Financial Regulatory Forum

U.S. court throws out designation of MetLife as ‘too big to fail’

April 6, 2016

A U.S. federal judge rescinded a government designation of MetLife as “too big to fail” and subject to increased regulatory oversight.

MetLife, AIG spinoffs of U.S. insurance units show “disruptive” fiduciary rules, not just capital needs

February 3, 2016

By Richard Satran, Regulatory Intelligence

(Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence) – The American insurance industry is being rapidly reshaped from a state-regulated backwater by what an industry group calls the “disruptive” impact of government regulation — and it is not just the often-cited capital demands placed on them by regulators who want bank-like systemic risk protection and activist investors who want quick returns on their investments.

Broker-dealers face big compliance challenge, new costs in FINRA stress tests

September 30, 2015

By Richard Satran, Regulatory Intelligence

NEW YORK, Sept. 30, 2015 (Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence) – Broker-dealers who have been largely spared the burden of the painful stress testing that major bank faced after the financial crisis of 2008 will finally taste some of the medicine given to the financial giants.

INTERVIEW: E*Trade bank growth limited by U.S. regulatory asset threshold – CRO Mike Pizzi

April 21, 2015

The Dodd-Frank $50 billion asset threshold used to categorize systemically important banks has been a strategic business factor for E*Trade, the online broker, and unless there are compelling factors to breach the mark, the firm will continue to limit expansion of its balance sheet, chief risk officer, Mike Pizzi, said in an interview this week. (more…)

Shortcomings seen in U.S. nonbank systemic-risk process for insurers

April 21, 2015

Critics of the the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s designation of nonbanks as systemically important got a chance last month to point to what they viewed as shortcomings in its approach, while also offering clues for possible improvements, during a U.S. Senate hearing on the issue. 

Basel committee tightens disclosure requirements for banks

February 6, 2015

In an effort to streamline banks’ regulatory data through increased transparency, and make them more comparable and consistent across the board, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has publishedrevised standards on disclosures.

U.S. leads the pack in monitoring shadow bank sector; IMF report shows how

November 5, 2014

The United States effort to begin reining in the risks from shadow banking was recognized by the International Monetary Fund in a recent report as being ahead of the curve, and parts of it could serve as a model for other countries.

Bankers say “derisking” underway amid sanctions crackdown; that’s the point, U.S. regulator says

October 3, 2014

A process of “derisking” is underway by financial firms exiting sectors that represent compliance landmines, bankers said on Tuesday, but a top U.S. sanctions enforcer said that is sometimes just the right move.

Canada’s financial system vulnerable to overheated housing market, central bank says

July 1, 2014

By Daniel Seleanu, Compliance Complete

TORONTO, July 1, 2014 (Thomson Reuters Accelus) – Canada’s overheated housing market represents a significant risk to the stability of its financial system, the country’s central bank has warned.

Insight: U.S. OCC’s “heightened expectations” standards for bank governance, and how to meet them

March 21, 2014

By Abel Picardi, Compliance Complete

NEW YORK, Mar. 21 (Thomson Reuters Accelus) – Proposed risk standards for banks regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) will expose top executives and directors of federally chartered insured institutions to greater accountability for any legal, risk or compliance shortcomings.
The OCC proposed the standards in January as way to broaden and enforce the application of its “heightened expectations” for bank stability. The expectations were issued in 2010, in response to the financial crisis. The proposed guidelines’ focus on top bank governance directly aims to limit ”accountability risk,” or the risk that a leadership not held to the consequences of its decisions can endanger an institution. (more…)