Regulators’ remorse: SVB and the case for IRRBB capital charges

Basel Committee chair among those who say Pillar 1 capital requirement could have helped control SVB risks

Expressions of regulatory remorse are a rare commodity. Yet, after the failure of Silicon Valley Bank in March, certain influential regulators wonder whether they should have pushed harder for strict rules on minimal capital charges against the interest rate risk in banks’ loan and deposit books.

Pablo Hernández de Cos, chair of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, is one such. At an April 12 roundtable held in Washington DC, he said Basel’s 2016 standards could have applied a so-called

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 or view our subscription options here:

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to View our subscription options

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here