This is the first time that we have ever come across entities that have no tax residence.

I could not disagree with you more. Of course you shifted something, the most valuable thing you have.

Why not close those egregious, unjustifiable loopholes, that are costing our Treasury so much money, and use that revenue to end sequestration this year and next year?

Why should those revenues that would come from closing those corporate tax loopholes not be used for any number of extremely important goals from deficit reduction to ending sequestration?

I share your hopes that this nomination can be acted upon quickly.

The President says he wants to close them. The President, when he was a Senator, co-sponsored much of the legislation that would have closed at least some of those egregious tax avoidance tactics.

A bunch of these loopholes that are being used to drain our Treasury, to ship money offshore, serve no economic purpose.

I think that tax reform, as you talk about it generically, needs to contribute to the deficit reduction effort.

But if that cannot be done or is not done this year, why not take the revenues from these loopholes which have no economic purpose, other than tax avoidance, and take that revenue to end sequestration?

We sure do not want them to grow any further.

I think that most of us, maybe all of us, agree that we need to have a credible commitment, the earlier the better.

The perpetrators of this attack will feel the full weight of that justice.

Whoever was responsible for targeting that celebration, whatever their twisted motives, they will fail.

America has demonstrated a remarkable resilience throughout its history and a firm determination to bring justice.

I know you have talked about the deficit and how to go about addressing it and how you would recommend that we proceed with deficit reduction.

The percentage of our GDP that comes to the Federal Government in the form of revenues is at a historic low.

Corporate taxes now account for a historically low percentage of all Federal revenues.

both Democratic U.S. Senators, Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow

So what you said is not exactly accurate on that day. Is that correct?

I think your answer was inaccurate.

That was a misstatement, misrepresentation, and flat out falsity, as far as I am concerned.

Well, that is looking forward, but, again, analyzing what happened here, I will go back to you, Mr. Waterhouse.

You think the average person listening to this would not think you were referring to the trades that were at issue that blew up?

Well, in general, let me ask you, Mr. Curry, what is your reaction to that activity, reducing the RWA not by selling risky assets but by designing models in order to produce lower numbers?

All right. Now, you also wrote in the email that the bank said, quote, that if you--referring to the OCC-- 'have been watching the position reports and the P&Ls,' do you know what position reports and P&Ls you could have been watching?