GAO urges curbs on 'tying'
The General Accounting Office has recommended that bank regulators take additional measures to adequately enforce laws against the tying of commercial credit to more lucrative investment banking business, despite a lack of hard evidence to support accusations that the practice may be widespread.
House Financial Services Committee chairman Michael Oxley, says: “The GAO found little evidence of widespread tying practices at commercial banks with their investment banking affiliates, but the study underscores the importance of continued vigilance.”
According to the GAO report, regulators have so far focused their enquiries on interviews with the banks and transaction-specific reviews, and have failed to include more broad-based transaction testing and interviews with corporate borrowers.
The GAO recommends that “banking regulators may have to obtain other forms of indirect evidence to assess whether banks unlawfully tie products and services.”
The report also shows that many corporate borrowers are confused by the anti-tying regulations, and that banks’ interpretations of the law and its exceptions can occasionally contain substantial variations. And although the Federal Reserve recently issued a new draft interpretation for public comment, the GAO has suggested that additional guidance on the laws is needed.
Congressman Dingell, the report’s sponsor, agrees. In a letter to the Fed’s Alan Greenspan, he wrote: “The interpretation is overly complex...and I continue to see many pitfalls for the wary and unwary alike…The tone of the document appears to be tilted toward a ‘wink and nod’ approach to non-compliance.”US Credit
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance
Could one-off loan losses at US regional banks become systemic?
Investors bet Zions, Western Alliance are isolated problems, but credit risk managers are nervous
SEC poised to approve expansion of CME-FICC cross-margining
Agency’s new division heads moving swiftly on applications related to US Treasury clearing
ECB bank supervisors want top-down stress test that bites
Proposal would simplify capital structure with something similar to US stress capital buffer
Clearing houses warn Esma margin rules will stifle innovation
Changes in model confidence levels could still trip supervisory threshold even after relaxation in final RTS
BlackRock, Citadel Securities, Nasdaq mull tokenised equities’ impact on regulations
An SEC panel recently debated the ramifications of a future with tokenised equities
CCPs trade blows over EU’s new open access push
Cboe Clear wants more interoperability; Euronext says ‘not with us’