Mark Mason: Again, it’s going to be a combination of continuing to bend the curve and bring our expenses down. Obviously, we’ve given you guidance on operating efficiency of less than 60%, which will be some of that top line growth, but it’s the combination of the two.
Operator: And our next question comes from Betsy Graseck with Morgan Stanley.
Betsy Graseck: Hi, good morning.
Mark Mason: Good morning.
Jane Fraser: Hi, Betsy
Betsy Graseck: I just wanted to confirm on the CET1. You have 100 basis point buffer on top of regulatory minimums. So that would suggest that the 13.3% that you got this quarter is in line with where you’re planning on holding it going forward. Is that fair?
Mark Mason: Yes. So you’re right, we hit 13.3% this quarter, down a tad bit from the 13.4% last quarter. Effective October 1, the 4.3% SCB comes into play. And so, that would equate to assuming the 100 basis point management buffer at 12.3% regulatory requirement and a 13.3% kind of target that we would manage to. I’d highlight a couple of things that I’m sure are obvious to you, Betsy. One is, this is the stress capital buffer for the 12 month period starting October 1. And two is, the strategy that we’ve described and talked about and have started to execute against is intentionally designed to help morph the business towards a more steady, predictable, consistent stream of revenues, fee revenue growth, as well as bring our expenses down over time, and exit these markets, and those things should contribute to reducing our stress capital buffer over time and improving our returns.
But the answer to your question very directly is, yes, the 13.3% would reflect where we’d be targeting as of October 1 for now.
Betsy Graseck: And since you mentioned you’re evaluating buybacks quarter-by-quarter. I guess the question here is, how should I think about that relative to we get Basel endgame coming out soon because clearly, when you’re at 13.3% against the new rate cap SEB, you it signals a bigger opportunity for buybacks over the coming quarters. So how should I think about that?
Jane Fraser: I think consistent with what we’ve been talking about. There’s a lot of uncertainty out there about the new capital requirements, both in terms of the nature of them and the timing of implementation. I think the industry is expecting to get more clarity about that with the comment period that will be coming up. Plus it’s a fairly uncertain macroeconomic environment at the moment. So both Mark and I feel it’s prudent to continue making that assessment until some of this uncertainty is clarified as to what precisely will do. You should take confidence that we’re at the levels, including the management buffer that we expect to be for the rest of the year. We’ve proven a good case of being able to build capital. That’s for sure over the last two years.
And you take comfort as well. We increased the dividend. We had $2 billion of capital returned last quarter. So our intentions are clear to return capital where we can, but also to be prudent in how we do so, given environment and current regulatory uncertainty.
Operator: And our next question comes from Mike Mayo with Wells Fargo.
Mike Mayo: Hi. One negative question, one positive question. So on the negative side, you talked about bending the cost curve, but I think second quarter year-over-year it’s bending the wrong way. And six quarters from now, you’re saying it should bend the other way. So what are we not seeing in the financials that gives you such confidence? Because it seems based on this quarter’s results, a little bit more of a trustee story. And on the positive side, TPS continued double digit growth, you continue to invest more in that business. How are you monetizing greater money motion among your multinational and other clients? Thanks.
