Tag: SVB

  • Fed blames Trump-era policies, SVB leaders — and itself — for bank’s stunning collapse

    Fed blames Trump-era policies, SVB leaders — and itself — for bank’s stunning collapse

    [ad_1]

    bank collapse fed review 75924

    Those directives, combined with the Fed’s implementation of a bipartisan bank deregulation law passed by Congress in 2018, “impeded effective supervision by reducing standards, increasing complexity, and promoting a less assertive supervisory approach,” according to the report.

    “We must strengthen the Federal Reserve’s supervision and regulation based on what we have learned,” Barr said in a press release.

    The document is the opening salvo in a renewed debate over bank regulation as the Fed and other agencies consider how to improve their policing of financial risks in the wake of banking industry turmoil. SVB and another regional lender, Signature Bank, failed after depositor runs during the same weekend in March, leading government officials to backstop all deposits for the two failed firms — even those not insured by the FDIC — in a bid to stem the panic.

    The fallout continues, with regulators and Wall Street now anxiously awaiting the fate of San Francisco-based First Republic, which was hammered by more than $100 billion of withdrawals after SVB’s collapse. The bank is furiously seeking avenues to stay afloat, and regulators are reportedly ready to put it in receivership if that effort fails.

    The findings on SVB are likely to lead to tougher rules on regional banks in particular, and Fed Chair Jerome Powell made clear he is backing efforts by Barr, who has been vice chair for supervision since July.

    “I welcome this thorough and self-critical report on Federal Reserve supervision from Vice Chair Barr,” Powell said in the release. “I agree with and support his recommendations to address our rules and supervisory practices, and I am confident they will lead to a stronger and more resilient banking system.”

    But House Financial Services Chair Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) slammed the report as overly political.

    “While there are areas identified by Vice Chair Barr on which we agree … the bulk of the report appears to be a justification of Democrats’ long-held priorities,” McHenry said in a statement. He called it “a thinly veiled attempt to validate the Biden Administration and Congressional Democrats’ calls for more regulation.”

    “Politicizing bank failures does not serve our economy, financial system, or the American people well,” he said.

    McHenry and other lawmakers had been closely awaiting the post-mortem on the Fed’s supervision of SVB as they weigh further scrutiny of the bank’s failure. Barr, in a letter highlighting his conclusions from the report, said he welcomes an external examination of the central bank’s oversight of SVB, including from Congress.

    One major finding is that the central bank has a culture where examiners shy away from taking forceful enough action to get banks to make important changes in a timely way, a senior Fed official told reporters. That problem worsened under Quarles, according to the report.

    “Supervisory practices shifted,” the document states. “In the interviews for this report, staff repeatedly mentioned changes in expectations and practices, including pressure to reduce the burden on firms,” as well as to meet a high bar of evidence before taking action.

    That approach “contributed to delays and, in some cases, led staff not to take action,” according to the report.

    Another problem, the report said, was just how quickly SVB grew, tripling in size in just a few years. Once the bank was big enough to warrant more stringent supervision, it was given considerable time to comply with heightened standards that it wasn’t ready for.

    Barr in his letter said supervisors should begin preparing banks ahead of time for those types of standards.

    Other key policies that Barr said he wants to consider:

    — Raising standards for regional banks.

    — Requiring banks that aren’t well-managed to rely less on debt and have more cash on hand. That could “serve as an important safeguard until risk controls improve, and they can focus management’s attention on the most critical issues.”

    — Targeting incentive pay for senior bank officials as a means to focus their attention on solving serious problems more quickly.

    — Toughening oversight of how banks compensate their leaders more generally.

    — Looking more closely at how much banks are relying on uninsured deposits and safe assets that have dropped in value to be able to get cash quickly in a crisis.

    The Government Accountability Office in its own report released Friday criticized both the Fed’s supervision of SVB and the FDIC’s oversight of Signature Bank. It found that regulators had identified issues with both banks but failed to “escalate supervisory actions in time to prevent the failures.”

    GAO had previously warned in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis about the risks posed by not acting fast enough to make supervisory concerns a priority. The agency in 2011 recommended that federal banking regulators consider incorporating “additional triggers that would require early and forceful regulatory action to address unsafe banking practices” into their supervisory frameworks.

    “While the regulators took steps to address our recommendations, we continue to believe that incorporating noncapital triggers would enhance the framework by encouraging earlier action and giving the regulators and banks more time to address deteriorating conditions before capital is depleted,” GAO said in the report.

    The FDIC in a separate report on Signature’s collapse, also released Friday, conceded that “in retrospect, [it] could have escalated supervisory actions sooner.” But it attributed a large share of the blame to insufficient staffing.

    The team dedicated to overseeing Signature “experienced frequent vacancies and continuous turnover” from 2017 through March 2023. That group was steadily expanded from three in 2017 to nine in 2023, as the bank grew, but had “at least one vacancy 60 percent of the time and had 17 different staff assigned during this time period not including field territory resources that were temporarily assigned to cover gaps.” It also had difficulty finding a qualified person to be the examiner in charge of the bank.

    This is a broader problem in the agency’s New York regional office, it added.

    Katy O’Donnell contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Fed #blames #Trumpera #policies #SVB #leaders #banks #stunning #collapse
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • ‘Justified anger’: Senators target executives, regulators in SVB collapse

    ‘Justified anger’: Senators target executives, regulators in SVB collapse

    [ad_1]

    2023 0316 finance 10 francis 1

    Brown said the failure of SVB and Signature Bank earlier this month came down to “hubris, entitlement, greed.”

    “Once again, small businesses and workers feared they would pay the price for other people’s bad decisions,” Brown said. “And we’re left with many questions—and justified anger—toward bank executives and boards, toward venture capitalists, toward federal and state bank regulators, and toward policymakers.”

    [ad_2]
    #Justified #anger #Senators #target #executives #regulators #SVB #collapse
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Onetime GOP ‘bomb-thrower’ tries to bring calm to SVB crisis

    Onetime GOP ‘bomb-thrower’ tries to bring calm to SVB crisis

    [ad_1]

    The methodical approach makes him a clear outlier in the GOP’s Trump era, which is significantly rowdier and more populist than the tea party that arose from the last financial crisis. McHenry says administration officials have responded well so far and that he’ll dig into how the failure happened in the days to come.

    “I worked with McHenry during this,” Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown, a progressive Ohio Democrat, said of the latest meltdown. “He seems to be responsible.”

    McHenry’s attempt to convey restraint at this early stage is at odds with other Republicans who are eager to beat up on President Joe Biden by casting the bank rescue as a culture war concern — raising questions about how many will follow his lead.

    It’s a statesman-like role the former upstart is playing across a number of issues confronting the GOP, from the debt limit to diversity, indicating that Democrats may have at least some top Republicans they can work with on the heaviest economic issues confronting the U.S.

    “Everybody’s got their own opinion,” said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), when asked about the House GOP’s emerging position under McHenry’s lead. “All I know is, I wouldn’t have bailed them out — a bunch of rich, left-wing, you know, political snobs.”

    McHenry entered Congress in 2005 at 29, providing little hint to people getting to know him in those early days that he would become one of the GOP’s leading pragmatists and dealmakers.

    A Roll Call columnist at the time called him “the GOP’s attack dog-in-training,” as he fought Democrats in an ethics battle against then-Majority Leader Tom Delay, who was indicted for criminal conspiracy. He joined the conservative Republican Study Committee, chaired by Mike Pence, and in the wake of that year’s major domestic crisis — Hurricane Katrina — McHenry called for cutting funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to rebuild schools.

    “He was extremely right-wing,” said Cam Fine, the former head of the Independent Community Bankers of America, which works closely with the Financial Services Committee. “He was pretty bombastic, quite frankly, and said a lot of things that you kind of shook your head at a little bit. … He was a ball of energy.”

    People close to McHenry said he realized over time that he didn’t want to pursue higher office and should get serious about his work in the House – in particular at the Financial Services Committee.

    Former House Speaker Paul Ryan, who advised McHenry to prioritize a committee chairmanship over leadership, said he was “a bomb thrower when he first came in … and then he dramatically matured.”

    “At some point he decided, I’m going to get bored running around like a crazy person here and I’m not going to matter — if I take it seriously I can make a difference,” said Scott Stewart, a former McHenry roommate who got to know him from their days as College Republicans.

    “He then committed to deeply understanding financial services and became a serious conservative without being a jerk.”

    In the ensuing years, McHenry followed a dual track through the ranks of House Republicans, moving up in seniority at the Financial Services Committee but also in House leadership, eventually becoming one of the GOP’s top vote counters as chief deputy whip.

    He became the top Republican on House Financial Services in 2019 and then chair this year.

    Before calamity struck the banking system the last few days, McHenry was determined to flex his dealmaking skills by finding bipartisan compromises with the Financial Services Committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), on things like cryptocurrency legislation. Waters led the committee before Democrats lost the House in the 2022 election.

    Soon after he became chair, McHenry drew flak from FOX News host Tucker Carlson and other conservative pundits by not completely eliminating from the committee’s oversight agenda a top priority for Waters — diversity and inclusion.

    “We do have a good relationship,” Waters said. “That’s not to say that good relationship is going to make me change my mind about some of his philosophy, and vice versa. … But I respect him. He respects me.”

    He was also emerging as a peacemaker in the fractious House GOP.

    McHenry helped Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) lock down the votes he needed to become speaker, a partnership that thrust the bow-tied Republican into the national spotlight as he negotiated with conservative rebels who dragged out the process for days, paralyzing the chamber.

    “He can relate to new young members who throw a lot of bombs,” Ryan said.

    His ability to draw together different factions of the party won him high praise from some of McCarthy’s closest allies.

    “He’s one of the brightest guys up here,” Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) said. “He’s got great instincts and has that amazing balance that is rare up here of being both a policy nerd and [having] really good strategic instincts.”

    His other big project this year was to try to steer Republicans toward a resolution of the debt-limit stalemate. He’s taken the position that holding U.S. borrowing authority hostage in exchange for spending cuts could be a disaster for markets, rankling conservatives like former Trump OMB Director Russell Vought, who said in an email: “I don’t have faith in Patrick McHenry.”

    So to those who know him, it’s no surprise that McHenry has tried to guide the House GOP to take a breath before going on the attack over the Biden administration’s rescue of depositors at the failed Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

    It’s a challenge as a growing number of Republicans like Paul cast the administration’s move as a mistake.

    “This is America,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) when asked about the House Republican response. “Everybody’s entitled to their opinion. But it’s currently a bailout.”

    Rep. Andy Barr of Kentucky, one of McHenry’s committee deputies, said, “Job No. 1 is for us to be the adults in a serious situation.”

    “This isn’t about poking either side of the aisle,” said Rep, Blaine Luetkemeyer of Missouri, another member of McHenry’s committee leadership team. “This is a time when we feel our country’s future is at risk here.”

    “We’ve got to rally around him and pull everybody together.”

    Sam Sutton contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]
    #Onetime #GOP #bombthrower #bring #calm #SVB #crisis
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • The crypto ‘contagion’ that helped bring down SVB

    The crypto ‘contagion’ that helped bring down SVB

    [ad_1]

    As U.S. banking regulators begin their post-mortem of Silicon Valley Bank, some pundits are pointing the finger at crypto markets, whose own collapse over the past year left the tech-focused lender hopelessly exposed.

    The conventional wisdom about crypto is that it’s “self-referential” — a separate universe to conventional finance — and that its inherent volatility can be contained. The emerging “contagion” theory is that there are enough linkages for extreme turmoil to spill over, much as a virus can sometimes jump from one species to another.

    That’s what happened here, according to Barney Frank, the former U.S. congressman who wrote sweeping new banking rules after the banking crisis in 2008, and joined the crypto-friendly Signature Bank as a board member in 2015.

    “I think, if it hadn’t been for FTX and the extreme nervousness about crypto, that this wouldn’t have happened,” Frank told POLITICO this week. “That wasn’t something that could have been anticipated by regulators.”

    FTX, the crypto exchange that collapsed in November amid allegations of massive fraud, capped a year of turmoil in crypto markets, as investors began withdrawing funds from riskier ventures in response to rising interest rates, which in turn exposed the shaky foundations underpinning the industry. The ensuing “crypto winter” saw the value of the industry plummet by two-thirds, from a peak of $3 trillion in 2021.

    Policymakers sought to reassure the public that volatility in the crypto market, blighted by scams and charlatans who sought to profit from investors’ fear of missing out, would naturally be contained. With the collapse of SVB, that claim is facing its biggest test yet.

    Patient zero

    Under the contagion theory, “patient zero” could be traced back to the implosion of TerraUSD, an “algorithmic stablecoin” that relied on financial engineering to keep its value on par with the U.S. dollar. That promise fell short in May last year following a mass sell-off, creating panic among investors who had used the virtual asset as a safe haven to park cash between taking punts on the crypto market. The origin of the crash is still subject to debate but rising interest rates are often cited as one of the main culprits. 

    TerraUSD’s demise was catastrophic for a major crypto hedge fund called Three Arrows Capital, dubbed 3AC. The money managers had invested $200 million into Luna, a crypto token whose value was used to prop up TerraUSD, which had become the third largest stablecoin on the market. A British Virgin Islands court ordered 3AC to liquidate its assets at the end of June.

    The fund’s end created even more problems for the industry. Major crypto lending businesses, such as BlockFi, Celsius Network and Voyager, had lent hundreds of millions of dollars to 3AC to finance its market bets and were now facing massive losses.

    Customers who had deposited their digital assets with the industry lender were suddenly locked out of their accounts, prompting FTX — then the third largest crypto exchange — to step in and bail out BlockFi and Voyager. Meanwhile, central banks continued to raise rates.

    The contagion seemed under control for a few months until revelations emerged in November that FTX had been using client cash to finance risky bets elsewhere. The exchange folded soon after, as its customers rushed to get their money out of the platform. BlockFi and Voyager, meanwhile, were left stranded.

    Outbreak widens

    This is the point where the outbreak of risk in the crypto industry might have jumped species into the banking sector. 

    Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank, two smaller banks that also failed last week, had extensive business with crypto exchanges, including FTX. Silvergate tried to downplay its exposure to FTX but ended up reporting a $1 billion loss over the last three months of 2022 after investors withdrew more than $8 billion in deposits. Signature also did its best to distance itself from FTX, which made up some 0.1 percent of its deposits. 

    GettyImages 1440504626
    FTX, the crypto exchange that collapsed in November amid allegations of massive fraud, capped a year of turmoil in crypto markets | Leon Neal/Getty Images

    SVB had no direct link to FTX, but was not immune to the broader contagion. Its depositors, including tech startups, crypto firms and VCs, started burning their cash reserves to run their businesses after venture capital funding dried up.

    “SVB and Silvergate had the same balance sheet structure and risks — massive duration mismatch, lots of uninsured runnable deposits backed by securities not marked to market, and inadequate regulatory capital because unrealized fair value losses excluded,” former Natwest banker and industry expert Frances Coppola told POLITICO.

    Eventually, the deposit drain forced SVB to liquidate underwater assets to accommodate its clients, while trying to handle losses on bond portfolios and an outsized bet on interest rates. As word got out, the withdrawals turned into a bank run as frictionless and hype-driven as a crypto bubble.

    Zachary Warmbrodt and Izabella Kaminska contributed reporting from Washington and London, respectively.

    This article has been updated to correct the value of the crypto industry.



    [ad_2]
    #crypto #contagion #helped #bring #SVB
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Top VC firms deeply concerned at SVB collapse, Ashneer offers a solution

    Top VC firms deeply concerned at SVB collapse, Ashneer offers a solution

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: Top venture capitalist (VC) firms on Saturday issued a joint statement on the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), one of the largest US banks serving the global startup community, saying they are “deeply disappointing and concerning”.

    Hemant Taneja, investor and managing partner at General Catalyst, said in a tweet that several VC leaders like Accel, Khosla Ventures, Altimeter Capital, Lightspeed Venture Partners, Mayfield Fund, Ribbit Capital, Redpoint Ventures and others met to discuss the aftermath of SVB’s downfall.

    “Silicon Valley Bank has been a trusted and long-time partner to the venture capital industry and our founders. For 40 years, it has been an important platform that played a pivotal role in serving the startup community and supporting the innovation economy in the US,” they said in a joint statement.

    The VC leaders said that in the event that SVB were to be purchased and appropriately capitalised, “we would be strongly supportive and encourage our portfolio companies to resume their banking relationship with them”.

    Ashneer Grover, former founder of BharatPe, took a dig at Taneja and other VC firms: “Bhai khareed lo fir investors mil ke. Uske liye bhi Founder dhoond rahe ho jo mehnat kare? Lagta hai PMC (Punjab and Maharashtra Cooperative Bank) ki tarah mujhe hi koodna padega bachane!”

    Grover had claimed that the acquisition of the crisis-ridden Punjab and Maharashtra Cooperative Bank (PMC) by Centrum-BharatPe consortium was the “smartest corporate move in history”.

    He further tweeted that “ebanks don’t get saved by passing these bureaucratic UN type joint resolutions by people with no intent to get their hands dirty. It requires intent and balls of steel”.

    On Friday, the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) took control of the SVB’s $175 billion in customer deposits.

    The bank’s collapse has left several startups, including in India, worried who have exposure to its investments and have active accounts in the bank.

    Meanwhile, the top VC leaders told startup founders that now is the time to diversify not panic.

    “SVB is a huge loss for our community. If everyone had moved 3-6 months cash out of SVB vs taking all out, SVB might still be standing. Now this is the move — don’t repeat yesterday. Not helpful to keep speculating and create more panic,” Taneja posted.

    [ad_2]
    #Top #firms #deeply #concerned #SVB #collapse #Ashneer #offers #solution

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )