By Ryan Tracy
WASHINGTON -- The largest big-bank rule changes proposed since
President Donald Trump took office would refashion one of the core
responses to the 2008 financial crisis, generating an unusual level
of opposition for the consensus-driven world of bank
regulation.
Trump-appointed officials are retooling the leverage ratio, a
capital rule adopted to curb excessive borrowing. The changes
portend more freedom for gigantic lenders such as Bank of America
Corp. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. to expand activities they have
cut back in recent years. Officials say other restrictions will
still prevent the banks from taking outsize risk.
Capital rules seek to prevent too much risk-taking by forcing
bankers to fund loans and investments with a minimum amount of
investors' equity, as opposed to less-secure borrowed money.
Big bank critics across the political spectrum support the
leverage ratio as a relatively simple curb. Bankers say the current
version is so strict and simplistic, it discourages them from
low-risk activities.
Regulators are siding with the industry and recently proposed
two major changes that would diminish its significance.
"That's going to allow us to have more flexibility," Bank of
America Chief Financial Officer Paul Donofrio said on an April 16
call with Wall Street analysts.
He was referring to a joint proposal by the Federal Reserve and
the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to lower the leverage
ratio for the largest U.S. banks. With the changes, the bank could
expand some business lines or potentially return more profits to
shareholders, he said. The Fed has separately proposed cutting back
the leverage ratio's role in its annual "stress tests" of big
banks.
The proposals are among the first in a series of expected
changes to the postcrisis regulatory regime erected by the Obama
administration. Trump-appointed regulators also are rewriting the
Volcker rule trading ban and revisiting bank liquidity rules with
the aim of lowering regulatory burden.
Opposition, particularly to the joint Fed-OCC proposal, is
coming from both conservatives and liberals.
"We haven't had a recession since 2008, so from one point of
view, our 'too big to fail' banks have never really been tested,"
Sen. John Kennedy (R., La.) told Fed Vice Chairman for Supervision
Randal Quarles at April 19 Senate Banking Committee hearing.
Echoing Democrats on the panel, Mr. Kennedy cautioned against
"fooling with the leverage ratio until we see how our banks do in a
real, full-blown recession."
Fed governor Lael Brainard's April vote against the Fed-OCC
leverage ratio proposal is the only dissent among 315 Fed board
votes on record since 2012.The Obama appointee said in a recent
speech that banks are profitable and her colleagues should be
worried about loosening capital rules.
"A booming economy can lead to a relaxation in lending standards
and an attendant increase in risky debt levels," she said.
Mr. Quarles, a Trump appointee who backed the proposals, on
Friday said "these new rules will maintain the resiliency of the
financial system and make our regulation simpler and more risk
sensitive." The agencies are taking public comments on the
proposals and could finalize them later this year.
Regulators measure banks' capital in two primary ways.
"Risk-weighted" rules assign each asset a different value, so a
bank bound by them would need to fund mortgages with more equity
than a Treasury bond, for instance. Leverage ratios are simpler
calculations comparing equity to total assets.
After the 2008 bailouts, regulators decided their risk-weighted
capital rules had failed. They responded by writing new
risk-weighted capital rules and, as a backstop, tightening leverage
ratio requirements.
The new system has made banks safer by building up their
loss-absorbing capital. Fed officials say also is having unintended
consequences.
For the biggest U.S. banks, leverage ratios are often stricter
than risk-weighted capital rules. The Fed says this gives bankers
the wrong incentive: The leverage ratio treats relatively safe,
low-margin activities the same as riskier and more profitable ones,
so why not take more risk?
"Removing that perverse incentive was something that was
important to do quickly," Mr. Quarles told the Senate panel.
Regulators in the Obama administration also wanted to
recalibrate the leverage ratio, but the proposals under Mr.
Quarles' watch go beyond what his predecessors telegraphed.
To pass annual "stress tests," the largest banks currently must
score well on two leverage ratios. The Fed is proposing to remove
one. The Fed-OCC proposal also reverses a policy that required huge
bank holding companies to maintain a tighter leverage ratio at
taxpayer-insured bank subsidiaries.
Leverage ratios have been a factor in banks' business decisions.
Some shrunk inventory of corporate and Treasury bonds -- holdings
that counted against their leverage ratios. Goldman finances fewer
short-term loans known as repurchase agreements or "repos."
JPMorgan started charging for certain types of deposits.
A larger question is whether the proposals will allow these
companies to grow their overall size, or to draw down capital and
send it to shareholders. If that occurred, banks would have less
equity to absorb losses in a downturn.
The Fed says that won't happen because risk-weighted capital
rules will remain strict. It points to an analysis of how the new
rules would have affected banks in recent years.
JPMorgan says its overall capital requirements "would likely be
higher" under the proposals.
Analysts at Goldman did a forward-looking analysis and reached a
different conclusion: If future Fed's stress tests yield results
similar to the 2017 exam, big banks besides Goldman would be able
to maintain about $5.4 billion less capital on average.
--Telis Demos contributed to this article.
Write to Ryan Tracy at ryan.tracy@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
May 07, 2018 05:44 ET (09:44 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2018 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Bank of America (NYSE:BAC)
Historical Stock Chart
From Aug 2024 to Sep 2024
Bank of America (NYSE:BAC)
Historical Stock Chart
From Sep 2023 to Sep 2024