How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

[Weatherman2020]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

 

[aaronleland]

A part of me is happy for their employees, while a part of me is saddened that we allow a criminal syndicate the size of JPMorgan to thrive.

 

[tigerred59]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

LOLOLOLOL....that's funny because where I live, most of there branches are all automated....they have on average each day, about 2 tellers, if that. But I can definately see the housing shit happening again, after all they did have to pay 560 million in fines for fuckin over the poor...why not try it for a second time.

 

[tigerred59]

A part of me is happy for their employees, while a part of me is saddened that we allow a criminal syndicate the size of JPMorgan to thrive.

LOLOLOL...this bank, paid on average fines upwards of a billion for cheating poor people out of their homes and I am 1000% certain, they're gonna give it another try...with Washington's approval this time. As for raising pay, and? This is what I'm finding most facisnating.....here we are applauding industries, that have made trillions in profits over the last 10 years...just sitting on money. Nobody was getting raises and some still aren't....myself included and yet we want to pat these mf's on the backs for now doing so....give me a fuckin break!!

 

[aaronleland]

I give most of these companies credit for investing what they save from the tax cuts on their employees, but JPMorgan deserves no such pat on the back. When you have tens of billions to piss away on numerous fines and lawsuits you have the "windfall" to invest in your employees, tax cuts or not.

 

[peach174]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

LOLOLOLOL....that's funny because where I live, most of there branches are all automated....they have on average each day, about 2 tellers, if that. But I can definately see the housing shit happening again, after all they did have to pay 560 million in fines for fuckin over the poor...why not try it for a second time.

Get Fanny and Freddie out of the Federal and into private management.
Political kabuki theater solved.

 

[tigerred59]

I give most of these companies credit for investing what they save from the tax cuts on their employees, but JPMorgan deserves no such pat on the back. When you have tens of billions to piss away on numerous fines and lawsuits you have the "windfall" to invest in your employees, tax cuts or not.

Not just the banks, but all factions of industries in this country have been making mega profits and nobody in the 47% range was getting shit.

 

[tigerred59]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

LOLOLOLOL....that's funny because where I live, most of there branches are all automated....they have on average each day, about 2 tellers, if that. But I can definately see the housing shit happening again, after all they did have to pay 560 million in fines for fuckin over the poor...why not try it for a second time.

Get Fanny and Freddie out of the Federal and into private management.
Political kabuki theater solved.

Does 2007 ring a bell, moron?

 

[Weatherman2020]

I give most of these companies credit for investing what they save from the tax cuts on their employees, but JPMorgan deserves no such pat on the back. When you have tens of billions to piss away on numerous fines and lawsuits you have the "windfall" to invest in your employees, tax cuts or not.

Not just the banks, but all factions of industries in this country have been making mega profits and nobody in the 47% range was getting shit.

Yeah, a few thousand extra is meaningless to the average American.

You should make a campaign ad out of that.

 

[peach174]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

LOLOLOLOL....that's funny because where I live, most of there branches are all automated....they have on average each day, about 2 tellers, if that. But I can definately see the housing shit happening again, after all they did have to pay 560 million in fines for fuckin over the poor...why not try it for a second time.

Get Fanny and Freddie out of the Federal and into private management.
Political kabuki theater solved.

Does 2007 ring a bell, moron?

Yes dummkopf

 

[Penelope]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

Buy up smaller banks. We'll see, wont we.

 

[leftwinger]

“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

LOLOLOLOL....that's funny because where I live, most of there branches are all automated....they have on average each day, about 2 tellers, if that. But I can definately see the housing shit happening again, after all they did have to pay 560 million in fines for fuckin over the poor...why not try it for a second time.

Great. Another flat-earth horse and buggy whipper weighs in! Same type wailing about the ATM in 1980. We will all die w/o some blue-haired old Chesterfield smoking hag writing out deposit slips at the Windows!

 

[usmbguest5318]

First:

Wow. I never thought I'd see the day when something a big bank does is, in effect, portrayed as being something good for so-called "working people."​

Second:

I bid readers to look at what JPMorgan has said specifically about how it'll use it's tax cut savings. One will note that JPM did not say it's using its tax cut savings to give workers a pay raise. That claim is an inference made by the writer/editors of the WSJ article.​

Third:

To see the reasons why, aside from the absence of an explicit statement from JPM that it is thus using its tax savings to accord pay increases, the remarks I made in "Second" is so, read on....​

Or as the left put it - it's terrible employees get paid more and citizens have more access to branches and home loans are more available.

Show us someone on "the left" who's actually said that regarding JPMorgan's actions....That you claim individuals on "the left" have "put it" that way doesn't demonstrate that anyone on "the left" has done so.

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall...“The biggest U.S. bank is planning to open more branches, expand mortgage lending and boost pay for some employees.”

How JPMorgan Will Spend a Big Chunk of Its Tax Windfall

Given the body of information available regarding JPM's employee pay plans and actions, the WSJ headline is at best a procrustean conclusion and at worse, flat-out propaganda. Either way, it disingenuously depicts JPM's intentions with regard to the $20B ($4B/year for five years, at a minimum [1]) in additional profit it is slated to realize due to Trump's tax cut.

JPMorgan Will Give 22,000 People a 10% Raise With Its Tax Law Windfall

The announcement comes as the bank looks to pocket an estimated windfall of roughly $4 billion of additional annual profit -- $20 billion over five years -- due to the cut in the U.S. corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%.

JPMorgan earlier this month said net income in 2017 climbed 1% from a year earlier, as revenue increased by 4% to $99.6 billion. Compensation costs rose by 3% to $31 billion, though the average worker's pay stayed flat as headcount grew by 4% to to about 250,000 employees.

Wages for about 22,000 full- and part-time employees will increase to $15 to $18 an hour, from $12 to $16.50 an hour, according to the statement. Eligible employees will receive an annual award of $750 later this month, and workers making less than $60,000 a year will see their medical-insurance deductibles reduced by $750.

[JMP's CEO, Jamie] Dimon got a 5% raise in total compensation last year to $29.5 million -- roughly 240 times what the average worker made.​

JPMorgan is giving raises to some 22K of it's workforce. How many people does JPMorgan employ? ~235K.

Am I suggesting the pay increase is a bad thing for the folks who'll receive it? Not in the least. I'm saying look carefully at the nature of the announcement and the extent of the pay increase. Based on the information in the article cited above:

• $88,000 --> JPM is giving a $3 to $4.5 dollar per hour increase to 22K employees. For convenience, let's call it $4/per employee per hour. That means that for one hour's labor from all 22K individuals, JPM will pay $88,000.
• $183,744,000 --> Assuming a standard work year of 2088 hours, that comes to $183,744,000 more (not including the incremental FICA/FUTA increase JPM will incur) than JPM in 2017 paid the workers who received the increase.
• 0.0091872 or 0.92% --> The portion of JPM's $20B tax windfall that JPM will use to boost earnings of 9% of its employees.
• $6.7B --> JPM's 2016 net income/profit. (2017 results haven't released.)
• $4B --> The first year tax (thus cash) savings JPM will realize from the tax cut. (Is the tax cut you received saving you two-thirds of your personal net income from 2016?)
• ~$1.4M --> The raise Dimon got in 2017.
• Unknown, therefore preclusive of one's being able to soundly/cogently conclude on the nature of JPM's purported largesse:
  • The percentage or dollar-per-hour or dollar-per-year raise the 22K workers got in 2017.
  • The percentage or dollar-per-hour or dollar-per-year raise JPM planned to, for 2018, give the 22K workers, regardless of whether it received a tax cut.

One will notice that above there are two unknowns. Can one obtain information that sheds light on either of those elements? Well, as it turns out, yes, because the information in the article I cited is not the only information available. Individuals who actually pay attention to (or bother to examine) what goes on in banking and is said by the top managers of major banks will observe that in 2016, JPM's CEO stated:

"Our minimum salary for American employees today is $10.15 an hour ... almost $3 above the current national minimum wage. Over the next three years, we will raise the minimum pay for 18,000 workers to $12 to $16.50 an hour, depending on geographic and market factors."
(Source -- That remark was very widely covered. Why it is that some folks conveniently have forgotten about its very existence -- I wouldn't expect non-JPM worker or shareholder to recall the specifics of the increase without looking them up -- is beyond me.)​

Combining the information in JPM's most recent announcement with Dimon's 2016 statement, it becomes clear that of the 22K employees who will receive an increase, at least 18K of them were going to receive it anyway. Which one? The ones who, as of 2016, on track to see their salaries increase from $12/hr to $16.50/hr. What is the impact of that piece of information on the calculations above? This:

• $88K becomes $12K
• $183,744,000 becomes $25,056,000 --> One'll observe that this is less than Dimon earned in 2017. Think about that. Assuming the pay increase for the folks going from $15/hr to $18/hr can be attributed to JPM's tax windfall, JPM has opted to pay, in total, to 4000 individuals (!) less than it pays to one person, its CEO.
• 0.0091872 or 0.92% becomes 0.0012528 or 0.13% -- To put this in perspective, assume you won the lottery and after taxes took home $20M. How much of that, per person, would you consider sharing with, say, your four children. More or less than $6264? Scaled to $20M, that is, in essence, what JPM is sharing with the 4000 employees to whom, as of 2016, it has not already planned to give pay increases.
• 9% of JPM's employees who'll receive the pay raise becomes 1%.

I think it's great that the 22K workers will receive a pay increase. That the increase has anything to do with JPM's tax windfall is, with regard to at least 18K of those workers, is pure sophistry. Quite simply, the increase that 18K of 22K workers will receive is one they were going to, per Dimon's 2016 remarks, receive anyway, tax cut or not.

JPM (and other corporations) certainly may attempt to engender some goodwill with Trump by allowing others to, with utter disregard for the totality of publicly available information about their wage practices and intentions, claim that JPM is using its tax savings to provide salary increases to workers. Thoughtful observers and analysts will realize immediately that such claims, at best, are little but editorial aggrandizement of Trump by the publishers/editors eager to avail themselves of an opportunity to pander to Trump's ego. The CEO's of firms like JPM of which such remarks are made are quite content to sit idly by and let folks make whatever inapt inferences suit them, so long as those inferences shine positive lights on their firm. [2]

BofA promises to spend most of its tax windfall on shareholders

"Having a healthy, strong company allows us to make these long-term, sustainable investments."
-- Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan CEO

Though some corporations may dole out wage increase, one can be sure that very little to none of the windfall from the tax cut will land as wages in the pockets of their employees.

Note:

1. The reason the projected savings are limited to $20B or $4B per year for five years is because five years is a typical forecasting period at the top level of organizations like JPM and because five years is the reasonably foreseeable period for which one can presume Trump's tax cut won't be repealed. It's merely a conservative-enough temporal basis for measuring such things.
2. Individuals of the utmost integrity would not sit idly by and allow to go uncorrected/unclarified any inaccurate representations of their intentions and actions. That said, even I know better than to hold my breath awaiting exhibitions of that level of integrity from a CEO of a Fortune 500 company. The few I've met are somewhat decent folks, but they ain't that decent.