U.S. banking agencies show support for Basel Agreement – NMP Skip to main content

U.S. banking agencies show support for Basel Agreement

Sep 13, 2010

The U.S. federal banking agencies support the agreement reached at the Sept. 12, 2010, meeting of the G-10 Governors and Heads of Supervision (GHOS). This action, in combination with the agreement reached at the July 26, 2010, meeting of GHOS, sets the stage for key regulatory changes to strengthen the capital and liquidity of internationally active banking organizations in the United States and around the world. The U.S. federal banking agencies actively supported the efforts of the GHOS and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel Committee) to increase the quality, quantity, and international consistency of capital, to strengthen liquidity standards, to discourage excessive leverage and risk taking, and to reduce procyclicality in regulatory requirements. The agreement represents a significant step forward in reducing the incidence and severity of future financial crises, providing for a more stable banking system that is less prone to excessive risk-taking, and better able to absorb losses while continuing to perform its essential function of providing credit to creditworthy households and businesses. The agreement represents a significant strengthening in prudential standards for large and internationally active banks. The GHOS agreement calls for national jurisdictions to implement the new requirements beginning Jan. 1, 2013. The GHOS announced that the new numerical minimum requirements would be phased in over two years beginning on Jan. 1, 2013, and that certain capital deductions and the phase-in of capital buffers would occur over time from Jan. 1, 2014, to no later than Jan. 1, 2019. This transition period is designed to give institutions the opportunity to implement the new prudential standards gradually over time, thus alleviating the potential for associated short-term pressures on the cost and availability of credit to households and businesses. Consistent with this objective, supervisors will be evaluating an institution's capital adequacy on the basis of the then-applicable standards as well as the strength of an institution's plans to meet future standards as they come into effect. The U.S. federal banking agencies support and endorse the efforts of the GHOS and the Basel Committee to strengthen the capital position of large and internationally active banks. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires the establishment of more stringent prudential standards, including higher capital and liquidity requirements for large, interconnected financial institutions. Moreover, the Basel Committee continues work on the development of measures to improve the loss absorbing capacity for systemically important financial institutions. This work would augment the standards announced by the GHOS.
About the author
Published
Sep 13, 2010
CHLA Backs Bank Capital Proposal, Questions Impact On Mortgage Lending

Trade group supports lower mortgage risk weights but says broader market forces — not capital rules — drove banks' retreat from the market

Senate Passes 21st Century ROAD To Housing Act In 85-5 Vote

Sweeping housing package heads back to House after Senate clears final version with broad bipartisan support

MISMO Updates Business Glossary To Support AI, eMortgages

New definitions covering eHELOCs, remote online notarization, valuation modernization, and compliance initiatives aim to improve consistency

Underwriters Don’t Slow Down Loans. They Eliminate Uncertainty.

ndustry’s biggest bottleneck is not underwriting itself — it is the uncertainty that reaches underwriting too late in the process. When validation happens upstream, speed follows naturally.

MISMO Launches AI Governance Framework For Mortgage Lenders

New FRAME toolkit gives lenders, servicers, and technology providers a roadmap for managing AI risk while supporting innovation

CFPB Tells Lenders Immigration Status Can Factor Into ATR Analysis

CFPB frames immigration status as a potential ability-to-repay factor when future U.S.-based income is at risk