthermore, businesses that hold tokens as investments…

    Article 2023年7月13日
  • Crypto Unveiling: LBRY Challenges SEC’s Double Standards on Crypto Securities Law

    TL;DR Breakdown LBRY, a crypto startup, criticizes the SEC for its dual narrative regarding the classification of its LBC, as security. The SEC’s denial of Coinbase’s request for clarity on how securities laws apply to the market, along with Chairman Gary Gensler’s stance on classifying most crypto assets as securities. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) recent decision to revise the penalty on LBRY, a crypto startup, has sparked a contentious debate surrounding the agency’s approach to classifying cryptocurrencies as securities. In court filings, the SEC cited LBRY’s financial difficulties as the reason behind revising the penalty, leading LBRY to question the SEC’s dual narrative regarding its cryptocurrency, LBC.  Additionally, LBRY referred to the SEC’s Coinbase filing, which sought clarity on how securities laws apply to the market. This article delves into the SEC’s actions, LBRY’s response, and the broader implications for the industry. Contents hide 1 SEC’s Revised Penalty and LBRY’s Critique 2 SEC’s Denial of Clarity Request and Criticism of Chairman Gensler 3 LBRY’s Challenge and the SEC’s Disregard of Staff Statements 4 Conclusion SEC’s Revised Penalty…

    Article 2023年5月17日
TOP