Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) has asked the Federal Reserve
Board to provide the analysis used to determine that the proposed regulations
implementing the Basel III Accord would leave the banking system adequately
capitalized. In a letter to the Fed, he also asked the Board to provide a
quantitative analysis of how the proposal will affect the capitalization levels
of US banks by size and asset class. The Ranking Member of the Senate Banking
Committee also requested that the Fed provide a cost-benefit analysis of the
impact these rules would have on both the US banking system and the overall
economy.
By omitting key data from this important rulemaking, he
noted, the Fed is preventing public understanding of the impact of the rules
and undermining the ability of Congress to hold federal agencies accountable
for the regulations they promulgate. Senator Shelby emphasized that it is
imperative that Congress and the public have the information they need to
independently assess the proposed regulations before they are adopted.
While reaffirming his belief that strong capital requirements
are essential to safety and soundness, Senator Shelby said that the proposal
fails to explain how the Basel III Accord is appropriate for the US banking
system and how the agencies calibrated Basel III for domestic financial
institutions. Although he agrees with the Fed’s assertion that the financial
crisis showed that the amount of high-quality capital held by banks globally
was insufficient to absorb losses during the financial crisis, the Senator said
that the proposed regulations do not explain why Basel III will ensure the
adequate capitalization of the US
banking system.
The Senator also strongly believes in transparent
cost-benefit analysis in the federal rulemaking process to ensure full
disclosure of the impact of new regulations. In that regard, the proposal
implementing Basel III fails to explain with the requisite specificity the
impact of the proposed regulations on the banking system and the overall
economy. He asked the Fed to provide Congress with a cost-benefit analysis estimating
how existing capitalization levels will change, the cost of complying with the
rules and their aggregate impact on the economy.
While the banking agencies said that they conducted an impact
analysis using bank regulatory input data, and made assumptions when such data
was unavailable, noted the Senator, such assumptions and the underlying data
were not disclosed. Essentially, the banking agencies have proposed regulations
based in large part on a global quantitative impact study using non-public data
and relying on non-public assumptions. More transparency is needed in this
process, concluded the Senator, adding that such a cloistered approach to
rulemaking is inconsistent with US
democracy.