FedFin Assessment:  Future of U.S. Bank Capital, Liquidity, Structural Regulation

In this report, we continue our policy postmortem of SVB/SBNY and, now, so much more.  Prior reports have assessed the overall political context (see Client Report RESOLVE49) and likely changes to FDIC insurance (see Client Report DEPOSITINSURANCE118), with a forthcoming Petrou op-ed in Barron’s focusing on specific ways to reform federal deposit insurance to protect only the innocent.  In this report, we look at some key regulatory changes likely as the banking agencies reevaluate the regional-bank capital, liquidity, and the IDI/BHC construct.  As noted in our initial assessment and thereafter, we do not expect meaningful legislative action on the Warren, et. al. bill to repeal “tailoring” requirements, but we do expect bipartisan political pressure not just for supervisory accountability (see another forthcoming report), but also regulatory revisions.  While Republicans strongly opposed tougher capital rules when Chairman Powell appeared before them just last week (see Client Report FEDERALRESERVE73), we expect them now only to make token statements of concern about any changes that do not adversely affect smaller banking organizations.  In addition to looking at specific regulatory rewrites, this report assesses timing, noting in particular how the pending end-game rules could serve as the vehicle for changes the agencies hope to muster quickly in order to minimize demands for structural change to their own powers.