By deleting three words from the Dodd-Frank Act, regulatory agencies could "refer to" credit ratings, which certainly makes sense, while never "requiring reliance" on them, which doesnt.
When sophisticated, global institutions leave a country or line of business, they create a vacuum likely to be filled by outfits less sensitive to, or capable of managing, the risks involved.
Another big law like Dodd-Frank could be harmful to the mortgage market, but an incremental approach to housing finance reform might be the perfect solution.
Community banks have a proportionate disadvantage to taxpayer-subsidized megabanks as the crushing burden of regulation meant to stop the abuses of Wall Street rain down excessively on Main Street.
A dedicated federal insurance regulator would understand the risks of the insurance business which are fundamentally different from those in banking while monitoring systemic dangers posed by the largest insurers.
Bloomberg estimates big banks receive an $83 billion taxpayer subsidy a year. But calculating bank funding levels at normal, as opposed to crisis times, and accounting for Dodd-Frank compliance costs yields a very different estimate.
