《鼓包人的安魂曲》?:重新审视投资银行监管

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Onnig H. Dombalagian
{"title":"《鼓包人的安魂曲》?:重新审视投资银行监管","authors":"Onnig H. Dombalagian","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1249441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I argue that the most efficient way to regulate investment banks for financial responsibility is to make them bear (at least some) of the consequences of a systemic crisis. More prudential oversight is not likely to be helpful, in an age of rigorous risk modeling, and complex federal insolvency regimes (as in the banking industry) are not likely to be tractable for investment banks. The most effective incentive for firms to take a more pro-active role in counterparty and systemic risk management, thus, is to formalize the existing expectation that financial services conglomerates participate (at least, to a degree commensurate with their interest) in the rescue of an insolvent competitor whom the industry deems \"too interconnected\" to fail. To that end, this Article proposes a self-regulatory framework for top-tier financial holding companies and investment banks both to make such determinations and help shoulder the burden in addressing the consequences. Congress would enact legislation creating the framework of such an organization, as well as principles for the sharing of information among participating firms, to be implemented by specific rules. The organization would be responsible for identifying risks, determining the flows of information necessary to contain those risks, and building mechanisms to share that information. More importantly, the organization would be expected to participate in the financing (and share in the profits or loss resulting from) any bailout of a member entity, pursuant to rules established by the organization. An industry regulator (similar to the SEC) would be responsible for overseeing rulemaking that establishes procedures for making such determinations and enforcing compliance with those rules. The Federal Reserve Board, meanwhile, would have the authority to monitor the activities of individual member firms, to set the terms for any acquisition of an insolvent member firm within the parameters established by the industry framework, and (at its discretion) to finance or fund a bailout, in part or in whole, if it is determined to be in the public interest.","PeriodicalId":46974,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Law Journal","volume":"301 1","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2009-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Requiem for the Bulge Bracket?: Revisiting Investment Bank Regulation\",\"authors\":\"Onnig H. Dombalagian\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1249441\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I argue that the most efficient way to regulate investment banks for financial responsibility is to make them bear (at least some) of the consequences of a systemic crisis. More prudential oversight is not likely to be helpful, in an age of rigorous risk modeling, and complex federal insolvency regimes (as in the banking industry) are not likely to be tractable for investment banks. The most effective incentive for firms to take a more pro-active role in counterparty and systemic risk management, thus, is to formalize the existing expectation that financial services conglomerates participate (at least, to a degree commensurate with their interest) in the rescue of an insolvent competitor whom the industry deems \\\"too interconnected\\\" to fail. To that end, this Article proposes a self-regulatory framework for top-tier financial holding companies and investment banks both to make such determinations and help shoulder the burden in addressing the consequences. Congress would enact legislation creating the framework of such an organization, as well as principles for the sharing of information among participating firms, to be implemented by specific rules. The organization would be responsible for identifying risks, determining the flows of information necessary to contain those risks, and building mechanisms to share that information. More importantly, the organization would be expected to participate in the financing (and share in the profits or loss resulting from) any bailout of a member entity, pursuant to rules established by the organization. An industry regulator (similar to the SEC) would be responsible for overseeing rulemaking that establishes procedures for making such determinations and enforcing compliance with those rules. The Federal Reserve Board, meanwhile, would have the authority to monitor the activities of individual member firms, to set the terms for any acquisition of an insolvent member firm within the parameters established by the industry framework, and (at its discretion) to finance or fund a bailout, in part or in whole, if it is determined to be in the public interest.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indiana Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"301 1\",\"pages\":\"2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indiana Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1249441\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indiana Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1249441","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

我认为,监管投资银行承担财务责任的最有效方式,是让它们承担(至少部分)系统性危机的后果。在一个严格的风险建模时代,更审慎的监管不太可能有帮助,而复杂的联邦破产制度(就像银行业一样)不太可能适用于投资银行。因此,促使公司在交易对手和系统风险管理中发挥更积极作用的最有效激励措施,是使现有的期望正式化,即金融服务集团参与(至少在与其利益相称的程度上)拯救破产的竞争对手,而该行业认为这些竞争对手“相互关联太大”而不能倒闭。为此,本文提出了一个顶级金融控股公司和投资银行的自我监管框架,以做出此类决定并帮助承担解决后果的负担。国会将颁布立法,建立这样一个组织的框架,以及参与公司之间分享信息的原则,并通过具体规则加以实施。该组织将负责识别风险,确定包含这些风险所需的信息流,并建立共享该信息的机制。更重要的是,根据该组织制定的规则,该组织将参与对成员实体的任何救助的融资(并分享由此产生的利润或损失)。行业监管机构(类似于美国证券交易委员会)将负责监督制定规则,制定做出此类决定和强制遵守这些规则的程序。与此同时,联邦储备委员会将有权监督单个成员公司的活动,有权在行业框架确定的参数范围内为任何收购破产成员公司设定条件,并(自行决定)为部分或全部救助提供资金或资金,如果确定这符合公众利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Requiem for the Bulge Bracket?: Revisiting Investment Bank Regulation
I argue that the most efficient way to regulate investment banks for financial responsibility is to make them bear (at least some) of the consequences of a systemic crisis. More prudential oversight is not likely to be helpful, in an age of rigorous risk modeling, and complex federal insolvency regimes (as in the banking industry) are not likely to be tractable for investment banks. The most effective incentive for firms to take a more pro-active role in counterparty and systemic risk management, thus, is to formalize the existing expectation that financial services conglomerates participate (at least, to a degree commensurate with their interest) in the rescue of an insolvent competitor whom the industry deems "too interconnected" to fail. To that end, this Article proposes a self-regulatory framework for top-tier financial holding companies and investment banks both to make such determinations and help shoulder the burden in addressing the consequences. Congress would enact legislation creating the framework of such an organization, as well as principles for the sharing of information among participating firms, to be implemented by specific rules. The organization would be responsible for identifying risks, determining the flows of information necessary to contain those risks, and building mechanisms to share that information. More importantly, the organization would be expected to participate in the financing (and share in the profits or loss resulting from) any bailout of a member entity, pursuant to rules established by the organization. An industry regulator (similar to the SEC) would be responsible for overseeing rulemaking that establishes procedures for making such determinations and enforcing compliance with those rules. The Federal Reserve Board, meanwhile, would have the authority to monitor the activities of individual member firms, to set the terms for any acquisition of an insolvent member firm within the parameters established by the industry framework, and (at its discretion) to finance or fund a bailout, in part or in whole, if it is determined to be in the public interest.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Founded in 1925, the Indiana Law Journal is a general-interest academic legal journal. The Indiana Law Journal is published quarterly by students of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law — Bloomington. The opportunity to become a member of the Journal is available to all students at the end of their first-year. Members are selected in one of two ways. First, students in the top of their class academically are automatically invited to become members. Second, a blind-graded writing competition is held to fill the remaining slots. This competition tests students" Bluebook skills and legal writing ability. Overall, approximately thirty-five offers are extended each year. Candidates who accept their offers make a two-year commitment to the Journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信