FDIC issues liquidity guidance and encourages contingency funding
The US regulator has released recommendations on liquidity risk and encourages capital-raising initiatives as US banks feel the pinch
WASHINGTON, DC – US regulator the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has issued guidance on liquidity risk. The regulator says its recommendations are in response to the market turmoil, focusing on the risk of illiquidity within off-balance sheet exposures. Its capital adequacy recommendations cover capital-raising initiatives and contingency funding plans.
The regulator says: “Liquidity risk measurement and management systems should reflect an institution's complexity, risk profile and scope of operations. Institutions that use wholesale funding, securitisations, brokered deposits and other high-rate funding strategies should ensure their contingency funding plans address relevant stress events.”
The FDIC’s guidelines come as market commentators speculate on the possible failure of another large US bank, in the wake of the Bear Stearns buyout last March, and banks’ likely heavy risk exposures to ailing government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – rumoured to be on the brink of further government intervention.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma won’t soften regulatory expectations for cloud and AI
CCP supervisory chair signals heightened scrutiny of third-party risk and operational resilience
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
