Time to end regulatory dillydallying

Oct 28, 2012 @ 12:01 am

Looking for an explanation for the weak — and getting weaker — economic recovery? Look no further than the nation's banks. Uncertainty about the future weight of regulations making their way through the bureaucratic maze in Washington is harming the banks, their clients in corporate America and economic growth. The regulators must get their acts together.

The resignation of Vikram Pandit as chief executive of Citigroup Inc. is only the most visible evidence of the troubles still surrounding the nation's banks, from the largest to the smallest. Until the banking sector finds new footing and begins to lend steadily again, the economic recovery can't be strong, and the stock and bond markets will remain volatile.

But the regulatory currents are swirling around the banking industry and, if not carefully handled, could further disrupt what lending the banks are doing just as uncertainty about the fiscal cliff peaks during Congress' lame-duck session following the election.

First, banks may face the loss of billions of dollars of corporate deposits between now and Dec. 31, when the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s unlimited guarantee on non-interest-bearing deposits will expire. The limit will then revert to $250,000.

Chief financial officers have parked billions of dollars of cash reserves in banks because of that federal guarantee. When it disappears, the CFOs are likely to seek short-term investments that provide some return for the risk, and to pull their money from all but the highest-rated banks, hurting the ability of the others to lend to businesses.

Many banks will hold off making loans until they can determine how much of those corporate deposits will walk out the door.

Although some of the money may find its way into money market funds, they have their own uncertainties, so most corporations with cash reserves will face tremendous doubts about where to place those funds.


The second issue distracting bank executives and causing them to limit lending is the likely implementation of the so-called Volcker rule.

The rule, included in the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, limits the ability of federally insured banks to make proprietary trades and to invest in private-equity and hedge funds. It was proposed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who argued that proprietary trading by banks played a key role in the financial crisis of 2007-08.

The provisions of the Volcker rule were supposed to be implemented July 21, but the regulatory agencies involved — the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission — have been struggling to agree on some key definitions. The final ones may not be ready before the end of the year.

Standard and Poor's estimates that if the final definitions are too harsh, they could cut $10 billion a year from bank earnings. Given the uncertainty, banks can't be blamed for being cautious in their lending.

The third issue hovering over the banks involves the capital requirements under the new international bank capital standards known as Basel III. These will require the banks to increase their common equity capital to 4.5% of assets and 6% of Tier 1 capital (which includes retained earnings), versus the current levels of 2% and 4%, respectively.


Basel III also requires a capital conservation buffer of 2.5% and allows national regulators to impose a countercyclical buffer of up to 2.5% in times of high credit growth. In addition, banks must hold more capital against commercial and residential real estate assets.

U.S. bankers are pressing regulators to modify the U.S. version of Basel III, especially to ease the burden on smaller banks, which will find the capital requirements particularly onerous. But the requirements will hurt profitability and growth for large as well as small banks — another reason for banks to limit their lending.

Although regulators are right to take the time to strike the right regulatory balance — not too tight and not too loose — they must bear in mind that delay and uncertainty inflict costs on banks, business and the economy as a whole.

It is time for them to make decisions. The economy is unlikely to show solid growth until these issues are settled, and banks and their clients can begin to adjust to the new realities.


What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Sponsored financial news

Upcoming Event

Apr 30


Retirement Income Summit

Join InvestmentNews at the 12th annual Retirement Income Summit - the industry's premier retirement planning conference.Much has changed - and much remains to be learned. Attend and discuss how the future is full of opportunity for ... Learn more

Featured video


When can advisers expect an SEC fiduciary rule proposal and other regs this year?

Managing editor Christina Nelson and senior reporter Mark Schoeff Jr. discuss regulations of consequence to financial advisers in 2018, and their likely timing.

Recommended Video

Path to growth

Latest news & opinion

Bond investors have more to worry about than a government shutdown

Inflation worries, international rates pushing Treasuries yields higher.

Morgan Stanley reports a loss of advisers after exiting the protocol for broker recruiting

The firm said it lost 47 brokers in the fourth quarter, the most in any quarter of 2017.

Morgan Stanley's wealth management fees climb to all-time high

Improvement reflect firm's shift of more clients into fee-based accounts priced on asset levels, which boosts results as markets rise.

Relying on trainees, Merrill Lynch boosts adviser headcount in 2017

Questions remain about long-term effectiveness of wirehouse's move away from recruiting experienced brokers.

Supreme Court review of SEC judges could roil pending cases

But long-term, the agency may get around questions of constitutionality by changing the way it brings on administrative law judges.


Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting investmentnews.com? It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist investmentnews.com

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print