Tabs

Bank/Thrift Supervision   |    Capital    |    CFPB    |    Deposit Insurance    |    Interchange    |    Mortgage Finance
Municipal Advisors   |    OCC-OTS Merger   |    Preemption    |    QM - QRM    |    Swaps   |    Volcker Rule    |    Full Topics List
 
Qualified Mortgage - Qualified Residential Mortgage
Swaps
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - CFPB
Bank/Thrift Holding Company Supervision
Capital
Deposit Insurance
Interchange
Mortgage Finance
Municipal Advisors
OCC-OTS Merger
Preemption
Volcker Rule
Corporate Governance
Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC)
Appraisals
Office of Financial Research (OFR)
Systemic Risk
Supervision and Oversight
Payment, Clearing and Settlement
Prudential Supervision
Trust & Securities
Asset-Backed Securities
Resolution Authority

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

ABA, Groups: TLAC Proposal Would Be Too Costly

The federal banking agencies’ proposal for the eight U.S. global systemically important banks to increase their total loss absorbing capacity, or TLAC, would create a $363 billion shortfall in eligible TLAC and long-term debt – plus $622 trillion in unrelated liabilities – by Jan. 1, 2019, a massive gap that would “be very expensive and perhaps impossible to cure…promptly,” according to ABA and several other trade groups in a comment letter. While the groups endorsed the overall concept of requiring TLAC, they argued that the agencies’ approach would be counterproductive, disruptive and unnecessary.

The agencies’ TLAC proposal would require banks to issue supplemental instruments that can be called upon should the company fail and need to be wound down rapidly. Under the proposal, G-SIBs would be required to have outstanding minimum levels of long-term debt, convertible to equity during resolution to recapitalize the firm’s critical operations. The proposed debt requirement would complement existing regulatory capital to meet the required level of TLAC.

A domestic G-SIB would be required to have outstanding long-term debt amounting to at least 6% of risk-weighted assets (plus its Basel Committee-designated G-SIB surcharge) or 4.5% of its total leverage exposure, whichever is greater. A G-SIB’s TLAC amount would be either 18% of risk-weighted assets or 9.5% of its total leverage exposure, whichever is greater.

To improve the proposal, the trade groups urged the agencies to eliminate separate long-term debt requirements, appropriately calibrate the required TLAC amounts, eliminate or limit the TLAC supplementary leverage ratio, eliminate restrictions on capital structure liabilities, permit appropriate grandfathering as TLAC is phased in and avoid imposing any domestic internal TLAC requirement. The groups also sent separate comments on TLAC requirements for U.S.-based operations of foreign G-SIBs.

Read the letter on U.S. G-SIBs.
Read the letter on foreign G-SIBs.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please read our comment policy before making a comment.