FORTUNE -- Move over "too big." There's a new knock on the mega banks: "Too connected to fail."
Two studies published in the past few weeks tackle the issue of whether big banks get special privileges because of their connections to top regulators and Washington officials.
Both studies focus on the early days of the financial crisis. The first, titled "The Value of Connections in Turbulent Times," came last month from a group of five economists including MIT's Simon Johnson, who has been a vocal proponent of breaking up the big banks. The Johnson study finds that shares of banks with stronger connections to Timothy Geithner rose 11.2% more than those that didn't after news was leaked back in 2008 that Geithner was to become Treasury Secretary. Remember, this was at the height of the financial crisis, when the possibility that the government would have to nationalize a number of banks, or all of them, was thought of as a real thing. The rise in stock prices could mean that investors thought that banks with better ties to a key Washington insider had a better chance of surviving the financial crisis intact, or at least getting better treatment.
The second study arrived earlier last week and focuses on the Federal Reserve and the loans it made to banks in 2007 and 2008. The study, by George Mason University economics professor Benjamin Blau, finds that banks receiving emergency loans spent significantly more --72 times as much -- on lobbying in the decade prior to the financial crisis than those that didn't get assistance. What's more, even after Blau adjusted for size, he found that banks with political connections got bigger loans than those that didn't.
This, of course, feels unfair. But it may not be all that surprising. Banks that deal in complex markets are often more likely to have stronger ties to regulators, who are making the rules. And since the financial crisis, in part, erupted because of the complexity of those markets, it makes sense that the banks that needed the most assistance were the ones that spent the most time with regulators.
The cynical way to interpret this data is that banks hire lobbyists and connected individuals in order to skirt the rules so that they can make risky bets that boost profits and bonuses in good times. In bad times, their connections lead to government bailouts on favorable terms, also boosting bonuses.
But that may not be exactly what's going on here. First, the Johnson study is only measuring perception, and the market could be getting this wrong. One of the biggest beneficiaries of the financial crisis was Wells Fargo (WFC). It was able to buy Wachovia and get huge tax breaks for doing so. And it also used the financial crisis to extend its dominance of the mortgage market. The Johnson study does show that Wells' stock did react positively to Geithner's appointment, but not nearly as much as Citigroup (C), which is still struggling post-financial crisis. Although, I guess, you could argue that without Geithner it would have been even worse.
The Johnson study didn't find any ties between Geithner and AIG (AIG). Yet Geithner was key in providing assistance to the large insurer. Johnson and Co. chalks that up to the fact that AIG was essentially a backdoor bailout for the big banks, but that doesn't really explain why Geithner defended paying bonuses to key AIG employees even after the firm -- and, by extension, the banks -- were bailed out.
To their credit, both studies point out that there could be something less nefarious going on here. The most benign comes from the Blau study that says banks that lobby were probably more likely to seek out Fed loans. But, in general, the studies claim that it is likely that Geithner and the Fed handed out assistance to the firms that they knew best. And if you are handing out taxpayer money and you hope to get it back, going with firms you know probably isn't a bad choice. But it's not as if all the spending on behalf of the banks has been free of misguided, or even corrupt, motivations and processes.
* Matt Levine: What AIG is really doing
* Ex-U.S. Mint director: $1 trillion platinum coin is a worthless gimmick
* A different ex-U.S. Mint director: $1 trillion platinum coin is viable solution
* An outside opinion: The Simpsons (sort of) weigh in on #MintTheCoin
* Morning Call: U.S. futures up on Alcoa, European shares climb and the Nikkei rises
* Who is a better detective: Batman of Sherlock Holmes?
* It's back: PE firms taking another look at Gardner Denver
* MOREDan Primack - Jan 9, 2013 7:12 AM ET
AIG's former subsidiary, AIA, helped save the company. Now it could be a competitor.
By Neel Chowdhury, contributor
FORTUNE -- Insurance giant AIG has always enjoyed a special relationship with AIA, its former Asian subsidiary. After all, AIG was founded in Shanghai in 1919 by C.V. Starr, an adventurous Californian who pioneered life insurance in Asia. AIG (AIG) left China in 1950, one year after Mao's communist takeover, but AIA remained MOREJan 9, 2013 5:00 AM ET
TARP inspector general says government has done little to prevent another AIG bailout.
Correction and Update, 7/25 9:20 AM
FORTUNE -- AIG (AIG) could be a drag on taxpayers for years to come, even after the bailout of the insurance giant is long done. That's the conclusion of this month's quarterly report from the government office that is tasked with overseeing the $700 billion TARP bailout fund.
Most commentators, including me, have focused MOREStephen Gandel, senior editor - Jul 25, 2012 12:01 AM ET
The U.S. government is sill unloading its huge stake in AIG. But why must it offer discounts?
FORTUNE -- On the surface, it seemed like highway robbery: The U.S. Treasury sold off almost $6 billion worth of AIG shares yesterday at $30.50 each -- a whopping 7% discount to AIG's stock price before the weekend.
By day's end, the stock had climbed right back up. After shares dipped to the offering price Monday morning, they traded MOREScott Cendrowski, writer - May 8, 2012 12:05 PM ET
America's biggest companies smashed records for earnings in 2011. Too bad the party can't last.
FORTUNE -- Given the sluggish recovery and a strapped consumer, you'd expect to see corporate America trudging along, not racing for glory. In fact, the Fortune 500 are thriving as a group. Unlike the U.S. economy, they've shown quicksilver agility, rapidly shifting their product mix and producing more goods at little new cost. This nimbleness belies MOREShawn Tully, senior editor-at-large - May 7, 2012 12:00 PM ET
Love them or hate them, the Fed crew are the rare breed in Washington that aren't just looking out for Number One.
FORTUNE -- We have an unfortunate tendency in this country to treat people as either heroes or villains, with no gradations in between. Take Fed chairman Ben Bernanke. He's being called exceptionally vicious names by right-wing types for supposedly undermining our currency and planting the seeds for future inflation -- MOREAllan Sloan, senior editor-at-large - Mar 21, 2012 5:00 AM ET
Clarification: 3/8 8:40 AM.
The Treasury Department is selling $6 billion worth of its AIG stock at a profit. But it's still not clear taxpayers will come out ahead on the insurer's bailout.
FORTUNE -- The good news: The government is about to get an another $14.5 billion of the money it poured into AIG (AIG) at the height of the financial crisis. The bad news: Uncle Sam is still owed $36 MOREStephen Gandel, senior editor - Mar 7, 2012 6:19 PM ET
Investors slammed shares of America's biggest bank by 20% today. The rout might not be over.
FORTUNE -- America's biggest bank just got a lot smaller. Bank of America's stock was crushed today, falling 20% at times to below $7. The last time its shares dropped so low: early 2009. Downright spooky.
In an ironic twist, banking analyst Dick Bove of Rochdale Securities blames the selloff on the bank's decision earlier this MOREScott Cendrowski, writer - Aug 8, 2011 4:29 PM ET
The U.S. government's often maligned $14 trillion intervention not only staved off global collapse - but is making money.
With Doris Burke
FORTUNE -- The bailout of the financial system is roughly as popular as Wall Street bonuses, the federal budget deficit, or LeBron James in a Cleveland sports bar. You hear over and over that the bailout was a disaster, it cost taxpayers a fortune, we didn't really need it, it MOREAllan Sloan, senior editor-at-large - Jul 8, 2011 5:00 AM ET
|The medical marijuana ad that never aired, despite contrary media headlines|
|The bull market at 5: Not old yet|
|Boeing reports wing cracks on Dreamliners|
|Get ready for 'over-the-top' TV|
|2 million students missing out on college aid|