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 Publishes Proposal to Increase Transparency of Banking Data

    APRA proposed to substantially increase the volume and breadth of data it makes publicly available on authorized deposit-taking institutions, including banks, credit unions, and building societies.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ESMA Consults on Guide to Internal Controls for Credit Rating Agencies

    ESMA launched a consultation on the guidelines on internal controls for credit rating agencies (CRAs).

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EU Finalizes Directive and Prudential Rules for Investment Firms

    EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, the Directive (2019/2034) and Regulation (2019/2033) on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    OSFI Revises Guideline on Principles for Management of Liquidity Risk

    OSFI finalized Guideline B-6 on the principles for the management of liquidity risk.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Consults on Framework to Manage Outsourcing and Third-Party Risk

    PRA published a consultation paper CP30/19 that sets out proposals to modernize the regulatory framework on outsourcing and third-party risk management.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BoE, PRA, and FCA Consult to Strengthen Operational Resilience

    BoE, PRA, and FCA published a shared policy summary and coordinated consultation papers on new requirements to strengthen operational resilience in the financial services sector.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EC Amends Rule on Mapping of External Credit Assessment Institutions

    EC published the implementing regulation (EU) 2019/2028, which amends Regulation 2016/1799, regarding the mapping tables specifying correspondence between the credit risk assessments of external credit assessment institutions (ECAIs) and the credit quality steps set out in the Capital Requirements Regulation.

    December 04, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Issues Second Part of Advice on Implementation of Basel III in EU

    EBA published the second part of its advice on the implementation of Basel III in EU, which complements the report published on August 05, 2019.

    December 04, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EU Approves European Council Proposal on CCP Recovery and Resolution

    EU ambassadors approved the position of European Council on a proposed framework for clearing houses and their authorities to prepare for and deal with financial difficulties.

    December 04, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    OSFI Releases Guideline on Foreign Bank Branch Deposit Requirements

    OSFI released the final version of Guideline A-10 on foreign bank branch deposit requirements, along with guideline impact analysis statement.

    December 04, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 4268