GS Free from TARP

Well, it's official. Goldman Sachs is no longer a part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The company announced yesterday that it had come to terms with the Treasury on a valuation of the warrants the Treasury was holding on behalf of the taxpayers. The final figure was $1.1 billion, after some wrangling on the part of the bank to value the warrants around $500 million.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti…

This frees the bank from any and all provisions of TARP legislation, most notably the pesky executive compensation limits. Which is a good thing for the bank, because every time I hear about the bonus pool, the average number gets larger.

The last I heard it was up to $900,000 per employee. It simply wouldn't do to have taxpayer input on something like that!

11 Comments

Funny this is how badly the gov got slammed by the media all this time. When GS paid back the $10B last month they paid $318M in preferred dividends, which translates to a 20+% return annualized.

Now they received another $1.1B just for the warrants. And they're going to auction off the JPM ones at open auction. People are so stupid.

 
Best Response
SolidarityFunny this is how badly the gov got slammed by the media all this time. When GS paid back the $10B last month they paid $318M in preferred dividends, which translates to a 20+% return annualized.

Now they received another $1.1B just for the warrants. And they're going to auction off the JPM ones at open auction. People are so stupid.

I think I know what you're trying to say, but your math is a little off. The TOTAL return (and the figure the financial press keeps quoting) amounts to roughly 23% annualized after the repurchase of the warrants for $1.1 billion. The actual interest paid was only 4.75% (annualized).

However, this rate of return assumes a zero value on the warrants at the time of issue, and that simply wasn't the case.

At the time the warrants were issued, they were theoretically worth about $620 million. Since the taxpayer had to give up the warrants upon redemption, the return on the warrants was roughly $480 million. Combined with the interest income, the total net return was about $798 million in 8 months, or about 12% annualized.

Still not a bad ROI.

All of this stuff is explained in the TARP Guide HERE.

The WSO Guide to Understanding TARP

 
Edmundo Braverman
SolidarityFunny this is how badly the gov got slammed by the media all this time. When GS paid back the $10B last month they paid $318M in preferred dividends, which translates to a 20+% return annualized.

Now they received another $1.1B just for the warrants. And they're going to auction off the JPM ones at open auction. People are so stupid.

I think I know what you're trying to say, but your math is a little off. The TOTAL return (and the figure the financial press keeps quoting) amounts to roughly 23% annualized after the repurchase of the warrants for $1.1 billion. The actual interest paid was only 4.75% (annualized).

However, this rate of return assumes a zero value on the warrants at the time of issue, and that simply wasn't the case.

At the time the warrants were issued, they were theoretically worth about $620 million. Since the taxpayer had to give up the warrants upon redemption, the return on the warrants was roughly $480 million. Combined with the interest income, the total net return was about $798 million in 8 months, or about 12% annualized.

Still not a bad ROI. .

The WSO Guide to Understanding TARP

Yeah the 23% was including the warrants and was basically just what the Treasury reported (no wonder it was misleading); didn't bother to personally confirm but thanks for breaking it down.

Buffett is keeping his until they expire... Strike price of $115 and the right to buy up to $5B. And people were bashing him when GS traded under $50 last year. Maybe when his GE calls are in the $ people will finally shut up.

 

Why don't you guys calculate the awesome return on our money when you consider that GS was floated some 10 billion through the aig bailout? Probably a terrible NEGATIVE return on the taxpayer dollar. GS(Goldman Sucks)

 

It was clear that Goldman did not need to be bailed out, and that accepting $10 billion in TARP funding really amounted to "taking one for the team." However, Goldman desperately needed AIG to be bailed out, and maybe playing along with Treasury's plan to save the world was just a little payback for the $13 billion Goldman knew was coming their way after the AIG bailout.

Some of you will contend that Goldman didn't actually need AIG to be bailed out because Goldman took short positions against the very CDOs that AIG provided swaps for. Ethical and fiduciary quandaries aside, this is pretty naive in that $13 billion is still $13 billion.

That money makes up the vast majority of the gargantuan bonus pool they're working up over there.

Now if you want to talk about net return, Goldman laid out $798 million for a $23 billion net benefit ($13 billion of which they got to keep free and clear), so the actual cost of funds to Goldman was zero. They essentially invested $798 million to earn a return of $13 billion.

The WSO Guide to Understanding TARP

 
Edmundo BravermanIt was clear that Goldman did not need to be bailed out, and that accepting $10 billion in TARP funding really amounted to "taking one for the team." However, Goldman desperately needed AIG to be bailed out, and maybe playing along with Treasury's plan to save the world was just a little payback for the $13 billion Goldman knew was coming their way after the AIG bailout.

Some of you will contend that Goldman didn't actually need AIG to be bailed out because Goldman took short positions against the very CDOs that AIG provided swaps for. Ethical and fiduciary quandaries aside, this is pretty naive in that $13 billion is still $13 billion.

That money makes up the vast majority of the gargantuan bonus pool they're working up over there.

Now if you want to talk about net return, Goldman laid out $798 million for a $23 billion net benefit ($13 billion of which they got to keep free and clear), so the actual cost of funds to Goldman was zero. They essentially invested $798 million to earn a return of $13 billion.

The WSO Guide to Understanding TARP

It also misses the point of Goldman's counterparty risk to AIGs other counterparties. Even if GS was fully hedged against AIG, many of AIG's other counterparties were not, and GS would've suffered indirectly from that.

 

Occaecati voluptates culpa est pariatur. Quis non quo sunt et.

A sit cumque et libero possimus commodi. Soluta ipsam placeat consequatur voluptas aliquid dignissimos est ut. Quia cumque tempore distinctio consequatur. Itaque esse et vitae dolore velit. Magni sunt perferendis exercitationem molestias. Aliquam veniam ea quos quaerat illo consequatur in. Perferendis magni ut ea.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.3%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.7%
  • JPMorgan 01 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (15) $434
  • Associates (46) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (80) $150
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (73) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”