Key Elements For The Basel IIi Capital Adequacy Framework

Accordingly, banking regulators assessed minimum values for each of these key measures. At 2007, “adequately capitalized” (i.e., minimum) levels were 4% for the Tier 1 capital ratio, 8% for the total capital ratio, and 3% for the leverage ratio; “well capitalized” levels were 6% for Tier 1 capital, 10% for total capital, and 5% for leverage. Well capitalized banks qualified for, among other things, lower premiums assessed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Undercapitalized banks (e.g., below the 8% minimum required total capital) received a warning from the FDIC; continued violation of capital requirements triggered further regulatory costs, including intervention or (in the extreme) takeover by government regulators.

Basel III is a global comprehensive collection of restructured regulatory standards on bank capital adequacy and liquidity. It was developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to strengthen the regulation, supervision and risk management of the banking sector (bis.org, 2010). It introduces new regulatory requirements on bank liquidity and bank leverage in response to the financial downturn caused by the Global Financial Crisis. Stefan Walter, Secretary General of the Basel Committee on banking supervision said in November 2010:

According to Barth, Prabha, and Wihlborg (2014), the capital adequacy regulation can result in rapid increase of compliance costs. What’s more, Volcker Rule prohibits proprietary trading, which can damage bank’s hedging capability and threaten bank’s profitability. Those extra regulatory burdens caused by the Act makes it less desirable to be too large.

Since the onset of the financial crisis 2008, the sovereign debt crisis in western economies and the new financial regulation with Basel III coming up, the financial industry faces the challenge of reinventing itself. The ring-fence for Commercial and Investment Banking, and new economic and regulatory capital requirements will determine the kinds of products banks will be able to distribute. It will have a huge impact in the Investment Banking business, which will suffer tough regulation and supervisory procedures. At the same time, credit risk models will be reviewed because they have failed to predict the crisis of 2008. The current financial and economic crisis doesn’t have any precedent in the past.

The reality of systemic risk made the task of regulating the financial system increasingly complicated, as the crises aren’t contained in one country or market. The extreme inter-dependence between the different agents is the main reason why we need regulation today, as some misconducts can cause a domino effect, affecting markets globally. The structure of the banking system in itself explains this process. In the finance industry, banks borrow money from other banks. If one bank fails, the one who lent the funds in the first place might also follow the same path, creating panic in the markets. The government’s first prerogative is to protect its citizens from these

First, high capital requirements could enable institutions to be more flexible facing financial stress and crises. Second, the CFPB strengthens the oversight responsibilities, lessens the regulatory infrastructure risky gaps, and improves the protection for consumers. Third, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) single-point-of-entry strategy installs standard procedures to wind down failed financial institutions,

The 2008 financial crisis should not be the last one readers will experience, but this paper would like to present a picture of how it unfolded and where went wrong, so that hopefully we can learn from it. This paper will address some post-crisis regulations and why regulators responded this way. It concludes that the key is to carry out reforms addressing the moral hazard issue deeply in our current financial system.

Basel III is another law implemented that will place additional strain on Banks. Basel III is a set of reform measures, developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. It is a framework used to strengthen risk management and a banks ability to absorb shocks from financial and economic stress. Basel III implemented new tier 1 capital requirements, new minimum leverage ratio requirements and new liquidity coverage ratios requirements. Community banks enjoyed a small victory by delaying the final implementation requirements for Basel III to March 31, 2019.

The American Banking system has always focused on order, resiliency and the ability to withstand the storm. When comparing banking systems, it is required analyze both the strengths and the weaknesses of each system. While examining the American banking system, a key strength that is presented is the pride if its resiliency, “these improvements in the resiliency of the banking system have been reinforced by a series of key capital and liquidity rules that have been enacted in the United States, including the Basel III capital and liquidity frameworks as adopted in more stringent form” (The State of American Banking).

Recent studies have investigated the impact of the 2007-2009 financial crises on banks’ capital. Berger and Bouwman (2011) emphasised the importance of capital during financial crisis. Their empirical study concludes that banks with solid capital base have some benefits during the crisis than those that are poorly capitalised. Well capitalised banks are more able to withstand the shocks due to liquidity squeeze, and therefore had higher chances of surviving the crisis period. Other benefits accrued to well capitalised banks include increase in their market share and profitability, as customers withdrew their funds from less capitalised to a well-capitalised banks. This conclusion was also reinforced by a recent empirical study conducted Olivier de Bandt et al (2014) on a sample of large French banks over a period of 1993 – 2012. Similarly, Gambacorta and Marques-Ibanez (2011) demonstrate the existence of structural changes during the period of financial crisis. They conclude that banks with weaker core capital positions, greater dependence on market funding and on non-interest sources of income restricted the loan supply more strongly during the crisis period. Using a multi-country panel of banks, Demirgüç-Kunt, Detragiache and Merrouche (2010) find among others results, that during

To address this deficiency, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) proposed the post-crisis regulatory capital framework - Basel III, aimed to improve both the quantity and quality of banking organisations regulatory capital and to build additional capacity for loss absorbency into the banking system to withstand markets and economic shocks (BCBS). The importance of capital to a banking organisation cannot be overemphasised, the amount of capital held by a bank determine: (i) the level risk the bank can enter into. (ii) Loss absorbency capacity. (III) The profitability level. (iv) The cost of fund. (v) Investors' confidence, and (vi) the going - concern of the bank. It is vital that banking organisations are able to maintain a balance between their capital risk portfolios. As a result, banks tend to adjust their balance sheet components to achieve an internally set capital

Deregulation, innovation and globalisation has changed the way banks run from asset management to liability management, as well as the change from ‘mono’ to ‘multi-tasking’ and the increased competition in the sector as well as risk. The banking system has evolved drastically from the traditional mono-tasking institution to what it is now. This change in roles of asset and liability management could be one of the main reasons behind the global

The primary measure used by regulators and analysts to measure a bank’s capital strength is the Tier 1 capital ratio. Analyzing this ratio indicates the strength and the bank’s ability to

Financial regulation is necessary and without an efficient set of regulations a country could see rises in unemployment, interest rates, and the deterioration of financial intermediaries. With the globalization of the financial industry, it becomes more and more common for businesses to seek financing outside of their county 's boarders. These innovations in the financial industry stress why it is so important for regulations to be created and changed to reduce risk and asymmetric information in financial systems.

This chapter is about the background of 2007-2008 financial crisis. The 2007-2008 financial crisis has a huge impact on US banking system and how the banks operate and how they are regulated after the financial turmoil. This financial crisis started with difficulty of rolling over asset backed commercial papers in the summer of 2007 due to uncertainty on the liquidity of mortgage backed securities and questions about the soundness of banks and non-bank financial institutes when interest rate continued to go up at a faster pace since 2004. In March 2008 the second wave of liquidity loss occurred after US government decided to bailout Bear Stearns and some commercial banks, then other financial institutions took it as a warning of financial difficulty of their peers. In the meantime banks started hoarding cash and reserve instead of lending out to fellow banks and corporations. The third wave of credit crunch which eventually brought down US financial system and spread over the globe was Lehman Brother’s bankruptcy in August 2008. Many major commercial banks in US held structured products and commercial papers of Lehman Brother, as a result, they suffered a great loss as Lehman Brother went into insolvency. This panic of bank insolvency caused loss of liquidity in both commercial paper market and inter-bank market. Still banks were reluctant to turn to US government or Federal Reserve as this kind of action might indicate delicacy of