特朗普給高盛帶來契機

When Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman Sachs’ chairman and chief executive, arrived at the Rayburn building on Capitol Hill in late 2010, he was battered and bruised. At the time his bank was viewed as a vivid example of Wall Street misbehaviour. In the previous months it had been sued by regulators, flayed by lawmakers then damaged by the passage of Dodd-Frank, a law that would curtail its freedom in the name of preventing another financial crisis.

2010年末，當高盛(Goldman Sachs)董事長兼首席執行官勞爾德貝蘭克梵(Lloyd Blankfein)抵達美國國會雷伯恩(Rayburn)辦公大樓時，他很受傷。他執掌的這家銀行當時被視爲華爾街不當行爲的生動例證。之前幾個月，該銀行被監管機構起訴，遭到立法者批評，接着又因《多德-弗蘭克法》(Dodd-Frank Act)通過而受損，該法將以防範另一場金融危機爲名，限制該行的自由。

Mr Blankfein was going to meet its co-author Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat and chairman of the House’s financial services committee. Goldman Sachs had concerns over the new oversight regime, but it could not afford to look intransigent. “I’m for smart regulation,” Mr Blankfein said in the private encounter, trying to sound co-operative. “And I’m for fucking dumb regulation,” Mr Frank replied sarcastically.

貝蘭克梵是來會晤該法的起草人之一、馬薩諸塞州民主黨人、衆議院金融服務委員會主席巴尼弗蘭克(Barney Frank)。高盛對這種新的監督機制感到擔憂，但不能表現出態度頑固。“我支持明智的監管，”貝蘭克梵在那個不公開會議上時表示，試圖表現出一種願意合作的態度。弗蘭克諷刺地回答：“我支持愚蠢透了的監管。”

If the Obama years were a harsh time for Goldman in Washington, the election of Donald Trump has provided a new opening. Not only does the president regularly rail against “job-killing regulations”, he has made two Goldman alumni his point men on financial regulation. Gary Cohn, Mr Blankfein’s former deputy, heads the national economic council, while Steven Mnuchin, once its chief information officer, is Treasury secretary.

如果說奧巴馬執政時期讓高盛在華盛頓的日子變得難過的話，那麼唐納德特朗普(Donald Trump)當選帶來了一個新的開端。特朗普不僅批評“扼殺就業的監管規定”，還讓兩位高盛人擔任金融監管領域的排頭兵：貝蘭克梵的前副手加里科恩(Gary Cohn)現在擔任國家經濟委員會主席，曾在高盛擔任首席信息官的史蒂文姆努欽(Steven Mnuchin)現任財政部長。

The new team in Washington could not have come at a more important time for Goldman. The bank that received a $10bn bailout from US taxpayers in 2008 is looking to the Trump administration for another helping hand, this time from what Goldman sees as overbearing regulation exacerbating its current trading funk.

華盛頓新團隊出現的時機對於高盛而言再重要不過了。2008年從美國納稅人獲得100億美元紓困資金的該行，正希望特朗普政府再次伸出援手，這一次的“問題”是在高盛看來讓人受不了的監管，這種監管加劇了該行目前的交易困境。

For years the main engine of the Goldman money machine has been trading securities, the division where Mr Blankfein and Mr Cohn won their spurs. It remains one of its biggest revenue streams, but is misfiring. Part of the blame lies with traders who made bad calls this year. But its predicament goes deeper. Post-crisis regulation has curtailed the operation. In 2007 the bank’s net trading revenue from bonds, currencies and commodities peaked at $16.2bn. Last year, notwithstanding some reorganisation, the rough equivalent was $7.6bn. Goldman’s trading business is a shadow of its former self, albeit still highly profitable.

多年來，高盛賺錢機器的主要引擎一直是證券交易，這是貝蘭克梵和科恩贏得聲望的部門。它現在仍是最大收入流之一，但正遭遇困境。這在一定程度上歸咎於交易員今年做出糟糕判斷。但困境的根源更爲深刻。危機後監管妨礙了這項業務。2007年，高盛來自債券、外匯和大宗商品的淨交易收入達到162億美元的峯值。去年，雖然有一些重組的影響，但是大致對應的收入爲76億美元。高盛的交易業務已大不如往昔，儘管仍然非常賺錢。

The main culprit in Goldman’s eyes is the Volcker rule, a ban on banks placing market bets with their own money. The idea of banning so-called proprietary trading — conceived by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker — was a centrepiece of former president Barack Obama’s efforts to build a bulwark against future crises requiring public bailouts. But the prohibition’s final form, which stretched to 964 pages of regulation, has been criticised by banks as muddled and overly complex. They blame it for inhibiting market making activity that was meant to be permitted.

高盛眼中的主要罪魁禍首是“沃爾克規則”(Volcker rule)，即禁止銀行使用自有資金在市場操盤。禁止所謂的自營交易的想法——由美聯儲(Fed)前主席保羅沃爾克(Paul Volcker)提出——是前總統巴拉克奧巴馬(Barack Obama)建設堡壘防範需要公衆紓困的未來危機舉措的核心。但禁令的最終形式（長達964頁的法規）受到各銀行的批評，稱其混亂且過於複雜，扼殺了本該允許的做市活動。

Mr Blankfein described the Volcker rule this month as “very cumbersome”, complaining “you have people sitting on trading desks very nervous”. Other Goldman insiders are more blunt in private, attacking Volcker as a noose tailored for the bank’s throat.

貝蘭克梵上月稱，沃爾克規則“極爲繁重”，他抱怨稱，它“讓坐在交易桌前的人們非常緊張”。其他高盛內部人士私下裏更不客氣，批評沃爾克規則就是想要了高盛的命。

Goldman declined to discuss its lobbying, but says: “As many of the regulators who implemented the [Volcker] rule have conceded, now is an appropriate time to review the rule.” The Financial Times has assembled a picture of its efforts from interviews with more than four dozen policymakers, bankers, lobbyists and lawyers. They describe an aggressive institution pushing to regain its trading edge by having Volcker watered down, if not abolished.

高盛拒絕討論其遊說活動，但表示：“正如實施（沃爾克）規則的很多監管者所承認的那樣，是時候重估這項規則。”英國《金融時報》根據對近50位政策制定者、銀行家、遊說者和律師的採訪，梳理出了高盛的努力。據他們介紹，該行正咄咄逼人地推動削弱——甚至廢止——沃爾克規則，以便重新獲得交易優勢。

The bank is “all over it”, says a Treasury official. “Their single focus this year, more than any other bank, is the Volcker rule,” says the Washington chief of a rival institution. Dennis Kelleher of Better Markets, which advocates tougher regulation, says: “Goldman has always been the big swashbuckling trader that wants to take huge risks and huge leverage for the big score.”

美國財政部一位官員表示，高盛正“全力投入這件事”。“他們今年的單一焦點就是沃爾克規則，超過其他任何銀行，”某家競爭對手的華盛頓主管表示。提倡加強監管的Better Markets的丹尼斯凱萊赫(Dennis Kelleher)表示，“高盛一直是霸氣凌厲的大型交易商，希望爲了賺大錢而承擔巨大風險和巨大槓桿。”

Mr Blankfein says he is “barely” in touch with his former colleagues Mr Cohn and Mr Mnuchin, claiming in June to be “apprehensive” about how it might look. But Goldman has cause to hope Washington will come to its rescue.

貝蘭克梵表示，他“很少”接觸他的前同事科恩和姆努欽，他曾在6月表示，對這樣的接觸會給外界留下的印象感到“擔心”。但高盛有理由期待華盛頓向它伸出援手。

When Mr Trump fired the gun on Wall Street deregulation this year Mr Cohn said “we’re not going to burden the banks with literally hundreds of billions of dollars of regulatory costs every year”. In June, Mr Mnuchin’s Treasury department unveiled a regulatory review whose bank-friendly recommendations included “substantial amendment” to the Volcker rule.

當特朗普今年表態要開始對華爾街解除管制時，科恩表示：“我們不會讓銀行背上每年數千億美元的監管成本負擔。”6月，姆努欽領導的財政部公佈了一份監管審議報告，其對銀行友好的建議包括“大量修改”沃爾克規則。

Randal Quarles, Mr Trump’s nominee to be the Fed’s regulatory chief, said last month that “the complexity of the rule makes it very difficult to apply and [we] should work to try to simplify [it]”.

特朗普提名的美聯儲監管負責人蘭德爾夸爾斯(Randal Quarles)曾在7月表示：“該規則的複雜性使其很難實施，我們應該努力簡化它。”

But there are reasons to be cautious, too. So far not a single significant regulation has been changed. White House turmoil has slowed the confirmation of Trump appointees at the main US watchdogs. Goldman is straining relations with its rivals and its critics are ultra-vigilant for any sign of a “Government Sachs” plot.

但也有理由保持謹慎。到目前爲止，還沒有一項重大法規得到修改。白宮的動盪拖延了對特朗普在美國主要監管機構任命官員的確認。高盛與其競爭對手的關係開始緊張，其批評者對“高盛政府”(Government Sachs)的任何徵兆都格外警惕。

Goldman Sachs and the Trump campaign were never natural bedfellows. Mr Trump’s final campaign video scorned the robber barons of the global elite as it displayed an image of Mr Blankfein. A tweet from the Goldman boss on Monday, interpreted by many as a comparison between the shadow cast by the solar eclipse and the Trump administration, hinted at the tensions. The head of its Washington office is a Democrat named Michael Paese, who leads a team of eight in-house lobbyists and oversaw lobbying spending of $1.4m in the first half of this year, compared with $3.2m for 2016, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. His boss is John Rogers, Goldman’s chief of staff, an earnest man from the Republican party establishment, which Mr Trump derides.

高盛和特朗普競選陣營從來不是特別有緣的夥伴。特朗普最終的競選視頻在展示貝蘭克梵照片的同時，鄙斥全球精英是強盜式資本家。高盛老闆最近發表的一條推文被許多人解讀爲，他將日食投下的陰影比作特朗普政府，暗示了雙方之間的緊張關係。高盛華盛頓辦事處負責人邁克爾佩斯(Michael Paese)是一名民主黨人，他領導着一個由8名內部遊說者組成的團隊；響應性政治中心(Center for Responsive Politics)的數據顯示，他們今年上半年在遊說上支出140萬美元，而2016年全年爲320萬美元。佩斯的老闆是高盛的幕僚長約翰羅傑斯(John Rogers)，一個堅定的共和黨體制內人士，而特朗普嘲笑這些人。

Where Goldman and the Trump team have found common cause is deregulation. The job of the Rogers-Paese axis is to turn Mr Trump’s anti-red tape rhetoric into blows against the Volcker rule. It is a clunky regulation disliked by almost all US banks. But its reform is crucial for Goldman because of the bank’s outsized dependence on trading. Citigroup has surpassed Goldman by spending $2.5m on lobbying in the first six months of 2017, while JPMorgan Chase is in line with it at $1.5m, but both are universal banks working on multiple fronts. Morgan Stanley, which doled out $1.2m, was the investment bank most similar to Goldman before the crisis, but it has shifted its focus to wealth management.

高盛和特朗普團隊在放松管制上找到了共同事業。羅傑斯-佩斯“軸心”的工作就是將特朗普的反官僚主義言論轉化爲對沃爾克規則的打擊。美國幾乎所有銀行都不喜歡這項礙手礙腳的法規。但其改革對高盛至關重要，因爲該行對交易極爲依賴。花旗集團(Citigroup) 2017年上半年支出了250萬美元遊說費用，超過了高盛的支出。摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase)以150萬美元與高盛看齊，但兩家都是有多條戰線的全能銀行。支出120萬美元的摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)在危機前是與高盛最相似的投資銀行，但其重心已轉移到財富管理。

Goldman, however, does not want to look like it is on a lone crusade. As one person who works with the bank says, it would be the kiss of death for any proposal to be branded the “Goldman Sachs amendment”. So it has tried to forge a united front with the industry.

但高盛並不希望自己看起來是在孤軍作戰。高盛的一位合作者表示，任何打有“高盛修正案”烙印的提案都將是死亡之吻，因此高盛試圖與整個銀行業建立統一戰線。

But there are cracks in the faade. “[Goldman] don’t play well with others. Unless there’s something they want and feel collectively they can do,” says the chief lobbyist of another bank. On Volcker, “whatever the industry view is, it has to be their view”, he adds. The corralling of its peers has happened via the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, or Sifma, a trade group. Sifma laid down a marker with comments it submitted in June to the Treasury’s regulatory review calling for Congress to erase the entire rule.

不過這條戰線存在裂縫。另一家銀行的首席遊說者表示：“（高盛）跟其他銀行相處得不好。除非有什麼他們想要的東西，並覺得大家團結起來可以有所作爲。”他說，在沃爾克規則這件事上，“無論行業的觀點是什麼，都必須是他們的觀點。”高盛凝聚行業共識的努力是通過行業團體美國證券業和金融市場協會(SIFMA)進行的。該協會在6月份向財政部的監管審議提交了意見，呼籲國會取消整個規則，從而確立了一個立場。

On conference calls where Sifma’s members thrashed out what they would say on Volcker, Goldman was “relentless” with Mr Paese at the helm, according to one person involved.

據一位知情人士透露，在SIFMA成員表達各自對沃爾克規則意見的電話會議上，由佩斯代表的高盛牢牢掌控着話題。

Another bank lobbyist says institutions that wanted refinements rather than the abolition of the Volcker rule pushed back against Goldman, worried that asking for too much would jeopardise the chance of any victories. But the lobbyist says that in the end: “What Sifma came out with on Volcker is what Goldman wanted. That’s where they did their fighting.” Ken Bentsen, Sifma president, however, denies that Goldman drove the process and says the trade group’s views have been consistent since 2010.

另一名銀行遊說者表示，有些想要改進而不是廢除沃爾克規則的機構對高盛提出反對，擔心要求太多會危及獲取任何勝利的機會。但這名遊說者表示，最終，“SIFMA對沃爾克規則發表的意見就是高盛想要的。那正是他們所爭取的。”不過，SIFMA主席肯本特森(Ken Bentsen)否認高盛驅動了整個過程，並表示該行業團體的看法自2010年以來一直沒有變過。

Putting himself in Goldman’s shoes, Peter J Solomon, founder and chairman of a boutique investment bank, says he would “absolutely” want to cast off Volcker and make big bets again. “I would want to do more. Where else are you going to make your money” he says.

一家精品投行的創始人和董事長彼得J所羅門(Peter J. Solomon)表示，如果站在高盛的角度，他“絕對”想要擺脫沃爾克規則，再次在市場上豪賭。他說：“我會想做更多事。不然你還能去哪兒賺錢？”

The received wisdom in Washington is that deregulation will come from Trump-appointees at the Fed and other agencies, which fleshed out Dodd-Frank with their rules and can loosen them within the existing law. In an internal podcast in March, Mr Paese said: “When those individuals are in place...I think you’ll see a deregulatory agenda come forward.” The Senate is yet to confirm Mr Quarles or a second Trump nominee for the Fed, which is Goldman’s primary regulator.

華盛頓的普遍觀點是，去監管化將由特朗普在美聯儲和其他機構任命的人員操刀，這些機構已經用各自的細則來落實《多德-弗蘭克法》，因而可以在現行法律的框架下放松管制。佩斯在3月的一次內部播客中表示：“這些人就位以後……我想你們會看到去監管議程出爐。”參議院還沒有確認夸爾斯或者特朗普在美聯儲（高盛的主要監管機構）提名的第二個人選的任命。

Only Congress could repeal the Volcker rule, and that is politically improbable. But there is a backdoor route for lawmakers to help Goldman. It would entail slipping Dodd-Frank changes into an end-of-year spending bill. Two people close to Goldman say it is evaluating its options. “We have our Christmas wishlist, but what can you actually get for the kids under the tree” says one.

只有國會才能廢除沃爾克規則，而這在政治上不太可能實現。但立法者可以走迂迴的路子幫助高盛，那就是把對《多德-弗蘭克法》的修改提案悄悄夾在年底的支出議案中。兩名知曉高盛內情的人士表示，該行正在評估這個方案。“我們有我們的聖誕願望清單，但最後你能把什麼禮物放在聖誕樹下給你的孩子們呢？”

Mr Mnuchin and Mr Cohn have hinted at changes that would exempt investment banks from some Dodd-Frank restrictions. In January, Mr Mnuchin told senators: “I think the concept of proprietary trading does not belong in banks with [federal] insurance.” The Volcker rule applies to all banks. Narrowing it to only the parts with government-insured deposits would liberate Goldman, because unlike its rivals it keeps its trading separate from its small consumer bank.

姆努欽和科恩已經暗示，會有一些改革讓投行免受《多德-弗蘭克法》的某些限制。今年1月，姆努欽對參議員們表示：“我認爲自營交易的概念不適用有（聯邦）保險的銀行。”目前沃爾克規則適用於所有銀行，如果將其適用範圍收窄至吸納政府擔保存款的銀行，高盛將會得到解放，因爲與競爭對手不同，該行的交易業務與其規模較小的零售銀行業務是分開的。

“That could be done by striking part of one sentence in the law,” says Tyler Gellasch, who helped draft the Volcker rule as a Senate aide. The Treasury denies its proposals would give an advantage to any large banks with a low reliance on deposit funding.

“只要刪掉法律文本中某一句話的一部分，就能做到這一點，”曾作爲參議院助理參與起草沃爾克規則的泰勒格拉施(Tyler Gellasch)表示。美國財政部否認其提案將對不那麼依賴存款資金的大銀行有利。

Then in April Mr Cohn said he favoured a 21st-century version of the Glass-Steagall law, a Depression-era statute that forced a structural separation of retail and investment banking. Mr Cohn’s version, however, was not about breaking up banks. Instead he alluded to multi-track regulation.

科恩在4月表示，他贊同一部21世紀版本的《格拉斯-斯蒂格爾法》(Glass-Steagall)。這部在大蕭條時代出臺的法律迫使銀行分拆零售業務和投行業務。然而，科恩說的並不是要分拆銀行業務；他指的是多軌監管。

“Right now we’ve got this massive set of regulations built to regulate all banks as [if] they’re equal,” Mr Cohn said. “We may be able to tailor regulations for different aspects of the financial markets and different aspects of the financial institutions.” Rival lobbyists took that to mean fewer rules for Goldman traders but little respite for universal banks with more diversified businesses.

“現在，我們制定了一套規模龐大的法規來監管所有的銀行，（就像）它們是等同的一樣，”科恩說，“我們或許能夠針對金融市場的不同方面和金融機構的不同方面量身定製監管法規。”競爭對手的遊說者將這解讀爲高盛的交易員將受到較少的規則約束，但業務更爲多樣的全能銀行沒有多少喘息機會。

Michael Barr of the University of Michigan, who helped craft Dodd-Frank at the Treasury department, says: “What the administration seems to mean is let’s return to prudential regulation focusing on banks — not the investment banks, holding companies, insurance companies or shadow banking activities. What they [officials] mean is let’s go back to the world we mostly had before the financial crisis.”

曾在財政部幫助起草《多德-弗蘭克法》的密歇根大學(University of Michigan)教授邁克爾巴爾(Michael Barr)表示：“本屆行政當局的意思似乎是讓我們回到專注於銀行的審慎監管——而不是投行、控股公司、保險公司或者影子銀行業務。他們（官員們）的意思是讓我們基本上回到金融危機前的那個世界。”

As Goldman’s president, Mr Cohn argued told the Obama administration that Dodd-Frank caused bond market liquidity to dry up. Democrats view the bank’s claims with scepticism, but they are no longer in charge.

時任高盛總裁的科恩曾告訴奧巴馬政府，《多德-弗蘭克法》導致債券市場流動性枯竭。民主黨人對高盛的說法表示懷疑，但現在國會已經不是他們的天下了。

In Mr Blankfein the emboldening effect of the Trump administration is unmistakable. In June he criticised policymakers’ response to the financial crisis as an “over-reaction”, a striking shift from his words in 2010. The bank’s lobbying reflects the change. A weakening of the Volcker rule is not guaranteed, but it is now within Goldman’s grasp.

特朗普政府給高盛帶來的壯膽效果在貝蘭克梵身上表露無遺。6月，他批評政策制定者對金融危機做出的反應“過度”，這與他在2010年的措辭截然不同。高盛的遊說者也反映出這個變化。削弱沃爾克規則的事情算不上板上釘釘，但它現在是高盛能夠企及的。

Additional reporting by Ben McLannahan in New York

本麥克蘭納汗(Ben McLannahan)紐約補充報道