Featured Product

    GAO Examines GSIB Actions to Mitigate Obstacles for Orderly Resolution

    December 10, 2018

    The U.S. GAO published a report on financial and legal obstacles global systemically important bank holding companies (G-SIBs) could face under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This report describes actions G-SIBs took to mitigate such financial and legal obstacles and analyzes expert views on the effectiveness of the actions, need for additional actions, and likely success of the single point-of-entry (SPOE) strategy. GAO focused on five U.S. G-SIBs with large portfolios of derivatives: Bank of America Corporation, Citigroup Inc, Goldman Sachs Group Inc, JPMorgan Chase & Co, and Morgan Stanley.

    The five G-SIBs in the review incorporated procedures and other controls in their 2017 resolution plans to mitigate financial and legal obstacles to orderly resolution under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Each G-SIB developed a resolution strategy using SPOE—that is, only the G-SIB holding company would enter bankruptcy. Before entering bankruptcy, the holding company would provide its subsidiaries with capital and liquidity to keep them solvent and enable their orderly wind-down or sale. However, a G-SIB could lack sufficient capital and liquidity to keep subsidiaries solvent or face legal challenges from creditors. To mitigate such obstacles, the five G-SIBs estimated the financial needs of subsidiaries under SPOE, pre-positioned loss-absorbing capital and long-term debt at key subsidiaries, conducted legal analysis to identify potential creditor challenges, and took other actions. In their review, FDIC and FED found no deficiencies with the G-SIBs’ 2017 plans. However, since none of the G-SIBs have gone through bankruptcy using SPOE, the potential effectiveness of their controls cannot be known.

    GAO reviewed and analyzed academic and industry studies on resolution of large financial firms; public sections of G-SIB resolution plans; laws, regulations, and regulatory guidance on G-SIB resolution plans; and proposals to amend the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. GAO judgmentally selected and interviewed 30 experts (judges, academics, attorneys, other professional service providers, and counterparties) based on their knowledge of the Code and G-SIB resolution. GAO also interviewed federal banking regulators and the five G-SIBs covered by the review of GAO. The experts interviewed by GAO had the following views on the controls of five G-SIBs to mitigate obstacles, on the need for additional actions, and on the SPOE strategies.

    • Most experts viewed G-SIB controls to mitigate financial obstacles as potentially "somewhat effective." However, some experts expressed concerns about the controls, partly because of the difficulty of forecasting capital and liquidity needs of subsidiaries and uncertainty about future events in a G-SIB failure. 
    • Experts had mixed views on the potential effectiveness of G-SIB controls to mitigate creditor challenges and other legal obstacles but supported certain Code amendments to further mitigate the obstacles. Most experts generally supported amending the Code to limit creditors from challenging a G-SIB’s provision of capital and liquidity to its subsidiaries before filing for bankruptcy. However, some were concerned about trade-offs between the interests of creditors and the public associated with such an amendment.
    • Most experts said a G-SIB could likely execute its SPOE strategy successfully if its failure affected only itself. However, most viewed success as unlikely if the failure occurred during a widespread market disruption. In that regard, some experts said it was important not to repeal the Orderly Liquidation Authority of the Dodd-Frank Act—which allows the federal government, if warranted, to resolve a G-SIB outside the Code.

     

    Related Links

    Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, US Bankruptcy Code, G-SIB, Too Big to Fail, Dodd Frank Act, Orderly Resolution, Systemic Risk, GAO

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    EBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Second Update for November 2019

    EBA updated the Single Rulebook question and answer (Q&A) tool with answers to eight questions that relate to the Bank Resolution and Recovery Directive (BRRD) and the Capital Requirements Regulation and Directive (CRR and CRD).

    November 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FASB Delays Effective Dates for CECL, Leases, and Hedging Standards

    FASB issued two Accounting Standards Updates finalizing the delays in effective dates for standards on current expected credit losses (CECL), leases, hedging, and long-duration insurance contracts.

    November 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ESMA Updates Q&A on Securitization Regulation in November 2019

    ESMA updated questions and answers (Q&A) on the Securitization Regulation (Regulation 2017/2402).

    November 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    HKMA Announces Finalization of Banking Liquidity Amendment Rules 2019

    HKMA issued a letter informing all authorized institutions that negative vetting of the Banking (Liquidity) (Amendment) Rules 2019 (BLAR) has now expired. Thus, the BLAR will now come into operation from January 01, 2020.

    November 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BCBS Consults on Revised Disclosures for Market Risk Framework

    BCBS launched a consultation on the revised disclosure requirements for the market risk framework for banks.

    November 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BCBS Consults on Disclosure Templates of Sovereign Exposures of Banks

    BCBS published a consultation on the voluntary disclosure templates related to sovereign exposures of banks.

    November 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Publishes Final Policy on Maintenance of TMTP Under Solvency II

    PRA published the policy statement (PS25/19) that contains the final supervisory statement (SS6/16) on maintenance of the transitional measure on technical provisions (TMTPs) under Solvency II.

    November 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSB Examines Implementation of Resolution Regimes in Financial Sector

    FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions and sets out plans for further work.

    November 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    IAIS Adopts ComFrame, ICS, and Holistic Framework for Systemic Risk

    IAIS adopted a comprehensive set of reforms—Common Framework (ComFrame), Insurance Capital Standard (ICS) Version 2.0, and Holistic Framework for Systemic Risk—that will enable effective cross-border supervision of insurance groups and contribute to global financial stability.

    November 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Publishes Templates for Statistical Disclosures Under Solvency II

    PRA published templates for statistical disclosures, as required under Article 31(2) of the Solvency II Directive.

    November 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 4157