Golden Copy: Basel Sequel Fatigue
The prospect of a 'Basel IV' has many wondering about several issues still outstanding with Basel III

If Basel III already has the industry quivering like a dog cowed by an invisible electric fence—as NYU professor Brad Hintz described it during a panel discussion hosted by Broadridge this week, around the release of its industry survey—what's it going to do if a tougher "Basel IV" comes along?
First of all, it's strange and confusing that Mark Carney, chair of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) and a governor of the Bank of England, is weighing in publicly about tightening risk modeling and capital assessment rules, which are part of Basel III—since the FSB isn't the architect or administrator of Basel III. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is the body responsible for that set of rules. We should be asking BCBS if they are thinking about a "Basel IV."
All that aside, the changes being made to Basel III are "pretty radical," as Hintz characterizes them. "European banks face some real issues with their risk weightings. If you adjust risk weightings, it's going to change inventory positions and your ability to hold legacy positions and work them out over time," he says. The result, according to Hintz, is that firms must offer a "smorgasbord of every product to everyone, all the time."
While capital adequacy and stress testing appear to be getting tougher in Europe, they may be getting easier in the US, if the US Federal Reserve removes, at the industry's urging, its assumption in CCAR testing that firms would continue dividends and stock buybacks even in a severe economic downturn. "From the Fed's perspective, it wants to use CCAR correctly, and that means they have to keep it opaque," says Hintz. The question then would be whether CCAR's requirements are so secretive or impenetrable that financial firms having difficulty completing the tests have a valid excuse as a result.
CCAR has been in place for a few years now, but its specifics change each year. BCBS 239, its European equivalent—and also the stress testing regiment carrying out Basel III's principles—is about to see its first run in 2016 (see my July column on industry readiness).
To know how to organize, process and report data to complete these tests and comply with these regulations depends on clarity about what the rules are and specificity about how they are being updated. In the present climate, it's questionable whether that's available. Before regulators can start a "Basel IV," they should tie up the loose ends still hanging off Basel III.
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@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: https://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.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@waterstechnology.com
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@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
AI’s next gig: The rising cost of off-channel communications compliance
As the cost of analyzing communications increases, what tools can firms deploy to save time and money while avoiding penalties?
CAT on life support after appeals court ruling
Ahead of a comprehensive review promised by the SEC, lawyers believe that the recent overturn of the Consolidated Audit Trail’s funding order could herald its demise.
Euroclear readies upgrade to settlement efficiency platform
Euroclear, Taskize, and Meritsoft are working together to deliver real-time insights and resolution capabilities to users settling with any of Euroclear’s CSDs.
Messaging’s chameleon: The changing faces and use cases of ISO 20022
The standard is being enhanced beyond its core payments messaging function to be adopted for new business needs.
TT partners Thoma Bravo, Fitch launches GenAI solution, AI infrastructure woes, and more
The Waters Cooler: EquiLend acquires Trading Apps, Ultumus and BMLL partner for ETF data and analytics, and more in this week’s roundup.
CAT funding plan struck down by US appeals court
The 11th Circuit court ruled that the SEC had not established a sufficient precedent to pass the costs of the Consolidated Audit Trail on to broker-dealers.
T+1 for Europe: Crying wolf or real concerns?
Brown Brothers Harriman’s Adrian Whelan asks how prepared the investment industry is for the changes ahead, and if concerns about its implementation are justified.
Crackdown on FX vendors could raise costs for dealers
MTF designation could cost aggregators and EMSs $3m to set up and $1m in annual maintenance.