Recommended Newsletters

Reuters U.S. Top News
A quick-fix on the day's news published with Reuters videos and award-winning news photography and delivered at your choice of one of four times during the day.
Reuters Deals Today
The latest Reuters articles on M&A, IPOs, private equity, hedge funds and regulatory updates delivered to your inbox each day.
Reuters Technology Report
Your daily briefing on the latest tech developments from around the world from Reuters expert tech correspondents.

Fed loses bid to review bailout disclosure ruling

NEW YORK | Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:10pm EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Federal Reserve will have to appeal to the Supreme Court if it wants to avoid having to disclose details of its emergency lending programs to banks bailed out with taxpayer money during the financial crisis.

The U.S. 2d Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Fed's motion on Friday to rehear the case in which Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News and News Corp's Fox News Network sought information on the U.S. central bank's emergency lending programs that began in late 2007.

The programs, designed to shore up the financial markets, more than doubled the Fed's balance sheet to well over $2 trillion, especially in the wake of the September 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

The Fed maintained that disclosing the information sought by the news outlets under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) could stigmatize banks, causing a loss of confidence that could lead to deposit runs and the demise of some lenders.

The Clearing House Association, a group of major U.S. and European banks, supported the Fed's efforts.

"We are reviewing the decision and considering our options for appeal," Fed spokesman David Skidmore said.

Joe Dillon, a Clearing House spokesman, declined to comment.

"DISCLOSURE, NOT SECRECY"

In his March ruling against the Fed, the chief judge of the appeals court, Dennis Jacobs, wrote for a three-judge panel that to award the central bank the power to deny disclosure would undermine the idea that "disclosure, not secrecy, is the dominant objective" of FOIA.

The Fed argued in its May 3 request for a re-hearing by the entire appeals court that the panel erred in not excusing it from having to disclose borrowers' names, loan amounts and loan dates for transactions at its discount window and from its emergency lending facilities.

"The real-world consequence of the panel's decision will be serious, perhaps irreparable harm to the institutional borrowers," the Fed said in its brief.

Clearing House members include the ABN Amro Bank NV unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, Bank of America Corp, Bank of New York Mellon Corp, Citigroup Inc, Deutsche Bank AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co, UBS AG, US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co.

The cases are Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System et al, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Nos. 09-4083, 09-4097.

(Reporting by Grant McCool and Jonathan Stempel; Additional reporting by Emily Kaiser)

Related Quotes and News

Company
Price
Related News
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
SirRaiuKoren wrote:
I think it’s about time the banks lose all of their credibility. Let them be stigmatized. Forcing the disclosure is just making them reap what they’ve sown over the last several decades. They got themselves into this mess, and now they’re going to have to deal with the consequences. If it ruins them, then it ruins them. So be it. In the long run, the country will be better off for it. I say if we lose all the banks that work in underhanded strategies that require secrecy, then we’ve made serious progress.

Aug 23, 2010 6:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:
If the Fed wishes to retain credibility with the public, their activities need to be open to review.For the banks to oppose this information tells us that there is some funny business that Mr. Paulson and the Bush administration engaged in some funny business or illegal activities to save their friends and donors at taxpayer expense.
As it is, even now, the banks get help and the public that saves money get a negative return on their savings. Banks pay less interest than the real rate of inflation. On the other side of the ledger, they charge ever higher interest and fees for all services.

Aug 23, 2010 8:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.