Jamie Dimon won't get off as easy at his second congressionalhearing this month when he tries to explain how JPMorgan Chase& Co. lost at least $2 billion on trades that he has said“violated common sense.”

The U.S. House Financial Services Committee will be a tougheraudience for Dimon when he testifies today after members of theSenate Banking Committee spent much of their June 13 hearingcomplimenting the chief executive officer or asking his advice onfinancial law, banking analysts said.

“He won't get lawmakers apologizing for asking him questionslike in the Senate,” said Paul Miller, a former examiner for theFederal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia and analyst at FBR CapitalMarkets in Arlington, Virginia. “There will probably be moreoutrage. They won't be as friendly.”

The House hearing will take more time and won't be nearly ascontrolled as Dimon faces more than 60 lawmakers, most of whom areup for re-election in November and motivated to capture localheadlines, said Mark Calabria, director of financial regulationstudies at the Cato Institute and a former senior aide to theSenate Banking Committee.

“The harsher and crazier that they can get, the more of a chancethat they'll get press coverage,” Calabria said. “It's the House,so there's always a bit more wildness to it.”

Dimon is also speaking on the second panel, following testimonyfrom regulators including Securities and Exchange Commissioner MarySchapiro and Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry. He facesDemocrats who have pressed for tighter regulations on Wall Street'slargest firms, including the co- author of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act.Lawmakers who have called to shrink or break up the largestfinancial institutions are also on the roster.

The hearing is the first held by the House on the tradinglosses, which have drawn inquiries from the SEC, Commodity FuturesTrading Commission and Department of Justice.

The SEC's review of JPMorgan's $2 billion trading loss is“ongoing” and may examine the accuracy of the bank's financialreporting, Schapiro said in remarks prepared for the hearing.

Schapiro, who said the SEC doesn't publicly discuss openinvestigations, laid out areas in which the agency could pursueclaims against an institution “in circumstances of this nature.”They include quarterly disclosures about market risks, compensationpolicies and accounting issues, she said.

Dimon's written statement is nearly identical to his remarks infront of the Senate Banking Committee last week. During thathearing, Dimon apologized for the losses and said he felt“terrible” that shareholders would lose money because of the chiefinvestment office's trading strategy.

Hedge 'Morphed'

During more than two hours of testimony, Dimon described a $2billion loss in the bank's chief investment office as a hedge that“morphed into something I can't justify,” and largely blamedsubordinates for a trading strategy gone wrong. The bank is lookingat clawing back some of the compensation earned by thoseresponsible, he said.

Risk-monitoring systems and executives at the largest U.S. bankfailed to adequately police threats concentrated in a derivativesportfolio at a London unit of the chief investment office, he said.The division wasn't subjected to the same scrutiny as otherbusinesses, and managers there deviated from control procedures,even after triggers on risk limits were breached, Dimon told theSenate panel.

Still, Dimon didn't back away from his criticism of theDodd-Frank Act and other regulations, including the so-calledVolcker rule, which he called “unnecessary.”

Representative Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the Republicanchairman of the committee, will emphasize the importance of capitalbuffers at the largest U.S. banks, according to his openingstatement. Bachus also will also home in on the Volcker rule, whichregulators are still revising.

“The Volcker rule proposal is, by itself, staggering in itslength and complexity,” Bachus said in his prepared remarks. “And,more than a month after this loss was disclosed, the regulatorsstill cannot say whether the Volcker rule would have prevented JPMorgan from making these trades.”

Lawmakers on the House committee, much like those on its Senatecounterpart, have benefited from JPMorgan's campaign donations.

Bachus received $11,000 from the bank's political actioncommittees and its employees during this campaign cycle, accordingto the Center for Responsive Politics. Representative Barney Frank,who was chairman of the committee from 2007 through 2010 and hasdecided to retire at the end of this term, received $11,000 fromthe bank and its employees during his first campaign cycle aschairman. Frank has received $4,500 this cycle.

Campaign Funding

Since the start of the current campaign cycle in 2011, lawmakerson the committee have received $168,055 from the bank's employeesand its political action committees, according to the Center forResponsive Politics. Republicans on the committee have received 73percent of that money. Since 2005, lawmakers on the panel, whichhas been controlled by both parties during the period, have takenin $1.3 million.

FBR analyst Miller said it's unlikely that House lawmakers willget any new information out of Dimon, saying that he'll dodge thequestions like he did in the Senate.

“There were some really good pointed questions last week, butthere was no follow up,” Miller said. “All he has to do is answerthe questions in a technical manner and they'll get lost.”

Comedian Jon Stewart was among those who poked fun at the Senatehearing, saying the senators were “sucking up to Jamie Dimon likethey were on JPMorgan's payroll.”

“The House members have heard that,” Calabria said. “They don'twant to see their name in the paper next to how much they've gottenfrom JPMorgan with the implication that they've taken it easy onthem.”

Bloomberg News

Copyright 2018 Bloomberg. All rightsreserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten,or redistributed.