Jamie Dimon Is Now a Billionaire
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33e06/33e06e38c8dc170acba42e0c434e2c92c1ed7335" alt=""
The vast majority of the billionaires in the U.S. made their money in one of two ways—they started a company, or they inherited their fortune or business.
But Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, has shown another path to riches. As a corporate manager, he may have amassed enough stock and boosted the share price enough to join the 10-figure club.
According to Bloomberg, Dimon is now worth $1.1 billion. His stake in JPMorgan through shares and options is worth $485 million and he also has real estate valued at $32 million. In addition, he has wealth from "an investment portfolio seeded by proceeds" from his previous stint at Citigroup.
Related: America’s Highest Paid CEO: It’s Not Who You Think
While highly unusual, Dimon isn't the first billionaire professional manager or executive who gained his wealth from stock in a company he didn't found or take public. The first manager-billionaire in the U.S. was believed to be Roberto Goizueta, CEO of Coca-Cola during the 1980s and 1990s. During his tenure, Coca-Cola's stock jumped more than 70-fold and Goizueta had stock and options totaling more than $1 billion.
More recently, the billionaire managers have been from finance. James Cayne, the colorful CEO and chairman of Bear Stearns became a billionaire on paper—before Bear Stearns collapsed during the financial crisis.
Richard Fuld, CEO of Lehman Brothers, also became a paper billionaire in 2007—before the investment bank became the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history in 2008.
Plenty of other finance chiefs have become billionaires—from hedge-funders to private-equity kings Steve Schwarzman and David Rubenstein. Citi founder Sandy Weill was a billionaire, but he created the company.
So while he may not be the first, Dimon may make history another way—by becoming the first manager-billionaire in finance to run a bank that thrives for decades after his leadership.
This article originally appeared on CNBC.
Read more from CNBc.
CNBC Charts the top 100 firms
Shift from slaes to planning fuels fee-only business
Harvard Receives Laegest Ever Gift
Chart of the Day: Why US Fertility Rates Are Falling
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aeb8b/aeb8b57231c3c9a03eb2dd24b9b5e81fe5d3bfdf" alt="9) Babysit 9) Babysit"
U.S. fertility rates have fallen to record lows for two straight years. “Because the fertility rate subtly shapes many major issues of the day — including immigration, education, housing, the labor supply, the social safety net and support for working families — there’s a lot of concern about why today’s young adults aren’t having as many children,” Claire Cain Miller explains at The New York Times’ Upshot. “So we asked them.”
Here are some results of the Times’ survey, conducted with Morning Consult. Read the full Times story for more details.
A Record Low 47% of US Adults Say They're 'Extremely Proud' to Be American
Gallup says that, for the first time in the 18 years it’s been asking U.S. adults how proud they are to be Americans, fewer than half say they are "extremely proud." Just 47 percent now say they’re extremely proud, down from 70 percent in 2003.
Another 25 percent say they’re “very proud” — but the combined 72 percent who say they’re extremely or very proud is also the lowest Gallup has recorded. Pride levels among liberals and Democrats have plunged since 2017. Overall, 74 percent of Republicans and just 32 percent of Democrats call themselves “extremely proud” to be American.
Pfizer Has Raised Prices on 100 of Its Products
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/003f7/003f79b405b46eae1daccb5a13d3608f6d74bdce" alt="FILE PHOTO: The Pfizer logo is seen at their world headquarters in New York, U.S. April 28, 2014. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo FILE PHOTO: The Pfizer logo is seen at their world headquarters in New York, U.S. April 28, 2014. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo"
Weeks after President Trump said that drugmakers were about to implement “voluntary massive drops in prices” — reductions that have yet to materialize — Pfizer has raised prices on 100 of its products, The Financial Times’s David Crow reports:
“The increases were effective as of July 1 and in most cases were more than 9 per cent — well above the rate of inflation in the US, which is running at about 2 per cent. … Pfizer, the largest standalone drugmaker in the US, did decrease the prices of five products by between 16 per cent and 44 per cent, according to the figures.”
Crow notes that Pfizer also raised prices on many of its medicines in January, meaning that some prices have been hiked by nearly 20 percent this year. The drugmaker said that it was only changing prices on 10 percent of its medicines and that list prices did not reflect what most patients or insurers actually paid. The net price increase after rebates and discounts was expected to be in the “low single digits,” the company told the FT.
Chart of the Day: Pass-Through Tax Deductions Made Easy
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f448f/f448fbae983faa37b0df62dea87a0a141deae6f1" alt=""
The Republican tax overhaul was supposed to simplify the tax code, but most experts say it fell well short of the goal. Martin Sullivan, chief economist at Tax Analysts, tweeted out a chart of the analysis required to determine whether income qualifies for the passthrough tax deduction of 20 percent, and as you’ll see, it’s anything but simple.
A Conservative Bashes GOP Dysfunction on Spending Cuts
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/23d42/23d42a7a486b848edcc16fec45467bd77e2fb164" alt=""
Brian Riedl, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, offers a blistering critique of congressional Republican’s problems cutting spending:
Since the Republicans took the House in 2011, nearly every annual budget blueprint has promised to balance the budget within a decade with anywhere from $5 trillion to $8 trillion in spending cuts. And yet, you may have noticed, the budget has not moved towards balance. This is because the budget merely sets a broad fiscal goal. To actually cut spending, Congress must follow up with specific legislation to reform Medicare, Medicaid, and all the other targeted programs. In reality, most lawmakers who pass these budgets have no intention whatsoever of cutting this spending. As soon as the budget is passed, the targets are forgotten. The spending-cut legislation is never even drafted, much less voted on.
The annual budget exercise is thus a cynical exercise in symbolism. Congress calculates how much spending must be cut over ten years to balance the budget. Then they pass legislation setting a goal of cutting that amount. Then they move on to other business. It’s like a baseball team announcing that they voted to win the next World Series, and then not showing up to play the season.
Read the full piece at National Review.