0
Your cart

Your cart is empty

Browse All Departments
  • All Departments
Price
  • R250 - R500 (2)
  • -
Status
Brand

Showing 1 - 2 of 2 matches in All Departments

Who Regulates Whom and How? An Overview of U.S. Financial Regulatory Policy for Banking and Securities Markets (Paperback):... Who Regulates Whom and How? An Overview of U.S. Financial Regulatory Policy for Banking and Securities Markets (Paperback)
Edward V. Murphy
R378 Discovery Miles 3 780 Ships in 10 - 15 working days

Financial regulatory policies are of interest to Congress because firms, consumers, and governments fund many of their activities through banks and securities markets. Furthermore, financial instability can damage the broader economy. Financial regulation is intended to protect borrowers and investors that participate in financial markets and mitigate financial instability. This report provides an overview of the regulatory policies of the agencies that oversee banking and securities markets and explains which agencies are responsible for which institutions, activities, and markets. Banking U.S. banking regulation traditionally focuses on prudence. Banks' business decisions are regulated for safety and soundness and adequate capital. In addition, banks are given access to a lender of last resort, and some bank creditors are provided guarantees (deposit insurance). Regulating the risks that banks take is believed to help smooth the credit cycle. The credit cycle refers to periodic booms and busts in lending. Prudential safety and soundness regulation and capital requirements date back to the 1860s when bank credit formed the money supply. The Federal Reserve as lender of last resort was created following the Panic of 1907. Deposit insurance was established in the 1930s to reduce the incentive of depositors to withdraw funds from banks during a financial panic. Securities, Derivatives, and Similar Contract Markets Federal securities regulation has traditionally focused on disclosure and conflicts of interest, rather than on prudence. Securities regulation is typically designed to ensure that market participants have access to enough information to make informed decisions, rather than to limit the riskiness of the business models of publicly traded firms. Firms that sell securities to the public must register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). SEC registration in no way implies that an investment is safe, only that material risks have been disclosed. The SEC also registers several classes of securities market participants and firms. It has enforcement powers for certain types of industry misstatements or omissions and for certain types of conflicts of interest. Derivatives trading is supervised by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which oversees trading on the futures exchanges, which have self-regulatory responsibilities as well. The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) required more disclosures in the over-the-counter derivatives market than prior to the financial crisis and has granted the CFTC and SEC authority over large derivatives traders. Government Sponsored Enterprises The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) oversees a group of government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). Two of the GSEs, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, securitize residential mortgages, and they were placed in conservatorship following mortgage losses in 2008. In the conservatorship, the Treasury provides financial support to the GSEs and FHFA and Treasury have managerial control over the enterprises. FHFA also regulates the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) system. Changes Following the 2008 Financial Crisis The Dodd-Frank Act created the interagency Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) and authorized a permanent staff to monitor systemic risk and consolidated bank regulation from five agencies to four. The DFA granted the Federal Reserve oversight authority and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) resolution authority over the largest financial firms. The DFA consolidated consumer protection rulemaking, which had been dispersed among several federal agencies, in the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Special Topics The appendices in this report include additional information on topics, such as the regulatory structure prior to the Dodd-Frank Act, organizational differences among financial firms, and the rating system that regulators use to evaluate the health of banks.

JP Morgan Trading Losses - Implications for the Volcker Rule and Other Regulation (Paperback): Edward V. Murphy, Rena S.... JP Morgan Trading Losses - Implications for the Volcker Rule and Other Regulation (Paperback)
Edward V. Murphy, Rena S. Miller, Gary Shorter
R377 Discovery Miles 3 770 Ships in 10 - 15 working days

On May 10, 2012, JP Morgan disclosed that it had lost more than $2 billion by trading financial derivatives. Jamie Dimon, CEO and chairman of JP Morgan, reported that the bank's Chief Investment Office (CIO) executed the trades to hedge the firm's overall credit exposure as part of the bank's asset liability management program (ALM). The CIO operated within the depository subsidiary of JP Morgan, although its offices were in London. The funding for the trades came from what JP Morgan characterized as excess deposits, which are the difference between deposits held by the bank and its commercial loans. The trading losses resulted from an attempt to unwind a previous hedge investment, although the precise details remain unconfirmed. The losses occurred in part because the CIO chose to place a new counter-hedge position, rather than simply unwind the original position. In 2007 and 2008, JP Morgan had bought an index tied to credit default swaps on a broad index of high-grade corporate bonds. In general, this index would tend to protect JP Morgan if general economic conditions worsened (or systemic risk increased) because the perceived health of highgrade firms would tend to deteriorate with the economy. In 2011, the CIO decided to change the firm's position by implementing a new counter trade. Because this new trade was not identical to the earlier trades, it introduced basis risk and market risk, among other potential problems. It is this second "hedge on a hedge" that is responsible for the losses in 2012. Several financial regulators are responsible for overseeing elements of the JP Morgan trading losses. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is the primary prudential regulator of federally chartered depository banks and their ALM activities, including the CIO of JP Morgan, even though it is located in London. The Federal Reserve is the prudential regulator of JP Morgan's holding company, although it would tend to defer to the primary prudential regulators of the firm's subsidiaries for significant regulation of those entities. The Federal Reserve also regulates systemic risk aspects of large financial firms such as JP Morgan. The CIO must comply with Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) regulations because it is part of the insured depository. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) oversees JP Morgan's required disclosures to the firm's stockholders regarding material risks and losses such as the trades. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulates trading in swaps and financial derivatives. The heads of these agencies coordinate through the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which is chaired by the Secretary of Treasury. The trading losses may have implications for a number of financial regulatory issues. For example, should the exemption to the Volcker Rule for hedging be interpreted broadly enough to encompass general portfolio hedges like the JP Morgan trades, or should hedging be limited to more specific risks? Are current regulations of large financial firms the appropriate balance to address perceptions that some firms are too-big-to-fail? The trading losses raise concerns about the calculation and reporting of risk by large financial firms. JP Morgan changed its value at risk (VaR) model during the time of the trading losses. Some are concerned that VaR models may not adequately address potential risks. Some are concerned that the change in reporting of the VaR at JP Morgan's CIO may not have provided adequate disclosures of the potential risks that JP Morgan faced. Such disclosures are governed by securities laws.

Free Delivery
Pinterest Twitter Facebook Google+
You may like...
Mother's Choice Baby Mink Blanket Bear
R499 Discovery Miles 4 990
Angelcare Nappy Bin Refills
R165 R145 Discovery Miles 1 450
Golf Groove Sharpener (Black)
R249 Discovery Miles 2 490
Philips TAUE101 Wired In-Ear Headphones…
R199 R129 Discovery Miles 1 290
Braai
Reuben Riffel Paperback R495 R359 Discovery Miles 3 590
Pulse Active Handgrip Trainer
R156 Discovery Miles 1 560
Boucheron Boucheron Eau De Parfum Spray…
R3,444 R1,046 Discovery Miles 10 460
Air Fryer - Herman's Top 100 Recipes
Herman Lensing Paperback R350 R235 Discovery Miles 2 350
Carbon City Zero - A Collaborative Board…
Rami Niemi Game R630 Discovery Miles 6 300
Loot
Nadine Gordimer Paperback  (2)
R383 R318 Discovery Miles 3 180

 

Partners