Archive for the ‘treasury’ Category

Preserving the Dual Banking System

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

Early this month I had the opportunity to hear Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner speak to the ICBA Washington Policy Summit. He was clear in his intent at that time that this administration was in the final planning stages in releasing their recommendations for reconstituting the bank regulatory system.

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal article by Paletta writes “the new bank regulatory agency could prove controversial because it would consolidate the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision and strip supervisory powers from the FDIC and the Federal Reserve.” The Federal Reserve would likely be deemed “the systemic regulator” and the FDIC would be relegated to receivership and insurance.

Another set of eyes?

Paletta goes on to report that the Administration has no intent to eliminate the dual banking system and stir controversy among the more than 5,000 state chartered banks. State charters and state regulators would be preserved but a single federal regulatory agency would have jurisdiction rights to examine the state banks and provide what the administration calls “another set of eyes. This approach would also prohibit “financial institutions from “shopping” for the best regulator.

Wait a minute. What would be the point of having a state charter and a state regulator if you also have to open your doors to the new OCC? Our dual banking system has served this country well for decades. One has to ask if this isn’t a back handed approach to create one super regulator for all banks who are systemically unimportant. Charter choice is not about “shopping” for the best regulator. It is about personal choice.

The Administration instead should be focusing on is preserving the existing regulatory structure as we know it and establishing a bifurcated regulatory system by establishing a community bank state or national charter and a commercial state or national charter along permissible banking power activities. Regulatory structure should be commensurate with risk depending on which charter choice you choose. Our current financial crisis was not caused by community financial institutions sticking to basic banking principles. It was caused by large commercial banks that expanded their reach into risky commercial enterprises.

A single federal regulator with jurisdiction over all systemically unimportant national and state banks would destroy, in this bloggers eyes, the dual banking system as we know it. It is not the current system that is broken, just the current one size fits all application of bank regulation.

Let’s all hope the Administration goes back to the drawing board, or in the event they advocate this new plan, Congress will see fit to ensure community banks are not further penalized for the sins of others.

Posted in FDIC, IBAT, ICBA, Independent Bankers Association of Texas, Texas Community Banking, Timothy Geithner, bank regulators, community banks, comptroller of the currency, federal reserve, office of thrift supervision, state bank charter, systemic regulator, systemically important, systemically unimportant, too big to fail, treasury | No Comments »

Breaking Up The Behemoths

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

“And David  strikes Goliath in the head with a stone from his sling; the Philistine fell on his face to the ground. “

It was music to all community bankers ears this week to hear three respected economists, one a 2001 Nobel prize recipient, tell a Joint Economic committee of Congress to break up the too-big-to-fail institutions and disassemble the oligarchy they have created.  I say Amen, too.

Breaking up the behemoth banks would mean recalibrating the disproportionate influence they have had on public policy.  Translated for community bankers…a bifurcated banking regulatory system just might be within our reach.  Community bankers are tired, and rightfully so, for paying for the sins of Wall Street in the form of higher FDIC insurance costs, and their owned tarnished credibility in the eyes of the general public and lawmakers.

There are obvious immediate benefits that will accrue to all community banks if Congress has the guts to set about a systematic plan to break up the big banks.  Deposits will funnel back to local communities where they were extracted and rightfully belong into the hands of the more than 8,000 community banks to be put to work for the local folks.  More money will be available for small business and consumers.

But perhaps the most significant benefit that could result from this is a reduction of the many hidden costs of regulatory burden…a burden that has most community institutions drowning in cesspool of paperwork.

Last month I heard one of the more sensible solutions to reducing the regulatory burden on community banks.  It was sensible to me because it is precisely what my colleagues and I have been advocating for the past ten years.  And, it came from a bank regulator no less.  He advocated that two charter types should be created; one a commercial charter for those institutions that choose to venture out of traditional banking services into exotic and risky product lines, and  a community bank charter for those institutions that wish to operate more on traditional banking product and service lines.  Each would be subjected to different regulatory and examination specifications proportionate to risk.

We are a long way from realizing the dream that one day community bankers would be rescued from over regulation…regulation that has largely been created thanks to the greed and corruption of the mega banks.  The testimony of  the three economists this week however was a good start.  It is nice to see that someone is hurling the stones precisely where they need to be hurled.

You never know when one just might bring the mighty behemoths down.

Posted in FDIC, Independent Bankers Association of Texas, TARP, bank regulators, default category, federal reserve, systemically important, systemically unimportant, taxpayer, treasury, wall street, zombie bank | 1 Comment »

Systemically Unimportant?

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

It’s like drinking from a fire hose.

Everyday there seems to be a new announcement from Treasury on the latest initiative to restore the financial system. Last week we learned that the Treasury and Administration would like to have visitation rights and new regulations imposed on “systemically” important non-bank institutions.

Soon, the Treasury will announce their plan for regulatory reform of the banking system. They are expected to announce that the Federal Reserve will be the regulator to oversee “systemically important” financial institutions.

I resent the constant reference to systemically important and systemically unimportant financial institutions. I recognize that the government has replaced too big to fail with too big to close or systemically risky to close.

In my way of thinking there is no such thing as a systemically unimportant financial institution, regardless of its size. Community banks after all are systemically important to their communities. Just see what happens to small business agriculture and consumer lending if the local banks goes down. It has a chilling affect on the economic well being of the community for years to come.  Community banks after all, are nothing more than a mirror image of the markets they serve.

Just ask any of the local folks who have seen their dreams realized thanks to their local community bank.

Posted in IBAT, Independent Bankers Association of Texas, Texas Community Banking, business agriculture, community banks, federal reserve, systemically important, systemically unimportant, too big to fail, treasury | 1 Comment »

Rearranging the Deck Chairs

Monday, March 23rd, 2009

By now, I should quit being surprised… surprised at anything the Treasury and the Administration might try to get this country moving again, and their attempt to restore troubled too-big to close (they have failed) financial institutions.  Today’s Treasury announcement of a new private/public partnership to package and auction  their problem assets is case in point.

I am struck by the irony of this announcement.  Is this not exactly what Treasury originally intended to do by creating the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) late last year to clear the balance sheets of the too big to close?  That plan was abandoned almost immediately after its development for fear that purchasing troubled assets from banks would expose the Treasury and taxpayers to paying too low a price for their acquisition.  Instead they opted for direct investments in the banks themselves.

Now they design an almost identical plan with one exception…private investors will have skin in the game alongside the government and they have guaranteed a market price  by allowing for competitive bids by pension and hedge funds and other would be investors.

I commend the Treasury and Geithner for this initiative… in my view it was precisely what was needed all along, the way TARP was originally intended.  Apparently the Street likes it too.  Markets are wildly up in heavy trading today following the announcement.

Finally, we have an action by the Treasury that just might save (at least for now) the sinking ships.  And all along, all they needed to do was simply rearrange the deck chairs.

It is clear that Treasury will do everything in its power to save the too big too close banks.  And once it is evident that they have, let’s hope a future initiative will be to break those suckers up so they can never be too big to close again.

Tags: ,
Posted in IBAT, Independent Bankers Association of Texas, TARP, Texas Community Banking, taxpayer, treasury, wall street | No Comments »