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: http://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
Waters Wavelength Ep. 312: Jibber-jabber
Tony, Reb, and Nyela talk about tariffs (not really), journalism (sorta), and pop culture (mostly).
Experts say HKEX’s plan for T+1 in 2025 is ‘sensible’
The exchange will continue providing core post-trade processing through CCASS but will engage with market participants on the service’s future as HKEX rolls out new OCP features.
No, no, no, and no: Overnight trading fails in SIP votes
The CTA and UTP operating committees voted yesterday on proposals from US exchanges to expand their trading hours and could not reach unanimous consensus.
Big xyt exploring bid to provide EU equities CT
So far, only one group, a consortium of the major European exchanges, has formally kept its hat in the ring to provide Europe’s consolidated tape for equities.
Jump Trading CIO: 24/7 trading ‘inevitable’
Execs from Jump, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and the DTCC say round-the-clock trading—whether five or seven days a week—is the future, but tech and data hurdles still exist.
Pisces season: Platform providers feed UK plan for private stock market
Several companies in the US and the UK are considering participating in a UK program to build a private stock market composed of separate trading platforms.
How to navigate regional nuances that complicate T+1 in Europe
European and UK firms face unique challenges in moving to T+1 settlement, writes Broadridge’s Carl Bennett, and they will need to follow a series of steps to ensure successful adoption by 2027.
Nasdaq leads push to reform options regulatory fee
A proposed rule change would pare costs for traders, raise them for banks, and defund smaller venues.