Who should regulators be accountable to?

The complaint by financial sector trade bodies about proposed changes to the UK's regulatory system raises the interesting question about the accountability - or lack thereof - of the financial regulators.  UK banks fear that the scrapping of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) will leave power in the hands of a small, unelected group. But can one really say that the FSA was accountable just because it was required to hold an annual public meeting and had to hold regular meetings with senior industry managers through its so-called Practioners' Panel? We wonder what the outcome of the Credit Crunch would have been if the regulators would have been subject to full democratic control during the past few years. If anything the reaction to the crisis would have been less decisive and therefore less effective. Democratic control would better be applied during the stage in the legislative process when the framework for the regulatory regime is designed and there is time for more - and more broadly based - discussion between all parties involved. That would allow the voice of taxpayers and consumers to have more weight in the ultimate outcome.

Pay rules: Bureaucratic nightmare in the making?

A report by PriceWaterhouse raises the spectre that new pay regulations could be applied to thousands of financial services firms. While the usual sham 'consultations' are conducted by the FSA we can confidently predict that by implementing new pay regulations beyond the small group of systemically important banks the dead hand of government would certainly make one mighty step towards killing the goose that lays the golden (tax) eggs in the City of London.
The average employee has zero influence on the overall risk profile and financial performance of his employer. A small circle of top managers is wholly responsible for the success of any enterprise in our system of corporate governance and any major delay in paying the much-needed pay-checks to staff further down the rung will only massively demotivate staff - and in many cases make them willing to consider a move to friendlier shores.

Verdict on Dood-Frank bank reforms

This quote (Liam Halligan, Sunday Telegraph, 25 July 2010) says it beautifully:

"Based on sound-thinking courageous judgement, the Glass-Steagall legislation was only 17 pages long. Packed with wheezes and loop-holes, Dodd-Frank runs to 2,319 pages. Enough said"

Limits to Vulture Funds?

A report about buyers of under-performing mortgages trying to strong-arm borrowers points to the problems that can be created by unfettered trading in loans. What treatment can borrowers - be they individuals, companies or countries - expect in a financial environment where every loan is for sale? Borrowers select lenders not only on price but also on reputation. They want to know who they deal with and do not expect the representative of an aggressive vulture fund to knock on their door if they struggle to meet repayment terms. 

Goldman cannot separate Derivative Profits

from its profits in cash securities. According to Bloomberg Goldman Sachs has refused to disclose how much it makes trading derivatives to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. Goldman CFO David Viniar stated that the firm 'has no way of separating out its derivatives data from trading in cash securities'.
We can only assume that some information got lost on the way from the FCIC to the reporter as we can not imagine that at a time when computing power is so abundant it would not be possible to separate the profitability by product - down to the P&L of each individual transaction.

Re-Recruit your team every day

In this interview the CEO of The Limited makes the interesting point that 'her job is to re-recruit her associates every day and give them a reason to choose to work for us and for her as opposed to anybody else'. Definitely a good point, - especially in view of the fact that so many relationships between boss and employee are adversarial rather than cooperative.

Lagarde: Stress tests will show EU banks healthy

Strange that she seems to know what the tests that are currently performed will look like.

Germany: Compliance Madness

It is well-known, that thanks to Karl Marx Germany 'gifted' Communism to the World. He may not have been the sole inventor of this creed but he certainly perfected a system that brought unhappiness to millions of people in its wake. Germany may not be considered to be at the cutting edge of the development of financial markets but the unreformed bureaucracy that holds the country in its grip certainly makes a meal of it when it comes to throw an -ever-tightening net of useless and costly controls over the activity of German citizens. Officialdom still lives in Kaiser's times when a citizen could truly be called an 'Untertan'. Little does it matter that the problems of German banks are mostly due to political interference in the Landesbank system that should have been abolished decades ago. Little does it matter that managements of certain private banks were making serious mistakes (and have in some cases been rewarded with princely retirement packages). But the bureaucrat's reaction is typical in as much as statism calls for ever-tighter prescriptive controls in order to 'improve' the system. Logic dictates that the end of this process is an ossified system that will at some stage resemble Cuba, North Korea or the former Soviet Union. Every step will be controlled, have to be submitted to approval by a 'commissar'. That the 'Elites' of Europe at this moment congratulate themselves (the utterly silly finance minister of France was seen to clap her hands at the signing ceremony) to have initiated another scheme to reward to undeserving (called EU 'Safety Net') is fitting testimony to the utter contempt they hold the subjects in their member states. It is offers little consolation that the situation is hardly any better in most other countries as governements seem to be in a concerted arms race to more control rather than proper reform of their economic and political systems. Unfortunately, the dominating system of 'pseudo-democracy' will allow the creation of more and more bad legislation. Only a system of direct democracy which we advocate will allow citizens to reign in unaccountable politicians and bureaucrats.

Banking: Maturity Mismatch continues

Reports about increasing levels of stress in bank funding should surprise no one. One of the key lessons - if not THE key lesson - of the Credit Crunch should have been that the Banking System was in need of a complete overhaul of the liability structure. Financing long-term assets and loans with shorter-dated liabilities may have worked in the days of sedate financial and economic structures in the period after WWII up to the 1980s. But an existence relying on hand-to-mouth feeding of liquidity from deposits that are for periods of days, weeks or even months was - and is - a recipe for disaster. Money Market Funds feed the illusion of liquidity on the asset side and are a further contributing factor to this asset-liability mismatch as is the enormous amount of commercial paper rolled over by companies as well as financial institutions. 

FSA behaves like a traffic warden

The FSA is a enough of a burden for the ordinary saver in this country. More than 4000 bureaucrats are well paid to push around paper and a corresponding army euphemistically called 'compliance officer' has to be fed on the other side of the fence . That those prosecuted face an inquisitorial regime becomes obvious from this case: like the victim of the traffic warden who faces extortionate costs if he does not immediately pay up the FSA's victims face the insult that they have to pay for ludicrously high prosecution 'costs' when the bureaucrats in their secure job (and without any proper accountability) are already paid their safe salaries by the taxpayer/saver. As in all legal cases in this country there are no proper checks on fee gauging as in other countries where the lawyer's fees are set in strict accordance to the amount of the claim.