Despite isolationist mood, U.S. isn’t going it alone on banking rules
By John Heltman
The Trump administration’s apprehension about global trade and international agreements poses a dilemma for advocates of cross-border regulatory standards. Should standards setters shift their focus away from Washington, or take more strident steps to keep the U.S. in the fold? …Leadership positions in international organizations tend to be designated according to shorthand political rules and arrangements, said Karen Shaw Petrou, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics. For example, the World Bank has historically been headed by an American, while the International Monetary Fund has historically been headed by a European. Given the importance that the U.S. plays in global finance, an American was probably the odds-on favorite to head the FSB from the outset, Petrou said. “These FSB votes, like all of these global regulatory agencies, are not done by logic but by politics and agreements,” Petrou said. “It had been assumed that, since [former FSB Chair and Bank of England Gov. Mark] Carney had been at the FSB for so long, and Americans don’t run any of the other key global regulatory bodies, that the FSB was going to be America’s turn this time. It’s just I think took a great deal more work than it otherwise would have.”