In recent years, it‘s become de rigueur for corporate America to prove it’s hip to the new way of doing things, i.e. that it totally gets it’s not O.K. to, say, sexually harass women, discriminate against them when hiring, and pay them like crap in comparison to their male counterparts, for the simple reason that they lack appendages that at one time you could wordlessly point to as explanation for why a male would be paid many multiples of a female. So when Citigroup announced last year that, after accounting for “job function, level, and geography,” internal analysis showed women at the bank were paid, on average, 99 percent of what men made, the company must have been pretty pleased! Unfortunately, the unadjusted data makes Citigroup look slightly less woke. As the bank revealed in a new blog post on Wednesday:

Today, we’re also being transparent about another piece of information. We’ve calculated our unadjusted or “raw” pay gap for women and U.S. minorities—which measures the difference in median total compensation when we don’t adjust for factors such as job function, level, and geography. This analysis shows that the median pay for women globally is 71 percent of the median for men, and the median pay for U.S. minorities is 93 percent of the median for non-minorities.

Ooo, that’s not a great look! Particularly given that one factor the bank says widened the gap was seniority, as claiming there would be less of a disparity if only women were promoted more is not a great argument. While Citi says it was the first U.S. bank to release a pay gap report last year, according to Bloomberg it only put out today’s much-less-flattering figures after significant pressure from activist shareholder Arjuna Capital, which filed a shareholder proposal in November asking the bank “to report the more straightforward comparison of men’s and women’s median earnings” of its entire workforce. “If we’re only dealing with statistically adjusted numbers, then we’re only dealing with half the problem,” said Arjuna managing partner Natasha Lamb. “We need more women in higher-paid positions and leadership.”

To be fair, Citi insists it’s actually going to do something to bridge the gap, with a “goal . . . to increase representation at the Assistant Vice President through Managing Director levels to at least 40 percent for women globally” by the end of 2021. (To account for discrepancy between minority and non-minority pay, it hopes to similarly increase representation for black employees in the U.S. by 8 percent.) Still, a goal is not the same thing as a mandate, so . . . check back in in 2021.

If you would like to receive the Levin Report in your inbox daily, click here to subscribe.

Hoaxers force world’s largest asset manager to deny authorship of letter advocating environmentally friendly policies

Every year, BlackRock founder Larry Fink sends a letter to C.E.O.s about issues facing investors. Last year, for instance, he told public companies that they must contribute to society, or risk losing the support of a firm that manages more than $6 trillion in assets. And this year, on Wednesday, a similarly high-minded missive went out saying BlackRock would “require all companies we hold stakes in to align their business models with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” in an effort to back up its criticism of the Trump administration for pulling out of the global accord that seeks to combat climate change, “an important framework for long-term sustainability.” Only, the letter wasn’t actually from Fink, but a group of enterprising scamps:

BlackRock has been targeted by an elaborate hoax involving a spoof letter purporting to be written by the fund group’s chief executive Larry Fink that was sent to media outlets.

The letter, which appears to be the work of environmental campaigners, issued a warning to companies that they must take decisive action on tackling climate change or be dumped by the world’s largest investor . . . The hoax also included the creation of a detailed Web site that closely mimics that of BlackRock.

Taking the bit a step further, an extremely official-looking press release claiming to be from a company spokesman was also sent out, disavowing the letter and saying the firm has no plans to “pressur[e] companies toward Paris-compliance and long-term sustainability,” as such things are “are at odds with near-term profitability.“ While, sadly, the asset manager did not in fact issue that specific denial, it did tweet that the letter claiming it espouses such environmentally friendly policies was fake:

Wall Street did pretty well for itself last year

Thanks, President Donny!

The six biggest U.S. banks have never had a $100 billion year. Until now.

Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., and their peers have already reported more than $111 billion of profit for 2018. Morgan Stanley will only make that number bigger when it releases its fourth-quarter results Thursday. They have Republican tax cuts to thank, along with rising interest rates, a surge in deal-making, and a retail-banking boom.

You’ll never believe it, but Trump’s former coal-lobbyist E.P.A. pick plans to gut environmental regulations

You might want to sit down for this:

Andrew Wheeler, a former fossil-fuel industry lobbyist whom President Trump nominated earlier this month to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, told a key Senate panel Wednesday that he would continue the administration’s aggressive reversal of environmental rules, even as Democrats asked him why he wasn’t doing more to curb greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change.

“Through our deregulatory actions, the Trump administration has proven that burdensome federal regulations are not necessary to drive environmental progress,” Wheeler claimed with a straight face during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday, not mentioning the significant damage his boss has already inflicted on the environment. He added that “certainty, and the innovation that thrives in a climate of certainty, are key to progress.”

Government just ignored this little document when it came to deciding Trump could keep his interest in D.C. hotel

That pesky Constitution:

The General Services Administration ignored constitutional implications when deciding to maintain the lease of the Old Post Office Building to the Trump International Hotel after Donald Trump became president, according to a new inspector-general report on the deal.

“G.S.A.’s decision-making process related to Tenant’s possible breach of the lease included serious shortcomings. G.S.A. had an obligation to uphold and enforce the Constitution. However, G.S.A. opted not to seek any guidance from O.L.C., and did not address the constitutional issues related to the management of the lease,” the I.G. report says.

Ah, well. Live and learn!

Elsewhere!

Goldman’s Tactic in Huge Malaysian Fraud Case: Smear an Ex-Partner (N.Y.T.)

Trade War Tops Global Risks for Business Leaders (W.S.J.)

Maxine Waters pledges “many hearings” into bank conduct and targets Trump’s chief of staff (CNBC)

Orcel’s Rise to Santander C.E.O. Ruined by Dispute Over UBS Pay (Bloomberg)

Jamie Dimon says a hard Brexit would be a “disaster” for the U.K. (CNBC)

So Bad It’s Good: Markets See Silver Lining in Brexit Rejection (Bloomberg)

U.S. pursuing criminal charges against Huawei for alleged theft of trade secrets (CNBC)

Snap Finance Chief Joins Executive Exodus (W.S.J.)

WeWork’s C.E.O. Makes Millions as Landlord to WeWork (W.S.J.)

Silicon Valley dad spends $1,500 a month to rent an apartment for his daughter’s 2 cats (CNBC)

— Lessons from the “Trump and the Media” class at University of Toronto

— An unsparing look at The New York Times

— A wild mystery surrounding the world’s most expensive painting sold at auction

— “I come from generations of unfulfilled women” —Glenn Close

— Jared and Ivanka’s curious movie date

Looking for more? Sign up for our daily Hive newsletter and never miss a story.