Those banks had contracts with the executives, saying they would get the bonuses if X metrics were met (likely what it was, maybe it was just a straight bonus every year, and the assumption is that they would be fired if they didn't preform). Those contracts don't go away because of a bailout.

I would be interested in legislation that changes this. If a private bank (I don't think there are many truly private banks anymore) wants to give whatever bonuses it wants, I really don't care.

But once public money is involved, I agree we need some strict controls.

Notice that you're effectively saying "the bailed out banks should renege on contracts". If nothing else, there's enough money on the table that the affected people are likely to litigate, and there's a fair chance you'll just end up paying the bonuses just the same, but now topped off with the expenses of a lawsuit.

Are the bonuses often contractual and not discretionary? If so, they're not really bonuses.

Contractual doesn't mean guaranteed. You could have a bonus that's contractually tied to a certain set of conditions being met (e.g. personal objectives). If the employee meets those objectives and the company doesn't pay out, they could be in breach, regardless of their financial situation.

They are bonuses, but the word "bonus" means slightly different things in different industries. In the banking industry, think of it more like a sales commission than a totally optional check for doing a really good job. It's paid out according to a pre-determined formula, not the whim of a manager.

Which makes sense. In the cases of financial institutions needing a bailout while simultaneously paying huge bonuses something must be seriously miscalibrated in their calculations.

Jailing the people responsible for committing criminal misconduct and confiscating their gains seems like a nice solution to this dilemma.

Isn't reneging on contracts a standard part of bankruptcy?

The whole purpose of the bailout is that there is no bankruptcy to begin with.

How do you think banks work? They are see-saws of money on one big balance sheet.

Also the regulatory situation in Europe is still much more stringent than in the US. In US banking there are a load of utter time wasting rules that provide little sanity to the issues suffered

Not to mention the unquantifiable damage taxpayers took because the economy went bye bye and they were unable to pay their loans and mortgages.

You can make a heck of a lot of money if you kill the economy, get bailed out and get to keep the properties and houses of the little guys that don't get the same benefits.

If you really wanted the economy to recover quickly you would be bailing out taxpayers not big corporations.

Not to burst anyone's bubble, but banks need loans to stay in business per definition. Especially in a Glass-Steagal world.