Tuesday, March 28, 2017

House Committee Hearing Examines SIFI Designation Process

Hears Testimony on FSOC's "Inconsistent and Arbitrary" SIFI Designation Process

Author: David Schwartz

The House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee held a hearing on Tuesday, March 28, 2017  to examine the process used by the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) to designate systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs). The subcommittee heard testimony from a panel of witnesses about the designation process and about the House Financial Services Committee’s February 28, 2017 report criticizing the FSOC and what it termed its “inconsistent and arbitrary” SIFI designation process. 

Comments (0)
Number of views (2741)

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Congressional Report Takes on FSOC "Too Big to Fail" Designations

"FSOC Designations of ‘Too Big to Fail’ Firms are Arbitrary and Inconsistent"

Author: David Schwartz

The House Financial Services Committee (“House Committee”) issued a report on February 28, 2017 calling into question the process by which the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) designates certain non-bank companies as "too big to fail.” Based on subpoenaed documents requested by the House Committee and the sworn testimony of Treasury Department officials, the report concludes that the FSOC is "inconsistent and arbitrary" in exercising its power to designate certain nonbank companies as systemically important. The report echoes criticisms made by government watchdogs and courts of the FSOC's transparency and its nonbank SIFI designation process.  

Comments (0)
Number of views (4949)

Thursday, December 10, 2015

House Committee Faults FSOC for “Lack of Transparency” in SIFI Designations

Author: David Schwartz

In a nearly four-hour hearing held on December 8, 2015, members of the House Financial Services Committee grilled the heads of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), accusing the FSOC of a poor transparency and lack of responsiveness to legislators’ requests for information. 

Comments (0)
Number of views (5102)

Thursday, April 2, 2015

A Hard Push Against the FSOC's Non-Bank SIFI Designation

Author: David Schwartz
Over the objections many, including asset managers, insurance companies, and even legislators and other regulators, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) has pushed ahead with its mandate to identify risks to financial stability that could arise from the material financial distress or failure, or ongoing activities, of nonbank financial companies (Non-bank SIFIs). Thus far, the FSOC has designated four firms as Non-bank SIFIs: On July 8, 2013, the FSOC voted to designate American International Group, Inc. and General Electric Capital Corporation, Inc.; on September 19, 2013, the FSOC voted to designate Prudential Financial, Inc.; and on December 18, 2014, the FSOC voted to designate MetLife, Inc.  MetLife is not taking the FSOC's action lying down, however.  The firm has taken to the courts to challenge its Non-bank SIFI designation. And more influential industry voices are speaking out against not only the designation process, but the very need for prudential oversight of Non-bank SIFIs.
Comments (0)
Number of views (4964)

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Dodd-Frank Implementation: Are We At the End of the Beginning, or the Beginning of the End?

Author: David Schwartz
With the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act having just celebrated its fourth birthday, where exactly are we in the the reform of our seemingly ever-evolving regulatory framework? Dan Ryan, Chairman of the Financial Services Regulatory Practice at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP takes a look at this very question to help us determine what is imminent, what is delayed, and what remains in limbo with regard to Dodd-Frank implementation.
Comments (0)
Number of views (5333)