Winnipeg Free Press - ONLINE EDITION

Trimming the hedging of America’s banks

  • Print

Enacted in 2010 as part of the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law, the Volcker Rule had a clear purpose: Prevent large, federally insured banks from speculating in the financial markets. Named for its leading advocate, former Federal Reserve chairman Paul A. Volcker, the rule was supposed to help reestablish a line between commercial banks, which would collect deposits and make loans, and hedge funds, private equity companies and investment banks, which would take risks without any federal safety net. Keeping banks out of the speculation business would eliminate a source of system instability and taxpayer risk.

The problem has been how to distinguish speculative activities, known as "proprietary trading," from activities Congress wants to permit, such as "market-making," in which banks buy and sell securities as a service to clients, and hedging, in which banks purchase securities to offset risks elsewhere in their holdings. These line-drawing exercises — and others — occupied five federal agencies from the time Dodd-Frank passed until Tuesday, when the agencies finally approved a regulation to implement the Volcker Rule.

No one would confuse the 71-page opus, and its 800-plus pages of explanatory text, with the clear, crisp ban on proprietary trading that Mr. Volcker first articulated. But on the whole, it is faithful to Mr. Volcker’s vision and likely to promote financial stability if well-administered. It defines market-making narrowly, linking it to demonstrated past client demand for such transactions, and it discourages banks from compensating employees according to trading gains. It also requires top management to vouch, in writing, for their compliance efforts.

On hedging, the rule is tougher than many expected, ruling out transactions that are not necessitated by a "specific, identifiable risk." This would appear to eliminate broader "portfolio risk" hedging of the kind that earned JPMorgan Chase a $6-billion loss on the notorious trades known as London Whale. Indeed, the fiasco was a turning point in the Volcker Rule process, leaving regulators much more skeptical of the banks’ arguments. Or, as Federal Reserve Governor Daniel K. Tarullo put it Tuesday, the London Whale loss "allowed staff to test the procedural and substantive requirements of the proposed rule against a real-world example of what should not happen in a banking organization."

As it happens, we are already living in a partially post-Volcker Rule world. The nation’s largest banks have been getting out of the proprietary-trading business in anticipation of the final document. But since they presumably abandoned the most clearly impermissible activities first, regulators could well be left to face the murkiest gray areas when the rule takes full effect in July 2015.

Mr. Tarullo alluded to these coming judgment calls when he noted that "a specific trade may be either permissible or impermissible depending on the context and circumstances within which that trade is made." As he also suggested, the challenge for regulators will be to conduct that case-by-case analysis without descending into arbitrariness. Ultimately, inconsistent regulators would offer the public no more protection than profit-seeking traders.

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes

    No

  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

LATEST VIDEO

RMTC preview of Good People

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • A water lily in full bloom is reflected in the pond at the Leo Mol Sculpture Garden Tuesday afternoon. Standup photo. Sept 11,  2012 (Ruth Bonneville/Winnipeg Free Press)
  • A nesting goose sits on the roof of GoodLife Fitness at 143 Nature Way near Kenaston as the morning sun comes up Wednesday morning- See Bryksa’s Goose a Day Photo- Day 07- Web crop-May 09, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)

View More Gallery Photos

Poll

What are you most looking forward to this Easter weekend?

View Results

View Related Story

Ads by Google