#SCB

15 02, 2024

STRESS32

2024-02-15T15:42:00-05:00February 15th, 2024|5- Client Report|

FedFin Assessment: New Fed Stress Tests are a lot Like the Old Fed Stress Tests

In this report, we assess the strategic and policy implications of the Fed’s new stress-test regime.  Released today, it incorporates new “exploratory” scenarios previewed by Vice Chair Barr as a response to the significant stress-test omissions laid bare in the March banking crisis.  However, these exploratory tests will not directly factor into the SCB, which will also be calibrated to current capital rules since the banking agencies are now most unlikely to finalize these in time for SCB calculations later this year.  We nonetheless expect bank supervisors to run bank results against internal models premised on new capital requirements, using supervisory discretion to address any capital shortfalls they feel warrant distribution restrictions regardless of formal test results.  Similarly, we think supervisors will take near-term action if any of the exploratory scenarios points to near-term risk.

STRESS32.pdf

25 07, 2023

DAILY072523

2023-07-25T17:18:26-04:00July 25th, 2023|2- Daily Briefing|

Key Democrat Takes On Fed Rate Hikes

Ahead of today’s FOMC meeting, Joint Economic Committee Chair Heinrich (D-NV) yesterday sent a letter to Fed Chair Powell cautioning against additional policy tightening.

Second HFSC Markup Targets Stablecoins, Regulatory Restrictions, ESG

Thursday’s HFSC has now added another day to its mark-up calendar this week, moving the stablecoin and ESG bills to Thursday doubtless in order to avoid an endurance contest before the August recess and still meet Chairman McHenry’s (R-NC) commitments.

Senate GOP Tries to Block Capital Rewrite

Just days before the banking agencies take up new capital rules, Senate Banking Ranking Member Scott (R-SC) and ten other committee Republicans sent a letter to Chairman Powell demanding greater transparency and prior consultation.

Waters Presses FHFA for FHLB Reform

Following FHFA listening sessions and in anticipation of a final report this September on the FHLB system, HFSC Ranking Member Waters (D-CA) late yesterday sent a letter to FHFA Director Thompson laying out a series of recommendations to significantly reform the system.

Ag Committees Slam SEC Custody Proposal

In a letter to SEC Chairman Gensler released today, Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Boozman (R-AR) and Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI) along with House Ag. Committee Chairman Thompson (R-PA) and Ranking Member Scott (D-GA) raised strong objections to what they called serious flaws in the SEC’s proposed custody rule (see FSM Report CUSTODY5).

Warren, Scott Renew Fed-Ethics Campaign

Continuing their bipartisan campaign against the Fed, Sens. Warren (D-MA) and Scott (R-FL) yesterday sent a letter

17 07, 2023

Karen Petrou: Counter-Cyclicality is One Critical Missing Piece of Barr’s Unholistic Construct

2023-07-17T16:55:22-04:00July 17th, 2023|The Vault|

Banks and Republicans are beating up on Michael Barr for much in his new capital construct.  The furor focuses on the high cost of the new capital rules, cost glossed over in Mr. Barr’s talk via an over-arching assumption that banks can readily do without two years of post-dividend retained earnings.  Maybe they can; investors not so much.  This is a big problem, but a little-noticed one also warrants more scrutiny:  the decision to leave untouched and apparently not even considered the U.S. version of the counter-cyclical capital buffer (CCyB).  This makes the new framework still more procyclical and even less holistic.  CCyBs have worked well around the world and a well-designed one in the U.S. would obviate the need for some – not all, but some – of Mr. Barr’s most counter-productive ideas even as it makes banks more resilient, the financial system safer, and the economy less volatile.

What are CCyBs?  The basic idea is that these are capital charges triggered in good times that are released under stress, making banks and the economies they serve better able to ride out macroeconomic boom-bust cycles.  The final U.S. version of the global CCyB framework acknowledges this global standard, but it goes on to say only that the Federal Reserve will know a boom or bust when it sees it and will do something about it via some sort of CCyB should it feel inclined to do so possibly after a rulemaking process on the up- and down-sides that …

17 07, 2023

M071723

2023-07-17T09:36:14-04:00July 17th, 2023|6- Client Memo|

Counter-Cyclicality is One Critical Missing Piece of Barr’s Unholistic Construct

Banks and Republicans are beating up on Michael Barr for much in his new capital construct.  The furor focuses on the high cost of the new capital rules, cost glossed over in Mr. Barr’s talk via an over-arching assumption that banks can readily do without two years of post-dividend retained earnings.  Maybe they can; investors not so much.  This is a big problem, but a little-noticed one also warrants more scrutiny:  the decision to leave untouched and apparently not even considered the U.S. version of the counter-cyclical capital buffer (CCyB).  This makes the new framework still more procyclical and even less holistic.  CCyBs have worked well around the world and a well-designed one in the U.S. would obviate the need for some – not all, but some – of Mr. Barr’s most counter-productive ideas even as it makes banks more resilient, the financial system safer, and the economy less volatile.

M071723.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

8 08, 2022

m080822

2023-01-04T13:13:40-05:00August 8th, 2022|6- Client Memo|

Procyclical Capital Rules and the Economy’s Discontent

In our recent paper outlining the holistic-capital regime regulators should quickly deploy, we noted that current rules are often counter-productive to their avowed goal of bank solvency without peril to prosperity.  However, one acute problem in the regulatory-capital rulebook – procyclicality – does particularly problematic damage when the economy faces acute challenges – i.e., now.  None of the pending one-off capital reforms addresses procyclicality and, in fact, several might make it even worse.  This memo shows how and then what should be quickly done to reinstate the counter-cyclicality all the regulators say they seek.

m080822.pdf

8 08, 2022

Karen Petrou: Procyclical Capital Rules and the Economy’s Discontent

2023-01-04T13:14:40-05:00August 8th, 2022|The Vault|

In our recent paper outlining the holistic-capital regime regulators should quickly deploy, we noted that current rules are often counter-productive to their avowed goal of bank solvency without peril to prosperity.  However, one acute problem in the regulatory-capital rulebook – procyclicality – does particularly problematic damage when the economy faces acute challenges – i.e., now.  None of the pending one-off capital reforms addresses procyclicality and, in fact, several might make it even worse.  This memo shows how and then what should be quickly done to reinstate the counter-cyclicality all the regulators say they seek.

Last Thursday, the Fed set new, often-higher risk-based capital (RBC) ratios for the largest banks.  The reason for this untimely capital hike lies in the interplay between the RBC rules and the Fed’s CCAR stress test.  Packaged into the stress capital buffer (SCB), these rules determine how much RBC each large bank must hold to ensure it can stay in the agencies’ good graces and, to its thinking, better still distribute capital.

Put very simply, the more RBC, the less RWAS – i.e., the risk-weighted assets, against which capital rules are measured.  The higher the weighting, the lower a capital-strained bank’s appetite to hold it unless risk is high enough also to offset the leverage ratio’s cost – at which point the bank is taking a lot of unnecessary risk to sidestep another set of unintended contradictions in the capital construct.  As a Fed study concludes, all but the very strongest banks sit on their …

11 07, 2022

m071122

2023-01-24T15:14:56-05:00July 11th, 2022|6- Client Memo|

Holistic-Capital FAQs and Some Priority Answers

Late last week, we released a new issue brief laying out how to quickly take Michael Barr’s suggestion of a holistic regulatory-capital regime from rhetoric to reality.  The American Banker did a fine job summarizing the paper and putting it into the policy context, generating a lot of questions to which I’ll turn in this memo.  By far the most common assertion is that this paper is a stealth big-bank campaign to cut regulatory capital.  If it is, that’s news to all of them, as they saw the paper about the same time the Banker article appeared.  More to the point and as I’ll discuss below, a holistic-capital regime wouldn’t come cheap, it would just be better honed and more effective.

m071122.pdf

11 07, 2022

Karen Petrou: Holistic-Capital FAQs and Some Priority Answers

2023-01-24T15:15:17-05:00July 11th, 2022|The Vault|

Late last week, we released a new issue brief laying out how to quickly take Michael Barr’s suggestion of a holistic regulatory-capital regime from rhetoric to reality.  The American Banker did a fine job summarizing the paper and putting it into the policy context, generating a lot of questions to which I’ll turn in this memo.  By far the most common assertion is that this paper is a stealth big-bank campaign to cut regulatory capital.  If it is, that’s news to all of them, as they saw the paper about the same time the Banker article appeared.  More to the point and as I’ll discuss below, a holistic-capital regime wouldn’t come cheap, it would just be better honed and more effective.

The paper was sparked by what might have been an offhand comment from Mr. Barr at his Senate confirmation hearing for the Fed’s supervision vice chair.  He was asked his views on the “Basel IV” package of regulatory-capital rewrites and said that he favored thinking about capital as a whole rather than finalizing individual standards in the absence of a broader vision.  Or that’s what he seemed to mean because, sensible man that he is, the less said at a confirmation hearing, the better, and talk quickly turned to other matters.  Assuming he meant what we thought he said, FedFin did our best to give it legs.

We did so in part by providing a short taxonomy of key capital requirements showing how they relate to other capital requirements …

Go to Top