world banking committee. let's link -- listen in right now. >> 5000 people do not do 5000 random things on their own. i am sure there were people talking to each other within the branch, but that analytical work is being done and has been done. i do not happen to have it here, we will work with your staff and make sure you have everything you need on that. >> i would welcome that and i am adjusted in knowing if this is a customer issue of more vulnerable population of thinking customers or as the word culture has been used a number of times, was there something different about los angeles which i assume and again, i think illegal behavior and immoral behavior and breaking the rules is wrong wherever it happens, but our goal in management -- your management of a financial institution is to diminish the chance of that happening. you never condone bad behavior, but we want to make certain the

circumstances in which it is discouraged and never encouraged and i do not have a feel for that circumstance. i do not know what really is the fact between the banking leadership that may have encouraged this behavior. we have seen this before. i served with a number of my colleagues including center that senator brown where we saw the consequences of a system that rewarded appointments for veterans who needed medical care . we saw a scandal across the country in which veterans were put on the list suggesting they had an appointment. they did not and circumstances --which those individuals those individuals were listed as having an appointment and the allegations exist that there was -- a failure of the va system to provide health care. there is a number of us on this

committee and in congress who work to find the right regulatory balance for financial institutions and just to stress with you the importance of than having our financial institutions the cave, their behavior conduct be a certain level, otherwise it undermines the efforts for the attempts to change the regulatory environment or financial success . we focus that on community banks , but we care about those financial institutions that have a relationship with their customers and one of the arguments that has been made is the relationship bankers can rely upon the relationship and what we are hearing from the circumstance that we find at wells fargo is that relationship , it didn advantage of not accrue to the benefit of the customer. mr. stumpf: you are right for

that portion and what hurts so much is that we spend so much time trying to do the right gets and when a customer product that is not used or benefiting them that hurts them and it hurts us. we have no interest. if i could take one a second i want to correct mr. chairman or share something that i was not as clear on. on deposit account fees, none of those are reported to credit bureaus, so the credit bureau impact relates exclusively to credit cards and we will run each one of those down. senator moran: let me ask a final question. i do not think you provided us with your precise timeframe in which regulators were notified. i would be interested in knowing what regulators were notified when, who, and what steps they then took in response to the

information they had. mr. stumpf: again, my recollection is that our prudential regulator the occ was involved and notified and active at about13 timeframe the time of the lawsuit from the city of los angeles. we informed the cfpb, so i can tell you what we did. i know you have a panel later with them. senator moran: none of these actions came to light as a result of the regulators finding the behavior? it was reported to them subsequent, is that true? mr. stumpf: i do not want to speak for them and i do not know what part is confidential supervisory information, but my recollection of what we did was deal with this issue, terminate people, inform our prudential regulator, and after the city of los angeles, informed the cfpb.

senator moran: my experience in dealing with the department of veterans affairs in way too many instances in my view the employees became the scapegoat for what i saw as actions or encouragement behavior by their supervisors and i would encourage your circumstance -- in your circumstance to make certain the employees are not the scapegoat for behavior at higher levels. mr. stumpf: i think that is a the 268,000and coming to work every day of our team members are the fabulous team members and i love them and what they do. the 5300, for whatever reason, they were dishonest and i am not scapegoating, but that is not part of our culture and some and many of those jobs -- most of them were very good american jobs.

>> senator merkley. senator merkley: did wells fargo create a sales pressure cooker that put -- between a rock and a hard place? mr. stumpf: i do not believe that. senator merkley: let me continue. a branch manager says regional bosses required hourly conferences on the florida branch's progress on accounts suchelling managers extras as overdraft protection. employees that fell behind had to stay late and work weekend and then came threats, anyone falling short after two months would be fired and we were constantly being told we would work with mcdonald's or it if we did not meet sales quotas we had to say for after school detention it felt like on saturday. is that a pressure cooking

situation putting tellers and bankers in an impossible situation? mr. stumpf: that has no place in our culture and it has no place and it hurt to read that. senator merkley: it says managers coast -- coached members on how to inflate sales numbers and the use the database for customers who had been preapproved for credit cards and order them. they were coached on it. is that a situation in which a pressure cooker coulter puts bankers and in them possible situation -- puts them in an impossible situation? mr. stumpf: there is nothing we did to encourage that. senator merkley: and yet they were being coached on how to coach employees on how to do this? what about a branch manager in the pacific northwest where i come from. a homeless woman who had opened six accounts.

we are taught how to open multiple accounts. it sounds good, but it does not benefit customers. let's talk about someone who in 2008 after being hired for two months found that this was happening these false accounts were happening and she went to her trainer and then her manager pushed was basically very hard to shut up in all kinds of different ways. you say the employee could of gone to someone and she did and eventually she filed a whistleblower suit and why did wells fargo say that was not legitimate? time, thee you the answer is because wells fargo said we fired her because she did not meet her quotas. here we have a situation where employees are written up and i have to stay late and i have to come in on weekends to be

coached and they are at risk of being fired. that sounds like a systemic management strategy for cross selling, but you refuse to take any responsibility blaming it on the personal ethics of individual employees who were at risk of losing their job if they did not meet their "daily solutions" target. can you even conceivably put your place in the position of an ordinary working person who has a child and their care and says they will be -- day care and says they will be fired and say there was no culture established that caused these problems? mr. stumpf: senator, i am very sorry that happened. that was not what we wanted to have happened. when those things happened i wish we would have routed all of that out and the vast majority of people did it the right day. senator merkley: your catalog said branch managers were always asking how many solutions -- new

accounts, did you sell today and they wanted three or four a day. i was always getting written up for failing to bump up my solution's numbers and some employees would ask local business owners to open additional accounts as favors to them and it seems as though you would have to be willing fully ignorant to believe these goals are achievable through any other means. cross-selling is a major pride point for the management of wells fargo including your report to annual -- in awe reports to customers -- annual report to customers. it was so high because you created a culture of cross-selling that pushed everyone to the maximum and the casualties of folks that would be fired if they did not meet it and yet you can only sit here and say there was no coaching, no management strategy -- constantly at the heart of the program and you were at the top

of this for a very long time. let's go back to 2005, 2007, 2010 you had one major position and promotion after the other and cross-selling was at the heart of it and you sit here and blame the little person who was pressured into an impossible situation. -- forhat really kind of want of another word a failure to accept responsibility? mr. stumpf: i started out today by accepting full responsibility. senator merkley: i take full responsibility for establishing a culture that put people in an impossible situation would be to resign. it would be to refund -- return your funds and help provide assistance for all of these people. all you say is i except her sensibility and by the way it is the fault of the 5000 people who just want ethical enough -- were not ethical enough.

that is not accepting a responsibility. this was a systemic problem that you benefited from norma sleigh and the bank benefited from enormously and you are scapegoating the people at the very bottom. mr. stumpf: i do not want to be confrontational, but i want to tell you the vast majority did the right thing and we love the idea of having deep mutually beneficial relationships with our customers. having a product the customer does not use, does not need, or does not want does not help the customer, does not help me, does not help the shareholder. senator merkley: you saw the reports, did you ever reveal the problems with this high-pressure sales strategy in terms of fraudulent credit accounts anytime in the course toward 2 million fraudulent accounts? did you ever disclose that to investors. mr. stumpf: let me just say -- senator merkley: well yes or no. mr. stumpf: there were 2 million

accounts we could not rule out as a possibility that they were not authorized. senator merkley: i am so glad you crossed that t and dotted that i. did you ever disclose the fraudulent material to your investors? you brag about the ability to get cross-selling and how that will be beneficial, but the problems that came from the strategy, the very problems that dozens and dozens of people have shared their stories about how it was on the ground and you can only blame them for ethical -- you never disclosed you had a systemic problem. you signed those reports personally, didn't you think that was material when you are n isng this is our big wi our cross-selling shadowy not to disclose it also had a dark side? mr. stumpf: there are a lot of

things our customers do and a lot of businesses we have. the is one ratio and all of positive accounts are off the books. having a customer have a product that they do not need is not helpful, it is not what we want. senator merkley: i want to close by saying i would like to hear about the amount of slamming that went on on overdraft protection since that has come up in a number of employees talk about how they were pressured into adding that. do you have details on that? mr. stumpf: i do not. senator merkley: can you have a staff sending details on that issue? mr. stumpf: i will have my staff instructed to work with your team as quickly as they can. senator merkley: can you get the information for the full committee? mr. stumpf: i do not know exactly what we are talking about. senator merkley: you do not know what overdraft protection is? mr. stumpf: i know we had a

program for overdraft protection -- credit card product with over to our protection, i will get my team to work with your team. i am asking to enter into the record the testimony housed by julie miller and another person who worked at wells fargo. a couple of clarification of points and then two or three more questions. we have discussed who was fired, the employees who were fired and i understand it and for those watching and listening and for the record especially, 90% of the people fired were not management. that means they were tellers, $12-$15 personal bankers. most of the people fired were not branch managers or regional managers. on second there is a mentioned that only credit cards would affect credit scores and the answer to one of these questions

, but if funds were moved out of a checking account and it bounced, that could affect credit scores. why it may narrowly be only credit cards it really isn't. a couple of questions. senator scott asked about where employees can go with concerns and it sounded from whistleblower lawsuits that an ethics complaint often resulted in managers condoning this behavior. is that true? mr. stumpf: i do not believe that is true. senator brown: how do you register and ethics complaint? mr. stumpf: as i understand how our ethics line works you call -- it is an anonymous call and is handled by a third party outside of the company who does work on that and reports it to the company. mr. stumpf: i would like more on that because my understanding is

initially you have to confront your supervisor who has much to say about it. now that we know what we do, will was further -- will worst fargo will wells continued -- the fine print of so many of these contracts. will wells fargo continue to thatthe position in court arbitration covering real accounts will apply to fraudulent ones and customers will be forced into arbitration rather than having access to the courts? mr. stumpf: i have instructed our team to do whatever it takes to take care of these customers. i will have to talk to my legal team. senator brown: my understanding of what has happened in the past , this mandatory arbitration clauses which many of us do not think fair generally in most consumers do not understand that they are part of a mandatory even know what it is an part of

a mandatory arbitration arrangement that that has been applied to these fraudulent accounts in addition to the ones that were not fraudulent. understand that is what happened and i hope your answer is specifically in response to that. mr. stumpf: again, i will talk to our team and get back to you. i am not an expert on that. stoler brown: this kerry -- carrie tolstedt reported directly to you, how frequently did you talk? mr. stumpf: we had weekly meetings. senator brown: in 2007 when you both took your respective roles none of this firing for fraudulent accounts -- did none of this ever come of it -- in your weekly or more than weekly meetings? being atf: i remember least making an impression upon me in 2013. senator brown: but from 2007 when you had your respective

roles, for six years regular meetings with one of your most managers missed discussing of a thousand people a year beginning and 2011, but we may go earlier than that we think. those discussions you have no recall that that ever came up? mr. stumpf: not the way it had in 2013. .enator brown: ok over the past 10 years your banks has -- bank has had a proper -- approximately 39 enforcement actions many related to failure to serve or abusive conduct toward customers and investors. you talk much about wells culture and how proud you are and it's ethics. what does this say if you have had 39 enforcement actions what does it say about your culture and compliance programs? mr. stumpf: we have more work to do and we are trying very hard

to build out all of the compliance and we need to treat customers fairly and to make sure we do things right every day. senator brown: last question. we know about the 5300 employees you say who committed -- many people appear have said the pressure on them was so great that they did things they should not have or maybe apparently you said -- i think he said they deserve to be fired. what about the people who -- understanding, too, that is 5300 and there were hundreds more who refused to cheat or quit because they do not want to be a part of this and saw what happened to others. what about the people who got fired for not meeting goals that you are now saying were ill-advised? there was a significant number

of people who were fired for not meeting their goals and now you say those goals were ill advised . what do you do to make those employees -- how do you identify them and how many are there and what you do to make those employees? mr. stumpf: i do not know about those numbers and i do not know widespreadcant or that is and i will get back to you on that. senator brown: more precisely, i expected you not to know that number, but that is one cometh there are a hundred or a thousand. for those that were fired for not meeting the goals you say are now ill advised to you have plans to make them whole? mr. stumpf: i will have to talk to our team. i do not know the numbers and frankly, i have not worked closely -- senator brown: in your mind and your conscience, does it say those people were fired because they did not reach goals and the

goals were a little biased, shouldn't you make it up to them? mr. stumpf: i know where you are going with your line of questioning and i am trying to be cooperative, i just haven't talked to our hr team and i do not know the numbers are the situation or other things involved. senator brown: i am less concerned with the numbers than the morality of it and i would like to ask you to do this. once you have made the determination of how many there are, i would like you to make them whole and if you are not willing to make them whole i would like a written response about why you made the decision not to make them whole. mr. stumpf: i will talk to the team and i will get back to you. >> senator menendez. senator menendez: let me give you a real-life exams -- example of me talk about scores being hurt. accounts were opened in customers names without their acquiescence, knowledge, including credit cards, of her

daughter who was just starting college. she has a negative consequence on her credit score which is not been resolved by wells fargo. you got the wrong person when he did to this lady because she happened to be a former staffer at the new jersey division of staffing and insurance and when she called your company and asked for the fraud decision -- fraud department she was told to call customer service. to this day the question of your daughter's credit score who is starting college is affected. there are below people here who wells fargo who's not -- has not responded to. is cross-selling and industrywide reality as evidenced by wells fargo or is it unique to wells fargo? mr. stumpf: i do not know what other companies do. i know we view it as an important metric as it relates to depth of relationship. senator menendez: you do not know if other banks do this? you don't review what your

competition is doing? you don't have any idea if they are doing cross-selling? you said it was not a material of an senator merkley. mr. stumpf: not a material financial event. senator menendez: what about the material event for the sec disclosure you said he never made? mr. stumpf: i am not a lawyer -- thetor menendez: based upon stock for your shareholders it certainly was a material event that should have come forward. carrie tolstedt, and responsible to the questions you said you ceo met withnd the her and said he wanted to move in a different direction and she decided to leave. that sounds a lot like you can either leave or you are going to be fired, maybe, or is it that you created a situation to give her the option to leave because you were concerned about what she might say about practices of

the banks and higher-ups? tim talked ton mrs. sloan and the chief operating officer talked to her and said we wanted to go a different direction there were a number of things different in the business and we had not made enough along with my consultation enough progress here and she was term eligible and decided to retire. senator menendez: you had no concerns about what she may say in front of the senate or any other entity undergrowth about what was known or not known? , what wereyou this the repercussions of not meeting sales quotas besides not getting the numbers -- bonus? can you tell me came under discipline for failing to meet sales goals, how many were terminated? mr. stumpf: i do not have the numbers. senator menendez: i think it is important to know those numbers.

he did not know how many people you terminated -- you know how many people you terminated that you said did the wrong thing, but you do not know how many people were terminated when they did not meet the overwhelming cooker boiler you put them under. i would like you to get those numbers to the committee. mr. stumpf: i will talk to our team. senator menendez: you said to senator scott that of course there were opportunities, you could raise your hand and there was an anonymous ethics line. do you read your e-mails? mr. stumpf: i read my e-mails. senator menendez: i would like to read an e-mail one of my constituents sent to you. she was a branch manager at wells fargo and i spoke to her yesterday about her experiences at wells fargo. in 2011 she wrote to you i am currently -- i am quoting now "i am currently an assistant vice president manager in northern jersey, i have been an employee

.f what cobia --wachovia as a team member i feel hurt with this company, there are challenges team members are faced with and those should not be a reason to move money from one account to another and to full the motivator, the person you had to go through who constantly was badgering you about whether you had opened enough accounts that we had accounts. these funds were moved to show growth when in actuality there was no net gain to the company's deposit base is wrong. in past months i was based -- placed on warning for not meeting these goals and the reasons bankers underneath me do not is i will not tolerate the movement of existing money just because we need checking account solutions and profit proxy to .ove up -- to the motivator these accounts make no sense for the customer."

did you read that e-mail? mr. stumpf: i do not remember that one. senator menendez: ok, well she was fired. so much for the safe haven and so much for -- she went to the ceo of the company about as good as it gets and she found no they haven there. 2012e ask you this, in wells fargo then and now the biggest loan company agreed to -- settle against the lawsuit that they discriminated against wall -- african-americans. an investigation by the department of justice's civil --hts decision -- division wells fargo into subpar mortgages. when i look at this history i get concerned with what is going on here. do you have demographics of

those customers who were hurt in those processing can you share it with the committee? mr. stumpf: let me go back to that particular case. i regret that, that wasn't done through a wholesale business and other people outside of our company. we were closing them and we shut down that division. in this case, when we take applications or do applications agecredit card, we capture and it is skewed toward younger to middle age americans. senator menendez: i would suggest you reach for item 36d on page nine of the complaint filed against wells fargo describing a wells fargo gaming practice of targeting individuals holding mexican consular cards. mr. stumpf: i don't -- i will look at that. >> senator schumer.

senator schumer: i apologize to the witness, it has been a busy morning. first come i want to say and i know other people have spoken about in terms of rescinding the bonuses, to the average american, it seems appalling that someone could make such -- someone who could make such large mistakes could be rewarded of seech an u amount of money. i know this has bee discussed. overall your bank has a good reputation. for the reputation of your bank, the value of your shares, as well as relationships with customers, i would urgently urge you to not allow those bonuses to occur. for thejust a statement record.

i would like to talk a little b because the cfp they have done incredible work over the past five years. this case exemplifies why the cfpb was created. the consumer financial protection bureau was formed to ensure that financial institutions, who harm consumers through deceptive practices, are held accountable and consumers are made whole again. in fact, it has gone $12 billion in relief and restitution. today's hearing reminds us why it was formed. and practices promoted at wells fargo were very wrong and bad, as i'm sure you said. the workingd environment at branches in the

country, including new york. then the financial damage, actions violated consumer trust. it have to work long and hard to regain the trust of consumers. givend just ask you, you what you have been through, and i know has not been pleasant, you agree that federal b serve as like cfp valuable role in terms of consumer protections struggle a lot of people on the other side of the i'll want to get rid of or greatly reduce the power of the cfpb. mr. stumpf: we share the values of all of our regulators. senator schumer: city think it is necessary? mr. stumpf: again, it is created by congress, and we agreed to work with them.

ok.tor schumer: do you believe the reforms -- i will let the answer speaks for itself. we think the cfpb has done an outstanding job. ok. do you believe the reforms -- wd the need for it. andbelieve that the reforms goals needed under the consent agreement will allow wells to go back on a path of protecting consumer's interest? mr. stumpf: yes. we have a lot of work to do. senator schumer: will you work with the cfpb to ensure that customers who were negatively impacted will be made home? -- whole? mr. stumpf: yes. senator schumer: were you aware

of the cross selling? they were. they were on this case before your top management discovered this. mr. stumpf: i don't know that. senator schumer: director cord here- the director will be shortly. we will ask him if that was the case. finally, do you believe the actions taken by the cfpb will the two other financial institutions to reevaluate and reconsider their own cross-selling practices? mr. stumpf: i have no idea on that. senator schumer: i think they will. i hope you would come around to the view that it is a necessary part of our system of banking. thank you for your questions.

you made the comment that i'm on the human resources and compensation committee. i just want to clarify that. senator schumer: is that the committee in charge of the bonuses? makesumpf: it recommendations to the full board. of course, i'm not a member of the full board. senator schumer: i would urge you to have the people on these committees do what we asked. thank you for holding this hearing and being so generous about time. i really appreciate you holding this hearing. know, some of my colleagues that you a letter

last week about the board's plan to call back compensation for senior executives who were responsible for overseeing this scam. wells fargo supplied us with a some of my colleagues that you a letter last week about the board's plan response yesterday. action came from somebody else in the company, which i guess is another example of holding yourself accountable. i want to focus now on the mysterious circumstances ms. whole studs retirement in -- holes in july.tirement she was in charge of all of the 5300 employees who were fired and she oversaw the creation of 2 million fake accounts. in july of this year, just two months before the settlement was announced, she retired at age 56. you indicated in the letter, responding to our letter, that she walks away with over $90 million in stocks, stock options, and awards. fortune magazine says it is

million.about $125 according to fortune, if she had been fired, instead of retiring, she would have had to forfeit as much as $45 million of that award. the response to our letter confirms that you knew of this scandal before she retired. said, "senior management and the board for aware of the pending litigation and investigation and discussions with our regulators relating to cells practices when she indicated her decision to retire." accurate? were you personally aware of the massive problems that occurred under her watch in july when she announced her retirement? mr. stumpf: i was aware we were involved in discussions with the

pb,y attorney and the cf guess. senator warren: you had indication that was a massive problem? if you knew this, did you consider firing her before she retired? mr. stumpf: at the time, she was reporting to our president and chief operating officer take senator warren: it is a simple question. you knew there was a problem, did you consider firing her? mr. stumpf: no. seriously?ren: you found out that one of your divisions created 2 million fake accounts and cheated thousands of your customers and you did not once consider firing her ahead of her retirement? mr. stumpf: in fact, when i look at her full body of work and the customer loyalty improvement and customer service -- all the work

that was done, she chose to retire. also, one other comments. you neverrren: considered firing her? stead has told s retired but is staying with the firm through the end of the year. in response to our letter, the "shen writing it states, is eligible to be considered for our 2016 annual incentive award. incentive award for doing a great job in 2016? that is unbelievable. you are the chairman and ceo. you believe it would be t toopriate for this tolsted get another bonus on top of the

million she has already gotten for her role in this massive scam? mr. stumpf: the board will consider that. prejudice theto board. senator warren: i do not understand that answer. you have already made changes to the compensation scheme for thousands of employees. you have said here today and talked about that. you have removed sales quotas, i think you told us. why can that be done across the entire day but a question about cutting compensation for a highly placed executive who oversaw a massive fraud takes long deliberation -- why is that? mr. stumpf: because there is a board-government process, and we want that to work properly. fired overtired

-- senator warren: i'm sorry, i understand if she was fired, she would not have access to a large part of her compensation. you will her walk out of the door with retirement. i don't understand. how do you explain this to your shareholders? mr. stumpf: there is a process that the board goes through. they will do that. warren: i do not understand. you keep saying the board, the board, as if these are strangers that you met in a dark alley. "the chairmanws, shall reside at all meetings of the board or go you are able to make changes, why can you not make a change here? mr. stumpf: a not on the human resources committee of the board. they have their own governing structure. we want that to perceive in the process that we have. will do thisn: we

your way. the letter asked a number of questions about climax -- of pays, on a number including yours. you are the chairman of the board. will you personally support the client back of all or part of lstedt's paid? mr. stumpf: i will not try to influence or prejudice the board. senator warren: you have absolutely no opinion on this? mr. stumpf: i will not opine on this. senator warren: you will sell say, lie, steal? mr. stumpf: we've never say do those kinds of things. senator warren: but if you do them, you can count on

chairmanstumpft to not say don't get your bonus. your actions are, people do this, and you will not take a single step two shut it down. i will ask the question again. will you support clawing back any or all of the pay for the person in charge of compliance, which we have not talked about much today -- the person who is supposed to be responsible that the rink is following the law. will you have any recommendation about that person? mr. stumpf: i will have the board to their process. senator warren: you will never have any recommendation at all? mr. stumpf: whatever the board does, i will accept and support. senator warren: you are not passive here. if you have no opinions on the most massive fraud that has hit this bank is the beginning of time, how can you continue to

collect a paycheck as chairman of the board? mr. stumpf: first of all, i disagree that this is massive fraud. secondly, the board will do their work, and i will not prejudice their work. i will support whatever they come up with. you accepted all along, as this fraud. , all of the performance bonuses on the cross selling at the heart of this. you launched -- watched your own stock go up over $200 million based in part on exactly this massive fraud. you pumped into wall street and said, we are doing such a great , youross-selling here should tell everybody to buyer stock. now, you turn around and say, i shall remain passive and simply accept what wells fargo wants to

do. in 2008, wall street promised change. it looks like it is business as usual. a giant pink cheeks the little guys and the executive line their own pockets. you make it clear that wall street will not change until we make a change. thank you. >> thank you for appearing today. we have some questions for the record. we have another panel. i hope you will answer these questions directly. we have a number of them. mr. stumpf: thank you very much. >> thank you. scarlet: you have an watching sessionhour 45 minutes chaired by senator shelby, who we will be speaking with later this afternoon. a lot of headlines there. senator elizabeth warren capping off their pushing him to give

some kind of opinion or stance on whether he would support the in chargef the person of retail banking operations because of her role, her oversight of this division. matt: it is very interesting. he is so reluctant to make any decisions about the behavior of his top level management, get, time and time again, in that testimony, he stated how disappointed he was with the decisions and actions and behavior of the lower-level employees. it seems he finds it very easy to make a judgment on the 5000 or more than 5000 employees that they fired, but finds it really difficult to make a judgment on stedt, who got a

hundred million dollar bonus last year and earlier this year retired. in fact, it seems he was going to make no decision even on the board. he is chairman of the board that will make the other board members decide, without giving his own opinion. at least it sounded like that. warren was,zabeth again, at the end there, pressing on accountability, taking it in a new direction. let's listen to what she had to say. senator warren: you have not resigned, you have not returned a single nickel of your personal or in earnings -- personal earnings. instead, your definition of accountable is push the blame to your low-level employees who do not have the money for a fancy pr firm to defend themselves? it is gutless leadership. matt: from the first round. he endured two rounds of that.

one of the things that was not really made clear, and probably the most important aspect of how muchonsumers damage was done. i believe senator menendez -- actually brown, of ohio was saying, if you have money move from one account to another company don't know about, that could result in a bounce check and could negatively affect your credit score. the firing of more than 500,000 employees, he does not think

that is a massive fraud. massive fraud? scarlet: there were several instances of direct questions, and as elizabeth warren pointed, he punted, he did not have the information on hand and would have to get his team to work on it with the senate taking team. it makes it sound like he is not personally involved. matt: that's right, that is his strategy saying, i have to work with mike team. he seemed to not know how an ethics complaint worked at his company. heu think that would have -- would have figured that out. he had not talked to hr about the employees who were fired about not making the quotas. scarlet: and don't forget, he was going to let the board make a final decision.

matt: he does not seem to know what his competitors are up to either. scarlet: these are all questions we will make to senator shelby later on. he is of course chairman of the senate thinking committee. that will take place at 1:30 eastern time. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: this is bloomberg markets. i'm scarlet fu here with matt milner. we want to give you a quick look .t shares of wells fargo this is the first back to back advance for the stock. it is up about 2.3 percent, although today it is certainly off the best levels of the session. it opened higher today but has since drifted lower. still up about 2.5%. matt: i'm going to go head and show this chart, the two day chart of wells fargo, but i will

normalize it to goldman sachs, bank of america, jp morgan. you can see how wells fargo has done compared to its peers. you can see it is doing considerably better than the other inc. stocks. of course, this is today and yesterday's trading, against the backdrop of how poorly they did last week. scarlet: down 6.8% last week. matt: maybe people thought it was oversold. this is very interesting, f'secially after john stump testimony. scarlet: he refused to ask a lot of the questions, promising to get back to them, as requested. unscathed escaped

from the crisis. it was not selling exotic products. it was really going after the bread-and-butter business of lending, particularly home loans. it is the biggest homeland in the country. that paid off very well. this was very easy to understand. warren buffett basically giving it his stamp of approval. matt: it would be very interesting to hear his take on testimony right now. considering he is such a salt of the earth guy, but he did not answer a number of questions. a.b. he would say, that is the right strategy testifying in front of congress. it was very long, the questions were aggressive. two rounds of elizabeth warren must be very difficult for any wall street ceo.

that was interesting back-and-forth between chuck schumer, senator schumer from new york and the ceo of wells fargo. schumer was trying to get him to say that the cfpb is important and he agrees with their mission. scarlet: that he will work with them to do what is right. matt: he said, we will work with mandated.at you scarlet: because of the law. matt: but, he would not agree it is a good thing. he was not going to get behind it and schumer had to come out and say -- scarlet: i guess that speaks volumes. right? let's listen to one exchange here between one of the senators and the ceo of wells fargo. >> to the average american, it seems appalling that somebody who could make such large suchkes should be rewarded .n unseen amount of money

for the reputation of your bank, the value of your shares, as well as the relationship with customers, i would urge you to not allow those bonuses to occur . scarlet: this is one of those things where they have not yet decided, the board of wells fargo, what they will do about that. that is what the senators were urging, some kind of clawback. matt: i just got an e-mail reminding me that warren buffett owns 10% of the company. we will touch of richard shelby at 1:30. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: good afternoon. with breaking

news on wells fargo. outrage after the bank's employees openly all the rice accounts for customers that the customers didn't know about. wereands of employees fired. none of the senior management has been fired. the senior executive in charge of that division and a charge of 2 million accounts that were fraudulently opened walked away with $125 million after she retired months before the settlement letter was made public. eric is on capitol hill and has an covering this event for us. it seemed most of the questions

were fairly aggressive. >> of all the hearings i have attended and i have attended a number involving wall street ceos, that was the most merciless beat down of a hearing i can imagine. they turned him into a piñata. and of course, he had no good answers because there were no good answers to be found but wells fargo has acknowledged this is inexcusable. emphasize the bipartisan nature of that. there were so many memorable down ins that may go senate hearing anthony between senator shelby and senator stumped over what stumped new was and wasn'tat communicated to the board and

regulators and shall be also grilled stump over this issue. grilled stump on why he wasn't going back before 2009 to find out if fake accounts were being opened up in the name of wells fargo customers, perhaps even going back as far as the 1998 merger. tumey grilled stump on the definition of fraud. for example, if someone had an application for a credit card in his name and what impact would that have on the mortgage rate for somebody and we had senator warren. buildf the hearing was a

up to what senator warren would ask. she grilled stump over accountability, specifically why he hadn't step down, returned a nickel of his compensation and why had in any other members of senior management in fired. here's one excerpt of senator warren's exchange. >> this is about accountability. you should resign. you should give back the money you took while this scam was going on and you should be criminally investigated by the department of justice and the securities and exchange commission. is worth pointing that john stumpf rejected the accusation that this was a scam, that it was widespread and systemic and said it affected only 1% of wells fargo's 268 .housand employees

that didn't go very far with senators who kept coming back to the fact it was 5300 employees who had been fired and some 2 million accounts and across the country with a concentration in california, arizona and new jersey. and a senator from montana said something that hasn't happened in 10 years in uniting this committee and not in a good way." matt: i felt like the senators were really well armed with facts and had done a lot of investigation themselves. they seemed to have e-mails and contacts with so many fired employees. i don't want to say it's not typical but it was impressive that the senate seen to know so much about the witnesses a job, even more it seemed than he did. >> i would be careful about giving too much credit to

senators. i think the credit goes to their staff for doing the hard work to dig up the facts and e-mails. there are differences that can be made between the kind of conduct wells fargo has acknowledged having perpetrated and what we saw other banks do. for example, jpmorgan in the london whale case or goldman sachs in the timberwolves hearing that carl levin held when he challenged tom montag and other executives about a deal that was described in terms i cannot repeat on television. those happened in the wholesale divisions of those banks.

the senators don't understand that part of the banking industry nearly as well as they understand main street. this isn't just red meat for a senate committee like the senate banking committee, it's something the senators can understand and something they are hearing from directly from their constituents. several senators quoted their constituents let written them letters, saying i worked at wells fargo and was fired after having raised objections direct you to the ceo or i'm a customer of wells fargo and my daughter at university had a fraudulent account opened in her name and it has affected her credit score and i want something done. the kind of thing you can't get with the london whale. >> this is something eminently relatable not just to the senators but to anyone with a banking account. scarlet: this is of course the

chairman of the senate banking committee that led the interrogation of wells fargo ceo and chairman john stump earlier today. >> it will be interesting to ask him what he thinks about the possibility of prosecution or change in regulation. to the trading day. let's head over to the markets desk. julie: i want to start with wells fargo. wells fargo shares have been holding up relatively well. today, they are up by about 1%. they had fallen as news of these firings surfaced. the stock was upgraded to an rarelyght today, saying have the shares been more inexpensive, trading at about 1.3 times book right now. that is one of the things that is perhaps a catalyst for some of the buying we are seeing for

the shares of stock we are seeing much change. this treading water as investors await commentary and decision-making from the federal reserve and bank of japan. note a couple things and commodities. we have been watching oil prices. there is a reversal in the price of oil. we saw a reversal higher after we got back commentary. now you will see oil is making a round trip and going back down again. natural gas hit three dollars for the first time in 16 months. you can see it's up above three right now. end to had a hot september. a live air-conditioner use. -- a lot of air-conditioner use. it's time to shift gears

away from wells fargo and what you are doing with your air-conditioner to the central are double-header that we looking forward to tomorrow. the federal reserve and bank of japan will announce the outcome of their policy meeting. analysts expect the fed to stand past. here with us now and you tell us her expectations is later range, senior economist at fs investments. let me first ask you about the boj. exciting to wait for more negative rates or maybe even a pathway to normalization. >> they are really pushing the limits of what we remotely consider to be monetary policy.

low productivity, low inflation, low growth, we are all looking at japan as this petri dish of what monetary policy can do. my expectation is they will probably propose more of the same, negative rates. i think what we will be watching for is whether or not central affect whatuly businesses do, what consumers do. it is the biggest bdc lender. loans to thended home company to martha stewart and jessica simpson. how important is this fed meeting for any fed meeting this dor to what your customers

and how much of an appetite they have for borrowing? >> my strong message to our client is not to get distracted by meeting by meetings, will they go or not, because i try to remind people that a quarter of a percentage point will have virtually no impact on the economy. most of our investments have a very long term horizon and i think that's so important because even people who get paid lots of money to trade this stuff and who are experts in the market get it wrong. especially when a lot of these markets are arranged. i'm always trying to keep people focused on finding growth in the economy, funding opportunity because we are in $18 trillion economy. there's still a lot of in the smith opportunity. a highermittedly have end roster of clients. compared to the average american

who will buy a house or be affected by a change in mortgage rates, do you think this fed decision will affect loan demand or what people are paying to the extent they actually notice it? >> that is one of the big issues. we are in a desert of yield across the board and the u.s. is in a better situation than the rest of the globe. what we try to do is provide income solutions for our clients because right now, it's all about income. more than anything else, i think .he fed is in do no harm mode do no harm not just to the u.s. but to the rest of the been because the u.s. had one for several years now. it seems increasingly reluctant to be the engine of global growth.

is that how they view it when they come out with their statements? >> the rest of the world is cutting rates or actively providing liquidity. i do think that gives them a little more room to maneuver when it comes to raising rates. it's harder for them to do harm. on the other hand, when the u.s. economy is the main engines of growth, i think anything that remotely would lead global markets to worry about a u.s. economic slowdown will really affect market sentiment and we're seeing volatility chris beck into the markets. matt: what about volatility. the fed constantly tells us

about their strategy, constantly sort of lays out what it sees as the path to normalization and never does any of it. do they risk losing credibility? the fed has gotten their own call wrong. two years ago, they thought the 3%. would be close to to me at best, it shows there's of confusion and different messaging on the part of the fed. they're starting to have a real issue communicating with the markets. matt: you can look at the. plot on the bloomberg. scarlet: having said that, you have a market in which bond

yields have tom back up. what is your interpretation of that rising yield? uncertaintyd to over whether said is going to do or is it something bigger and broader like a regime change? >> i think we spend a lot of time looking at the central bank and they have a tremendous amount of power over market sentiment. the big risk off move we have seen in 2016 time of -- kind of came out of left field. we had the big chinese equities and the brexit move. we have been here before with the fed saying we are on hold for this meeting but we want to raise rates and in him -- maybe a couple meetings from now. they have pushed to the sidelines. scarlet: thank you for joining

us. don't miss our coverage tomorrow are the fed's decision. we will be live starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern time.

scarlet: you are watching bloomberg. matt: this is your global business report. as those new president -- brazil's new president talking tough when it comes to reforming the economy, valentin reduce spending and repair the budget. the two airlines will take a number of steps to increase cooperation. the: and we look at challenges of keeping the u.s. supreme court free from political pressure even in a

highly polarized election year. the president of brazil confident lawmakers will approve a cap on government spending by the end of the year. michelle tamir took office last month. she spoke with eric about brazil the economy and how long it will take to eliminate the budget deficit. it will be two or three years before we totally eliminate the ago, i saw some time a very telling research finding. matt: social security reform should be pass by next year. scarlet: batons and air china have signed an agreement, giving .he airlines a better grip

google is preparing to unveil a homemart from in automation hardware. the company is hosting an event into francis to october 4. there are reports google may ditch nexus brand. the company sent out a tweet #madebygoogle.tag is madee supreme court up of justices that remain on the court until voluntary retirement or death. the system was designed to keep these judges free from election pressures. a vacancy has raised concerns partisan politics is tainting its work. here is the situation. the course decision on issues including race relations and presidential reach have become more polarized in recent years and its public approval rating is leading. donald trump called for justice

ruth bader ginsburg to resign after she said she didn't want to think about the prospect of a trump presidency. she then said she regretted her 11 buys comment. this intensify the campaign spotlight already turned on the court because of an empty seat. president obama dominated merrick garland to the court to replace antonin scalia. at the moment, republican lawmakers have said they are determined not to let garland take scalia's place. if decisions have frequently shifted the nation's political direction from brown versus board of education in 1954, which desegregated public schools, to roe versus wade in 1973, which legalized abortion in every state. supporters of lifetime tenure say it allows the views of justices to evolve far from the ideologies of the president, who

named them with no fear of retribution. critics note the court lacks external supervision so there's no recourse when justices appear to violate ethics laws or hear cases in which they have conflicts of interest. reformers say one solution is term limits. either way, the supreme court is part of the current u.s. election cycle. you can read more about the supreme court and all our quick takes on the bloomberg and that is your global business report. head to bloomberg.com for more stories.

scarlet: this is bloomberg markets. president obama not about to write quietly into the sunset as his time in the white house winds down. he is diving head first into the 2016 election, launching a

campaign blitz for hillary clinton that hasn't been seen in the modern era. is miketalk more dorney, who joins us from washington. this is all about preserving his legacy. like they have been thinking about doing this for more than a that electing a democrat will preserve his policy achievement like a obamacare and the treaty with a an and willir make the name obama mean something, that philosophy mean something, over time. scarlet: he made it clear when he was speaking to a blog audience that he would consider it a personal insult that they didn't show up to vote for clinton. what i found interesting was the president has a pretty high favorability rating, approval rating, which i hadn't realized. obama has abarack better approval rating for any president since world war ii at

this era except eisenhower, reagan, and bill clinton. unlike reagan and bill clinton, he's not going into the election with scandals. unlike eisenhower, he doesn't disdain the nominee. it's a really unique circumstance with the president having a high public approval rating and he's all in for the candidate. more important, among democrats, and particularly among african-americans and young people, both are very pro-obama. scarlet: thank you so much for joining us. coming up next, new brazilian president michelle timer return -- but tends the u.s.. she won general assembly for the first time.

matt: we are live from bloomberg world headquarters in new york city. i'm matt miller. scarlet: i'm scarlet fu. let's begin with the headlines

on bloomberg first world news. mark: hillary clinton leads donald trump 50% to 45% among likely voters. that's according to an nbc news survey monkey weekly election tracking survey. went to leeds trump 45% to 40% among likely voters. gary johnson has 10% and jill stein with 4%. the u.n. has suspended all convoys in syria after airstrikes on a trucks killed at least one dozen people. the attack could endanger the already fragile cease-fire ordered by the u.s. and russia. the syrian military said the troops had failed to stop washington says it appears to extend the troops while moscow says it could still be salvaged. 40% of the population of somalia, 5 million people, aren't getting enough food. the report does the number of

people who are food insecure has increased by 300,000 since february with more than 300,000 children under the age of five acutely at my motorist. -- acutely malnourished. i'm mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. brazil: the president of is confident lawmakers will approve a cap on government spending by the end of the year. michelle tamura took office -- took office last month. mr. president, you want to cap government spending in real terms as well as make social security more restrictive. ambitioustwo

proposals that both require constitutional change and they're not without opposition. let us talk about timing, a timeline. realistically, when will these two important reforms be passed into law? >> these are two difficult reforms but they are essential. precisely because they are essential, i believe we will pass these issues or subject matters in congress and regarding measures that cap government spending, that may be renewed. regard, i'm absolutely certain we will be able to pass that measure before the end of this year. the other reform is social security and pension reform, which will be submitted this year, but it will certainly be passed next year.

a timelinee or less that is required for these bills to be passed. they therazilians government isn't spending enough on education, on health care. if you cap spending, that means, unless you take it from somewhere else, you won't be able to spend more on health care and schools. >> that is an argument often used by the opposition, because if you read the content of the bill, he would see the nature, there is an overall spelling without any reduction to health care and education. we have already applied the .eiling unlike what was said, we have increased the budget

appropriations for health and education. they will not be at all somehow harm the constitutional ceiling. >> how long will it take to close the budget deficit? how many years? i think it has to be years before brazil has a primary surplus. >> that is true. with a deficit of 217 billion. we have established managers to .educe the deficit all of that is the result of fiscal economic policy lowering inflation and there is also a trend that we will reach the center of the inflation target. create jobs.to

i must say that some time ago not to long ago, i had a very telling research finding indicating that we had cut the spending ceiling, we would have no deficit what so ever in brazil. >> if we support you relied on for impeachment in congress is fragile, the brazilian people themselves aren't in love with the idea of austerity. how do you maintain the momentum hasthe bold reforms that been announced over the past four months during your term's interim president? the same reforms, domestic as this people and foreign investors are counting on to provide the economy. changing theally business climate in the country.

furthermore, may i state for the we're able to tostablish, managing reestablish trust, which will trigger an inflow of more investment and of course there is some degree of resistance to innovation at times. it all depends to a certain extent on the way we are able to communicate and the way we are able to properly explain reforms. brazilians in the brazilian population beginning to understand these reforms are key and essential to recover, resume hope and trust in the country. scarlet: eric speaking in an exclusive interview with the brazilian president. matt: canister -- canada's minister of trade is touring up in advance of the october 27

signing day for the canada eu free trade deal. the comprehensive trade agreement will open up a market of 500 and customers for canadian companies if they can maneuver through rising antitrade rhetoric that's not only global but in europe as well. >> the story is very tough right now for trade. i would say for the idea of an open, global economy overall. risee seeing very much the of sometimes quite ugly protectionist anti-globalization sentiments in europe. we are seeing a lot of those ceilings being expressed in the u.s. election campaign. matt: canada's trade minister. we bring in pamela ritchie for more perspective on the deal. it's obviously a massive deal.

it's fascinating when it comes at a time the u k may have to give up this kind of access. how long has canada been working on this? >> all of those elements are in this. life spent 2014. the final draft of it translated into all kinds of different languages. all the different governments it isread it and something that still needs ratification. we are aiming for the date of october 27 when more signatures are needed for this. it's meant to bring $12 billion worth of trade into europe and 500 million consumers. critics and they have their doubt. many of those criticisms were voiced over the weekend in germany. kind of outline the resistance that the eu canada

free trade deal has been receiving, particularly in germany. berlin as well less six other cities across germany, there was a total of one of 300,000 people. the message from these protesters, these deals for the eu are not good for germany. broadly concerned that multinational companies will have too much freedom to work with in the eu. concern about food, that medicine, not going through the same checks they go through within the eu. also that there is a real frustration with the dispute resolution framework currently in place for this. inc. some are draft new pieces to clarify how provisions might be carried out. all this said, the german social took allc party head of this in stride and put it to a party vote on monday.

the social democrats are part of the governing coalition of dueling out aand little more and try to prove the point of why this deal needs to go through. on brexit, the argument from the canadian side is the eu needs a win after the disappointment of brexit and they would like to get this rolling before article fifth he is actually triggered. -- 50 is actually triggered. matt: thank you. scarlet: coming up, is the emerging our market due for a correction? why this market has gone from boom to bust. this is bloomberg. ♪

matt: the art market has gone from boom to bust as a seller's bail on their end urging in vestments. boughtstract canvas was for $100,000 in 2014. the painting just sold at auction at an almost 80% discount. so, does painting actually sold. 421 $8,000. worth $20,000.s 100 thousand dollars. this isn't specific to this one artist. for us a statically, but what is going on in the markets. from are looking at this

market perspective. there was a .2 or three years ago when a certain group of artists in their 20's become really hot and investors jump on them and the work was very inexpensive at the time. were tradingrs multiple times and adding to the auctions. then there was one worker that sold for $10,000 in two years later, close to $400,000. a lot of people were doing that. now we are seeing the tail end of it and it's really not a bloodbath. i was at the auction earlier today and the work is selling, but the work we just saw on the screen, it was bought by a collector and art dealer in l.a. for $100,000.

in 2014. now the new price is $24,000. you said he was a little drunk when he bought it. >> no, the heat in the frenzy and the pace of transaction was really heavy. matt: drunk with excitement. scarlet: you are saying it's not a bloodbath, but clearly part of this boom and bust cycle we are seeing in the art world. does this correlate with other kinds of art? are you seeing this elsewhere in the art world? >> or the huge contraction in the general art market. mostly, it's driven by the fact sellers are very nervous and don't want to put their prized picasso's up for sale without guarantees, without certainty the work will sell. the auction houses don't want to

give those guarantees, take on the risk. the contraction is largely at this point. sake, i'm happy the work is selling. seeing now arere closer to what we saw two or three years ago, but they also are a lot of times lower than what the galleries are charging for the same artist. how it will all shake out. scarlet: is there anyone appraising these works that sold originally for 100 thousand dollars? >> the auction house gives an estimate for every artwork. it sold better than its high estimate. in the room,idding but in the same auction, i was

surprised there was one artwork by an artist i wasn't familiar with estimated at $8,000 and sold for $465,000. that was a little crazy. i really haven't seen anything like this. -- $563. matt: you said a lot of these works, for example, use got scott douglash come his painting goes for 100000 and $24,000 but his new works in galleries taking a price higher than that. >> he will have a solo exhibition in new york later next month. that work is priced between $25,000 and $80,000. he's represented by very good galleries. he has dealers in l.a., new

york, hong kong. they all say the new work is being sold. we will see what will happen with that. dealers are there any capitalizing on this downturn in prices? are they setting themselves up for the next cycle when it comes back? i always think there someone in the background trying to maneuver and position themselves for the next upturn. >> there are people like the hubei. -- who by like that. a lot of times, it's very low prices. he said that he is going to be an active higher and seller in this upcoming action. his idea is that if estimates are so low now in a way, they are back to where they were. kind of almost like resetting

the market. people really don't think they have to take a huge risk. the work in our market, it's not a lot of money. i think that there are something like that happening. it will be interesting to see if there is enough demand and people are scared away from this huge volatility. matt: thank you so much. you can read more about the art market at bloomberg pursuits. it's more diverse than the bond market. through the visual destination frog the finest eggs in life. watches, wine, cars. art as well. scarlet: coming, looking for an earnings miracle. we break down if that is at all

possible. this is bloomberg. ♪

matt: this is bloomberg markets. u.s. stock analysts are as earningshe fast expansion since the bull market began. hitting forecast for next or would require s&p 500 companies to increase profits at a rate that hasn't happened since 2011. your to break this down for us is oliver renick. oliver: it's going to take quite a bit not just to get from where we are not to the end of the year but another big jump in 2017. let's take a look at what's happening in terms of valuation in the market. this is a big deal as we start to think about a potentially rising rate environment. and whether or not stocks can continue to go higher from where we are.

whit line is looking at 12-month interval. if you look down here at the purple line, that is shilling your spread between the two. we are at a time right now where the cap has widened out and the current s&p 500 earnings are giving a multiple of about 20 whereas if you price it out for a year, they're such a growth in earnings expected that it brings down the multiple to 18. this is basically showing you , whichential earnings right now are pretty lofty. what you're looking at is the blue line. this will be your earnings and you have the white line my below showing you your current. 106.5 is what we have for eps

right now. now is about 10% so we have to go 10% to the end of 2016 to get to that 117 number. another 13% to get where we project 2017 earnings at $120 a an economic growth to pick up while we sustain that move higher. when you look at what's happening here in the u.s. versus the rest of the world, this is showing you the blue line, which is the msci world ./e

the we are looking at on bottom panel is the spread between those price-earnings. the purple line shows you the pe look at the s&p 500 based on the forward earnings. inre is such a growth priced to worldwide earnings but if you flip it and you talk about right now with the past 12 months, the s&p 500 actually looks cheap. largely a very lofty expectation not just for the u.s. but when the rest of the world. matt: thank you very much for that. he pointed out that not only our expectations for earnings to increase very high, but oil has a really contributed and it could be possible that a lot of analysts are expecting oil

prices to go back up to at least a $60 range in that could contribute positively in the energy segment and also in a lot of industrial segments. i derive so much, that i cannot understand where the demand side of this equation is. scarlet: coming up, richard shelby joining us. he will tell us why wells fargo ceo john stubbs, how he and have thaty trust has been broken by the bank. we will discuss. ♪

vonnie: welcome to bloomberg markets.

david: we are alive and bloomberg world headquarters in new york and covering stories out of san francisco, trinidad, tokyo. stop trying to hold onto gains as traders await key decisions with a fed decision exactly 24 hours away. there are big lines for the new iphone seven but one of the product is not the huge blockbuster is expected to be? we look at how the new phone will be impacting the telecom giants like verizon and at&t. and the oracle ceo is our guest from oracle world. markets close in about two hours. let's turn to julie hyman. bouncingocks have been around as they were yesterday and a tight trading range. investors are waiting for central-bank action or commentary tomorrow from the fed and bank of japan. we have thma