Bipartisan Group Of Senators Urges Financial Regulators To Prioritize Rules And Regulations That Help End “Too Big To Fail”

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Senators Bob Corker, R-Tn., Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., David Vitter, R-La., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, on Tuesday wrote to Federal Reserve Governor Daniel K. Tarullo, Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry, and Chairman of the FDIC Martin Gruenberg, urging them to “proceed deliberately and expeditiously” to finalize rules regarding capital requirements for large financial institutions and to ensure that should a large institution fail, the losses associated with the failure can be absorbed by its own shareholders and creditors.

Their letter states, “By acting to substantially strengthen capital requirements and to ensure that future losses of a large bank failure will be absorbed by its shareholders and unsecured creditors, you [financial regulators] will further your statutory mandate to protect the public against financial instability and go a long way toward ending too-big-to-fail.”

A complete copy of the letter follows:

“Dear Governor Tarullo, Comptroller Curry, and Chairman Gruenberg:

“As you know, the debate over ending too-big-to-fail continues to draw public attention and concern.  In this regard, we urge you to proceed deliberately and expeditiously with the following measures:

“Bank Capital: Numerous studies have shown that regulator reliance on the internal models of large banks to determine the riskiness of the banks’ assets has led to wide variations in the amount of capital held by banks with similar portfolios.  Internal models can be inherently unreliable, and, of course, they rest on assumptions that often prove to be false, such as, most recently, the assumption that OECD member country debt is entirely risk free. 

“The Basel Committee agreed to an international leverage ratio in its 2010 Basel III capital accord to address weaknesses in the use of risk-based standards.  But this leverage ratio will only have meaning if it is sufficiently strong.  And just as importantly, while the use of asset risk weights makes some sense, we should not rely on them completely.  An appropriate minimum overall capital ratio in exchange for a reduced reliance on models would make sense.

“There is widespread, bipartisan agreement that excessive leverage played a major role in the 2008 financial crisis and ensuing need for taxpayer bailouts.  Constraining leverage through the use of a simple and effective leverage ratio would go a long way toward correcting deficiencies in the capital regulation of large, complex financial institutions that proved to be seriously over leveraged prior to the crisis. 

“In addition, we believe that we should not move forward with an overly complicated capital regime for smaller institutions.  As you know, community banks, for example, have very different business models than globally active financial institutions, and while there may be merit in improving the capital framework applicable to them, this should be a secondary priority to constraining leverage at the largest firms.  The new Basel III capital standards were designed for large, internationally active banks, as was appropriate. We urge you to complete work on capital standards for the largest banks before turning to the smaller institutions. Then, devise a simpler framework that, unlike the current proposals, will be within the reach and capabilities of community institutions.

“Enhanced Prudential Standards: Even with tougher capital standards, there is no guarantee that a large bank failure can be prevented in the future. As a consequence, it is imperative that you ensure that should a large institution fail, the losses associated with the failure can be absorbed by its own shareholders and creditors. These losses should not be forced on other members of the industry through special assessments, as DFA would require, or worse, despite the prohibition in DFA, on taxpayers.  The FDIC, working in consultation with the Federal Reserve Board and international regulators, is developing a new strategy for the orderly resolution of a large, internationally active bank which involves seizing control of its holding company.  However, to be successful, it is imperative that the holding company issue enough equity and long-term unsecured debt to absorb losses.  For this reason, commentators, including FDIC and Federal Reserve Board officials, have acknowledged the wisdom and need for requiring complex financial institutions to issue an appropriate amount of equity and long-term, unsecured debt at the holding company level, where investors and creditors clearly understand there is a risk of loss in the event of a failure.  We urge you to consider the vital step of having loss absorption capacity at the holding company level, as you draft rules for the regulation of large systemically risky firms.

“We understand that the financial regulators have had a daunting task in promulgating and finalizing the numerous regulatory provisions required by Dodd-Frank.  Given the many demands on your time and resources, some prioritization is obviously necessary.  As such, we ask that you move expeditiously in these two areas, given continued public concern over the dangers that large financial institutions pose to our banking system and to the overall economy.  By acting to substantially strengthen capital requirements and to ensure that future losses of a large bank failure will be absorbed by its shareholders and unsecured creditors, you will further your statutory mandate to protect the public against financial instability and go a long way toward ending too-big-to-fail.”


Kevin Harrington To Be Keynote Speaker At Entrepreneur Power Luncheon May 26

The keynote speaker for Urban League of Greater Chattanooga’s third annual Entrepreneur Power Luncheon will be Kevin Harrington, i nventor of the infomercial, original shark on Shark Tank and as seen on TV Pioneer. Officials said, "Kevin is one of the most successful entrepreneurs of our time."    The luncheon will be on  Tuesday, May 26, from 11:30 a.m.–1 ... (click for more)

Chambliss Law Firm Lauded For Client Service And Complex Work

Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C. stands out for its premium value, according to BTI Consulting, earning a place on BTI’s Honor Roll of Bet-the-Company Law Firms.    BTI’s Brand Elite 2015: Client Perceptions of the Best-Branded Law Firms independent report states that clients trust Chambliss as “a safe choice for the most complex and high-risk work.” ... (click for more)

State Attorney General Says Case Was Argued Well To Let States Decide On Same-Sex Marriage

Tennessee Attorney General Herbert H. Slatery III said the state's position on same-sex marriage was argued well before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday. He said, “Associate Solicitor General Counsel Joe Whalen did an excellent job arguing the case. He represented well the State of Tennessee, poised and articulate as he was when he successfully argued the case before the Sixth ... (click for more)

DA Tells Dalton Jury Cell Phone Of Skyy Mims Was Found At Murder Scene

District Attorney Bert Poston told a jury in Dalton on Monday that the cell phone of Skyy Mims was found at the scene of the murder of convenience store clerk DK Chaudhari. He said Ms. Mims carried out the robbery in order to get Lotto tickets that she hoped would bring her money to finance her budding musical career. He said she took 80 "$500 A Week For Life" tickets. The ... (click for more)

The Heart Of A Teacher Makes A Difference - And Response (2)

In less than four weeks, I expect to be one of 216 graduating seniors from East Hamilton School. One could say all possible variables help a student rise to the highest levels in school; but a student is more than his environment or genetic code. He is a mixture of his own propensity and dedication to academics, coupled with a systemic team of mentors who give their all as a student’s ... (click for more)

Roy Exum: Who Is This Barbarian?

The Tennessee Supreme Court upheld a curious decision on what defines a “whistleblower” last month, saying you can’t blow the whistle on your employer if he’s the only one who hears the whistle. No, you’ve got to go to someone other than the perpetrator which not only makes sense, but appears to heighten one’s chance of success. What is much more curious is why somebody didn’t ... (click for more)