Uncategorized

Here’s the Fed’s Plan for Tighter Bank Oversight After SVB’s Failure

&copy Bloomberg. Silicon Valley Bank headquarters in Santa Clara, California, US, on Friday, March 10, 2023. Silicon Valley Bank became the biggest US bank failure in more than a decade, after its long-established customer base of tech startups grew worried and yanked deposits.

(Bloomberg) — The Federal Reserve will undertake an expansive review of US bank rules in the wake of Silicon Valley Bank’s failure, a top official said Friday following a detailed report on the bank’s collapse.

Michael Barr, the Fed vice chair for supervision, outlined a slew of potential changes to how the Fed oversees financial institutions, from capital and liquidity requirements to annual stress testing. The changes would not require legislative approval, a senior Fed official told reporters Friday, but would likely take several years to complete.

Read more: Fed Seeks Broad Changes to Bank Rules in Aftermath of SVB

In a letter accompanying the SVB report, Barr said the Fed should evaluate regulation and supervision in several key areas:

  • Interest-rate risk, an area that SVB failed to manage “appropriately” and the Fed failed to push hard enough
  • Liquidity risk, including risks from uninsured deposits and the treatment of held-to-maturity securities
  • Considering applying standardized liquidity requirements to a broader set of firms
  • Capital requirements, including broadening the group of firms that must take into account unrealized gains or losses on available-for-sale securities
  • Incentive compensation standards that better encourage bank managers to mind risks
  • Stress-testing requirements, which the Fed eased in 2019 for mid-size banks like SVB

Barr also recommended changes to how the Fed supervises banks on the ground, including:

  • Paying closer attention to particular risks posed by firms with rapid growth or other special factors, such as concentration, regardless of asset size
  • Requiring, in individual cases, additional capital or liquidity for firms with inadequate capital planning, liquidity risk management or governance and controls. For example: “Limits on capital distributions or incentive compensation could be appropriate and effective in some cases”
  • Developing a culture that “empowers supervisors,” after staff members failed to act quickly or forcefully on SVB
  • Encouraging supervisors to think through potential “tail events with severe consequences”

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

Read the full article here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Videos

Watch full video on YouTube

Videos

Watch full video on YouTube

News

Introduction One of the interesting elements of preferred shares in Canada is that some of the issues (and then predominantly preferred equity issued by...

Copyright © 2023 Repay Down. All Rights Reserved.

Exit mobile version