Ex-Federal Bank Examiner Performance

One of the main problems that I heard in the recordings was that supervisors paid excessive deference to banks, and as a result, they were less aggressive in finding issues or in following up on Goldman Sachs in a forceful way, which is known as regulatory capture. Since they show an undue difference to those same banks they are examining and try to soften critical findings.
In the recordings a Goldman Sachs employee states “Once clients were wealthy enough, certain consumer laws didn’t apply to them” Once you have obtained enough wealth you can pull the strings to favor yourself more. These recordings were provided by the ex-federal bank examiner Carmen Segarra. I believe the recordings of the conversations are legal to a certain extent. If there is malice involved, then the recordings are illegal, but in theory Segarra did not have a malicious intention. These recordings were necessary for Segarra to obtain evidence against the Federal Reserve, since they are a closed institution. Unfortunately, since she is a licensed
The ethical concept of utilitarianism can be described as the greater good for society. In a sense this can be seen as the main theory in the federal bank examiner performance, since their reports help the business world continue to function. Their bank examines provide information to other stakeholders that are involved, which their daily routine and survival depends on the federal bank examiner reports. Those stakeholders can be the general public, other banks, investors, and the government. If Ms. Segarra was to follow the AICPA standards, then her duty to the public will be the same, but to a lesser degree, since the main focus for the AICPA is to protect the client. .400.41 of the AICPA would apply to both an audit and a bank examiner, since this code places an important emphasis on the external