- The Washington Times - Wednesday, March 18, 2009

WASHINGTON _ AIG’s chairman says some of the firm’s executives have begun returning all or part of the bonuses that have stirred a wave of outrage, but lawmakers are in no mood to wait.

Edward Liddy was still in the witness chair Wednesday when House Democratic leaders announced plans for a vote Thursday on legislation that would tax away 90 percent of the extra pay. It would cover executives at AIG and many other bailed-out firms.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Under intense pressure from the Obama administration and Congress, the head of bailed-out insurance giant AIG declared Wednesday that some of the firm’s executives have begun returning all or part of bonuses totaling $165 million.

Edward Liddy, brought in last year to oversee a company that has received $182 billion in federal bailout funds, offered no details. Buffeted by congressional outrage, he said he was angry, too, but did not respond directly when advised in pungent terms to pay to the Treasury all the money handed out last weekend in “retention payments.”

“Eat it now. Take it out of your profits down the road. It’s a lot sweeter now than it’s gonna be later,” said Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.

Liddy slid into the witness chair at a congressional hearing as President Barack Obama sought anew to quell a furor that has bedeviled his administration since word of the bonuses surfaced over the weekend.

Obama, who took office just under two months ago, told reporters his administration was not responsible for a lack of federal supervision of AIG that preceded the company’s demise, nor for the decision made last year to pay what he called “outrageous bonuses.”

Still, he said, “The buck stops with me.” He said that “my goal is to make sure that we never put ourselves in this kind of position again,” and he disclosed the administration was consulting with Congress on the possibility of creating a new agency to govern the meltdown of large financial institutions such as AIG.

He also gave a strong vote of confidence to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who has been the target of growing Republican criticism.

Obama spoke as congressional Democrats worked on legislation designed to recoup most or all of the $165 million by exposing it to new taxes. A House vote was likely Thursday on a bill placing a 90 percent tax on the payments to top-paid executives at companies like AIG that received large bailouts from the federal government.

Republicans raised pointed questions about the extent of Geithner’s advance knowledge of the bonuses, and stressed they had been locked out of discussions earlier this year when Democrats decided to jettison a provision from legislation that could have revoked the payments.

“The fact is that the bill the president signed, which protected the AIG bonuses and others, was written behind closed doors by Democratic leaders of the House and Senate. There was no transparency,” said Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee.

Liddy’s presence in a congressional hearing room was evidence of a bipartisan opposition to the bonuses, although his status as a $1-a-year CEO called out of retirement last year to try and untangle AIG’s financial mess made him a less-than-easy target for expressions of outrage.

“No one knows better than I that AIG has been the recipient of generous amounts of government financial aid,” he said. “We have been the beneficiary of the American people’s forbearance and patients,” he added, acknowledging that patience was wearing thin.

Liddy said that on Tuesday, he had “asked those who have received retention payments in excess of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments.” Some have “already stepped forward and returned 100 percent,” he added.

Asked by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., whether he would turn over the names of individuals who received the money, as well as the amounts, he said he would do so only if assured the information not be made public.

When Frank said he might seek a subpoena, Liddy said he was concerned about the safety of the employees and their families, and read aloud from a death threat received by one of them.

Frank said he would be guided in part by security considerations, but Ackerman later noted that Andrew Cuomo, the New York attorney general, was already seeking the names with a subpoena.

Liddy said he had not yet complied, sidestepped several times when asked whether he would, and finally said “it would be our intent” to do so.

But Cuomo swiftly issued a statement saying Liddy’s pledge was “simply too little, too late. … Rather than take half-measures, AIG should immediately turn over the list, which we have subpoenaed, of who got what and when.”

He added, “We prefer not to go to court on this matter, but AIG is leaving us little choice. I hope the leadership at the company comes to its senses now.”

Separately, AIG spokesman Mark Herr said he could not say how many executives had turned back the money. “Bear in mind, these bonuses were only just paid,” he said.

He added the company may not release that information. Asked why, he responded, “Why is it cloudy today? Because sometimes it just is.”

For his part, Liddy also said the Federal Reserve knew long in advance of the bonus payments and acquiesced in them, noting that officials from the independent agency attend key company meetings. But he said the same was not true of Geithner, adding, “We do our work with the Federal Reserve.”

Liddy gave skeptical committee members what amounted to a tutorial in the practice of paying retention bonuses _ he did not call them that _ to executives.

He said the money was offered to executives in AIG’s financial products section, where risky investments finally became the entire company’s undoing. He said each executive was offered money to dispose of his “business book,” meaning the transactions he had been in charge of handling, and thus far, the company’s financial derivatives had been reduced from $2.7 trillion to $1.6 trillion.

He had decided it was worth paying the money to retain the services of executives who knew the business best, he said. And he had received legal advice that there were valid contracts requiring the payments.

“I know 165 million is a very large number. It’s a very large number. In the context of 1.6 trillion … we thought it was a good trade,” he said.

Liddy added there was still a risk of financial catastrophe if the remaining $1.6 trillion in financial instruments were not disposed of properly.

But Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., angrily told the witness the contract read like “the captain and the crew of the ship reserving the lifeboats.”

Liddy replied that he was not at the firm when the contracts were negotiated, and said, as he has before, that he would not have approved them.

Lynch said the terms had been put in place in December, after Liddy arrived at AIG.

But Liddy disputed that. “I take offense, Sir,” he said.

“Well you take it rightly. Offense was intended,” shot back Lynch.


Associated Press writers Jim Kuhnhenn, Jennifer Loven and Stephenson Jacobs contributed to this story.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2021 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide