Operator: Glenn Schorr, UBS.
Glenn Schorr - UBS: So just top-down, if revenues are little better and very market related, expenses are little higher as comp normalizes, and credit moving in the right direction but trending directionally with the economy. When you look at the revenue front, you alluded to it little bit in your prepared remarks, but can we kind of drill down and try to say where are the leading indicators for revenue growth, because there is potentially a bank fee, there is clearly a bunch of revenue headwinds related to the regulatory changes. Can we parse out where there are some leading indicators for revenue growth or is that kind of (weighted) on the economy as well?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Glenn, this is Jamie. Just real quickly, just let's all not call it a bank fee and call what it is, which is a punitive bank tax.
Glenn Schorr - UBS: Fair enough.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: No, I mean, I think you heard me cover some of the items, Glenn. You hit on some of the businesses are market sensitive, but clearly you look at the market sensitive results and you’ve got to feel good about the franchise we’ve got here. So if the market opportunities present themselves and we’re serving our clients and those businesses can do well, we think secular trends there over the long term are good. Obviously, it's too early to call what kind of regulatory impacts there could be in any of these businesses and how business models react. But we’re not worried about our ability to compete and do well in the market side businesses. On the lending side businesses, you clearly have the dynamics of portfolios running off affecting revenues away from that. So again, I think you see noise in some of the numbers quarter over quarter, but I think we’re positioned to keep building the businesses, taking market share and growing. So the story I would say is, as you heard at Investor Day, investing for growth in all these businesses, more bankers, more branches, better products, California and the Commercial Bank. So, that’s what I would point you to, but secular – I guess overlying trends of asset rundown and potential for regulatory impacts, yes we’ll have to deal with those, but we understand that and we’ll do fine.
Glenn Schorr - UBS: Okay. On that point, the things you’ve noted and others in the outlook related to whether there’d be overdraft policy changes to anticipation of impact on cards, how much of the fee hits are kind of in the run rate versus on the come?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: You’d say in the first half of the year, you’ll have a lot of the impacts on card side. It’ll be in the run rate. We’re still waiting for a few pieces of Card Act legislation to really be finalized, which won’t happen until June, reasonable and proportionate fees, but away from that we are going to have it in our run rate shortly. Retail, we have a partial impact of some of the actions we took on overdraft fees. Reducing number of items in this quarter is already in the run rate. There is some changes in customer behaviors anyway lowering overdraft fees in the quarter, and so the rest of those effects won’t come in until the latter part of the year when all the changes go in third quarter I guess. So by the end of the year, you’d probably see those kind of effects.
Glenn Schorr - UBS: Last quickly, (FIC) you’ve been – first of all, performance is great and off the charts and you mentioned that’s across products, that’s across regions, interesting because VAR’s down and you’ve been signaling competition is healing. You also signaled I thought that (asset) spreads were narrowing. Was volume and volatility that strong that it carries (the day to more) competition than lower VAR?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: This is Jamie. Just, number one is, VAR is just a measure, which is an inadequate measure of most things, okay. And remember, you’re dropping very volatile trading months from a year ago and adding very benign trading months now to VAR, and that’s a huge reason why VAR has dropped so much. And it’s not just volatility, so first of all people did a great job. The spreads are back to kind of where they were. So think of it as they’ve almost normalized and that’s fine, but a lot of client flow, a lot of volume, and good trading around there.
Operator: John McDonald, Sanford Bernstein.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: I was wondering on the repurchase reserve, any color on what drove the improvement in the reps and warranty expense this quarter? Did the GSEs (do you know if they’ve hit their), kind of peak vintages and if they’re kind of at full capacity in their put-back activities now?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: No, that number is just going to bounce around a little bit. Put-back levels are about similar to what they were in the past couple of quarters. And no, insights into vintage burnout or anything like that yet, but…
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: And no insight in terms of whether they’re at kind of full capacity in there whether they could step up in their activity levels?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Nothing different than what Charlie covered at investor day is what I'd say.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: The bad news, it may have peaked, but let's see if that’s true after a while longer.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: On the NSF/OD impact, can you give any color on the assumptions that are incorporated into your estimate of the $500 million hit? And is it too early to have confidence at? Is that really a guess on your part? Or do you have some confidence in that hit or is it too early?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I'd say it's better than just a guess. We did work on it when we did it, but it was an early estimate. So let’s leave it at that. I mean we need to see how everything evolves from here, but it was a reasonable estimate when we did it. We need to wait and see how it actually falls through.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: You’re still offering customers the (option). Have you considered the disallowance of overdraft on debit that BofA implemented and decided against that?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: So far, we think the more consumer friendly thing is to fairly offer the consumer an option, not to push at marketing, but to very fairly say, you have this option or that option. That still is our intent. And BofA remember will offer that at the ATM for cash, and they’ll notify the customer. So we went to the customer very fairly. We think we’re offering them option, probably is something they prefer. I mean they always can turn it down.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: And Mike one quick…
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: And just remember, lot of the options that customer has is to link to other accounts, link to a credit card, things that are cheaper, so we want to make sure that we do all those things also for the customer.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: And embedded in your $500 million is some estimate of how many customers opt then I guess, am I correct?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Yes.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Remember that’s a very static analysis, and we’ve looked at it again and we’ll re-update it, and we don’t think it’s going to change dramatically over time.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: And one quick thing on the (SOP 3) portfolio, the credit impaired. Mike, other companies are showing gains to their NIM and NII from purchase accounting accretion, which seems to be related to the repricing of deposits better than they had marked, in some cases cash flows on the impaired loans coming in better. Do you have that dynamic going on too and just don’t talk about it, or that is just different for you because you have different assumptions in your marks?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: There are two things. One, it depends on when you did your initial marks and where rate levels were. So there’s one effect of just actual market driven assumptions at the time you did things. And two is we may have that dynamic over time, remember we do the (SOP 33) evaluation at sub-portfolios, so we’ve been focused on our prime option ARM and prime mortgage portfolios. Other one’s have been behaving okay, and if the day comes when we have a view that they’ll come in below lifetime loss expectations, we may have a adjustment to make, but that would be down the road.
John McDonald - Sanford Bernstein: So far you’ve not had a material NIM accretion?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Correct, yeah.
Operator: Guy Moszkowski, Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
Guy Moszkowski - Bank of America: I was wondering if you could just give us a little bit more of an update on what you’re seeing with loan modifications as they affect both first and second mortgages, and how that does or doesn’t inform the change in your tone, if not your guidance, where you’re saying that if trends continue then loan losses on home equity, prime and subprime might not get to those guidance levels? And to what extend are modifications affecting that thought process?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Guy, to the first questions, if you look at HAMP, okay, which is a government program, and the government now – and I’m looking at it in total, not for JPMorgan, the government was aiming, I think, for 3 to 4 million mods. We actually think at current ramp rates, take a long time to ramp it up, we’ll get to that 2 million on HAMP. That’s what we believe, okay. And in addition to that, most of the banks do other modifications which are also good for customers, so for us it’s more than double of what we’re doing in terms of HAMP mods. And on the mortgage lending categories, all of the indicators, new delinquencies, roll rates, (indiscernible), they’re all getting a little bit better. And we think that’s good. And that trend didn’t just stabilize late last year, January, February, March have gotten better, so it’s early. And those are actual numbers. You’re guessing about what future changes might be because of legislation or stuff like that, and we don’t know. We’re hoping they all get better. And we also think a lot of that will be driven by the economy, not by anything else.
Guy Moszkowski - Bank of America: But to the extent that a lot of people think that if you’re significantly modifying principal on even first that that’s going to have a negative impact on second and the like. Are you factoring that thought process into the fact that you’re saying that we might still end up with loss rates below the prior guidance levels?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Yes, based on the way we see it now, Guy.
Guy Moszkowski - Bank of America: That’s fair. And then if I can just ask a little bit more detail on the $2.3 billion build in that litigation reserve. Can you help us understand better the distinctions between what’s between the funds that are available there and what you’re doing in the investment bank where you also alluded to building some litigation reserves there? And not sure I understood the distinction that I think you were trying to make between what’s available for the GSE reps and warranties issues and what this might be for?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: So let me make this simple, okay. In the Investment Bank, Retail and Corporate, we’ve put up reps and warranty reserves and litigation reserves for GSEs and all other mortgages, including private securities. We’ve tried to do it diligently. Some of those numbers ran through the Investment Bank this quarter. We’ve broken out the numbers in Retail, and we’ve put the numbers in Corporate. A lot of the numbers in Corporate relate to WaMu. We are not going to give any other information. We think we’ve properly accrued the reps and warranties whether they come through on the rep and warranty line or the litigation line. They are legitimate claims as some of these mortgages were properly done. It’s going to be done mortgage by mortgage, but other than that we think we’ve done a pretty good job recognizing the problem early.
Guy Moszkowski - Bank of America: And then I just have one more question which relates to the Investment Bank. I noticed that assets basically didn’t increase or only a very small amount and yet your revenues, in particular, in fixed were obviously extremely strong. Is there some color you can give us on increases that you’re seeing in turnover rate of average positions or something like that, or you’re just turning the balance sheet very, very quickly?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: It’s hard to answer the question. There is plenty of client volume, and I don’t know the turnover rates off hand. And you might see the balance sheet go up a little bit over time from here.
Operator: Betsy Graseck, Morgan Stanley.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: Couple questions on credit and capital. If the U.S. economy gets no worse, is it safe to assume that you guys are done adding to reserves on a consolidated basis for the remainder of this credit cycle?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Betsy, your assumptions about what the future holds is as good as ours. Credit card, when we look at today, remember we have real visibility only really into next quarter, those reserves can be coming down over time. Mortgage, the numbers are starting to look hopeful. Though, there’s so much uncertainty around mortgage that I want to see it myself before you actually start taking it down. The real question for mortgage to me is how long the high losses last. That’s the real question (to me on) mortgage, not just the reserve number, because a huge loss is running through our book today and I think in commercial, and I put all the wholesale in this, investment banking and middle market, it looks like underlying credit trends are getting better including a reduction in non-performers, a repair of non-performers, and the financial stability of companies.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: And on just the mortgage piece, there’s this recent HAMP on earned principal forgiveness, could you give us your sense of how you’re going to approach this new HAMP modification program?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Yeah, we’re working on that now and we’re not ideologically opposed to principal forgiveness. The issue with that is it’s got to be done loan by loan to be fair. There’s no other way to do it that’s proper and fair both to the mortgage and to the bank. And I don’t want to double count it because remember if you do principal forgiveness, it’s not that different than reducing payments for five years. So you can double count a little bit but if we change our programs and we add some additional principal forgiveness funds, it might change some of loss rates going forward, but we don’t know that for sure. But it might. Remember, we already have a lot of reserves (up this stuff), high losses running through, underlying trends are getting a little better. But it’s also not completely clear what all the government programs, so we’re still working to try and clarify what it is they meant on some of those programs.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: How far along do you feel you are in the mortgage (pick getting through the price on) the sloppy underwriting that was done in ’06, ’07, ’08 period?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: 53%.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: 53%?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Look, honestly, if things start to peak out and the economy gets better, you’re through the worst part, but there’s ways to go and as you will see as I see what’s going on in Washington and things like that, but the underlying trends look good, we shouldn’t forget that.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: And can you just give us some sense as to how you think about the capital that you’ve got right now, core Tier 1, 9.1%? At what point do you feel you’re able to start managing capital, either with dividends or buybacks?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: So I think we’ve been very clear in the dividend. We want to see real underlying employment growth for at least several months. That’s number one. Number two, we’d like to see real and sustained improvements in delinquencies and chargeoffs in mortgages, and that’s not just one month. We’d like to see that continue for a while. And number three, I think we’ve pointed out as have other banks, there’s a lot of capital uncertainty. There’s uncertainty around Basel II rules, Basel III rules, dividend tax rules, bonus tax rules, and we’d like to see some of that clear up before we start using our capital. So that number will probably continue to go up over time. We want to make sure that we’re always properly capitalized and this company is never questioned. And we end up with excess capital. You haven’t thrown it away. You just get to use it later.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: There’s just a question is, could you potentially be in the same position that you’re in now with card where your reserves are very high relative to your forward look on losses. So could you end up in a position where you’ve got significant amounts of capital and you’re not able to deploy it as quickly as you would like?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: It’s possible, yes.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: And then on real employment growth, are you talking about net job creation or are you talking about just unemployment going down?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: No, I am talking about net job creation. That is the really important thing, getting more people back to work. The other number has a lot of other calculations in it.
Betsy Graseck - Morgan Stanley: Okay. So that could have a fairly long tail to it?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: No, I think what I mean by real job creation is that we really believe we’ve got a sustained recovery. That to me is a couple hundred thousand jobs being added for several months in a row.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: The other one is our own credit costs, so it’s not just delinquencies, it's credit costs making the turn. So when retail is stabilized, then we’d like to see them turn downwards.
Operator: Meredith Whitney, Meredith Whitney Advisors.
Meredith Whitney - Meredith Whitney Advisory: I wanted to ask about the – issues of mortgage modifications have been well covered. I am more curious about the credit card modifications, because there are no government guidelines to follow with those. And what your outlook is in terms of, how much free capital is freed up by those – by actually the mortgage modifications or if the credit card modifications are what’s the main driver of improvement in early stage delinquencies or is there something else?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: There are no credit card modification programs any different today than they were way back. And remember by the end of the last two years, we’ve written off close to 20% of the portfolio. You would expect in an economic recovery or even stability that delinquencies and charges would come down, and in fact, they are. So we’ve written off a lot of the bad stuff.
Meredith Whitney - Meredith Whitney Advisory: No, I appreciate that, but I am just looking at the – what you guys put out, which is your card modifications doubled from ‘08 to ‘09, so if that’s a – yes, I would expect that normally, but for the average consumer, things haven’t gotten materially better. So I am just trying to figure out what’s going on?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I think you are talking about the things that are in credit forecast, I think that will – that just tracks charge-offs and bankruptcies and stuff like that, so –
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: And that just is working through the bad stuff, the challenged stuff. So as you see that charge-offs are associated with that versus the charge-offs Jamie is talking about and you are left with a better performing portfolio at the end of that process.
Meredith Whitney - Meredith Whitney Advisory: So will it be then that the high end is the most resilient than what the low end is, if you could just provide a little bit color in terms of what specifically you see with credit cards?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: In credit card, across income spans, FICO bands, and vintages we are seeing improvements in delinquencies and charge-offs.
Meredith Whitney - Meredith Whitney Advisory: And the main driver of that is because obviously employment is not improving just in your estimation?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I think the main driver is the fact that the people who are worst off have already charged-off. And in prior recessions, when unemployment stops going up, you start to see an improvement in those things. So that is typical in a recession that the rate of change of unemployment is a bigger driver of credit card delinquencies and losses than simply absolute rates of unemployment.
Meredith Whitney - Meredith Whitney Advisory: And then just a follow-up on your credit card, the portfolio through WaMu has obviously been in runoff, what is in that portfolio ultimately goes, not the WaMu portfolio, but the collective portfolio, when do you start to see it stabilize, yes, in terms of size?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I think the Chase portfolio, I would say, which is a $132 billion of it is already – if we believe it basically stabilizes as it is and the WaMu portfolio, which is how much –
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Twentish billion and keeps going down.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Twentish billion and is going to keep going down and I think we gave some of that number at the Investor Day.
Operator: Matthew O'Connor, Deutsche Bank.
Matthew O'Connor - Deutsche Bank: If I could just ask a big picture question, given that you are getting more confident in the economic recovery and a lot of banks have significantly pulled back on credit, for example, Bank of America is now focused on just the super-prime within credit card, essentially exiting prime and below, it just feels like there is a lot of opportunity to lend as demand comes back to call it middle America and below. I am just wondering how you are thinking about, can you capitalize on some of the opportunity?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Yes. I mean, I think you see us growing out on credit card new programs all the time, and I think auto loans are up, and I think jumbo loans are up just a little bit, but they are up, maybe double from the year ago and – but we still have and we (brought) this out at our Investor Day a large liquidation in the home lending portfolio, because people are no longer doing subprime, Alt-A, and a bunch of products like an option ARM, and some of that we acquired from WaMu. That is going to run off, but the other stuff year-over-year, I think, you actually may start to see increases.
Matthew O'Connor - Deutsche Bank: And then on the wholesale side of business, there is a lot of commercial real estate that one could argue is going to change hands, maybe out of CMBS, out of the regionals into potentially banks like yours or that you could be involved in that process. How do you think that’s shaken out and where are we in the process of some of that stuff getting restructured and can you make some money off that?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Yes, I think you’ve seen a lot of real estate stuff getting restructured and has problems, and it's kind of a delayed lag, it's going to happen over the next two years, but if there is a proper way to do real estate lending, secured with the right developers, and that we get some of the upside stuff, we’ll be happy to do it.
Matthew O'Connor - Deutsche Bank: And then just separately, you've talked about getting positioned for rising interest rates, but it seems like you’re doing it relatively slowly, and to be fair, most banks are adding securities and you are taking them away, but it seems like it's just a little bit each quarter. So should we interpret that as you aren’t too concerned that either short or maybe more importantly the long end is not going to go out meaningfully anytime soon?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: So I think the way to look at us today is that today we were at a fairly neutral position, and so I think the disclosure we make in the 10-K shows for interest rates, the whole curve going up 100 basis points, (of course) it’s like $300 million. But that’s – call that a very, very neutral position. So we’ve already gone from being short funded to neutral. And the question is, are we going to change it from there? We don’t have to change it at all, but my guess is, we will change it, and rising long rates help earnings, rising short rates hurt earnings. And so when you talk about neutralizing it, you’re going to neutralize one versus the other, little complex, but we like where we are today, and over time that portfolio will probably come down. I mean that portfolio is just one measure of interest rate exposure. And it hasn’t come down that much, that portfolio, though we have changed the components of it.
Matthew O'Connor - Deutsche Bank: And I’m sorry, just to follow up on that, does that mean less extension risk or what do you mean by that?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I would say, we’re reducing some of the extension risk and reducing some of the credit exposure in it.
Operator: Mike Mayo, CLSA.
Mike Mayo - CLSA: I was still looking for some clarification, you had $8.3 billion of trading revenues, about 30% of the firm’s revenues, and I’m not really sure why the trading revenues were so high at $8.3 billion? I guess some sub-questions would be; number one, how much proprietary trading was there? Second part would be, how much in derivatives? And by the way, what did the derivatives legislation do to you guys? And three, how much of that might go away if rates go up on the short end faster than you expect?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I think, first of all, I would say it’s very little proprietary when you talk about pure proprietary. It is a lot of client flow. So we’re not the only ones who saw that. I think you’re going to see other people report similarly good numbers, somewhat driven by client flow and it’s good results by our traders. They are on the ball, they’re paying attention and rising rates don’t necessarily hurt your trading results. It’s not because we’re taking a mismatch in trading to see some of that. There is some benefit from the fact that spreads keep on coming in and you have the reverse from last year instead of the losses in mortgage – kind of legacy credit and mortgage positions. You have small gains in those things. And we agree, it was a very good quarter for FICC in particular and we’re not going to tell that we expect to continue like that all year.
Mike Mayo - CLSA: Back in the old days, you gave some sort of guidance for fixed income trading revenues, so if they were $5.5 billion this quarter, any guess of what a more normal level would be?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I wouldn’t say we ever. We’re always talking about trading as volatile and hard to predict. I mean, obviously, we got an investment in people and balance sheet, and in infrastructure so you would expect – you expect results that are positive, and this was a strong quarter, no question about it. And so, it likely on average runs lower than this level, but I’m not going to give you a number on where.
Mike Mayo - CLSA: And legislation on derivatives, could that have a positive, negative or uncertain impact, what’s your thought?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Well, it’s very hard to have a positive impact and the devil is in the details here and it’s very – when we oversimplify it, we’re not doing justice to the issue. We do believe that most standardized things will go to clearing house and that’s fine. Then it, of itself, doesn’t have a huge impact on revenues. Then is the issue about how much of those and other trades go through an exchange and the transparency, that could depend on how it’s designed and how much room is left to do, have exceptions over the counter or end user exceptions and that’s not defined yet. So it will be a negative, Mike, and depending on the real detail, it could be some $100 million to a couple of billion dollars.
Mike Mayo - CLSA: And then last follow-up, you’ve kind of addressed the fixed income trading, the equity trading side, implied volatility reached to two-year low in March, fixed dropped, volume increased only 5%, so why did equity trading do so much better?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Our traders did a good job and that was also cash derivatives and prime brokers. So, I put it all together, I think they all had a good quarter.
Mike Mayo - CLSA: Anything by region on all your trading, did Asia do better, Europe, U.S?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Across the Investment Bank, Americas did great, Asia did pretty well, Europe did pretty well, but not as well as it had done before, if I’m recalling the numbers correctly. No particular areas of weakness, it was strong pretty much everywhere.
Operator: Jason Goldberg, Barclays Capital.
Jason Goldberg - Barclays Capital: I guess you addressed derivative stuff, I guess lot of uncertainty also with respect to the changes to the securitization process that the SEC voted last week and now, maybe trying to include a 5% risk retention by the sponsors, can you really talk about thoughts about securitization activity going forward?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I think in credit card, it’s going to be virtually gone, because the big credit card – most of them don’t need to it at all, so some issuers will do it, and there’s a lot of detail in that 5%. So we’re not opposed to the concept (of skinning the game), the details, what tranches, how you do it, I think it will make it smaller but won’t eliminate it, that’s my own guess. And the real securitization markets that you haven’t seen come back yet are the mortgage securitization markets. And I think at one point you’re going to see that. 5% will just change what kind of returns you need – what the spreads would be on the total securitization to give the person who is going to own the 5% a equity-like return and what they have to retain since it’s (permanent).
Jason Goldberg - Barclays Capital: And then also I guess another area of uncertainty is I guess comments we’re getting from the banks for Basel at the end of this week and I know the Fed’s encouraged you guys to comment just maybe kind of your thoughts around that and kind of what you are looking to see change from the original documents?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: We’ll get our comments in and we talked about this a little bit on Investor Day. It’s going to be – a lot of things out there. That’s a big issue. How all those ideas that are on the table and rightly so, how in the proposals they connect together with each other. The capital side of Basel III, the liquidity side of Basel III, together with everything that’s in play today away from Basel III. So I think the biggest point is just to make it cohesive and thoughtful and take time to evaluate the impact analyses that are going to be underway as well. So I won’t give you a particular – I mean, there’s powerful potential changes in there that has been well commented on. But our feedback is in and we hope to see a process whereby we get a revised set of proposals towards the end of the year after impact studies are done, but we may not get that. We may just get a final rule. We’ll see.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: And I think most people think that some of those things in Basel – look, no one’s against proper capital and liquidity. That we need. A lot of those things in Basel III had too much, but you can’t include agency or MBS as liquid securities. 30% of deposits have to be held like there’s going to be a run in 30% of your deposits you need to hold on basically on T-bills against that. I think a lot of that’s going to get modified appropriately. So the impact of Basel III will be, when it’s ultimately rolled out, it’d be substantially less than the impact that you saw on the initial Basel III proposal. The other thing which is really important for American banks is it needs to be consistent globally. That is an important competitive attribute. I think the regulators know that. If you have different countries do it, it could have a dramatic effect. I also want to point out that Basel III will have a much bigger effect on non-U.S. banks. And so the European banks, they have to look at those numbers and they will have a different reaction to it and probably going to want to face that in over two years to 50 to make up for the dramatic impact on the balance sheet.
Jason Goldberg - Barclays Capital: Thanks. And then just lastly, Mike on the slide six on lending update, you talked about stability and improvement in delinquencies in one bullet. In the next bullet, you talked to just the impact of foreclosure moratorium, extended timelines and REO and modifications. I guess any sense to kind of quantify the impact in terms of how much delinquencies are being impacted by those factors?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: It’s really the back end stuff, Jason. It just continues – and the back ends have elevated levels of delinquency rates. I think 10%, 15% is what we said once upon a time but haven’t freshened that up. But remember, it’s not an income statement effect, the fact that those are getting delayed because we’re being very active in making sure that we charge things down and realize the economic loss just because of those very delays, yet it does create some inflation of back end delinquency rates, which is why we’re so focused on those charts. Early bucket delinquencies, mid-bucket delinquencies, and then what’s going on in the 150-day plus where some of that stuff sits for longer before it gets cycled out is a separate issue that has some distortions in it.
Operator: Moshe Orenbuch, Credit Suisse.
Moshe Orenbuch - Credit Suisse: Just kind of following up on the home equity discussion, it’s encouraging that you’re hoping and seeing signs perhaps that the losses aren’t worse than you expected and could in fact be better. It does seem I guess from outside a little counterintuitive and I guess maybe could you expand a little bit on your comments from the Investor Day about the rundown of kind of 60ish billion of the JPMorgan home equity portfolio? Is there anything that could make you revisit that some of the expectations for your participation in the mortgage market as we go forward?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I didn’t get the question.
Moshe Orenbuch - Credit Suisse: At the end of the Investor Day, Jamie has said that inclusive of WaMu, you had $230 billion of mortgage assets that were likely to run off the books, but over $100 billion of those were kind of JPMorgan assets inclusive of big chunk of the home equity portfolio. Are you still kind of committed to running down that much of your mortgage assets? Is there anything that might change there?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I think it’s really a function of just, we’re trying to give a sense that those rundowns are real when you consider how much of even the Chase portfolio when you apply current underwriting standards given proven income as opposed to stated income, LTVs that are sensitive to forward home price expectations and lower – all those layered in against a reasonable set of origination levels that would qualify there given where home prices are is what’s driving that. I mean if those underlying factors allow us to do more volume at those kind of new lending standards, the numbers can be different but that’s a reasonable guess on where we might find ourselves going over many years.
Operator: Jeff Harte, Sandler O'Neill.
Jeff Harte - Sandler O'Neill: Couple things. One, I suppose somewhat simply, how should we be thinking about the tax rate going forward, given how it’s been low for at least a couple quarters running now?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I’d say I mean look back on where we’re running low 30s, I mean we're a little bit lower than that, high 20s this quarter on a reported basis. So a little bit audit settlements in this quarter deflated the ratio, but (much of) that we would have been around in the low 30s which is a decent place to see the number.
Jeff Harte - Sandler O'Neill: And when we look at the home equity loss assumptions within RFS. The sticking with the $1.4 billion outlook versus the $1.1 billion it's kind of running now, how much of that is just conservatism versus are there kind of modification spillovers or something else driving you to be conservative there?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I think it’s more the fact that it’s a little – I mean it's a little hard right now given the inflection we’re seeing to tune up a better number to give you than to say that’s what we last said. Hold the thought while we get some more months of experience under us, but given what we’re seeing in early buckets, it could be that we don’t hit those numbers. That’s the best I can give you on that score, just not yet able and ready to give numbers as good as what we had before, but we’re just caveating that they’re not so solid anymore given some of the early trends.
Jeff Harte - Sandler O'Neill: And then just kind of from the economic or credit statistics that you’re seeing versus what you’re looking for as opposed to there being some kind of a HAMP rollover effect, or is there something else dragging on it?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Look, the actual roll rates, delinquencies, charge-offs, by vintage look a little better, but add to that the uncertainty around housing, government programs, new foreclosures, the economy we're being cautious.
Operator: Nancy Bush, NAB Research, LLC.
Nancy Bush - NAB Research, LLC: Quick question on what will happen in a rising rate environment. I mean the Fed continues to keep rates low, but the long end keeps creeping up here and making run it for. Can you just give me some idea how you look at NIM in a rising rate environment? How you think your core funding is going to trend, whether you expect an extraordinary level of deposit pricing competition, et cetera?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Nancy, it's hard to say because you are talking about something that really relates almost more to competition than anything else. I believe that if you have a rising rate environment, short rates going up 100 or 200 basis points, long rates going up a 100 to 200 basis points, but it’s because of a healthy economy, everything will be fine. If you have stagflation, rates going up, you don’t have a healthy economy, that’s by the worst situation for a bank. And in and of itself, it's not the interest rate exposure, it’s the other things that are going to drive that including as you pointed out competition.
Nancy Bush - NAB Research, LLC: Any thoughts about – I mean obviously we’ve been in an extraordinarily liquid environment here and deposits have been rising as a result, any thoughts about what we will see in the real core deposit growth or lack thereof as rates start to rise, and whether you see any – you’ll see any need this time around, because we are coming off such a low rate base, to really give consumers more of the rise than you might have otherwise?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: When we talk about interest rate exposures, we already built into that our assumptions about how much of rate rise you pass on to consumers. So we’ve already assumed that, and I’d say we are pretty aggressive assuming that you’ve got to pass on quite a bit of it, at least early on in an interest rate cycle. And then on the consumer side, if you look at consumers, they have a lot of excess cash – (indiscernible) our economists, a lot of that’s also in money market funds. It’s a little bit different in deposit accounts, but we’re going to compete for our clients business like everybody else and we are assuming that it will be competitive going forward.
Operator: Ed Najarian, ISI Group.
Edward Najarian - ISI Group: Just a quick question I guess for Mike, I am not sure if you’re able to break this down, but we saw the net interest margin expand from 3.02% to 3.32%. I am assuming most of that came from FAS 166/167, as well as probably what went on with trading and the corporate securities portfolio, but is there a way to indicate the portion of that that might have been related to the core lending and deposit business?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Yes, I’d say it was about stable. I mean no material action in that, nor looking ahead would I expect there would necessarily be when you put aside the deliberate stuff we’re doing in the investment portfolio or just the outcome of what’s going on in the trading businesses.
Edward Najarian - ISI Group: And then just as a quick follow-up, the $2.3 billion for the litigation reserve, I know you indicated that you don’t want to talk in more detail about that, but should we consider that pretty much a one-time item, and at least, for now the expectation would be that that would not exist in future quarters?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Well, since it’s going to take years to sort all the stuff out, we took an estimate now, and I think it would be a while before we had any reason to make any changes to that.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Yes, we don’t expect to have to make any, but you never know when it comes to these items.
Operator: James Mitchell, Buckingham Research.
James Mitchell - Buckingham Research: Just a couple of quick follow-ups, do you have any thoughts on the pipeline in the Investment Bank, is it up, down?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: It looks fine. We’ve pointed out many times before, pipelines are notoriously bad. Things go away, things come in, and the debt market there is – sometimes pipeline is not there at all because deals can get done very quickly, but it looks healthy.
James Mitchell - Buckingham Research: Any kind of more clarity on the impact to the bonus tax in the second quarter. Is it something that you think could be quite material? You’re not mentioning it because it’s on the small side, how should we think about it?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: The only point I want to make is, it may be material and if it does happen it’s likely to be a second quarter accounting event. That’s the only point I really want to make at this stage.
James Mitchell - Buckingham Research: Okay so no specifics.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: It’s a one off, if it happens, even if it is material, but...
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: So the government in the U.K. says.
James Mitchell - Buckingham Research: One last question, you’ve put out estimates for the impact of lower overdraft fees, the Card Act, etcetera, in the $500 million range for each, the retail business and the card business. Obviously, there is some impact in the first quarter. Can you give some percentages around it? Are we 50% off the way there, are we 25% off the way there, how should we think about…?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Card is almost a 100%, Retail is 50%.
Operator: Matt Burnell, Wells Fargo.
Matthew Burnell - Wells Fargo: Just a quick question on the slide deck in the appendix, obviously, early-stage delinquencies in home equity and prime mortgage are coming down or flattening in the case of prime mortgage. Can you give us an update as to how the California and Florida markets specifically are performing in the early-stage delinquency?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I should have said this before, across vintages, FICO scores, LTVs, regions, states, we are seeing pretty much improvement, it’s broad based.
Matthew Burnell - Wells Fargo: And then a bigger picture question, what do you think the effects might be on the markets and specifically JPMorgan’s trading, if the rating agencies come through with the ratings downgrades on some of your competitors in light of potential regulatory changes?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I would put it in ‘not much’ category, but…
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I think that’s right. And my bet would be it’s going to take some time for that to actually manifest itself but we will see.
Operator: Chris Kotowski, Oppenheimer & Co.
Chris Kotowski - Oppenheimer: I noticed that even excluding the – on your C&I loans you had an uptick this quarter for the first time in a long time and I wonder is that – even excluding the effect of FAS 167 – and is that indicative of customers beginning to play some offence in your opinion and could we actually have seen the bottom in corporate loan demand?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: We may be – Jamie hit it earlier. I mean what’s going on in the investment bank is, access is there, FAS 167 drove the change in that business net of market’s activities. I’d say the real litmus test for wholesale would more be your middle market business and there it’s starting to stabilize but still down a touch from last quarter.
Operator: (Ron Mandel, GIC).
Ron Mandel - GIC: Most of my questions have been asked. I guess, the only thing I was wondering at this point was whether in your caution on home equity chargeoffs there is still some risk to higher charge-offs from first mortgages being modified and then the second’s being written off because that still seems to be such a hot button for the legislators and also for investors in first mortgages?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I will put that in the – first of all, we’re already doing that a little bit. We’re already modifying seconds, and not all seconds have first and not all seconds are in trouble, and so you really got to parse through all that, but I will put that as an issue of uncertainty out there that remains yes. And we are also doing the 2MP program like most other banks.
Ron Mandel - GIC: Any way of quantifying what the impact of that program and the others might be on the chargeoffs?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: The devil is in the detail to how they’re done. They’re not really – presumably they will be done in a thoughtful way which, as Jamie said, we’re already doing a lot of this stuff on a loan-by-loan basis in a way that’s appropriate and making changes and adjustments. And in answer to Guy’s question earlier, we factor all that into how we think about future chargeoffs and therefore reserving. So we have a view. It’s just a question of whether the programs come in with something that’s blanket or a less thoughtful approach than we think makes sense.
Ron Mandel - GIC: Yes, I mean, it just seems bizarre in some cases where people have stopped paying on their first, but still paying on their second, so it would seem like, those types of (loans event) have no value and eventually will be written-off even if they are current now.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: That statement, if that were true in some cases then that would be true the way you – your assumptions are all true, your conclusion will be true, but that’s not always the case and there are a lot of different reasons why people are doing things and –
Operator: Carole Berger, Soleil Securities.
Carole Berger - Soleil Securities: I have a non-earnings question for Jamie. Yesterday, Kerry Killinger testified before a Congressional Committee, and essentially said that the only reason WaMu was put out of business was because that they didn’t belong to ‘The Club’. And given the fact that you just added to reserves for the impaired portfolio, I’d like your comments on to whether or not WaMu probably would have failed regardless of the way it was handled?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: You got to ask the regulators. We had nothing to do with the decisions that were made around declaring them insolvent and stuff like that. And obviously they were having a deposit outflow. As you remember, when we bought the company, we put up $40 billion, the reserves for write-down on various assets.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: We raised $11.5 billion the next day to replenish the capital that was needed to execute that.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: And since then the world has been worse, not better.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Right.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: So we put up slightly additional reserves in certain different categories, so – plus I am unaware of any ‘Club’ to tell you the truth.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: And I am not aware that there was any other bidder other than ourselves.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: And I was flying back from China so I didn’t see the testimony.
Operator: Brad Ball, Ladenburg.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: I wondered if you can add some color on credit card sales volume trends up 7% year-over-year in the Chase cards, any comment on trends intra-quarter? Also, where is the spending being done, which segments and do you think it’s sustainable at these levels or is this just growing off a relatively lower year-over-year comp?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Well, it’s definitely the later, growing off lower year-over-year comp, and as you go back to some of Gordon’s Investor Day slides, the more affluent the segment, the earlier and the greater magnitude of sales pickup, and we think as it relates to the market broadly, our share of sales is picking up related to all of the work that the business is doing with the new products and rewards programs and partners programs we have, and then there is some seasonality, obviously, when you go from the first versus the fourth bigger – a big spending season in the fourth quarter.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: And what I saw is that, consumer spend and incomes are kind of back to where they were before all this crisis, and you’ve seen retail sales up, you’ve seen restaurant sales up, you’ve seen airplanes sales up, you’ve seen car sales up. I mean that’s the fact. And you could guess as well as we can guess whether it’s going to continue or not. And we even see luxury sales up.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: So, it’s not just non-discretionary, it’s actually some discretionary category?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: I always question that discretionary break out, because when you really dig into it, it’s hard to determine some of that, but if you just pick out specific luxury items and then travel, vacation type travel, those are up, and they are up even stronger than the aggregates if I remember correctly.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: And then follow-up, a clarification, in your response to the question about the CARD Act, I think Mike indicated that, well, some of the major provisions aren’t implemented until August, which we know, so we don’t know the impact of those, but then later Jamie responded by saying that 100% was in the first quarter number. I am confused by that.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: 100% of everything that we know of, and there is a straggling piece or two that the final outcomes of what the legislation would be is not yet obvious.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Which should probably cost us $300 million or $400 million or $500 million. We don’t really know the number yet, but just assume it’s going to cost something.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: So the additional provisions that will be implemented, August 22, will cost between $300 million and $500 million roughly?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: That’s just a – I am throwing out a number, but yes.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Purely a guess on my boss’s part.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: And then just to be clear, again, I am sorry, in the first quarter net loss of $300 million or so, there was a CARD Act cost, both in terms of revenue and expense?
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Say it again.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: Just to be clear –
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Yes, there was.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: And the magnitude of that on a run rate basis is consistent with what your prior guidance had been?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: More or less.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: Remember, we’ve always said, those are static analysis. Let’s say we’re just kind of run it through, but people are changing how they price for cards, how they are using cards and I’m not sure the static analysis will be what it’ll ultimately cost the company three years from now.
Bradley Ball - Ladenburg: Actually, just reminded myself one more question. What you said about the consumer spending trends, is that what drove the comment that Mike made about small business starting to pick-up a bit. I guess small business on the borrowing side is what you (implied)?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: That’s right.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: That’s another good sign, small business loans are up pretty substantially.
Operator: Richard Bove, Rochdale Securities.
Richard Bove - Rochdale Securities: The consolidation of the VIEs raises two questions, I guess. One is concerning your equity accounts. I understand that you took on more liabilities than assets, and therefore, you reduced your equity. But why did you reduce retained earnings? Why do retained earnings go down by $1.4 billion?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: I mean really the change was bringing on $88 million worth of assets, which was largely credit card, Dick, and then you had the major change. The equity account was putting up a loan loss reserves related to those card assets.
James Dimon - Chairman and CEO: If you take a look at the quarter, you've got earnings minus the after-tax effect of that $7 billion of reserves, plus OCI, plus whole bunch of other stuff.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Yes, lot of opportunities in the quarter, but the FAS 166/167 was about $4.5 billion after-tax negative to the equity account, all driven really by the credit card side which was the reserves.
Richard Bove - Rochdale Securities: Yes. I know I can understand why the equity account went down by the $4.5 billion. I just was surprised to see it show up in retained earnings. But the other question relates to the allowance for loan losses, the $7.4 billion that was added to reserves. Why didn’t that go through the income statement?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: That’s what the accounting pronouncements were on how to handle 166/167. So that’s a guidance on how all banks will handle that one.
Richard Bove - Rochdale Securities: Was that the reason that the net charge-offs were higher than the provision as it did go through – in other words the provision was lower than net charge-offs? And I’m wondering if it’s because of the –
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: No, no, independent of that. I mean the provision less than charge-offs was separately the release of the $1 billion of reserves in credit cards given the improving credit trends, delinquencies and roll rates.
Richard Bove - Rochdale Securities: All right. So in other words, the charge-off numbers shouldn’t be used as an indicator let’s say in the second or third quarters to what might happen to the provision?
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Everything you saw in the Cards segment about charge-off rate and the guidance we talked about, none of that is affected by 166/167.
Richard Bove - Rochdale Securities: Thank everybody.
Michael J. Cavanagh - Finance: Okay. Well, thanks, everybody. Looking forward to next quarter.
Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s teleconference. You may all disconnect.