Department of the Treasury – Budget in Brief 

Special Inspector General for TARP 

Program Summary by Budget Activity 

Note: FY 2016 Other resources reflect actual obligations. 

Summary 

The FY 2018 Budget proposes $20,297,000, 

which is 50 percent below the FY 2017 

Annualized CR level.1

 Treasury has 

committed $38 billion for TARP housing 

programs, of which more than $8 billion 

remains outstanding for payments scheduled to 

occur through FY 2023.2

 Currently, TARP 

spending is approximately $1 billion per 

quarter. Of the amount proposed, 81 percent is 

for investigations and 19 percent is for audits. 

SIGTARP’s criminal investigations of TARP 

recipients counter threats to public safety and 

Government interests, including public 

corruption, antitrust (unfair competition), 

contract fraud, financial institution fraud, and 

mortgage fraud. SIGTARP’s audits identify 

costly waste, abuse, risk of fraud, and 

inefficiency. SIGTARP has ongoing criminal 

investigations into TARP recipients, and 

 

1 Including $200,000 for training and $40,000 to the Council of the 

Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. 

2

 Of this amount, $7.01 billion is obligated to be paid and $3.93 billion 

committed in the Making Home Affordable Program and $3.2 billion 

is obligated to be paid in the Hardest Hit Fund program. 

ongoing audits requested by members of 

Congress. Under TARP’s Hardest Hit Fund, 

which was scheduled to end in FY 2018, but 

was extended and expanded by $2 billion in 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 

(P.L. 114-113), recipients of TARP dollars 

include 19 state housing finance agencies, 

38 cities/counties, 147 individuals, eight forprofit companies, 158 non-profits, 39 land 

banks, hundreds of demolition contractors, 

homebuyers, and homeowners. Separately, 

recipients of TARP dollars through the 

Making Home Affordable Program include 

Ocwen Loan Servicing, Wells Fargo Bank, 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, Bank of America, 

Nationstar Mortgage, Select Portfolio 

Servicing, CitiMortgage, and more than 130 

other mortgage servicers. 

SIGTARP’s investigations have recovered $10 

billion, which translates to a 40-times return 

on investment from its annual appropriations 

through FY 2016.3

 This is in addition to $2 

 

3

 Includes fines, restitution, forfeiture, and full homeowner relief by a 

large financial institution. 

Dollars in thousands

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

Budget Activity Enacted Annualized CR Request Change % Change

Investigations 31,801 32,069 16,441 (15,628) -48.73%

Audit 8,870 8,525 3,856 (4,669) -54.77%

Subtotal Appropriated Resources $ 40,671 $ 40,594 $ 20,297 $ (20,297) -50.00%

Unobligated Balances Brought Forward - 4,000 11,090 7,090 177.25%

Available PPIP Funds 475 1,548 1,613 65 4.20%

Total Program Operating Level $ 41,146 $ 46,142 $ 33,000 $ (13,142) -28.48%

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

Budget Activity Enacted Enacted Request Change % Change

Investigations 32,276 36,770 26,730 (10,040) -27.30%

Audit 8,870 9,372 6,270 (3,102) -33.10%

Total SIGTARP by Budget Activity $ 41,146 $ 46,142 $ 33,000 $ (13,142) -28.48%

Total FTE 192 192 100 (92) -47.92%

FY 2018 to FY 2018

FY 2016 to FY 2017
Department of the Treasury – Budget in Brief 

billion in cost-saving audit recommendations, 

including $161 million in savings that will be 

realized from implemented recommendations 

this year. For the last three fiscal years, 

recoveries to the Government exceeded 

SIGTARP’s budget proposal and offset 

taxpayer losses. SIGTARP has developed a 

deep expertise in identifying crime in TARP, 

with 394 defendants criminally charged, nearly 

100 of which were charged in FY 2016-2017. 

SIGTARP investigations have also resulted in 

significant Department of Justice enforcement 

actions against TARP recipients Bank of 

America, JPMorgan Chase Bank, Goldman 

Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Ally Financial, 

SunTrust Bank, Fifth Third Bank, and General 

Motors. SIGTARP audits in FY 2016-2017 

identified costly waste, abuse, and risk of 

criminal behavior in ongoing TARP programs. 

SIGTARP FY 2018 Budget Highlights 

FY 2018 Budget Adjustments 

Pay Raise +$465,000 / +0 FTE 

Funds are requested for the proposed January 

2018 pay-raise. 

Pay Annualization +$170,000 / +0 FTE 

Funds are requested for annualization of the 

January 2017 pay-raise. 

Non-Pay +$174,000 / +0 FTE 

Funds are requested for non-labor expenses 

such as travel, contracts, rent, contracts, 

supplies, and equipment. 

Technical FTE Adjustment 

-$14,600,000 / -92 FTE 

The technical adjustment reduces the 

appropriated FTE level. 

Reduce Support Services -$6,506,000 / -0 

FTE 

SIGTARP will also seek to reduce nonpersonnel costs. 

Explanation of Budget Activities 

Investigations ($16,441,000 from direct 

appropriations)

The Investigations budget activity supports 

SIGTARP’s priority of law enforcement of 

crimes related to TARP. 

Audit ($3,856,000 from direct 

appropriations) 

The Audit budget activity supports 

SIGTARP’s priority of being an independent 

watchdog over the billions of TARP dollars 

being disbursed. 

Both activities support and complement 

Treasury’s efforts to safeguard and protect the 

integrity of the financial system. SIGTARP 

coordinates with other law enforcement 

agencies, leveraging its unique position and 

expertise by forming law enforcement 

partnerships. 

Public-Private Investment Program (PPIP) 

SIGTARP is requesting that PPIP funds be 

made available to support SIGTARP’s 

oversight of ongoing TARP programs. 

Please refer to the Summary of FY 2018 

Appropriations Language later in this 

document or SIGTARP’s Congressional 

Justification for proposed language.

Special Inspector General for TARP FTE Amount

FY 2017 Annualized CR 184 $40,594 

Changes to Base:

Maintaining Current Levels (MCLs): $809 

Pay raise 465 

Pay annualization 170 

Non-pay 174 

Program Reductions (92) (21,106)

Technical FTE Adjustment (92) (14,600)

Reduce Support Services (6,506)

Subtotal Changes to Base (92) (20,297)

Total FY 2018 Base 92 $20,297 

Total FY 2018 Request 92 $20,297 
Department of the Treasury – Budget in Brief 

SIGTARP Performance Highlights 

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

FY 2014 – 

FY 2016

Budget Activity Performance Measures Actual Actual Actual Target Target Trend

Investigations

Percentage of Cases Accepted 

for Consideration by Civil or 

Criminal Authorities Resulting 

in a Positive Final Outcome

N/A N/A 77.0 70.0 70.0 N/A

Investigations

Percentage of Cases 

Presented to Civil or Criminal 

Authorities within Eight Months 

of the Case Being Opened

N/A N/A 80.0 70.0 50.0 N/A

Investigations

Percentage of Cases That are 

Joint Agency/Task Force 

Investigations

75.5 69.65 71.0 70.0 50.0

Investigations

Percentage of Preliminary 

Investigations Converted to 

Full Investigations within 180 

Days

95.75 100.0 99.0 80.0 60.0

Audit

Number of Completed Audit 

Products including Referral to 

Investigations Division (Units)

N/A N/A 11 7.0 3.0 N/A

Key: DISC - Discontinued, B - Baseline

Description of Performance 

SIGTARP exceeded all metrics in FY 2016. 

In FY 2016, the “Percentage of Cases That are 

Joint Agency/Task Force Investigations” with 

other law enforcement agencies was 

71 percent. In FY 2016, “Percentage of 

Preliminary Investigations Converted to Full 

Investigations within 180 days” was 

99 percent, exceeding the target of 80 percent. 

The “Percentage of Cases Accepted for 

Consideration by Civil or Criminal Authorities 

Resulting in a Positive Final Outcome” in 

FY 2016 was 77 percent success rate, 

exceeded its target of 60 percent. During 

FY 2016, the “Percentage of Cases Presented 

to Civil or Criminal Authorities within Eight 

Months of the Case Being Opened,” was 

80 percent, exceeding the target of 70 percent. 

SIGTARP exceeded its performance measure 

“Number of Completed Audit Products 

including Referrals to Investigations Division” 

of seven in FY 2016, with 11 products. 

SIGTARP exceeded its 85 percent goal of 

“Percentage of Congressional Inquiries 

Responded to within 45 Days of Receipt,” at 

100 percent. 
Department of the Treasury – Budget in Brief 

Comments of the Honorable Christy Goldsmith Romero 

Special Inspector General Troubled Asset Relief Program 

on the FY 2018 Proposed Funding Level 

Under the provisions of section 6(f)(3)(E) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, as 

applied through the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Special Inspector 

General has provided the following comments regarding FY 2018 proposed funding: 

The FY 2018 budget request substantially inhibits the Office of the Special Inspector General 

(OIG) for TARP from performing the duties of the office, including audits and criminal 

investigations. The proposed funding represents a 50% reduction ($20 million) from the FY 

2017 level enacted by the Congress, despite the Federal Government’s continued ownership 

or control of troubled assets in TARP housing programs that are $38 billion in size – the 

same size as last year. This year alone (FY 2018), Treasury will spend $4 billion in TARP. 

This spending is in two programs: (1) the recently expanded and extended Housing Finance 

Agency Innovation Fund for the Hardest Hit Housing Markets (Hardest Hit Fund or HHF); 

and (2) TARP’s Making Home Affordable Program (MHA), which has spent just over half 

(60%) of obligated/committed TARP dollars. 

In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016, the Congress authorized an extension and 

an additional $2 billion in the Hardest Hit Fund. With that authorization, Treasury extended 

the spending of Federal dollars in HHF from FY 2018 to FY 2022. There are $3.2 billion in 

unspent Federal dollars in HHF. Recipients of these Federal TARP dollars are 19 state 

agencies, 38 cities/counties, 147 individuals, 8 for-profit companies, 158 non-profits, 39 land 

banks, hundreds of demolition contractors and subcontractors (including asbestos,

inspection and removal, waste disposal, fill dirt, grading, greening, site inspection, 

maintenance), homebuyers, and homeowners. 

The OIG’s investigations and audits have revealed risks of criminal behavior, fraud, waste, 

and abuse in the Hardest Hit Fund program. The OIG’s FY 2016 audit revealed that the 

HHF blight demolition program is significantly vulnerable to the substantial risk of unfair 

competitive practices, including favoritism, undue influence, contract steering, bid-rigging, 

and other closed-door contracting processes, as well as fraudulent overcharging. Only two 

of 20 recommendations in that audit have been implemented. Other FY 2016 audits revealed 

abuse related to evicting people out of their homes to qualify for TARP-funded demolition, 

and $8.2 million in waste of TARP dollars by a state agency contractor. 

Additionally, in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016, the Congress terminated MHA, 

but exempted homeowners who applied before December 31, 2016. Just over half (60%) of 

these federal dollars have been paid to Ocwen, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of 

America, Nationstar, SPS, CitiMortgage, and more than 130 mortgage servicers, investors 

and homeowners. Treasury is obligated or committed to pay a remaining $10.94 billion 

through FY 2023. Program participation has remained steady at about one million 

homeowners in FY 2015, FY 2016 and FY 2017. The OIG’s investigations with the Justice 

Department, and audits, have revealed a track record of violations of TARP rules and the 
Department of the Treasury – Budget in Brief 

law by some servicers in MHA and warned of risk of fraud, waste, and abuse to the Federal 

Government and homeowners. 

The OIG has a significant number of ongoing criminal investigations of recipients of Federal 

dollars in TARP, in addition to audits of TARP recipients. The proposed budget effectively 

removes the resources necessary for the OIG to: (1) identify costly waste and abuse, as well 

as cost savings through ongoing and future audits, and (2) conduct ongoing and future 

criminal investigations that (a) counter threats, including public corruption, antitrust (unfair 

competition), contract fraud, financial institution fraud, and mortgage fraud, and (b) lead to 

indictments, convictions, prison sentences, and recoveries. This places critical Federal 

Government interests at risk, and substantially inhibits the OIG in carrying out its duties and 

responsibilities.