Talk:UBS

Tendencious, and misleading link

Tegasaurus94 (talk) 17:24, 8 April 2021 (UTC)The introduction talks about a "legally sanctioned oligopoly" in Swiss banking. That is not only tendencious (I doubt the Swiss regulator would accept such an assertion) but the link to "Banking in Switzerland" does not support this claim.

Yeah, I am inclined to agree. There is nothing to support this in the article or in Banking in Switzerland (which is wikilinked). I am removing this. JBchrch (talk) 19:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Especially since PostFinance is not only an important competitor, it is also considered a nationaly systemic bank. JBchrch (talk) 23:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to update CSR section with more up-to-date information

Could you please review and consider for implementation the below edit (please note I'm a COI editor - I'm happy to introduce the changes myself, however, I don't want to breach Wikipedia rules):

Update Corporate Social Responsibility section with more actual information:

In 2014, UBS published its environmental and social risk policy framework. The framework defines how environmental and social risk is governed and is integrated in management practices as well as client and supplier relationship policies. Since 2014, the firm has taken further steps to apply transparency and reporting standards, which has included increasing climate-related disclosures and supporting initiatives that promote an orderly transition to a low-carbon economy as defined by the Paris Agreement.

UBS was first named global industry leader in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) in 2015 and has held the position through 2020. In 2019, UBS became a founding signatory member of the Principles for Responsible Banking and in 2020, was the first major global financial institution to make sustainable investments the preferred solution for private clients investing globally.

Also in 2020, UBS committed to helping its clients reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in their investment portfolios by 2050 and became a founding member of the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative. This group of 30 major international asset managers pledges to set interim targets for increasing the proportion of assets managed in line with the Paris Agreement. In 2020, UBS was listed on the CDP climate A list.

The UBS Optimus Foundation raised in 2020 a record USD 168 million in donations through its rapid fund-raising response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In support of communities, the firm committed USD 30 million to COVID-19-related aid projects and pursued community affairs activities that reached nearly 520,000 beneficiaries.

Please advise if it is ok for me, an editor with conflict of interest, to implement such change directly.

Best regards, WROanna1862 (talk)

Hi WROanna1862, happy to work with you on this:

• I notice that all the sources provided are WP:PRIMARY source. Since CSR is somewhat promotional in nature (as opposed to accounting figures for instance), it would be preferable if you could source the additions to WP:SECONDARY, such as news articles.
• Large sections of your proposal are unsourced, including the first paragraph, which is almost entirely sourced to a UNFCC source about the Paris Agreement (so effectively unsourced). Could you remedy this?

We'll refine once this is fixed. JBchrch talk 11:43, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi JBchrch, thank you for your reply and I'm sorry for a delayed response (I didn't turn the notifications on - fixed). I'll run a deeper research and will try to provide more secondary sources.

Best, WROanna1862 (talk) 09:22, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Controversies

1. I checked the GA nomination process. There was NONE per say (basically some dude saying it is "GA"/😄). If so, Wikipedia should not be used as a reliable source - at least for UBS...

2. quotation taken from the web: (why is all this sourced and reliable/indisputable information MISSING?). Thanks. 172.58.236.222 (talk) 22:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Holocaust assets (1930s–1998)

In January 1997, Michel Christopher "Christoph" Meili, a night guard at the Union Bank of Switzerland (precursor of UBS) in Zürich, Switzerland, discovered that bank officials were destroying documents about orphaned assets, believed to be the credit balances of deceased Jewish clients whose heirs' whereabouts were unknown, as well as books from the Nazi German Reichsbank.[154] The books listed real-estate records for Berlin property that had been seized by the Nazis, placed in Swiss accounts, and then claimed to be owned by UBS.[155] The destruction of such documents is illegal under Swiss law.[156] This edict was the legal basis and foundation of the Bergier commission, constituted on December 19, 1996. Articles 4, 5, and 7 made the destruction or withholding of documents relating to orphaned assets illegal.

Meili took some of the bank files home, then handed them over to a local Jewish organization, which brought the documents to the police and eventually to the press that subsequently revealed the document destruction.[157] Zurich's authorities opened a judicial investigation against Meili for suspected violations of the Swiss laws on banking secrecy,[158]which is a prosecutable offense ex officio in Switzerland.[159] After Meili and his family reported receiving death threats, they fled to the United States and were granted political asylum.[58][59]

After a US$2.56 billion lawsuit was filed against UBS and other Swiss banks on behalf of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust, a settlement was reached between UBS and other Swiss banks that had laundered Nazi assets totaling US $1.25 billion in August 1998.[160][161][162]

In his book Imperfect Justice, Stuart Eizenstat claimed the "Meili Affair" was important in the decision of Swiss banks to participate in the process of reparations for victims of Nazi looting during World War II. He wrote that the affair "did more than anything to turn the Swiss banks into international pariahs by linking their dubious behavior during and after the war to the discovery of a seemingly unapologetic attempt to cover it up now by destroying documents."[163] Eizenstat believes that the affair influenced the Swiss Bankers Association (SBA) decision to create a Humanitarian Fund for the Victims of the Holocaust,[164] as well as being one of a series of events that influenced the calling of the 1997 London Conference on Nazi Gold.[165]

U.S. trade embargoes (2003–2004)

On May 10, 2004, UBS was fined US$100 million by the U.S. Federal Reserve for illegally transferring funds from an account set up by the Federal Reserve at UBS to Iran, Cuba, and other countries under U.S. trade embargoes.

Indian stock market crash (2004–2009)

The Indian securities regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) alleged that UBS had played a role in the 2004 "Black Monday" stock market crash which followed the National Democratic Alliance government’s defeat in thegeneral elections. SEBI's ruling of May 17, 2005 barred UBS from issuing or renewing participatory notes for one year.[166] The ban was later lifted on appeal, as a result of a Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) ruling on September 9, 2005. SEBI challenged SAT's order in the Supreme Court of India. On February 9, 2009, the Supreme Court disposed of the case after SEBI and UBS said they had reached a settlement under which UBS agreed to pay an amount of about₹50 lakh (US$79,000).[167]

U.S. discrimination lawsuits (2001–2005)

In April 2005, UBS lost the landmark discrimination and sexual harassment case, Zubulake v. UBS Warburg. The plaintiff, Laura Zubulake, was a former institutional equities salesperson at the company's Stamford office. The jury found that her manager, Matthew Chapin, had denied her important accounts and mocked her appearance to co-workers. She claimed that several sexist policies in place, such as entertaining clients at strip clubs, made it difficult for women to socialize and foster business contacts with clients.[168] The jury found that UBS had destroyed relevant e-mail evidence after thelitigation hold had been in place. UBS was ordered to pay the plaintiff US$9.1 million in compensatory damages (including back pay and professional damage), and US$20.2 million in punitive damages.[169]

On October 18, 2005, three African-American employees filed a class action lawsuit against the company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging racial discrimination in hiring, promotion, and other employment practices. The three plaintiffs in Freddie H. Cook, Sylvester L. Flaming Jr., and Timothy J. Gandy v. UBS Financial Services, Inc., claimed that segregation and discrimination in job assignments and compensation were widespread and the firm had done nothing to diversify its workforce. The lawsuit also claimed that offices operating inLargo, Maryland and Flushing, New York were illegally created to serve African-Americans and Asian-Americans respectively, and that the firm’s management frequently ridiculed the Largo branch office and its staff, referring to it as a “diversity” office. On April 23, 2007, U.S. District Judge, Peter J. Messitte, granted plaintiff's request to dismiss the class allegations without prejudice. As a result of this dismissal, the case now comprises the individual claims of three plaintiffs.[170]

U.S. tax evasion (2005– )

Main article: UBS Tax Evasion Controversy

In 2005, Bradley Birkenfeld, a Geneva-based employee who worked in the bank's North American wealth management business, claimed that UBS's dealings with American clients violated an agreement between the bank and the U.S.Internal Revenue Service.[171] He said that he was disturbed by an internal legal document that he believed was prepared to give UBS legal cover should bank-sanctioned illegal activities be uncovered. The bank could then shift the blame to its employees.[172] He subsequently complained to UBS compliance officials about the bank's "unfair and deceptive business practices". When he received no response after three months, he wrote to UBS General Counsel Peter Kurer about the illegal practices.[173][174] Subsequently, Birkenfeld resigned from UBS in October 2005.[175]

In 2007, Birkenfeld, a U.S. citizen, decided to tell the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) what he knew about UBS's practices. At the same time, he planned to take advantage of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 that could pay him up to 30% of any tax revenue recouped by the IRS as a result of Birkenfeld's information.[176] In April 2007, Birkenfeld's attorney arranged for Birkenfeld to be cooperating with the DOJ, though the relationship between the department and the whistleblower were troubled. Birkenfeld also met with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the IRS, and the U.S. Senate.[176]

In June 2008, based on Birkenfeld's revelations, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation made a formal request to enter Switzerland to probe a multi-million-dollar tax evasion case involving UBS. That same month, the United States Senatepanel that Birkenfeld had communicated with accused Swiss banks, including UBS, of helping wealthy Americans evade taxes through offshore accounts, and estimated the total cost of this practice to be in excess of US$100 billion annually.[177] According to the findings, U.S. clients held about 19,000 accounts at UBS, with an estimated US$18 billion to US$20 billion in assets, in Switzerland.[178]

UBS Headquarters in Basel, Switzerland.

In response to the report and the FBI investigation, UBS announced that it would cease providing cross-border private banking services to US-domiciled clients through its non-US regulated units as of July 2008.[179] In November 2008, a U.S. federal grand jury indicted Raoul Weil, Chairman and CEO of UBS Global Wealth Management and Business Banking and member of UBS's Group Executive Board, in connection with the ongoing investigation of UBS's US cross-border business.[180] UBS would eventually cut ties to Weil in May 2009 and he would face charges after UBS had settled its criminal case with the government. The U.S. issued an international arrest warrant for Weil, and he was extradited to the United States after being arrested in Italy in 2013.[181] In January 2014, Weil pleaded not-guilty in federal court to helping U.S. taxpayers evade taxes on $20 billion in offshore assets.[182]

On February 18, 2009, UBS agreed to pay a fine of US$780 million to the U.S. government and entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) on charges of conspiring to defraud the United States by impeding the Internal Revenue Service. The DPA obliged UBS to pay US$780 million to settle criminal charges, and criminal charges were dismissed.[183][184] The figures include interest, penalties, restitution for unpaid taxes and disgorgement of profits. As part of the deal, UBS also settled Securities and Exchange Commission charges of having acted as an unregistered broker/dealer and investment adviser for Americans.[185]

The day after settling its criminal case on February 19, 2009, the U.S. government filed a civil suit against UBS to reveal the names of all 52,000 American customers, alleging that the bank and these customers conspired to defraud the IRS and federal government of the legitimately owed tax revenue. The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) had provided to the United States government the identities of, and account information for, certain United States customers of UBS’s cross-border business as part of its criminal investigation in 2009. On August 12, 2009, UBS announced a settlement deal that ended its litigation with the IRS.[186] However, this settlement set up a showdown between the U.S. and Swiss governments over the secrecy of Swiss bank accounts. It was not until June 2010 that Swiss lawmakers approved a deal to reveal client data and account details of U.S. clients who were suspected of tax evasion.[187]

In February 2015, UBS announced to be investigated by the federal government over new charges stating that UBS facilitated tax evasion by its U.S. clients. The focus of the investigation lies on the possible sale of bearer bonds, a type of unregistered security that provides anonymity to the owner.[188][189][190] UBS announced that it was cooperating with the investigators.[188]

UBS employees allegedly discussed the legal ramifications of the use of bearer bonds with their clients, a type of security that has been virtually illegal in the U.S. The government investigation is trying to determine whether there was a criminal conspiracy to evade taxes and conceal what had allegedly already been done.[191] The investigation, which was launched in January 2015, also aims to determine whether bearer bonds were provided as investment vehicles to UBS clients before the expiration of its 2009 deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice. The agreement lapsed in October 2010. Should UBS have violated the agreement, the federal government can make new allegations against UBS on charges stemming from the violation. In such a case, prosecutors would likely ask for significant fines and for UBS to be put under regulatory oversight.[190]

Rogue trader scandal (2008–2012)

Main article: 2011 UBS rogue trader scandal

On September 15, 2011, UBS became aware of a massive loss, originally estimated at US$2 billion, allegedly due to unauthorized trading by Kweku Adoboli, a then 31-year-old trader on the Delta One desk of the firm’s investment bank.[192] Adoboli was arrested and later charged with fraud by abuse of position and false accounting dating as far back as 2008.

UBS's actual losses were subsequently confirmed as US$2.3 billion, and according to the prosecutor in Adoboli's trial he "was a gamble or two from destroying Switzerland's largest bank for his own benefit."[193][194]

The bank stated that no client positions had been affected and its CEO Oswald Grübel initially dismissed calls for his resignation, commenting that “if someone acts with criminal intent, you can’t do anything.”[195][196]

However, UBS's management was subsequently criticized for its "lapses" by the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation, the bank's largest shareholder, in a rare press statement on September 20, 2011. On September 24, 2011 UBS announced Grübel's resignation, and the appointment of Sergio Ermotti as a Group CEO on an interim basis.[197][198]

On October 5, 2011, Francois Gouws and Yassine Bouhara, co-heads of UBS's Global Equities franchise, also resigned.[199]

The scale of UBS's losses led to renewed calls for the global separation of commercial banking from investment banking, while media commentators suggested UBS should consider downsizing its investment bank and potentially rebranding it under the resurrected S.G. Warburg name.[200][201][202]

In Switzerland, where the Government had bailed out UBS in 2008, particular concern was voiced about the nature of the alleged trading which, it was suggested, might have been directed against the interests of the Swiss economy.[203]Christian Levrat, the President of the SP-Party said, "Should it prove true that UBS, having been rescued by the state in 2008, has speculated against the Swiss franc, [UBS Chairman] Villiger must take the consequences."[204]

If found guilty, Abodoli will have generated the third-largest loss by a rogue trader in history, after Jerome Kerviel ofSociété Générale (who also worked on a Delta One desk) and Yasuo Hamanaka, a copper trader at Sumitomo Corporation.[205]

Lehman Brothers notes (2007–2013)

In 2011, UBS was fined US$2.5 million by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority connected to the sale of Lehman Brothers Holdings structured notes for omissions and misleading statements it made to investors. UBS underwrote and marketed $900 million worth of 100% Principal-Protection Notes between March 2007 and September 2008; Lehman Bros. went bankrupt in September 2008. UBS also agreed to pay US$8.25 million in restitution and interest to American investors.[206]

In August 2013, UBS settled a class action lawsuit filed by holders of Lehman notes. The lawsuit alleged that UBS's depiction of the financial condition of Lehman Bros. was misleading. UBS settled the lawsuit with a payout of US$120 million.[207]

U.S. municipal bond market rigging (2001–2013)

In 2011, UBS agreed to pay US$160 million in restitution, penalties and disgorgement of profits for rigging bids in the U.S.municipal bond market, after the bank and three of its employees were charged by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2010. In July 2013, the three employees were convicted of conspiracy in the muni market fraud: former UBS Vice President Gary Heinz was sentenced to 27 months in prison and fined US$400,000; former UBS global commodities chief Peter Ghavami was sentenced to 18 months and fined US $1 million; and former UBS VP Michael Welty received a 16-month sentence and fined US$300,000. In addition to conspriacy, Ghavami and Heinz also were convicted of wire fraud. Federal prosecutors had asked for much harsher sentences, but U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood rebuffed the request. Wood said that the criminal behavior of the three was an aberration from their normal law-abiding lives.[208][209]

Arms sales and Indian money laundering (2003–2011)

UBS was implicated in a money laundering case involving Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi and an Indian citizen introduced to UBS by Khashoggi. In 2011, Hasan Ali Khan, owner of a Pune, India stud farm, was arrested by India'sEnforcement Directorate and charged with serving as a front man for Khashoggi. Khan and Kolkata businessman Kashinath Tapuriah were charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Allegedly, in 2003, Khan helped launder US$300 million of money Khashoggi made through arms sales via the Zurich branch of UBS.[210][211]

Introduced to UBS by Khashoggi in 1982, Khan enabled the arms dealer to launder funds held in American accounts through UBS Geneva.[212] One of Khan's accounts eventually was frozen when it was determined that the source of the funds came from Khashoggi's arms sales.

India Today reported that Mr Khan allegedly had US$8 billion in "black money" (laundered money) in a UBS account. The figures were reported to be verified by India Today, based on a letter written by UBS Zurich. The government of India reportedly verified the existence of this account in UBS.[213]

UBS denied Indian media reports alleging that it maintained a business relationship with or had any assets or accounts for Hasan Ali Khan. Upon formal request by the Indian and Swiss government authorities, the bank announced that the documentation corroborating such allegations was forged and numerous media reports claiming he had US$8 billion in black money at the bank were false.[214][215]

Libor benchmark rigging (2005–2012)

Main article: Libor scandal

In December 2012, UBS agreed to pay US$1.5 billion to settle a case filed by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission alleging that UBS engaged in a criminal conspiracy to rig the London Interbank Offered Rate (Libor) benchmarks used on loans via company's Japan-based subsidiary. UBS has also been charged by British and Swiss financial regulators for its Libor manipulation scheme. In settling the case, the bank acknowledged wrongdoing. UBS Chief Executive Sergio Ermotti said, "We are taking responsibility for what happened," and said that all the employees linked to the scam had already left the bank. The U.S. fine would contribute to the bank's loss of US$2.7 billion in the fourth quarter.[216]

UBS also paid a fine of £160 million (US$0.3 billion) to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the largest fine issued by the U.K. regulator for Libor rigging.[217]

The UBS scheme involved multiple banks, brokers and traders to manipulate interest rates to generate a profit on trades. The scheme lasted for six years before it was broken up. UBS entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, following which it was not a subject of criminal charges, except for company's subsidiary, UBS Securities Japan, which was not exempt. The subsidiary pleaded guilty to wire fraud.[218]

The scheme's ringleader was former UBS trader Thomas Hayes, who was indicted by U.S. prosecutors along with a Swiss national, Roger Darin.[216]

Currency benchmark rigging (2003– )

Main article: Forex scandal

Market regulators in Asia, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States began to investigate the $5 trillion-a-day foreign-exchange market after Bloomberg News reported in June 2013 that several of the world's largest currency trading banks had been front-running client orders and rigging the foreign exchange benchmark WM/Reuters rates bycolluding with counterparts. The behavior occurred daily in the spot foreign-exchange market and went on for at least a decade according to currency traders.[219]

At the center of the investigation were the transcripts of electronic chatrooms in which senior currency traders discussed with their competitors at other banks the types and volume of the trades they planned to place. The electronic chatrooms had names such as "The Cartel," "The Bandits' Club," "One Team, One Dream" and "The Mafia".[220][221][222]

UBS set aside approximately US$2 billion in expected liability for alleged charges in currency rigging and French tax evasion cases.[223]

For the currency rigging charges, UBS paid US$800 million to American, British, and Swiss regulators.[224]

U.S. mortgage-backed securities (2004–2015)

In July 2013, UBS settled a lawsuit filed against it and 17 other banks by Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), the U.S. federal agency that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with a payout of US$885 million, but without UBS having to admit any wrongdoing. At the time of the settlement, the agency already settle with two other institutions, but UBS settlement was the first where the amount paid was released to public.

On behalf of Fannie and Freddie, the FHFA had sued UBS and 17 other banks in July 2011 over mortgage-backed securities sold to the two government-sponsored enterprises that buy mortgages in the secondary market and repackage them as securities to boost liquidity in the mortgage business. The lawsuit claimed that UBS misrepresented the quality of mortgages sold to the two housing agencies for US$4.5 billion.[225][226]

In February 2015, UBS along with Citigroup and Goldman Sachs Group agreed to a $235 million settlement stemming from residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by the defunct Residential Capital LLC (ResCap) and underwritten by the three financial institutions.

The ResCap RMBS were issued before the sub-prime mortgage crisis, and the lawsuit dates from 2008. The lawsuit alleged that the prospectuses and registration statements issued by UBS, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs did not adequately disclose the risks of the RMBS and were, in fact, misleading to investors, who sustained heavy losses. The lawsuit alleged that the behavior of the three defendants violated securities laws.[227]

French tax evasion (2002– )

In 2013, France launched an investigation into UBS France's alleged abetting of tax evasion by French taxpayers.[228]

The investigation was spurred by the March 2012 publication of a muckraking book about UBS, Ces 600 milliards qui manquent à la France – Enquête au cœur de l’évasion fiscale ("Those 600 billion which France is missing – Inquiry into the heart of tax evasion"), which estimated the amount of tax income lost to UBS-controlled offshore accounts at €600 billion.[229]

UBS France executive Patrick de Fayet was among three local branch executives being investigated. UBS wealth management bankers allegedly broke the law by enabling French taxpayers to hide their assets in UBS-controlled offshore assets to avoid paying taxes. The bankers undertook to direct their French clients' assets to UBS's Switzerland operation, rather than keep the money in France.[230] UBS set aside approximately US$2 billion in expected liability for its currency rigging and French tax evasion cases.[223]

UBS is facing fines of up to five billion euros for its alleged role in tax fraud, according to the French newspaper Le Temps.[231]

In July 2014, the bank was required to post a bond of 1.1 billion euros, which UBS complied with while making multiple appeals in the French court system, finally losing its appeal at the Cour de Cassation, France's highest court. UBS may appeal that ruling at the European Court of Human Rights.[232]

In February 2015, U.S. whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld, the key figure in the UBS tax evasion scandal in the U.S., was subpoenaed by French magistrate investigating the case.[233]

The U.S. Department of Justice approved the request for Birkenfeld, who is still on parole after being convicted of one count of conspiracy to abet tax evasion by his UBS client Igor Olenicoff, to visit France to testify in the UBS case.[234]

Federal Judge William Zloch granted Birkenfeld permission to travel to France from 27 February to 1 March 2015 to appear before the French court.[235][236]

In 2014, UBS accused the French government of engaging in a "highly politicized process" in its investigation of the bank and its French subsidiary. The crackdown on UBS France that began in mid-2013 where it came to light that Jerome Cahuzac, who served as budget director in the government of President Francois Hollande, had a secret Swiss bank account.[237]

German tax evasion (2004– )

UBS Deutschland AG came under investigation by prosecutors in Mannheim, Germany, after a tax probe revealed suspicious funds transfers from Germany to Switzerland allegedly facilitated by UBS Deutschland's Frankfurt office. Prosecutors have investigated UBS's abetting of tax evasion by German taxpayers from 2004 to 2012. The investigation was expected to lessen the chances of a German-Swiss tax treaty.[238]

UBS Deutschland's Frankfurt office was raided by tax investigators in May 2012, and over 100,000 computer files and records were seized for evidence. The bank, which claims it is cooperating with the investigators, said that "an internal investigation into the specific allegations has not identified any evidence of misbehavior by UBS Deutschland AG."[238]

In July 2014, the bank paid approximately US$400 million to settle similar charges in Bochum, Germany.[239][240]

Belgian tax evasion (2004– )

In June 2014, the chief executive of UBS Belgium, Marcel Brühwiler, was arrested on suspicion of fraud, while UBS' offices and Brühwiler's residence were searched by police. It is alleged that UBS Belgium actively recruited rich Belgians, proposing to funnel funds to secret Swiss accounts, enabling tax avoidance.[241]

Timber corruption and Malaysian money laundering (2006– )

Swiss authorities are conducting criminal investigations on charges against UBS for laundering $90 million associated with timber businesses and government officials in Malaysia.[242][243][244]

end quote.

Given all the uncured problems cited above, I believe a GA reassessment is needed. Cheers, 172.58.236.93 (talk) 12:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

So ... over a year later, how come there's still no word about the manifold controversies in the entry? 98.115.255.240 (talk) 05:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Biased article

The article seems like someone from UBS wrote it. Too much self-praise and no mention on the banks money laundering schemes. No mention of fines by regulators also. 2.137.169.197 (talk) 08:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

UBS

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: - Delist Fails NPOV and verifiability Femke (talk) 18:48, 5 June 2022 (UTC).

Concern that the article includes unsourced content and downplays the controversies that the organization has been involved in, see the talk page for details. (t · c) buidhe 15:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Comment by Swiss romulus moved from the other GAR:

• This article needs serious updating. See its talk page for the details. Besides it was not properly promoted GA in the first place.. Swiss romulus (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I agree, Swiss romulus. Since this is a community GAR it needs to be closed by an uninvolved editor, but so far there is no support for keeping it as a GA. (t · c) buidhe 00:23, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

• I've just checked, and there's no sign that the relevant WikiProjects were notified about this GAR at the time the nomination was made; such notifications are part of the GAR process. I don't think this can be properly closed before they have been notified and given a chance to bring the article back up to GA level. buidhe, can you please take care of it? (When I was checking, I saw that you'd notified one of them about an FAR; GARs should get the same attention.) While it's much less likely that the original GA nominator and reviewer are still around, they should also be notified if they are still editing. Thank you for taking care of this. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

   Done (t · c) buidhe 03:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Assets under management

The linked article in footnote 14 makes no reference to assets under management (AuM) 77.56.214.211 (talk) 12:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Disagreement over whether UBS name derived from Union Bank of Switzerland

Although this article states that, "UBS does not stand for Union Bank of Switzerland." an article on Investopia says that it does. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/ubs.asp states,

"The name UBS is derived from one of its predecessor corporations, the Union Bank of Switzerland. The current UBS originated when the Union Bank of Switzerland merged with the Swiss Bank Corporation in 1998. Thus, UBS is now used as the company's official name and not as an acronym."

Interestingly the ubs.com site itself takes both positions,

https://www.ubs.com/global/en/our-firm.html states,

Fun fact - UBS does not stand for Union Bank of Switzerland. In fact, that was one of the more than 370 financial firms that have, since 1862, become part of today's UBS.

while their page at https://www.ubs.com/global/en/investor-relations/contact/faq/about.html states,

"The name 'UBS' came from one of our predecessor firms - the Union Bank of Switzerland. However, just like other prominent brands which used to be an abbreviation of a company name, UBS is no longer considered an acronym." Techguy95 (talk) 05:39, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

RFC: Who the founders are of merged banks

See discussion here. Imcdc Contact 02:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Kind Tennis Fan, DonSpencer1, One Factor, LivinRealGüd, and RafiqAaronson: At the link provided above, Imcdc has opened a debate regarding which figures (if any) should qualify as UBS's founders. If you have any thoughts on the matter, please take a moment to share your opinions there.Emiya1980 (talk) 04:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)