As we mentioned last week it is premature to write the obituary for Dodd-Frank. Regulators have publicly recommitted themselves to seeing Dodd-Frank implemented fully. But regulators are not the only ones who would like to hold on to at least some aspects of the new regulatory landscape. Recently in speeches and congressional testimony, rather than calling for wholesale repeal, leaders of several of the largest banks and trade groups in the U.S. financial industry have advocated revision and refinement of the regulations under the Act, preserving what works while changing what does not.

In his December 2, 2016 keynote speech at the second Conference on Banking Development, Stability and Sustainability, Basel Committee Chairman Stefan Ingves invited the financial industry and academics to help better calibrate capital and liquidity standards. As the Committee finalizes Basel III, Ingves said that he welcomes research and rigorous analysis of how the Committee should think about the capital benefits of allowing banks to use internally modeled approaches to calibrate appropriate capital floors. While standardized modeling approaches have the benefit of being uniform and simple, they lack precision and may ignore real differences in risk among banks better addressed by internal models. Recognizing that “academic challenge…is an essential ingredient of a healthy financial and regulatory system,” Chairman Ingves says that the Basel Committee is eager to see research that answers questions like:

• What are the pre-conditions for such models to produce better outcomes than, say, simpler standardized approaches? 
• To whom do the benefits of improved modeling accrue?  For example, if a bank using a model can lower its capital requirements by, say, 30%, what are the financial stability and real economy benefits of such an approach? 
• To what extent do the benefits of modeling accrue to lower-risk borrowers as opposed to the parties being compensated for developing and using the models?

The fast pace and broad scope of new regulation are driving participants in the complex derivatives markets to adapt quickly. Layers of old infrastructure and practices built up over time need to be overhauled to keep up with new regulation, technological change, and overall structural changes in derivatives markets.  In a September 15, 2016 white paper, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) has called for greater standardization and automation of derivatives trade processes in order to improve efficiency, reduce complexity, and lower costs for market participants.  According to ISDA’s chief executive Scott O’Malia, "More recently, the sheer pace of regulatory change has meant firms have been under pressure to tackle the next pressing deadline. The result is a derivatives infrastructure that is duplicative and based on incompatible operating standards, and this isn’t sustainable.”  The white paper identifies a number of ways the ISDA proposes to automate and streamline the significant reporting, trading, clearing and collateral management requirements that have emerged as a result of regulatory changes. In addition, the paper highlights areas where greater standardization and investments in technology, like blockchain, can make traded processing faster, more efficient, and more cost-effective at all stages of derivatives trading.