Noticias en español de fuentes internacionales.

Markets

Bank of America posts third-quarter profit drop due to $1.2 billion Treasury fine

World desk, Times News (2026-10-14): Bank of America posted a sharp decline to third-quarter profit after being hit with a $1.2 billion penalty by the U.S. Treasury Department. Earnings per… Fuente primaria: original en CNBC Top News (cnbc.com).

· CNBC Top News

Bank of America posts third-quarter profit drop due to $1.2 billion Treasury fine

Bank of America posted a sharp decline to third-quarter profit after being hit with a $1.2 billion penalty by the U.S. Treasury Department.

  • Earnings per share: 91 cents, may not compare with $1.10 LSEG estimate
  • Revenue: $30.12 billion vs. $30.69 billion estimate

The bank's profit fell 17% to $6.93 billion, or 91 cents a share. Excluding the penalty, which sapped income by 17 cents, EPS would've been $1.08 a share.

Revenue rose 3.2% to $30.12 billion, below expectations by about $570 million, largely on misses from Wall Street trading operations.

The Treasury episode, in which U.S. regulators said the company failed to report billions of dollars in suspicious transactions, will inevitably spark questions as to whether CEO Brian Moynihan has a handle on controls at the second-biggest U.S. bank by assets.

Moynihan took the helm in 2010 and spent the early years of his tenure making amends for mortgage-related abuses in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Now, questions arise as to whether there are any more risk-management issues waiting to be found.

The Treasury announcement adds 11th-hour intrigue to what was an otherwise fairly routine bank earnings week. On Tuesday, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and Wells Fargo posted mixed results, with JPMorgan missing EPS and revenue estimates for the first time in years.

This story is developing. Please check back for updates.

Correction: Bank of America reported third-quarter revenue on an FTE basis of $30.12 billion compared with LSEG estimates of $30.69 billion. An earlier version misstated the comparison.