Citigroup: No Bonus? No Problem!

Recs

12

Disney Buys Marvel!

David Gardner called it. He’s up 1,334%! See what David’s recommending that you buy NEXT.

Ah, Citigroup (NYSE: C). The U.S. government has poured $45 billion of taxpayer money into its tills, leaving all of us with 34% of this messed-up, "too big to fail" entity. Given not-so-distant outrage over bonuses at places like AIG (NYSE: AIG), well, hurray, the people at Citigroup aren't getting any bonuses. However, it looks like some of them are getting massive pay raises instead. Sounds like good work if you can get it.

You've probably heard by now that Citigroup's giving out pay raises of up to 50% to many employees to make up for the lack of bonuses. Citigroup isn't alone, though; Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) and UBS (NYSE: UBS) recently upped pay, too. (And of course, apparently there's no recession at Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) -- that company might embark on the biggest bonus payouts in history, although granted, it also repaid $10 billion in TARP funds.)

Of course, we can't really ignore the fact that part of the whole "moral hazard" component is the fact that Citigroup, in its crippled state, still has to compete for talent -- and now that we taxpayers are on the hook, everybody would like to see it do well. Unfortunately, maybe the deeply unsettling thing here is that this so-called talent were the ones who helped fashion this economic disaster in the first place.

We all collectively sneered when the truth came out about the "smartest guys in the room" at Enron. Now it appears that we're rewarding the same kind of arrogance, greed, and stupidity, simply saying it can't be helped. I suppose we're all supposed to assume that we're making a gesture of good faith for these folks, and this is the way to ensure they do a good job -- hey, you screwed up, but we know you know better and won't do it again.

I fear that means we're the big suckers, and unfortunately, this may just be a meaningless rant because at this point, situations like Citigroup's are so convoluted and fraught with philosophical confusion, it's difficult to know which way to turn.

I will say this, though: There's something pretty sick about people who feel so entitled that performance versus failure doesn't matter, and I fear that our culture is getting poisoned with that mindset; I recently called it downright depressing. We are rewarding for failure over and over again; the government directing taxpayer funds into entities that basically failed has underlined why it's called "moral hazard."

My Foolish colleague Morgan Housel recently described Citigroup as "a failed company taped together by a government whose sole mission is to ensure that a disaster of this magnitude never happens again." I'm not too pleased with the idea that there will be fatter wallets, but probably not for shareholders or taxpayers. Unfortunately, complication appears to be a sign of the times as the state of confusion mounts surrounding the chimerical economy (and by that, I mean, part great white shark, part three-toed sloth, and a dash of slime mold … ew, that's ugly, and I don't think it can survive) and the monstrous "incentives" that are being created.

Check into some related Foolishness:

“Make Big Money With Options” Motley Fool CFO Ollen Douglass recently made over $100,000 buying options on 7 well known stocks. Now we’re committed to turning his small fortune into a massive one! And we want you to join us! Enter your email address to hear more:

Alyce Lomax does not own shares of any of the companies mentioned. The Fool has a disclosure policy.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On June 24, 2009, at 6:28 PM, plange01 wrote:

    with citigroups stock at $3 a share.the people invested in this winner are livin big and wont care about giving the people who got that stock so high extra money...

  • Report this Comment On June 25, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Tactless wrote:

    If more people would speak with their pockets in protest of issues they do not like, abuses like this would end. I personally do not have any account with Citi since I closed an account with Washington Mutual in a protest to TARP the minute Citi took them over. If I did have an account with them now, I would be closing that account too. I already boycott the major gas suppliers who were posting record profits while gas was $4+ a gallon last summer (and were typically $.10 higher than the lower competitors), Walmart (once it quit being "made in the USA" as they claimed when they first opened), and have paid off all my cards each month so as not to pay any of these fat cats a dime. I hope if they do get those HUGE raises that they are taxed so outrageously that this type of GREED is discouraged. Unbelievable!

  • Report this Comment On June 25, 2009, at 9:12 AM, Melaschasm wrote:

    Tarp and the other bailouts were specifically designed to transfew taxpayer money to the politically connected. The AIG bonases and the Citi raises are the intended results of TARP.

    If TARP was meant to help people pay their mortgages, it would have sent a $7000 payment to every American's first mortgage, rather than dole out money based upon political donations.

  • Report this Comment On June 25, 2009, at 4:07 PM, wasmick wrote:

    I always find this kind of hypocrisy hilarious. Dotcom millionaires calling those of the same stripe crooks....

    Everybody knows all you technology and dot commers made millions in the last bubble. Companies with no earnings getting pumped up to ridiculous valuations....then when the air goes out of the balloon the dot commers take their money and the small nvestor gets wiped out. Apparently it was OK then.

    Now, however it's reason to be outraged. Unbelievable.

  • Report this Comment On June 27, 2009, at 2:10 PM, ynotc wrote:

    I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. The minute the government got involved the whole process gets turned upside down. In capitalism inefficient companies are allowed to die, while in government inefficiencency is rewarded with more money. A great example would be our failing, non competitive education system. The worse that schools perform the more money they say that they need to fix the problem. The answer is not more money it is a different system that is selected on it's merits by indivdual voting with thier dollars. Everyone is afraid to let these large organizations fail. I am much more concerned about what happens when we do not allow them to fail.

  • Report this Comment On June 27, 2009, at 2:33 PM, burrowsx wrote:

    There is a relatively simple solution to excessive compensation, and that is to add additional steps to marginal income tax rates, to the levels of the 1950's, the time of our greatest national prosperity. When boards of directors see that 90% of their trophy bonuses and salaries are going to the government, Croessus like compensation will cease, and the demand for fat payments will slim down to sustainable levels.

    Our acceptance of high compensations to hold employees is based on a market which is out of balance both with company performance, and with worldwide levels of compensation for the same work. Rewarding bean-counters at such levels, while pauperizing the Einsteins of our era is a senseless waste of productive capacity, and intellectual opportunity

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 928011, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 12/1/2009 5:11:15 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
Is Everybody Losing It in Finance's Nervous Breakdown?

Related Tickers

12/1/2009 4:01 PM
AIG $30.84 Up +2.44 +8.59%
American Internati… CAPS Rating: **
C $4.10 Down -0.01 -0.24%
Citigroup, Inc. CAPS Rating: ***
GS $167.63 Down -2.03 -1.20%
Goldman Sachs Grou… CAPS Rating: ***
MS $31.52 Down -0.06 -0.19%
Morgan Stanley CAPS Rating: **
UBS $16.00 Up +0.31 +1.98%
UBS AG (USA) CAPS Rating: **

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Exchange: An exchange is the setting where investors meet to trade securities, including stocks, options and futures. Exchanges also provide the technology needed to settle trades and ensure liquidity. While exchanges used to always be physical places, they are increasingly becoming virtual.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!