Goldman Agrees to $5 Billion Deal Over Faulty Mortgages

A trader works in the Goldman Sachs booth on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.

A trader works in the Goldman Sachs booth on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)

January 15, 2016

The Wall Street powerhouse Goldman Sachs on Thursday agreed in principle to pay up to $5 billion to settle a government investigation into its role in the financial crisis.

The proposed agreement, which was announced after markets closed on Thursday, is the largest regulatory penalty in Goldman’s history, and allows the bank to turn the page on an era that has seen banks, mortgage firms and other financial institutions pay at least $181.1 billion in crisis-related settlements.

The deal is the third major penalty to be paid by Goldman in the eight years since the height of the crisis. In 2014, the bank agreed to pay the Federal Housing Finance Agency $1.2 billion to resolve claims that it never disclosed the risks in certain mortgage bonds that it sold. In 2010, it paid $550 million to the Securities and Exchange Commission for its role in creating a collateralized debt obligation named Abacus that resulted in giant losses for investors.

But Goldman’s legal tab for crisis-related activity has largely paled in comparison to that of its largest competitors — primarily because its role in doling out faulty mortgages and mortgage-backed securities was smaller than others on Wall Street. In 2014, for example, Bank of America paid nearly $17 billion in a similar settlement. The year before that, JPMorgan Chase paid about $13 billion.

As part of the settlement, Goldman will pay the Department of Justice a $2.385 billion civil penalty, $875 million to a mix of federal and state entities and also provide $1.8 billion in consumer relief. The deal resolves claims stemming from its underwriting and sale of residential mortgage-backed securities from 2005 to 2007.

“We are pleased to have reached an agreement in principle to resolve these matters,” Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman’s chairman and chief executive, said in a statement.

If the deal is finalized by the Justice Department, it would mark the first such agreement since Loretta Lynch took over as attorney general from Eric Holder last April. Under Holder, the department became the target of fierce criticism for failing to prosecute any high-level executives for alleged fraud in the lead-up to the crisis. Instead, the department resolved investigations through large monetary settlements and so-called deferred-prosecution agreements in which banks often did not have to admit or deny responsibility.

As a result, critics say, legal settlements have simply become a cost of doing business for many Wall Street banks. In one recent study, the United States Public Interest Group, a nonprofit advocacy group, looked at $80 billion in legal settlements agreed to by several major corporations, and found that because of the way the deals were structured, at least $48 billion of that amount was eligible for tax deductions. Out of JPMorgan’s $13 billion mortgage settlement, for example, $11 billion was eligible for a deduction, according to the study.

Final approval of the Goldman agreement is not expected for several weeks, so it remains unclear whether the deal would be eligible for such tax breaks.

Jason M. Breslow

Jason M. Breslow, Former Digital Editor



In order to foster a civil and literate discussion that respects all participants, FRONTLINE has the following guidelines for commentary. By submitting comments here, you are consenting to these rules:

Readers' comments that include profanity, obscenity, personal attacks, harassment, or are defamatory, sexist, racist, violate a third party's right to privacy, or are otherwise inappropriate, will be removed. Entries that are unsigned or are "signed" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. We reserve the right to not post comments that are more than 400 words. We will take steps to block users who repeatedly violate our commenting rules, terms of use, or privacy policies. You are fully responsible for your comments.

blog comments powered by Disqus

More Stories

A Consequential Supreme Court Term, Decades in the Making
For context on the historic U.S. Supreme Court term that ended June 30 — and several of its monumental decisions — revisit past FRONTLINE documentaries on how conservatives gained a court majority, as well as on abortion, guns, the environment and more.
July 6, 2022
Mass Shootings, a Supreme Court Ruling, Bipartisan Legislation: How America Reached This Moment on Guns
FRONTLINE has been chronicling America’s dialogue on guns for years. Get the backstory on the recent news in these documentaries.
June 29, 2022
The Supreme Court Has Overturned 'Roe v. Wade.' These Documentaries Show How We Got Here.
Overriding nearly five decades of legal precedent, the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that legalized abortion in the U.S. These documentaries offer context on how America reached this moment.
June 24, 2022
Why the Black Educator Forced Out Over Bogus Critical Race Theory Claims Wanted to Share Her Story
ProPublica reporter Nicole Carr explains why educator Cecelia Lewis was hesitant to speak to reporters about white parents forcing her out of her job and why she ultimately decided she had to.
June 18, 2022