RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeSense on Cents Endorses H.R. 3482: Restoring Main Street Investor Protection and Confidence Act
Posted by Larry Doyle on December 16th, 2013 10:10 AM |
A year ago, I strongly endorsed H.R. 757 to restore credibility to the Securities Investor Protection Act that had been decimated by the manner in which the Madoff trustee went about its business.
That act went into committee at year-end 2012 and died there, strangled by those legislators feeding at the financial industry’s trough. Fortunately, the forces behind 757 are not easily swayed and they are back with H.R. 3482, legislation entitled as “Restoring Main Street Investor Protection and Confidence Act.”
I welcome endorsing it. Why? (more…)
Sense on Cents Supports HR 757
Posted by Larry Doyle on July 31st, 2012 6:05 AM |
Earlier this year I came out in support of HR 757, legislation drafted and proposed by Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), to address the sham perpetrated by the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) upon innocent investors. As I wrote in support of HR 757 then,
Why are we discussing SIPC today? Recall that post Bernie Madoff, the SIPC fund was depleted. Recall also that for approximately 13 years those paying into SIPC were charged an annual premium of $150 in order to put the SIPC stamp of protection on their brokerage statements.
Did you just spill your coffee and think I must have mistyped that figure. I didn’t. I highlighted that ridiculous figure in November 2009.
$150 annual premium paid by each and every Wall Street brokerage house to put a stamp of investor protection on their statements. What type of insurance do you purchase for a $150 annual premium? Seriously. (more…)
Open Letter to NY Times’ Joe Nocera re: Madoff
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 30th, 2012 8:01 AM |
Dear Joe,
As a longtime subscriber to The New York Times, could you enlighten me as to when the media in our nation diverted its mission of pursuing the truth to one of actively advancing agendas? Actually, Joe, hold that thought and perhaps we could have that lengthy discussion another time.
I write to you today specifically in regard to your interest in the ongoing legal battles in the recovery and restitution of funds in the Madoff scandal. In your recent commentaries (The Mets Switch Teams; March 19, 2012, and Helen Chaitman Doesn’t Know When to Quit; March 29, 2012), one does not have to read all that hard to gather you are a strong mouthpiece for SIPC trustee Irving Picard. In the process, you make what amount to ad hominem attacks on Ms. Chaitman who represents hundreds of Madoff investors.
Rather than debating the merits or lack thereof in the recent settlement crafted between the owners of the New York Mets and the SIPC trustee Irving Picard, perhaps we could dig a little deeper and address questions which remain unanswered yet central to what was really going on inside the Madoff operation. Given your position and accompanying power of the public pen, I would ask you to address the following: (more…)
Support H.R. 757 for Real Investor Protection
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 5th, 2012 8:47 AM |
All too often I have heard over the last few years from investors violated by the Wall Street-Washington incestuous process and feeling totally disenfranchised as a result. Why have investors gotten trampled?
Great question and worthy of widespread debate and discussion. In an attempt to narrow our focus today, let’s zero in on the Securities Investor Protection Corporation, the organization designed to:
restoring funds to investors with assets in the hands of bankrupt and otherwise financially troubled brokerage firms. The Securities Investor Protection Corporation was not chartered by Congress to combat fraud.
From where does SIPC raise its funds in order to offer this protection to investors? (more…)
Is Jon Corzine “Too Big to Be Indicted”? Part III
Posted by Larry Doyle on November 22nd, 2011 4:29 PM |
This commentary runs a little long, but I exhort you to read it in its entirety as it captures the sentiments of readers who are extremely close to or actually “in the MF arena.” Their messages are filled with real pain and anguish which is not found in the media. This is reality. I hope you will want to share this post with your friends. LD
As if $600 million in missing customer funds were not enough, recent news emanating from the debacle that defines the bankruptcy of MF Global puts the estimated misappropriation of customer funds at a cool $1.2 billion. Yes, billion with a B!
Those involved in the markets would easily ascertain that those manning the MF Global ship redirected these customer funds in an attempt to save the ship as it was going down. The customers themselves remain in a state of shock and bewilderment as to how this reality might ever have come to pass.
Meanwhile, the outrage in America burns while the lack of trust and confidence in the markets, the market makers, and those charged with protecting investors grows stronger by the day.
You don’t believe me? Read on and chew on these messages I recently received from people “in the arena”: (more…)
Madoff Ruling: More Reason Not to Trust Wall Street or Washington
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 1st, 2010 1:03 PM |
On the heels of my commentary this morning addressing why Harry Markopolos feels America’s citizens should not trust the government, we receive more fuel for the fire.
The timing of this release is truly uncanny:
MADOFF JUDGE’S RULING REDUCES PROTECTIONS AGAINST PONZI SCHEMES FOR ALL SECURITIES INVESTORS
Judge rules SIPC does not have to insure every account up to $500,000, shifts burden of Madoff losses to American taxpayer. (more…)
Madoff Investors Suing SIPC
Posted by Larry Doyle on February 24th, 2010 2:39 PM |
You can rest assured that the powers that be on Wall Street would just as soon have the Madoff saga over. The Madoff scam perpetrated on investors is an ugly reminder of the non-existent financial regulatory system during the better part of the last twenty years.
I also believe many in Washington also might like to see the Madoff saga quietly pass by. The failures of the SEC, FINRA, and SIPC in this greatest of scams are an ugly reminder of the Wall Street-Washington incest.
Well, while many of the incestuous partners would like to turn the page, there remains a lot of filth that still needs to be cleaned up and a lot of individuals and institutions that need to be held to account. (more…)
Kanjorski and Ackerman Undress the SEC and SIPC
Posted by Larry Doyle on December 15th, 2009 2:47 PM |
Having written about the massive regulatory failures on Wall Street for the better part of 2009, I am heartened by the House Finance Sub-Committee on Capital Markets hearing last week. The bell that tolled in this hearing deserves to ring loud, long, and clear across our great land. The regulatory and insurance failures on Wall Street deserve to be exposed far beyond Sense on Cents.
Rackets operate best in the dark. Well, let’s get that flashlight out again!
For those unaware, SIPC (the Securities Investor Protection Corporation) is an insurance fund in which member firms pay premiums to cover losses. From SIPC’s own website, we learn:
What SIPC Covers . . . What it Does Not
The cash and securities – such as stocks and bonds – held by a customer at a financially troubled brokerage firm are protected by SIPC.
Among the investments that are ineligible for SIPC protection are commodity futures contracts and currency, as well as investment contracts (such as limited partnerships) and fixed annuity contracts that are not registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933.
It is important to recognize that SIPC does not work the same way as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in terms of blanket protection of losses.
For this insurance coverage, SIPC charged its member firms an annual premium of $150 from 1996 until April 2009. That is no joke. Wall Street firms paid a token $150 a year to promote the idea that your investments were protected. While SIPC did have a $1 billion reserve fund, that was woefully insufficient to cover the losses incurred in the Madoff scam. Make no mistake, though, the SIPC annual premium of $150 should also be looked upon as a scam.
Think of it. Individuals pay far more for auto insurance than Goldman Sachs paid for investor insurance for over 12 years.
Are you getting increasingly pissed off? America should be extremely pissed off. The SIPC coverage has been a critical part of the Wall Street racket. (more…)
Will Wall Street Banks be Compelled to Compensate Madoff Investors?
Posted by Larry Doyle on December 15th, 2009 11:46 AM |
Will Congress hit the Wall Street banks with a one-time assessment in order to compensate Madoff investors? Why might that happen? Very simply because SIPC (Securities Investor Protection Corporation) was woefully underfunded given the fact that SIPC member-firms, including all the large Wall Street banks, paid a token $150 (yes, that is not a misprint, a token $150) annual premium from 1996 until April 2009 for SIPC coverage.
Each and every investor in America should be livid at the insurance scam perpetrated by SIPC and its member firms, but especially by the largest firms taking the greatest risks!
I will address this insurance scam in a post later today, but for now I want to highlight an engagement between Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA) and Stephen Harbeck, the head of SIPC that occurred last week during a hearing on securities investor protection reform.
This interaction should have received massive coverage by the mainstream media. Regrettably, but not surprisingly, it did not. Why? If it received the appropriate coverage, it would shine a laser beam on the incestuous nature of the relationship between Wall Street firms and its regulators (SEC and FINRA) and insurer (SIPC).
From the transcript of the hearing last week: (more…)
