Showing posts with label sec. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sec. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Geithner Running Point on Reform

Although healthcare reform seemed to be pushing ahead of financial reform in the political dialogue race, President Obama's Lehman Anniversary speech on Wall Street last week seems to have re-energized the movement somewhat. While GlobalRiskJobs and Risk Talent Associates are definitely seeing an increase in activity on the financial risk and compliance front, we definitely expected more to see more robust signs of recovery on the hiring front at this point in the year. One of the preconditions to a wholesale shift has always been a more intense regulatory/reporting environment, which we still believe will come, but things have been slow to develop largely because of the traffic jam in Washington. So, with Geithner's focus now moving from crisis manager to running the point on financial reform, we will see where it takes us. Geithner seems to have simplified the message, focusing on three key points that legislators should consider when enacting financial reform: 1) offer “substantial” new protections to consumers and investors, 2) make the financial system less vulnerable to crisis, and 3) protect taxpayers from having to bail out future crises.

Are some of the regulators past the point of fixing? Bloomberg commentator Susan Antilla wonders as much about the SEC in a recent piece. She looks at Judge Rakoff's beat-down of the SEC-Bank of America settlement as just the latest example of a regulator that needs an overhaul. Meanwhile, the SEC is seeking more power to oversee derivatives markets.

GlobalRiskBlog favorite Andy Kessler weighs in on bank pay controls in today's Wall Street Journal. Kessler argues that it was excessive leverage, rather than excessive risk that drove the financial system to the brink of disaster.

As the G-20 convenes in Pittsburgh, U.S. and European leaders remain divided on how much capital the world's largest financial institutions should keep on hand to meet unexpected losses. Most agree that a major lesson of the Crisis is that higher capital requirements are essential, and G-20 leaders hope to have an agreement on new standards by the end of 2010, with implementation by the end of 2012.

Congress has turned its attention to the Rating Agencies. New allegations by a recently departed Moody's analyst named Eric Kolchinsky have added fuel to the debate over the role and influence of credit ratings and whether recent reforms are sufficient to prevent a repeat of past missteps.

The FDIC is being criticized for its handling of many of the recent bank failures. A recent report about the failure of Colorado-based New Frontier Bank criticizes the agency and other regulators for not being aggressive enough in handling the brewing financial crisis.

And finally, the controversial filmmaker Michael Moore is back in the headlines with "Capitalism: A Love Story", a scathing look at the financial system through the lens of the Crisis.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Regulatory Turf Wars Gaining Steam

Lots of buzz this week about future oversight of the financial markets. While GlobalRiskJobs and GlobalComplianceJobs have been anticipating significant changes in the regulatory landscape, the political landscape has thus far provided more of a speed bump to true reform than initially thought. The Obama Administration is (finally) expected to finish up a plan to present to Congress by the end of June, but the timetable for any reform plan to be approved by Congress looks like the end of this year. The Obama administration has been pushing a more radical reform agenda, while existing regulators naturally have sought to defend their existing turf. As a result, no firm regulatory structure has yet to emerge. The primary issue seems to be whether to reorganize the basic structure of oversight, or whether to implement new rules at existing agencies that would accomplish the same end. It would seem that, given the scope of this crisis, if there was ever a time where legislators and te public would be willing to accept a radical overhaul, now would be it. The adminsitration has had its hands full with the issue of bank supervision, and the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) which has come under fire for its seeming impotence in the AIG, WAMU and IndyMac fiascos is likely to be sacrificed first in the name of reform. Also on the table is a merger of the SEC and the CFTC, although House Financial Services Committe Chairman Barney Frank is not a supporter of such a move. Another political sticking point surrounds the idea of a systemic risk regulator. Treasury wants the Fed to become a financial market uber-regulator responsible for systemic risk, although many politicians and regulators are reluctant to concentrate so much power at the Fed. As mentioned last week, a new Financial Products Safety Commission has also been proposed, although Mary Schapiro naturally opposes any threat to diminish SEC power and lashed out against the idea. Another battle on the Hill is brewing between Frank and House Agriculture Committe Chairman Collin Peterson surrounding who will get authority to regulate credit default swaps. The Ag Committees in Congress traditionally oversee the CFTC and oppose any challenge to their authority.

The Links:
  • The FT details some of battles being fought over bank regulation.
  • Bloomberg's Alison Vekshin has written a good profile of FDIC Chief Sheila Bair.
  • Wall Street is having its say in the battle over derivatives regulation. Banks want to preserve the intra-dealer market and raise barriers to new entrants to keep the OTC business as compartmentalized as possible.
  • The FT believes regulatory authority in the US should be assigned by function, not product.
  • EU banking regulators may get the power to overrule national banking authorities under new plans in the works as a response to the financial crisis.
  • The WSJ comments on the derivatives PR war going on inside the Beltway.











Thursday, May 7, 2009

The Future of "Too Big to Fail"

FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Bair addressed "Too Big to Fail" in front of the Senate Committee on Banking Housing and Urban Affairs. Bair urged lawmakers to consider a government regulatory framework to monitor global, systemic financial institutions thought to be “too big to fail.” Read the testimony here.

Stress Test results are out, and BofA's apparent need for $34B in capital has been this week's worst-kept secret. banks will need to raise at least $65B in new capital The WSJ has a helpful interactive graph comparing the 19 banks that were stress-tested. Also, WSJ's David Wessel explains what the stress tests will tell us about bank health.

Matthew Richardson and Nouriel Roubini write about a missed opportunity in the FT. The pair feel that insolvent banks should feel the wrath of the markets, asking "why keep insolvent banks afloat?" and invoke the concept of "creative destruction" first argued by Joseph Schumpeter. fellow Doom-and-Gloomer Nassim Nicholas Taleb calls the current global crisis "vastly worse" than the 1930s becaause the global financial system is so interdependent now.

The GAO criticized former SEC chairman Chris Cox and his regime for creating an atmosphere in which enforcement attorneys felt thay had been weakened in their ability to take action. New SEC chair Schapiro dicontinued Cox' "Pilot Program" which had instituted a pre-approval process for investigations.

Author Richard Posner writes that we should move the spotlight off the bankers for a bit and focus on goverment officials who failed in their role of assuring economic stability.

Regulators looking North for inspiration? Marie-Josee Kravis sets the record straight on why it wasn't regulation, per se, that has spared Canada's banks from the worst of the crisis. She credits prudent management, rather than regulation, which prevented the excesses that were commonplace in the U.S. banking environment.

Don't forget to visit GlobalComplianceJobs, the place for high profile regulatory and compliance career opportunities.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Regulators Step-Up Game to Nab Stanford

Doesn't it always seem like it happens this way? In many areas of life we have rules and oversight in place to avoid a cataclysmic outcome, but what it really takes is for someone to get away with something. Something BIG. So, here we are again being reactive. Bernie Madoff got away with a huge scam for years, before finally being exposed in December. Today in the WSJ we learn that it took fallout from the Madoff case to have the SEC increase its scrutiny of R. Allen Stanford and his own $8B fraud. Madoff. Cosmo. Forte. Nadel. Stanford. How many more of these fraudsters will be exposed as the new harsher regulatory spotlight shines in the darkest corners of the financial markets?