#capital rules

Home/Tag:#capital rules
20 03, 2023

Karen Petrou: Three Fast, Urgent Fixes to U.S. Bank Supervision and One Major Change to End Bailouts

2023-03-20T11:35:24-04:00March 20th, 2023|The Vault|

In the wake of recent bank failures, much has rightly been said about how supervisors failed to act even though warning claxons blared.  Nothing that happened to Silvergate, SVB, or Signature is due to forces beyond supervisory control, but there are deep, structural weaknesses in how banks have long been supervised.  How long?  I went back to my 2001 Senate Banking testimony about what was then the largest-ever failure to find that many of the lessons that should have been learned never sunk in.

Given that this hearing was in 2001, a good deal of what I said about bank capital requirements was about Basel I and is thus long out of date.  However, one key point isn’t:  the capital triggers used to spark prompt corrective action (PCA) were and are an unduly-simplistic way to identify the need for rapid supervisory intervention.

Silvergate, SVB, and Signature were all “well” capitalized right up to the brink of collapse because each of the banks in its own way arbitraged the capital rules to enormous – and obvious – advantage.  Nothing in law or rule bars bank supervisors from stepping in well before PCA ratios sink but nothing seems to stir supervisors to do so.  1991’s PCA requirements were an important advance at the time, but it was outdated only a decade later.  Now, it’s a dangerous supervisory distraction.

What else noted in 2001 remains an urgent fix?  Over two decades ago, I urged the FDIC to reinstate the high-growth early-warning system it …

20 03, 2023

M032023

2023-03-20T11:35:13-04:00March 20th, 2023|6- Client Memo|

Three Fast, Urgent Fixes to U.S. Bank Supervision and One Major Change to End Bailouts

In the wake of recent bank failures, much has rightly been said about how supervisors failed to act even though warning claxons blared.  Nothing that happened to Silvergate, SVB, or Signature is due to forces beyond supervisory control, but there are deep, structural weaknesses in how banks have long been supervised.  How long?  I went back to my 2001 Senate Banking testimony about what was then the largest-ever failure to find that many of the lessons that should have been learned never sunk in.

m032023.pdf

17 03, 2023

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

2023-03-17T16:50:38-04:00March 17th, 2023|The Vault|

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.

The full report is available to retainer clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here and here.…

17 03, 2023

REFORM216

2023-03-17T14:27:00-04:00March 17th, 2023|5- Client Report|

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.

REFORM216.pdf

13 03, 2023

DAILY031323

2023-03-13T17:25:04-04:00March 13th, 2023|2- Daily Briefing|

Biden Promises Regulatory Revamp

In an effort to restore confidence in the banking system, President Biden announced that he will ask Congress and the banking regulators to strengthen regulations that were rolled back by the Trump administration.

Political Battle Lines Take Shape

In the wake of yesterday’s decision to protect all SVB depositors, Members of Congress are now positioning themselves for future action.

Biden Presses Stability in Wake of SVB, Signature Rescues

Reflecting ongoing uncertainties and political fallout, President Biden later this morning reiterated comments from earlier today noted in our prior alert.

Comment Deadline Set for GSE Capital Proposal

The Federal Register today includes the FHFA’s proposal to refine Fannie and Freddie’s capital construct.

Fed Tries to Get Ahead of SVB Storm

Even as Sen. Hagerty (R-TN) led calls to review Fed supervision, the Fed today announced that Vice Chair Barr will lead a review of SVB’s supervision and regulation.

Daily031323.pdf

9 03, 2023

GSE-030923

2023-03-09T15:28:01-05:00March 9th, 2023|4- GSE Activity Report|

Now What?

As detailed in our reports earlier this week on Powell’s appearance before Senate Banking and HFSC, much was said about the pending rewrite of big-bank capital standards.  As we’ve noted, this matters a lot to the comparative advantage of GSEs, nonbank mortgage players, and banks large and small.  As a result, we here go in depth on what Powell said – and mostly didn’t – about what’s next on these critical standards.

GSE-030923.pdf

7 03, 2023

FEDERALRESERVE72

2023-03-07T16:06:02-05:00March 7th, 2023|5- Client Report|

Battle Lines Form Over Capital Rewrite

Although Chairman Powell’s testimony kept exclusively to monetary policy, today’s Senate Banking hearing seemed only to go through the motions set at previous hearings with regard to inflation, growth, and the Fed’s long-term objectives.  Real energy was reserved for regulatory-policy questions, most notably future bank capital standards.  As anticipated, Republicans were unified in a series of questions all focused on the extent to which Chairman Powell will allow Vice Chairman Barr’s holistic-capital exercise to result in the higher capital standards Mr. Barr says are warranted for the largest banks.

FEDERALRESERVE72.pdf

3 03, 2023

Al030623

2023-03-03T17:17:37-05:00March 3rd, 2023|3- This Week|

Gloves Off

When Chairman Powell comes before HFSC and Senate Banking this week, we’ll see if FedFin’s forecast for newly-rough going plays out, but all signs say it will.  In the lead-up to the midterm, Democrats other than Sen. Warren (D-MA) who weren’t all that sympathetic to many Fed actions held their tongues in order to protect a central bank that, for all its putative independence, seemed aligned with Biden Administration statements promoting American prosperity and the near-term chances of reduced inflation.  With the 2024 election looking even uglier than the midterm and Republicans in control of the House, Mr. Powell may find himself squeezed hard from both sides of the aisle, taking lots of heat on issues ranging from monetary policy and the debt ceiling to a panoply of Fed regulatory and payment-system decisions along with the pending nomination of a new vice chair.

Al030623.pdf

27 02, 2023

Karen Petrou: How the SEC Turned Custody Reform from a Righteous Cause to Jihad and Why it Matters

2023-02-27T09:57:44-05:00February 27th, 2023|The Vault|

As we finalized our new in-depth analysis of the SEC’s rewrite of the nation’s custody rules, I asked  some of the best-informed people I know if they had ever heard of a financial custodian.  All they could come up with is the name of their elementary-school custodian and, in some ways, this is apt.  Custody is among the services often called market “plumbing” because one only notices its importance when something goes wrong or realizes how risky poor maintenance is when everything gets wet.  The SEC is right to retool custody services – their abuse was all too evident in the Madoff affair and even more costly to hapless investors in the course of crypto chaos.  However, as seems often the case with the Commission, it has taken a righteous cause and turned it into a jihad.

When my question about custody services doesn’t outright kill conversation, I often explain the importance of this obscure financial service as follows:  when you give an investment adviser your money to buy stock or other assets, he or she does so on your behalf.  The adviser takes a bit – okay, maybe a big bit – for his or her trouble, but the assets purchased are yours, not the adviser’s.  If the investment is poor because the asset loses value, that’s your bad.  But, if the asset loses value or, worse, disappears due to malfeasance or insolvency on the part of the adviser, you’ve quite literally been robbed.  To prevent this, custodial …

27 02, 2023

M022723

2023-02-27T09:57:34-05:00February 27th, 2023|6- Client Memo|

How the SEC Turned Custody Reform from a Righteous Cause to Jihad and Why it Matters

As we finalized our new in-depth analysis of the SEC’s rewrite of the nation’s custody rules, I asked  some of the best-informed people I know if they had ever heard of a financial custodian.  All they could come up with is the name of their elementary-school custodian and, in some ways, this is apt.  Custody is among the services often called market “plumbing” because one only notices its importance when something goes wrong or realizes how risky poor maintenance is when everything gets wet.  The SEC is right to retool custody services – their abuse was all too evident in the Madoff affair and even more costly to hapless investors in the course of crypto chaos.  However, as seems often the case with the Commission, it has taken a righteous cause and turned it into a jihad.

m022723.pdf

Go to Top