Featured Product

    IMF Working Paper on the Nature of Regulatory Capital Requirements

    August 04, 2017

    IMF published a working paper that compares the regulatory capital requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act and the 10% leverage ratio, as proposed by the U.S. Treasury and the U.S. House of Representatives' Financial CHOICE Act (FCA). The paper also highlights the potential for regulatory arbitrage by banks and the associated moral hazard problem that arises due to the option of the FCA qualifying banking organizations.

    The paper undertakes certain exercises to assess the qualifying banks option. It uses balance sheet data on the types of banks (by asset size) that would qualify for the off-ramp under the FCA and estimates how much capital banks would need to add to qualify for the “off-ramp” regulation. Then, to surmise whether there could be a self-selection of more risk-prone banks in the off-ramp, the paper analyzes the balance sheet characteristics of banks with a relatively small capital gap to the 10% leverage ratio. The analysis identifies an important moral hazard problem that arises due to the qualifying banks' optionality, where banks are likely to increase the riskiness of their asset portfolio and qualify for the FCA “off-ramp” relief, with unintended effects on financial stability. This moral hazard problem would manifest through banks increasing the RWA imprint in their balance sheet through increased risk taking, thereby qualifying for the “off-ramp” regulatory relief, under which banks hold 10% leverage ratio while enjoying higher expected returns and lower regulatory costs. This would make the banks riskier and, due to smaller capital buffers, less resilient to adverse shocks.

     

    However, the results show that small banks (total assets below USD 3 billion) with capital gaps to the qualifying banks threshold would tend not to opt for the “off-ramp.” Despite the stated intention of policymakers to provide regulatory relief for small banks under the proposed FCA, this paper concludes that these banks would opt to stay under the existing Dodd-Frank Act regime. Investors and the market would expect large and globally active banks to meet modern regulatory standards. Also, banks that can have large maturity mismatches and a fewer share of highly liquid assets than demanded under the Dodd-Frank Act or Basel III would be less attractive as a counterpart in the interbank market. Finally, it is also clear that reliance on regulation alone (Pillar 1) cannot be sufficient. Supervisors (Pillar 2) need to continue to increase market discipline (Pillar 3) and transparency, and help financial institutions increase internal risk management capacity and capital planning.

     

    Related Link: Working Paper (PDF)

    Keywords: Americas, United States of America, Banking, Dodd Frank Act, Basel III, Capital Requirements, Regulatory Arbitrage, IMF

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    APRA Plans to Assess Climate Risks and Develop Prudential Guidance

    APRA published a letter that outlines its plans to undertake a climate change vulnerability assessment and develop a prudential practice guide focused on climate-related financial risks.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FDIC Publishes Guide to Help with Third-Party Risk Management

    The technology lab of FDIC (FDiTech) published a new guide to help financial technology, or fintech, companies and others partner with banks.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    APRA to Transition to Annual Stress Testing of Large Banks in 2020

    APRA published key findings of the stress testing assessment conducted on authorized deposit-taking institutions.

    February 21, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    IAIS Statement on Monitoring Period of Insurance Capital Standard

    IAIS published a statement from its Secretary General Jonathan Dixon on the Insurance Capital Standard (ICS) monitoring period.

    February 21, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EC Consults on Review of Non-Financial Reporting Directive

    EC is launched a consultation on the review of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive or NFRD (Directive 2014/95/EU, as part of its strategy to strengthen sustainable investment in Europe.

    February 20, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EIOPA Consults on Standards for Supervisory Reporting Under PEPP Rule

    EIOPA is consulting on the implementing technical standards for supervisory reporting and cooperation, as mandated by the Pan-European Personal Pension Product (PEPP) Regulation (Regulation 2019/1238).

    February 20, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EIOPA Publishes Statement on Adverse Interest Rate Environment

    EIOPA published a supervisory statement on the impact of the ultra-low or negative interest rate environment on the insurance sector in EU.

    February 20, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ECB Report on Transfer of Liquidity from EONIA Products to €STR

    ECB published a report on the transfer of liquidity from the cash and derivatives products of the Euro Overnight Index Average (EONIA) to the Euro Short-Term Rate (€STR).

    February 19, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ESRB Publishes Report on Systemic Cyberattacks

    ESRB published a report that explores systemic implications of cyber incidents, such as cyberattacks.

    February 19, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSB Chair Sets Out Key Deliverables for G20 Presidency of Saudi Arabia

    FSB published a letter from the Chair Randal K. Quarles to the G20 finance ministers and Central Bank governors ahead of the meetings in Riyadh on February 22-23.

    February 19, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 4720