AIG may bite back on bailout hand
But behind the scenes, the restored insurance company is weighing whether to tell the US government agencies that rescued it during the financial crisis: Thanks, but you cheated our shareholders.
The AIG board will meet on Wednesday to discuss a $US25 billion shareholder lawsuit against the government. The lawsuit does not argue that government help was not needed. It contends that the onerous nature of the rescue - the taking of what became a 92 per cent stake in the company, the deal's high interest rates and the funnelling of billions to the insurer's Wall Street clients — deprived shareholders of tens of billions of dollars and violated the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits the taking of private property for "public use, without just compensation".
Maurice Greenberg, AIG's former chief executive, who remains a major investor in the company, filed the lawsuit in 2011 on behalf of fellow shareholders. He has since urged AIG to join the case, a move that could nudge the government into settlement talks.
The choice is not a simple one for the insurer. Its board members, most of whom joined after the bailout, owe a duty to shareholders to consider the lawsuit. If the board does not give careful consideration to the case, Mr Greenberg could challenge its decision to abstain.
Should Mr Greenberg snare a major settlement without AIG, the company could face additional lawsuits from other shareholders. Suing the government would not only placate the 87-year-old former chief but would put AIG in line for a potential payout.
Yet such a move would almost certainly be widely seen as an audacious display of ingratitude. The action would also threaten to inflame tensions in Washington, where the company has become a byword for excessive risk-taking on Wall Street.
Some government officials are already upset with the company for even seriously entertaining the lawsuit, people briefed on the matter said. They noted that without the bailout, AIG shareholders would have fared far worse in bankruptcy.
"On the one hand, from a corporate governance perspective, it appears they're being extra cautious and careful," said Frank Partnoy, a former banker who is now a professor of law and finance at the University of San Diego School of Law. "On the other hand, it's a slap in the face to the taxpayer and the government."
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
After repaying the US$182 billion bailout, AIG is weighing whether to join a US$25 billion shareholder lawsuit against the US government that challenges the terms of the rescue and claims those terms harmed shareholders.
The lawsuit was filed in 2011 by Maurice Greenberg, AIG's former chief executive, on behalf of shareholders. It alleges the rescue involved taking what became a 92% stake in the company, high interest rates and the funnelling of billions to AIG’s Wall Street clients, depriving shareholders of tens of billions of dollars and violating the Fifth Amendment.
No. The lawsuit does not argue the government help was unnecessary. Instead, it contends the onerous nature and specific terms of the rescue unfairly deprived shareholders and may have violated constitutional protections against taking private property without just compensation.
If AIG joins the case, it could push the government toward settlement talks and potentially put the company in line for a payout. It could also placate Maurice Greenberg and reduce the chance he pursues separate action on behalf of shareholders.
Suing the government could be seen as an audacious display of ingratitude, risk inflaming tensions in Washington, damage AIG’s public reputation—where it’s already associated with excessive risk-taking—and draw criticism from government officials who note shareholders might have fared worse in bankruptcy.
AIG’s board is responsible for considering the lawsuit carefully because its members owe a duty to shareholders. The board was scheduled to meet to discuss the matter, and if it refuses to consider joining, Maurice Greenberg could challenge that decision.
Publicly, AIG has been running a nationwide advertising campaign with the tagline 'Thank you America' after repaying the bailout, even as it privately weighs legal action against the government.
Yes. If Maurice Greenberg secures a major settlement without AIG’s participation, other shareholders might bring additional lawsuits and AIG could face pressure or claims as a result of separate settlements.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
