Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
Related: About this forumFederal Reserve Tries Wizardry to Cure Derivatives Problem
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/05/federal-reserve-tries-wizardry-to-cure-derivatives-problem/The first proposal mapped out by the Fed is called the Net Stable Funding Ratio and would require the largest banking organizations to maintain a stable funding structure in relation to the composition of their assets, derivative exposures, and commitments. The Fed doesnt want a bank run or a demand for derivatives collateral to drain the bank of its liquidity. (Read the details of the proposed rule here.)
The second plan would establish restrictions within derivative and repo contracts of U.S. Global Systemically Important Banks (GSIBs) and the U.S. operations of foreign GSIBs. The idea is to prevent derivative or repo counterparties from cancelling the contracts if the GSIB failed and was put into resolution under the terms of the Dodd-Frank legislation. That could trigger a disorderly resolution and contagion at other banks (otherwise known as a repeat of 2008). The details of that rule proposal are here.
One of the Fed speakers described this second plan as follows: this proposal would not apply to subsidiary national banks of GSIBs or to federal branches of foreign GSIBs. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency [OCC] is expected to propose a similar set of restrictions to cover those entities
The subsidiary national banks of the GSIBs are where the vast majority of the obscene amounts of risky derivatives reside. According to the OCC, as of December 31, 2015, there were $237 trillion in notional derivatives (face amount) at the 25 largest bank holding companies with the bulk of that amount on the books of just four insured banks: JPMorgan Chase, Citibank, Goldman Sachs Bank USA and Bank of America.
Why is the Fed making a big deal of this rulemaking if the rule isnt even touching the parts of the banks where the biggest threats exist? Was the whole exercise of holding a public meeting to pressure the OCC to adopt the same rule?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 951 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Federal Reserve Tries Wizardry to Cure Derivatives Problem (Original Post)
eridani
May 2016
OP
merrily
(45,251 posts)1. Very interesting timing on worrying about derivatives--or appearing to, anyway.
Califonz
(465 posts)2. So, how much of my IRA account
do they plan on converting into Treasury bonds?
A HERETIC I AM
(24,376 posts)3. Exactly as much.....
as you allow.