Trading book capital must be "several times" higher, FSA says
Capital requirements for assets held on the trading book should be "several times" higher than at present, according to the chairman of the UK Financial Services Authority, Adair Turner.
Speaking in London yesterday, Turner echoed calls from other regulators for increased capital requirements.
"in respect to the trading books of banks, we need to remove procyclicality and to increase capital requirements not just marginally but by several times," Turner said. The current low capital requirements were out of date, he said - drawn up in a time when trading books could be expected to hold only highly liquid securities such as government bonds, rather than the less liquid structured credit products banks hold now. Turner also blamed reliance on value-at-risk, which he said was likely to produce procyclical results and ignore tail risk.
Echoing an FSA statement released on Monday, Turner said the Basel II capital adequacy rules should be revised to produce higher overall capital requirements and a more counter-cyclical outcome; banks should be encouraged to build up high levels of capital in good times and draw on them during a downturn. This would mean that at present, banks should be operating with the lowest possible levels of capital - core Tier 1 ratios of 4% and Tier 1 ratios of 6-7%, the FSA said.
Turner also called for greater emphasis on liquidity risk, more wide-ranging stress tests and a clampdown on non-bank financial institutions.
See also: Basel Committee prepares to raise capital requirements with 'stressed VAR' test
G-30: large banks may be too big to trade
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 Basel Committee
FRTB implementation: key insights and learnings
Duncan Cryle and Jeff Aziz of SS&C Algorithmics discuss strategic questions and key decisions facing banks as they approach FRTB implementation
Basel concession strengthens US opposition to NSFR
Lobbyists say change to gross derivatives liabilities measure shows the whole ratio is flawed
Basel’s Tsuiki: review of bank rules no free-for-all
Evaluation of new framework by Basel Committee will not be excuse for tweaking pre-agreed rules
Pulling it all together: Challenges and opportunities for banks preparing for FRTB regulation
Content provided by IBM
EU lawmakers consider extending FRTB deadline
European Commission policy expert says current deadline is too ambitious
Custodians could face higher Basel G-Sib surcharges
Data shows removal of cap on substitutability in revised methodology would hit four banks
MEP: Basel too slow to deal with clearing capital clash
Isda AGM: Swinburne criticises Basel’s lethargy on clash between leverage and clearing rules
Fears of fragmentation over Basel shadow banking rules
Step-in risk guidelines could be taken more seriously in the EU than in the US