midas Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) There was a thread in this forum in October last year discussing Chase Business Banking division sending letters to many of their business customers stating that after November 2013 they would no longer be able to conduct international wire transfers. At the time many posters in that thread accused the original poster of worrying unnecessarily. I wonder if those same people will do the same now that HSBC is restricting its customers withdrawals. But before they do so, perhaps they should familiarise themselves with the story about the frog sitting in boiling water. "you shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours." He wrote to complain to HSBC about the new rules and also that he had not been informed of any change. The bank said it did not have to tell him. "As this was not a change to the Terms and Conditions of your bank account, we had no need to pre-notify customers of the change," HSBC wrote. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25861717 Edited January 25, 2014 by midas 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 note: "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced." case closed! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancnx Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 I have an HSBC account and I regularly transfer lump sums to my bank in Thailand from UK. Seamlessly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 I have an HSBC account and I regularly transfer lump sums to my bank in Thailand from UK. Seamlessly! cash was the [temporary] problem, not transfers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrry Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 There was a time where no bank would default on a genuine order to pay from an account holder. In cash. Any default would have been considered unthinkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 25, 2014 Author Share Posted January 25, 2014 note: "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced." case closed! nothing to worry about then……. it's not like they are laundering money for drug cartels or something....oh wait 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asiantravel Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 note: "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced." case closed! Naam in your haste to declare the matter " closed ", perhaps those with more inquisitive minds would at least like to question whether there is any possibility of a connection between these withdrawal restrictions and a $70 billion capitalisation shortfall in HSBC's accounts that was reported in the daily Telegraph on 16 January? https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/the-latest-hsbc-scandal-an-80-billion-capitalization-shortfall/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 25, 2014 Author Share Posted January 25, 2014 note: "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced." case closed! Naam in your haste to declare the matter " closed ", perhaps those with more inquisitive minds would at least like to question whether there is any possibility of a connection between these withdrawal restrictions and a $70 billion capitalisation shortfall in HSBC's accounts that was reported in the daily Telegraph on 16 January? https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/the-latest-hsbc-scandal-an-80-billion-capitalization-shortfall/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJP Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 25, 2014 Author Share Posted January 25, 2014 tut tut tut ..............from the article “In our view, HSBC has not made the necessary adjustments, during the quantitative easing reprieve. Rather, it has allowed legacy problems to linger as new ones in emerging markets gather pace. The result has been extreme earnings overstatement, causing HSBC to become one of the largest practitioners of capital forebearance globally. This charade appears to be ending, given how few earnings levers remain besides selling off core elements of the franchise and the stringencies of Basel III compliance,” wrote Forensic Asia.-The broker adds: “While having stated capital ratios well above peer averages is all well and good, HSBC’s stated capital ratios would appear to be nothing more than a mirage if our analysis is correct.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 25, 2014 Author Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. Beppe Grillo is a comedian, blogger turn politician who is causing a lot of distress in the fake facade of the monetary system in Europe. After watching this video, you know why. Edited January 25, 2014 by midas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJP Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 ^^ New formula needed. Old one has expired. The people are the same. The resources are the same (I hope). Why do we permit human tragedy on a grand scale because of failed maths? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMarlow Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. Beppe Grillo is a comedian, blogger turn politician who is causing a lot of distress in the fake facade of the monetary system in Europe. After watching this video, you know why. "After watching this video, you know why." Is it because he clearly doesn't know his arse from his elbow? Either that or it's a very old video (don't think it is because the BBC shot in it is dated 2013); he talks about Jugoslavia, a country that hasn't existed since the early 90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sustento Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) "HSBC has said that following customer feedback, it was changing its policy: "We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual and out of keeping with the normal running of their account. Since last November, in some instances we may have also asked these customers to show us evidence of what the cash is required for." "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced." Money Box asked other banks what their policy is on large cash withdrawals. They all said they reserved the right to ask questions about large cash withdrawals." Edited January 25, 2014 by sustento Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheungWan Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. Beppe Grillo is a comedian, blogger turn politician who is causing a lot of distress in the fake facade of the monetary system in Europe. After watching this video, you know why. Another comedian doing the populist demagogue dance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davejones Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. The reason to book in advance is because most banks don't keep much cash on the premises. Not many take out large amounts in cash, so why bother keeping cash. Do you expect them to keep a few billion just in case everyone turns up wanting cash on the same day. If you're worried you can transfer it all out electronically right away. It's only cash you need to order. No-one is stopping you take all the money out of your account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheungWan Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. The reason to book in advance is because most banks don't keep much cash on the premises. Not many take out large amounts in cash, so why bother keeping cash. Do you expect them to keep a few billion just in case everyone turns up wanting cash on the same day. If you're worried you can transfer it all out electronically right away. It's only cash you need to order. No-one is stopping you take all the money out of your account. Cash-wise, 3k is chump-change for cash in most bank branches. Nothing to do with bank runs and other such nonsense, more to do with added procedures to account for transactions, which of course can be inconvenient. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJP Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) Nope, they hadn't pre-booked cash withdrawals either . . . . . . meanwhile in Zimbabwe I had no idea British high street banks were there . . . . . . let's not forget our friends across the pond . . . . . . reminds me of a film . . . Edited January 25, 2014 by MJP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sustento Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. The reason to book in advance is because most banks don't keep much cash on the premises. Not many take out large amounts in cash, so why bother keeping cash. Do you expect them to keep a few billion just in case everyone turns up wanting cash on the same day. If you're worried you can transfer it all out electronically right away. It's only cash you need to order. No-one is stopping you take all the money out of your account. Cash-wise, 3k is chump-change for cash in most bank branches. Nothing to do with bank runs and other such nonsense, more to do with added procedures to account for transactions, which of course can be inconvenient. I used to work in a bank when I first left school. We had a maximum amount of cash that we were allowed to keep on site. Anything above the maximum had to be returned to head office. We had a collection once a week by an armoured van. If we had an excess at any other time of the week we packaged it up and took it the Post Office. They used to run a service called 'High Value Package' especially for very high value stuff. We used to post it off to head office. I assume it's all changed today but I bet bank branches still have a maximum amount of money they're allowed to keep on site. I bet that some of the large capacity ATMs have more cash in them that the branches whose walls they're built into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornishcarlos Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. The reason to book in advance is because most banks don't keep much cash on the premises. Not many take out large amounts in cash, so why bother keeping cash. Do you expect them to keep a few billion just in case everyone turns up wanting cash on the same day. If you're worried you can transfer it all out electronically right away. It's only cash you need to order. No-one is stopping you take all the money out of your account. Not true... I just tried to transfer money from my Lloyds International acc to my Thai acc, can't do it ?? Seems since they split recently with TSB, some website technical issues have surfaced.. I spoke to them on the phone (sat phone from work on a boat) and they told me I could do the transfer if I sent them a letter. Should I send it by dolphin ?? So now my internet banking is just a fancy way to see my balance on screen, no other use at all.. The guy on the phone even said as much Show me MY money... On a plus note, stops Mrs Cornish spending too much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxman71 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Question for those with relevant knowledge: I will soon (within a month or so) be needing to wire transfer about 2-3 million THB from my personal account with Krung Thai Bank in Thailand to my personal account in the US, for the purpose of buying out my sister's share of a family enterprise in the US. I have had the Krung Thai account for over 8 years and it has been reported to the IRS in the US every year via the FBAR and Form 8938. Does anyone know if I will have a problem with executing this transfer ? Thanks ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 note: "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced." case closed! Naam in your haste to declare the matter " closed ", perhaps those with more inquisitive minds would at least like to question whether there is any possibility of a connection between these withdrawal restrictions and a $70 billion capitalisation shortfall in HSBC's accounts that was reported in the daily Telegraph on 16 January? https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/the-latest-hsbc-scandal-an-80-billion-capitalization-shortfall/ mea culpa! i did not consider that possibility. there is clearly a connection! it was rather easy for HSBC to compensate for $70,000,000,000 capitalisation shortfall by refusing cash payments to a fistful of UK clients. goddàm banksters! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludacris Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Maxman, From personal experience, for anything other than sending a small amount to yourself overseas Thai banks have always asked questions. Here's what I've found through trial and error: 1. Transferring amounts less than a few hundred thousand baht to my own account overseas requires no extra documentation. Sending money to yourself comes under the 'transfer of savings' reason and I believe it is the easiest. 2. Transfers to anyone but myself or to a company requires documentation from the receiving end (ie. bill from the company, etc) 3. Anything more than a few hundred thousand baht requires documented prove of where the money came from (ie. letter from employer). As a result, to send money abroad for almost any purpose the easiest way I've found is to transfer to my own account overseas and then write a check on the account or do an internet transfer or bill payment from Thailand on my overseas account. Because of all this hassle getting money out, I regularly transfer any excess cash out of the country. I could do it less frequently and in larger amounts, but regularly getting a letter from my employer is a pain. Also, you can always bring the money back with no problem, and I feel better with most of it abroad if anything should happen here which would make me leave the country quickly, such as the political situation turning ugly and the banks having to close, or even my visa not being renewed. I do have investments in Thailand, but those are for the long-term and locked in, and hopefully I could access those once the dust settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 You get this with Barclays. Went into the bank last year to pull out £3000 to buy an old VW. "Have you booked this?" said in the most condescendingly authoritative b1tch tone. Conversation followed . . . - No, give me the the money right now. - You need to book it. - Give me the money. - Well, we'll have to wait for the safe to open. - Is this to stop banks runs LOL? - Oh no no, nothing like that. - Course it is. - Well, if everyone did this at once it would all collapse. - Safe open yet? Now I had well over £50k in this account. If it was a bank run I'd be wanting it all, no? They're terrified of bank runs now. The reason to book in advance is because most banks don't keep much cash on the premises. Not many take out large amounts in cash, so why bother keeping cash. Do you expect them to keep a few billion just in case everyone turns up wanting cash on the same day. If you're worried you can transfer it all out electronically right away. It's only cash you need to order. No-one is stopping you take all the money out of your account. Cash-wise, 3k is chump-change for cash in most bank branches. Nothing to do with bank runs and other such nonsense, more to do with added procedures to account for transactions, which of course can be inconvenient. You have no greater insight into this than anyone else and why should anyone feel safe keeping their money in a bank that has been shown to have a $70 billion shortfall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 You have no greater insight into this than anyone else and why should anyone feel safe keeping their money in a bank that has been shown to have a $70 billion shortfall? anybody with a minimum of insight would not lament a "shortfall" which is based on not yet implemented Basel III rules which call if implemented to increase capitalisation by the end of this decade. note1: quotations out of context are half truths and worse than lies! note2: even Basel II has not yet fully been implemented! and it looks like Basel III might be fully implemented when 70% of the expats presently living in Thailand have experienced a rebirth. In the report, the analysts apply what they describe as a “moderate stress test” to the balance sheets of HSBC’s major subsidiaries. From this analysis they conclude that even using a low-end estimate, the assets of the bank’s Hong Kong division, for instance, are overstated by about $15bn, while those of its UK subsidiary could be overvalued by $17bn. Taking the analysis further, the report sets out the impact of incoming Basel III capital rules and says HSBC could be required... HSBC, Britain’s biggest bank by market capitalisation and total assets, is also reckoned to be the UK’s best capitalised major lender, with a tier 1 ratio of 12.8pc, well above the minimum required by the Prudential (Frankfurt: PRU.F - news) Regulation Authority. http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/hsbc-faces-70bn-capital-hole-133705984.html summary: facts talk, gloomy bullshit walks. case closed! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 You have no greater insight into this than anyone else and why should anyone feel safe keeping their money in a bank that has been shown to have a $70 billion shortfall? anybody with a minimum of insight would not lament a "shortfall" which is based on not yet implemented Basel III rules which call if implemented to increase capitalisation by the end of this decade. note1: quotations out of context are half truths and worse than lies! note2: even Basel II has not yet fully been implemented! and it looks like Basel III might be fully implemented when 70% of the expats presently living in Thailand have experienced a rebirth. In the report, the analysts apply what they describe as a “moderate stress test” to the balance sheets of HSBC’s major subsidiaries. From this analysis they conclude that even using a low-end estimate, the assets of the bank’s Hong Kong division, for instance, are overstated by about $15bn, while those of its UK subsidiary could be overvalued by $17bn. Taking the analysis further, the report sets out the impact of incoming Basel III capital rules and says HSBC could be required... HSBC, Britain’s biggest bank by market capitalisation and total assets, is also reckoned to be the UK’s best capitalised major lender, with a tier 1 ratio of 12.8pc, well above the minimum required by the Prudential (Frankfurt: PRU.F - news) Regulation Authority. http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/hsbc-faces-70bn-capital-hole-133705984.html summary: facts talk, gloomy bullshit walks. case closed! Anyway what is $70 billion between friends when their derivative exposure is $ 4.321 Trilion dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 You have no greater insight into this than anyone else and why should anyone feel safe keeping their money in a bank that has been shown to have a $70 billion shortfall? anybody with a minimum of insight would not lament a "shortfall" which is based on not yet implemented Basel III rules which call if implemented to increase capitalisation by the end of this decade. note1: quotations out of context are half truths and worse than lies! note2: even Basel II has not yet fully been implemented! and it looks like Basel III might be fully implemented when 70% of the expats presently living in Thailand have experienced a rebirth. In the report, the analysts apply what they describe as a “moderate stress test” to the balance sheets of HSBC’s major subsidiaries. From this analysis they conclude that even using a low-end estimate, the assets of the bank’s Hong Kong division, for instance, are overstated by about $15bn, while those of its UK subsidiary could be overvalued by $17bn. Taking the analysis further, the report sets out the impact of incoming Basel III capital rules and says HSBC could be required... HSBC, Britain’s biggest bank by market capitalisation and total assets, is also reckoned to be the UK’s best capitalised major lender, with a tier 1 ratio of 12.8pc, well above the minimum required by the Prudential (Frankfurt: PRU.F - news) Regulation Authority. http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/hsbc-faces-70bn-capital-hole-133705984.html summary: facts talk, gloomy bullshit walks. case closed! Anyway what is $70 billion between friends when their derivative exposure is $ 4.321 Trilion dollars. exposure doesn't mean anything. what counts is the percentage of exposures causing a profit minus the percentage of exposures causing a loss. i am convinced that HSBC, being a rather successful entity, will not experience a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 (edited) anybody with a minimum of insight would not lament a "shortfall" which is based on not yet implemented Basel III rules which call if implemented to increase capitalisation by the end of this decade. note1: quotations out of context are half truths and worse than lies! note2: even Basel II has not yet fully been implemented! and it looks like Basel III might be fully implemented when 70% of the expats presently living in Thailand have experienced a rebirth. In the report, the analysts apply what they describe as a “moderate stress test” to the balance sheets of HSBC’s major subsidiaries. From this analysis they conclude that even using a low-end estimate, the assets of the bank’s Hong Kong division, for instance, are overstated by about $15bn, while those of its UK subsidiary could be overvalued by $17bn. Taking the analysis further, the report sets out the impact of incoming Basel III capital rules and says HSBC could be required... HSBC, Britain’s biggest bank by market capitalisation and total assets, is also reckoned to be the UK’s best capitalised major lender, with a tier 1 ratio of 12.8pc, well above the minimum required by the Prudential (Frankfurt: PRU.F - news) Regulation Authority. http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/hsbc-faces-70bn-capital-hole-133705984.html summary: facts talk, gloomy bullshit walks. case closed! Anyway what is $70 billion between friends when their derivative exposure is $ 4.321 Trilion dollars. exposure doesn't mean anything. what counts is the percentage of exposures causing a profit minus the percentage of exposures causing a loss. i am convinced that HSBC, being a rather successful entity, will not experience a loss. HSBC has been sued for allegedly funneling more than $8.9 billion to the largest ponzi-scheme in history – Bernie Maddof’s investment business. HSBC (along w/ JP Morgan Chase) has been sued for alleged conspiracy suppressing the price of silver and gold, partially through precious metal DERIVATIVES and making billions of dollars on it. State of Hawaii is suing HSBC (and other banks) for deceptive credit card lending practices. DZ Bank in Germany is suing HSBC (and JP Morgan) for deceptive (lying) practices when selling home-loan-backed securities. HSBC is also under investigation for laundering billions of dollars. Edited January 26, 2014 by midas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 HSBC is also under investigation for laundering billions of dollars. there's money laundering and there's money laundering. but whatever, the chapter is closed. Last year, HSBC agreed to pay US authorities $1.9bn (£1.2bn) in a settlement over money laundering, the largest paid in such a case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 HSBC is also under investigation for laundering billions of dollars. there's money laundering and there's money laundering. but whatever, the chapter is closed. Last year, HSBC agreed to pay US authorities $1.9bn (£1.2bn) in a settlement over money laundering, the largest paid in such a case. The unregulated derivatives market presents a massive financial risk and the corruption and immorality of banks like HSBC makes the situation even worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now