DOCSLIB.ORG

The Financial Stability Board and International Standards

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Financial Stability Board and International Standards CIGI G20 Papers | No. 1, June 2010 The Financial Stability Board and International Standards Eric Helleiner Addressing International Governance Challenges The Centre for International Governance Innovation Table of Contents Summary Summary 2 Established in April 2009 by the Group of 20 (G20) leaders, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) has been described by US Treasury About the Author 3 Secretary Tim Geithner in very ambitious terms as a new “fourth pillar” of the architecture of global economic governance alongside Introduction 3 the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and World Membership and Legitimacy 2 Trade Organization (WTO). Its basic structure and mandate build directly on those of its predecessor, the Financial Stability Forum Widening Membership and New Challenges 5 (FSF), an institution that did not live up to the hopes of many of its founders. Will the FSB meet the same fate in its efforts to strengthen Enduring Legitimacy Problems vis-à-vis Non- 7 international prudential standards? members Mechanisms for Promoting Compliance 8 Three features of the FSB will help it overcome some of the FSF’s weaknesses: its larger membership addresses some of the Strengthening Compliance in Four Ways 9 FSF’s legitimacy problems; it has been assigned more effective mechanisms to encourage compliance with international New Challenges and Priorities 11 standards; and the FSB has been given a stronger capacity to The Importance of Macroprudential Regulation 12 tackle macroprudential issues. Each of these features also raises new challenges and priorities to be addressed: A Stronger Capacity to Address 13 Macroprudential Issues • With the FSB’s larger membership, the following should be encouraged: more focus on principles-based international The Challenges of Macroprudential Regulation 15 standards rather than detailed rule-based ones; the Addressing Private Capture 16 strengthening of the voice of new developing country members within the institution; and further efforts to Conclusion 17 address its lack of accountability to non-members. Appendix: Comparing the Financial Stability 20 Forum and the Financial Stability Board • Each of the FSB’s four new mechanisms to strengthen compliance with international standards could be Works Cited 22 improved: the mandatory regular Financial Sector Assessment Programs (FSAPs) and publication of the Acronyms and Abbreviations 25 detailed IMF/WB assessments related to the ROCSs About CIGI 26 for members; the new membership obligations to implement international standards; the new peer- review process for FSB members; and the new FSB-led process to tackle non-cooperating jurisdictions. This paper was originally prepared for the conference on • The FSB’s capacity to tackle macroprudential issues could “International Governance Innovation: Issues for the 2010 be strengthened by: clarifying the standard setting bodies’ Summits,” May 3–5, 2010, Waterloo, Canada. (SSBs) accountability to the FSB; continuing to prioritize the creation of international standards for counter-cyclical regulation and the treatment of systematically important institutions, markets and instruments; and devoting more attention to the task of minimizing the risk of private sector capture of financial regulatory policy making. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Centre for International Governance Innovation or its Board of Directors and/ If these challenges and priorities are met successfully, the FSB will or Board of Governors. strengthen the institutional foundation of international regulatory cooperation. Rather than becoming a powerful international body, however, its role would remain primarily focused on facilitating Copyright © 2010, The Centre for International Governance Innovation. This work was carried out with the support of The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), transgovernmental networks, with ultimate responsibility for Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org). This work is licensed under a Creative financial regulation and supervision still resting firmly at the Commons Attribution — Non-commercial — No Derivatives License. To view this license, visit (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/3.0/). For re-use or distribution, please include national level (or perhaps at the regional level in the case of Europe). this copyright notice. 2 The Financial Stability Board and International Standards inter-governmental institution along the lines of the IMF, About the Author World Bank or WTO. Eric Helleiner is CIGI Chair in International Political Economy The FSB may look like an unusual institution, but its at the Balsillie School of International Affairs and Professor basic structure and mandate build directly on that of its of Political Science of the University of Waterloo. He received predecessor, the Financial Stability Forum (FSF). Created his PhD from the London School of Economics and is author in the wake of the last major global financial crisis in 1997- of States and the Reemergence of Global Finance (1994), 1998, the FSF also began its life with high hopes. But the The Making of National Money (2003), and Towards North organization came to play a more marginal role in global American Monetary Union? (2006). He is author of many financial governance than many of its founders had articles and chapters on issues relating to international money hoped. As Howard Davies and David Green (2008: 116) put it, “the FSF has not met some of the ambitious aims and finance, and is co-editor of a number of collections, foreseen for it when it was established in early 1999.” including most recently The Financial Stability Board: An Will the FSB meet the same fate? This paper addresses Effective Fourth Pillar of Global Economic Governance? (CIGI this question with a special focus on the FSB’s mandate to 2010), Global Finance in Crisis: The Politics of International strengthen international prudential standards.2 Regulatory Change (Routledge, 2010), The Future of the Dollar (Cornell, 2009), The Geopolitics of Sovereign Wealth Funds I argue that three features of the FSB will help it overcome (special section of Geopolitics, 2009), and At Home Abroad? some of the FSF’s weaknesses: its larger membership The Dollar’s Destiny as a World Currency (special issue of should help it address some of the legitimacy problems that Review of International Political Economy, 2008). He has been the FSF faced; it has been assigned stronger mechanisms a Canada Research Chair, and has won the Trudeau Foundation for encouraging compliance with international standards; Fellows Prize, the Donner Book Prize, and the Marvin Gelber and it has been given a stronger capacity to tackle Essay Prize in International Relations. He was also recently a macroprudential concerns. At the same time, each of these member of the Warwick Commission on International Financial changes raises new challenges and priorities, and I advance Reform (2009) and is presently co-editor of the book series suggestions to address them (which are summarized in the conclusion for readers wanting to go directly to the Cornell Studies in Money. punch line). If these challenges and priorities are met successfully, the FSB will strengthen the institutional foundation of international regulatory cooperation. Introduction Rather than becoming a powerful international body, however, its role would remain primarily focused on Established in April 2009 by the G20 leaders, the Financial facilitating transgovernmental networks, with ultimate Stability Board (FSB) has been described by US Treasury responsibility for financial regulation and supervision Secretary Tim Geithner in very ambitious terms as a new still resting firmly at the national level (or perhaps at the “fourth pillar” of the architecture of global economic regional level in the case of Europe). governance alongside the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB) and World Trade Organization WTO (US Treasury, 2009).1 But the FSB is a very different kind of pillar than these other institutions. It lacks any Membership and Legitimacy formal power and has only a tiny staff, and its creation has not been ratified by any national legislature. The Although the construction of international prudential FSB’s membership also includes an odd mix of central regulatory standards dates back to the 1988 Basel Accord bankers, finance ministry officials and supervisory and on bank capital standards, the process really accelerated regulatory authorities from a relatively narrow group of after the 1997-1998 global financial crisis when the Group countries alongside officials from international financial of Seven (G7) policy makers launched an ambitious effort institutions and standard-setting bodies. The FSB is to develop and promote international financial standards designed to act more as a loose network of these various in a wider range of sectors. The principal rationale for national and international officials than a substantial the construction of this “international standards regime” was that the 1997-1998 crisis had emanated primarily 1 For their helpful comments, I am grateful to Rolf Alter, Tom Bernes, Amar Bhattacharya, Jack Boorman, Colin Bradford, Ralph Bryant, Peter 2 The FSB’s mandate also includes tasks such as conducting (jointly Gakunu, Morris Goldstein, Jim Haley, Sungmin Kim, Rajiv Kumar, with the IMF) early warning exercises, setting guidelines for and Jacques Mistral, Avinash Persaud, Tony Porter,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Basel III: Post-Crisis Reforms
    Basel III: Post-Crisis Reforms Implementation Timeline Focus: Capital Definitions, Capital Focus: Capital Requirements Buffers and Liquidity Requirements Basel lll 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 1 January 2022 Full implementation of: 1. Revised standardised approach for credit risk; 2. Revised IRB framework; 1 January 3. Revised CVA framework; 1 January 1 January 1 January 1 January 1 January 2018 4. Revised operational risk framework; 2027 5. Revised market risk framework (Fundamental Review of 2023 2024 2025 2026 Full implementation of Leverage Trading Book); and Output 6. Leverage Ratio (revised exposure definition). Output Output Output Output Ratio (Existing exposure floor: Transitional implementation floor: 55% floor: 60% floor: 65% floor: 70% definition) Output floor: 50% 72.5% Capital Ratios 0% - 2.5% 0% - 2.5% Countercyclical 0% - 2.5% 2.5% Buffer 2.5% Conservation 2.5% Buffer 8% 6% Minimum Capital 4.5% Requirement Core Equity Tier 1 (CET 1) Tier 1 (T1) Total Capital (Tier 1 + Tier 2) Standardised Approach for Credit Risk New Categories of Revisions to the Existing Standardised Approach Exposures • Exposures to Banks • Exposure to Covered Bonds Bank exposures will be risk-weighted based on either the External Credit Risk Assessment Approach (ECRA) or Standardised Credit Risk Rated covered bonds will be risk Assessment Approach (SCRA). Banks are to apply ECRA where regulators do allow the use of external ratings for regulatory purposes and weighted based on issue SCRA for regulators that don’t. specific rating while risk weights for unrated covered bonds will • Exposures to Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) be inferred from the issuer’s For exposures that do not fulfil the eligibility criteria, risk weights are to be determined by either SCRA or ECRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Basel I, Basel II, and Basel III on Letters of Credit and Trade Finance
    Impact of Basel I, Basel II, and Basel III on Letters of Credit and Trade Finance Requirement Basel I Basel II Basel III 2013 2015 2019 Common Equity 2.0% of 3.5% of RWA 4.5% of RWA 4.5% of RWA RWA Tier 1 Capital 4.0% of 4.0% of 4.5% of RWA 6.0% of RWA 6.0% of RWA RWA RWA Total Capital 8.0% of 8.0% of 8.0% of RWA 8.0% of RWA 8.0% of RWA RWA RWA Capital Conversion -0- -0- +2.5% of RWA Buffer Leverage Ratio Observation Observation (4% of direct assets) (based on Total Capital) 3% of total direct and contingent assets Counter Cyclical Buffer +Up to 2.5% of RWA Liquidity Coverage Observation 30 days 30 days Net Stable Funding Observation Observation 1 year Additional Loss +1% to 2.5% of RWA Absorbency Color Code Key (US Applicability): (Applies only in the US) In the US, applies only to “Large, Internationally-Active Banks” Not yet implemented in the US Depending on the bank and the point in the economic cycle, under Basel III, the total capital requirement for a bank in 2019 may be as much as 15.5% of Risk-Weighted Assets (“RWA”), compared with 8% under Basel I and Basel II. The amount of Risk-Weighted Assets (“RWA”) is computed by multiplying the amount of each asset and contingent asset by a risk weighting and a Credit Conversion Factor (“CCF”) Under Basel I, risk weightings are set: 0% for sovereign obligors, 20% for banks where tenors ≤ one year, 50% for municipalities and residential mortgages, 100% for all corporate obligors Under Basel II, risk weightings are based on internal or external (rating agency) risk ratings with no special distinction for banks; capital requirements for exposures to banks are increased by as much as 650% (from 20% to as much as 150%) The Credit Conversion Factor for Letters of Credit varies under Basel I vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Procyclicality Arising from the Bank Capital Framework
    Joint FSF-BCBS Working Group on Bank Capital Issues Reducing procyclicality arising from the bank capital framework March 2009 Financial Stability Forum Joint FSF-BCBS Working Group on Bank Capital Issues Reducing procyclicality arising from the bank capital framework This note sets out recommendations to address the potential procyclicality of the regulatory capital framework for internationally active banks. Some of these recommendations are focused on mitigating the cyclicality of the minimum capital requirement, while maintaining an appropriate degree of risk sensitivity. Other measures are intended to introduce countercyclical elements into the framework. The recommendations on procyclicality form a critical part of a comprehensive strategy to address the lessons of the crisis as they relate to the regulation, supervision and risk management of internationally active banks. This strategy covers the following four areas: Enhancing the risk coverage of the Basel II framework; Strengthening over time the level, quality, consistency and transparency of the regulatory capital base; Mitigating the procyclicality of regulatory capital requirements and promoting the build up of capital buffers above the minimum in good economic conditions that can be drawn upon in stress; and Supplementing the capital framework with a simple, non-risk based measure to contain the build up of leverage in the banking system. The objective of these measures is to ensure that the Basel II capital framework promotes prudent capital buffers over the credit cycle and to mitigate the risk that the regulatory capital framework amplifies shocks between the financial and real sectors. As regulatory capital requirements are just one driver of bank lending behaviour, the proposals set out should be considered in the wider context of other measures to address procyclicality and reduce systemic risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Basel II, Sovereign Ratings and Transfer Risk External Versus Internal Ratings
    Basel II, Sovereign Ratings and Transfer Risk External versus Internal Ratings by Stijn Claessens and Geert Embrechts* 07 May 2002 Abstract Basel II puts great emphasis on external ratings, including from rating agencies, to quantify credit risks, but it also allows financial institutions to use their internal risk ratings. This is also the case for international lending, but following recent emerging markets’ crises, the quality of sovereign ratings has received much criticism. At the same time, little is known about the quality of internal ratings of country risk. Using data from a major international bank, we assess the relative performance of internal and external country ratings. We find that internal and external ratings are driven by similar factors and both underestimate “event risks”, but that external ratings are somewhat slower in adjusting to a financial crisis. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ University of Amsterdam and Rabobank International, the Netherlands respectively. For presentation at the conference Basel II: An Economic Assessment, Bank for International Settlements, Basel, 17-18 May 2002, organized by the Centre for Economic Policy Research, Journal of Financial Intermediation, and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The opinions do not necessarily express those of the Rabobank. The authors would like to thank Peter Boswijk and Martijn Krijger for help with the statistical analysis and Michiel van Voorst, Leendert Colijn, Adriaan Kukler, Frank Ligtenberg and Leonhardt van Efferink for comments on an earlier version. 1 Introduction In January 2001 the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued a consultative document on a new Basel Capital Accord (the ‘Basel II’ proposal). Under the standardized approach, Basel II puts greater emphasis on the role of external ratings, including from rating agencies, to assess credit risks.
    [Show full text]
  • DEFENDING the WOLF the Useful Contradiction of the Bundesbank Carlo Bastasin
    DEFENDING THE WOLF The Useful Contradiction of the Bundesbank Carlo Bastasin SEP Policy Brief No. 1 - 2014 The Deutsche Bundesbank, the German central bank, is commonly regarded as the Euroarea's boogeyman. The pressure imparted by the German monetary authority, for instance, rendered the European Central Bank reluctant to follow the footprints of the Federal Reserve and of other central banks, and engage in non- standard monetary policy measures that might rapidly put an end to the crisis that has been plaguing the euro zone. At several stages, during the current crisis, the ECB has been forced to take actions and prevent severe economic and financial dislocations. Given the institutional vacuum at the area-wide level and the lack of political capacity of the other institutions, the European Central Bank had often to move across the borders of its traditional domain. This has given reason to a slew of criticisms repeatedly and loudly voiced by the Bundesbank. Being also the most vocal policy actor evoking the fiscal risks associated with effecting implicit cross-border transfers via the ECB's balance sheet, the Bundesbank has appeared to have a “non- monetary” hidden agenda or even a “national political” mission. In fact, the Bundesbank has regularly appealed to two fundamental principles of sound economic and monetary policy management that cannot be easily overlooked by anybody concerned that monetary policy may lose its ability to preserve price stability. Should monetary independence be eroded by the increasing tasks devolved to the central banks, wider economic and political consequences might then arise. The first principle is the need to avoid fiscal dominance, not allowing inflation to be determined by the level of fiscal debts; the second is the “principle of responsibility” that sees a contradiction if individual responsibility is blurred by the intervention of joint liability as in the case of a State running unsound fiscal policies and being automatically bailed out by the mutualization of its liabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Standards for Minimum Capital Requirements for Market Risk by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (“The Committee”)
    A revised version of this standard was published in January 2019. https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d457.pdf Basel Committee on Banking Supervision STANDARDS Minimum capital requirements for market risk January 2016 A revised version of this standard was published in January 2019. https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d457.pdf This publication is available on the BIS website (www.bis.org). © Bank for International Settlements 2015. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated. ISBN 978-92-9197-399-6 (print) ISBN 978-92-9197-416-0 (online) A revised version of this standard was published in January 2019. https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d457.pdf Minimum capital requirements for Market Risk Contents Preamble ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Minimum capital requirements for market risk ..................................................................................................................... 5 A. The boundary between the trading book and banking book and the scope of application of the minimum capital requirements for market risk ........................................................................................................... 5 1. Scope of application and methods of measuring market risk ...................................................................... 5 2. Definition of the trading book ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Group of Twenty: a History
    THE GROUP OF TWENTY : A H ISTORY The study of the G-20’s History is revealing. A new institution established less than 10 years ago has emerged as a central player in the global financial architecture and an effective contributor to global economic and financial stability. While some operational challenges persist, as is typical of any new institution, the lessons from the study of the contribution of the G-20 to global economic and financial stability are important. Because of the work of the G-20 we are already witnessing evidence of the benefits of shifting to a new model of multilateral engagement. Excerpt from the closing address of President Mbeki of South Africa to G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, 18 November 2007, Kleinmond, Western Cape. 2 Table of Contents Excerpt from a Speech by President Mbeki....................................................................2 Executive Summary...........................................................................................................5 The Group of Twenty: a History ......................................................................................7 Preface............................................................................................................................7 Background....................................................................................................................8 The G-22 .............................................................................................................12 The G-33 .............................................................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • Basel Ii/Iii Implementation Roadmap for the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union
    BASEL II/III IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP FOR THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN CURRENCY UNION Bank Supervision Department EASTERN CARIBBEAN CENTRAL BANK ST KITTS BASEL II/III IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP FOR THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN CURRENCY UNION 1.0 PURPOSE This Roadmap provides an overview of the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank’s (ECCB/the Central Bank) Basel II/III implementation programme for the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU). The document outlines the Central Bank’s approach towards implementation, the implementation options selected and key deliverables/activities. The Roadmap is intended to guide the expectations and actions of all stakeholders associated with the Basel II/III implementation process. 2.0 INTRODUCTION The ECCB is committed to implementing certain aspects of Basel II/III in the ECCU for computing the capital adequacy of institutions licenced under the Banking Act 2015 (the Act), in accordance with Sections 46 and 47 of the Act1. Towards this end, the ECCB established a dedicated team (Basel Implementation Group) for spearheading the implementation effort and a Basel II/III Working Committee comprising of representatives from the ECCB, ECCU Bankers Association and commercial banks, for collaborating with the banking industry on an ongoing basis. The Central Bank sought comments on some draft standards2 in 2018 and plans to continue to deepen its interaction with licensees via a number of consultations and training sessions. Basel II/III constitutes a more comprehensive measure of capital adequacy than the existing Basel I. Basel II/III seeks to align regulatory capital requirements more closely with the underlying risks that banks face. The framework requires banks to assess the riskiness of their assets with respect to credit, market and operational risks and seeks to ensure that banks’ minimum capital requirements better reflect inherent risks in their portfolios, risk management practices and accompanying disclosures to the public.
    [Show full text]
  • POLICY BRIEF No. 34
    DEVELOPMENT CENTRE POLICY BRIEFS OECD DEVELOPMENT CENTRE POLICY BRIEF No. 34 In its research activities, the Development Centre aims to identify and analyse problems the implications of which will be of concern in the near future to both member and non-member countries of BANKING ON DEVELOPMENT the OECD. The conclusions represent a contribution to the search for policies to deal with the issues involved. PRIVATE FINANCIAL ACTORS AND DONORS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES The Policy Briefs deliver the research findings in a concise and accessible way. This series, with its wide, targeted and rapid distribution, is specifically intended for policy and decision makers in the fields concerned. by This Brief militates for the creation of an Innovation Laboratory Javier Santiso for Development Finance to enhance interactions between public donors and private actors in development finance. It further argues for deeper involvement of actors from emerging and developing countries; multi-directional global alliances between financiers; a ● A large, untapped reservoir of potential partnerships between databank of current best practices and projects in public/private private financial institutions (banks, asset managers, private partnerships for development; and alliances between donors and equity firms, etc.) and aid donors remains to be fully exploited. private banks to alleviate the negative impact of Basel II rules. Finally, the Brief proposes the creation of a Development Finance ● Banks, private equity and asset management firms are Award in recognition of those institutions most prepared to exploit important parts of a broad set of private actors in the field. the synergies between private lenders and the public sector in pursuit of development objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • An Explanatory Note on the Basel II IRB Risk Weight Functions
    Basel Committee on Banking Supervision An Explanatory Note on the Basel II IRB Risk Weight Functions July 2005 Requests for copies of publications, or for additions/changes to the mailing list, should be sent to: Bank for International Settlements Press & Communications CH-4002 Basel, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] Fax: +41 61 280 9100 and +41 61 280 8100 © Bank for International Settlements 20054. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated. ISBN print: 92-9131-673-3 Table of Contents 1. Introduction......................................................................................................................1 2. Economic foundations of the risk weight formulas ..........................................................1 3. Regulatory requirements to the Basel credit risk model..................................................4 4. Model specification..........................................................................................................4 4.1. The ASRF framework.............................................................................................4 4.2. Average and conditional PDs.................................................................................5 4.3. Loss Given Default.................................................................................................6 4.4. Expected versus Unexpected Losses ....................................................................7 4.5. Asset correlations...................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Mr. Tietmeyer Reviews the Central Bank Council of the Deutsche Bundesbank on Its 50Th Anniversary Address Delivered by the President of the Deutsche Bundesbank, Prof
    Mr. Tietmeyer reviews the Central Bank Council of the Deutsche Bundesbank on its 50th anniversary Address delivered by the President of the Deutsche Bundesbank, Prof. Hans Tietmeyer, during the ceremony marking the 50th anniversary of the first meeting of the Central Bank Council at the Land Central Bank of Hesse in Frankfurt/Main on 5/3/98. On March 8, 1948, eleven men gathered next door in the building of the then Land Central Bank of Hesse. The Central Bank Council - which at that time was still “provisional” - of the Bank deutscher Länder, which had been established on March 1, was meeting for the first time. An American officer of the Allied Banking Commission (appropriately named Mr. Freeman) convened the first meeting at 10.30 a.m. There will be quite a few fiftieth anniversaries in the coming weeks and months occasioned by the flood of major events relating to Germany which took place in 1948 and 1949. Many of these events were certainly more dramatic and spectacular than the first meeting of the Central Bank Council. Yet, if we remember this meeting now, it is because a crucial decision for the future began to take shape at that time. If that which was begun on March 8, 1948 had not met with success, the history of the D-Mark (and perhaps also the history of our country) would have taken a different course. It is true that the preparations for the introduction of the D-Mark were carried out elsewhere and by others, particularly by the Allies themselves. Yet, with monetary reform on June 20, when the first D-Mark banknotes came into circulation, the fate of the new currency began to be linked to the viability and the stability orientation of the German Central Bank Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Arbitraging the Basel Securitization Framework: Evidence from German ABS Investment Matthias Efing (Swiss Finance Institute and University of Geneva)
    Discussion Paper Deutsche Bundesbank No 40/2015 Arbitraging the Basel securitization framework: evidence from German ABS investment Matthias Efing (Swiss Finance Institute and University of Geneva) Discussion Papers represent the authors‘ personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Deutsche Bundesbank or its staff. Editorial Board: Daniel Foos Thomas Kick Jochen Mankart Christoph Memmel Panagiota Tzamourani Deutsche Bundesbank, Wilhelm-Epstein-Straße 14, 60431 Frankfurt am Main, Postfach 10 06 02, 60006 Frankfurt am Main Tel +49 69 9566-0 Please address all orders in writing to: Deutsche Bundesbank, Press and Public Relations Division, at the above address or via fax +49 69 9566-3077 Internet http://www.bundesbank.de Reproduction permitted only if source is stated. ISBN 978–3–95729–207–0 (Printversion) ISBN 978–3–95729–208–7 (Internetversion) Non-technical summary Research Question The 2007-2009 financial crisis has raised fundamental questions about the effectiveness of the Basel II Securitization Framework, which regulates bank investments into asset-backed securities (ABS). The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision(2014) has identified \mechanic reliance on external ratings" and “insufficient risk sensitivity" as two major weaknesses of the framework. Yet, the full extent to which banks actually exploit these shortcomings and evade regulatory capital requirements is not known. This paper analyzes the scope of risk weight arbitrage under the Basel II Securitization Framework. Contribution A lack of data on the individual asset holdings of institutional investors has so far pre- vented the analysis of the demand-side of the ABS market. I overcome this obstacle using the Securities Holdings Statistics of the Deutsche Bundesbank, which records the on-balance sheet holdings of banks in Germany on a security-by-security basis.
    [Show full text]