Fed hears renewed calls for tuneup of G-Sib surcharge
Failure to revisit 2015 methodology has led to inflated systemic risk scores, experts say
The US Federal Reserve’s approach to measuring large banks’ systemic risk provided a hefty punching bag for speakers at a conference on capital rules hosted by the regulator on Tuesday (July 22).
A panel of industry experts argued the Fed’s methodology for calculating the capital surcharge for global systemically important banks (G-Sibs) has resulted in inflated and volatile capital requirements that do not accurately reflect individual lenders’ riskiness.
“When comparing G-Sib score growth
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@centralbanking.com or view our subscription options here: subscriptions.centralbanking.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@centralbanking.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@centralbanking.com 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@centralbanking.com test test test
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@centralbanking.com test test test
More on Regulation
US banks hoping for end of DFAST global market shock
As Fed consults on stress-test reform, lobby group argues regulator is double-counting market risk
Cryptogeddon: a user’s guide for central banks
How might monetary authorities react if a digital asset crash destabilised the financial system?
BIS paper proposes simpler Basel capital framework
Authors say ‘capital stack’ is too complex and does not provide enough resilience to some shocks
ECB finds holes in banks’ credit spread risk nets
Banks censured for insufficient evidence to support exclusion of products from CSRBB perimeter
No Fed G-Sib buffer reform in 2025, say experts
Recalibration of method 2 seen as more likely than its abolition; banks resist daily averaging
Banks grapple with Fed’s double deadline on stress-test plans
Supervisor consulting simultaneously on next year’s test scenario and broader model changes
Taiwan’s central bank seeks oversight over stablecoin issuance
Deputy governor says potentially volatile assets could affect financial stability
How EU supervisors react to interest rate risk outliers
Banks have faced no automatic penalties for breaching new NII test, but do come under microscope