Citi pulls out of Wachovia deal
Citi yesterday gave up on its attempt to take over Wachovia, ceding the ground to rival bidder Wells Fargo.
The bank said it broke off negotiations due to "dramatic differences" with Wells Fargo "in the parties' transaction structures and views of the risks involved". It now plans to launch a lawsuit against both Wachovia and Wells Fargo for breach of contract, but will not attempt to block the merger.
"Our shareholders have been unjustly and illegally deprived of the opportunity the transaction created," Citi said. Citi argues it had an exclusive agreement to take over Wachovia, which was broken when the other bank started negotiating with Wells Fargo.
Unlike the proposed merger with Citi, the $11.7 billion all-share Wachovia-Wells Fargo merger will not require any support from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Wachovia said. The Citi deal would have seen FDIC take $12 billion in stock and warrants in return for guaranteeing all but the first $42 billion of losses on a $312 billion loan pool, the first time FDIC has used its "systemic risk" powers to guarantee bank debt.
See also: Citigroup to acquire Wachovia
Wachovia appoints Phelan as CRO
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Critics warn against softening risk transfer rules for insurers
Proposal to cut capital for unfunded protection of loan books would create systemic risk, investors say
Barr defends easing of Basel III endgame proposal
Fed’s top regulator says he will stay and finish the package, is comfortable with capital impact
Bank of England to review UK clearing rules
Broader collateral set and greater margin transparency could be adopted from Emir 3.0, but not active accounts requirement
The wisdom of Oz? Why Australia is phasing out AT1s
Analysts think Australian banks will transition smoothly, but other countries unlikely to follow
EU trade repository matching disrupted by Emir overhaul
Some say problem affecting derivatives reporting has been resolved, but others find it persists
Barclays and HSBC opt for FRTB internal models
However, UK pair unlikely to chase approval in time for Basel III go-live in January 2026
Foreign banks want level playing field in US Basel III redraft
IHCs say capital charges for op risk and inter-affiliate trades out of line with US-based peers
CFTC’s Mersinger wants new rules for vertical silos
Republican commissioner shares Democrats’ concerns about combined FCMs and clearing houses