= Subscriber content; or subscribe now to access all American Banker content.

How Basel III Capital Requirements Hurt Community Banks


(5) Comments



Comments (5)
Shea makes several good points and reinforces Thomas Hoenig's recent comments. Basel has a long, irregular history of unintended consequences starting with favorable risk-weighting for residential mortgages and OECD sovereign debt. This promoted heightened resi lending among US banks and heavy sovereign debt concentrations among Euro banks. We're living with the results.
Posted by bolasov | Thursday, September 27 2012 at 9:43AM ET
There is no logic including community banks at all. B3 is and was intented to protect the financial systems from SYSTEMIC RISK. There are not one community bank that can even begin to threaten our system. If you look at the other participants in B3 they don't even have a community banking system. What has taken place is our multi regulators attempting to have another sword to poke at our nations smaller banks. The only explanation I can think of is because they CAN and it will give them more comfort, power an authority but forgetting that it would offer not one iota of national or international protection to the financial systems. If the Obama people want to create jobs and improve the economy they will put a stop to this absurdity.
Posted by Rhsmith999 | Wednesday, September 26 2012 at 3:31PM ET
American is fast becoming non competitive in the global market place. Banks are already being crushed by the cost of new regulations. The quickest way to be sure that banking can't lend to help the economy recover is to implement Basel III. Please withdraw and take another look. Given the opportunity banks will help in the process.
Posted by Moneychanger | Wednesday, September 26 2012 at 3:25PM ET
It not only hurts community banks. It hurts all banks.
Posted by neall12 | Wednesday, September 26 2012 at 2:57PM ET
The B3 proposed implementing rules for the standardized approaches are a bad fit for community banks. In fact, I am hard pressed to find any U.S. banks for which they are a good fit. The one-size-fits-all structure of the standardized approaches don't fit any bank. They are far more complicated than they need to be, and punitive for way too many aspects of the U.S. economy, without producing offsetting improvements to safety and soundness. They need to be withdrawn and reworked to take into account the many problems that are being raised, and only reproposed in a form that will truly enhance safety and soundness and strengthen not weaken an already weak economy.
Posted by WayneAbernathy | Wednesday, September 26 2012 at 2:52PM ET
Add Your Comments:
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.