The bottom line is that this suit [SEC vs Goldman Sachs] has proved to be no more than a common "strike" suit, no better than the sort of private securities class actions that triggered Congressional reform 15 years ago. Instead of attorneys’ fees, the SEC’s objective appears to have been purely political. In the end it extracted a ransom payment from Goldman so the firm could reclaim its reputation and get back to business.[Definitional link for strike suit added].
The court must now review the settlement. It should take a cue from the dissenting Commissioners and reject it because of the puzzling and troubling inconsistency between the amount of the settlement and Goldman’s meaningless admissions. The SEC should have to prove exactly what Goldman did wrong. This will force Goldman to either litigate or make a meaningful settlement. Goldman is hardly an object of pity at this point. In any event, the issues here go far beyond Goldman to, among other things, the proper role and function of the SEC.
It is sad that the SEC not only cannot be trusted to find fraud, but that it can no longer be trusted to litigate and settle cases involving the supposed frauds that it finds. But this is where we find ourselves in the days following 'financial reform."
Read much more about the Goldman case and settlement from Larry Ribstein here.
Everyone has the right to settle their financial issues, especially with debts. There is debt settlement agency that could help a person avoid declaring personal bankruptcy. Negotiating debt settlement is a very timely solution because of the massive effect of recession. This settlement gives hope to everyone trying to rise up from their downfall.
ReplyDelete