Global financial system reform the Dodd Frank Act and the G20 agenda

Description
The Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 is the keystone policy response directed at reforming US
financial system activities and oversight in the wake of the 2007-2009 financial crisis. The USA also
has financial system reform policy commitments in the international arena, including in particular by
virtue of its membership in the G20. The purpose of this paper is to consider US policy initiatives
related to a core dimension of financial system reform: risks posed by systemically important financial
institutions (“SIFIs”).

Journal of Financial Economic Policy
Global financial system reform: the Dodd-Frank Act and the G20 agenda
Daniel E. Nolle
Article information:
To cite this document:
Daniel E. Nolle, (2012),"Global financial system reform: the Dodd-Frank Act and the G20 agenda", J ournal
of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 4 Iss 2 pp. 160 - 197
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381211229005
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:44 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 50 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 420 times since 2012*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Donatella Porrini, Giovanni B. Ramello, (2011),"Class action and financial markets: insights
from law and economics", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 3 Iss 2 pp. 140-160 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381111133615
Thomas Willett, Eric M.P. Chiu, Sirathorn (B.J .) Dechsakulthorn, Ramya Ghosh, Bernard Kibesse,
Kenneth Kim, J eff (Yongbok) Kim, Alice Ouyang, (2011),"Classifying international aspects
of currency regimes", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 3 Iss 4 pp. 288-303 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381111182882
Puspa Amri, Apanard P. Angkinand, Clas Wihlborg, (2011),"International comparisons of bank regulation,
liberalization, and banking crises", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 3 Iss 4 pp. 322-339 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381111182909
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Global ?nancial system reform:
the Dodd-Frank Act and the
G20 agenda
Daniel E. Nolle
Economics Department, Of?ce of the Comptroller of the Currency,
Washington, DC, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 is the keystone policy response directed at reforming US
?nancial system activities and oversight in the wake of the 2007-2009 ?nancial crisis. The USA also
has ?nancial system reform policy commitments in the international arena, including in particular by
virtue of its membership in the G20. The purpose of this paper is to consider US policy initiatives
related to a core dimension of ?nancial system reform: risks posed by systemically important ?nancial
institutions (“SIFIs”).
Design/methodology/approach – The paper provides a deta‘iled comparison of SIFI policy
initiatives and timetables under both the Dodd-Frank Act and the G20 agenda, as re?ected in the
ongoing work plan of the Financial Stability Board (FSB), and poses the question “Are US domestic
and international ?nancial system reform commitments in sync?”
Findings – The study ?nds that, fundamentally, the answer is “yes.” However, the comparison yields
two caveats with potential policy implications. First, the two agendas differ in their relative emphasis
on the coverage of both banks and nonbanks. The G20/FSB focus, at least over the near-term,
is bank-centric compared with the Dodd-Frank Act, which consistently addresses both bank and
nonbank ?nancial ?rms. Second, implementation of Dodd-Frank Act provisions is subject to
long-established US law mandating that there be suf?cient opportunity for public input into the
rulemaking process, whereas the G20/FSB process has been less systematic and transparent on public
consultation and feedback.
Practical implications – These observations may be relevant to the current debate over the speed
and scope of Dodd-Frank Act implementation measures, and to the discussion about the future
international competitiveness of US banks and nonbank ?nancial ?rms.
Originality/value – This study is the ?rst to present a detailed, comprehensive comparison of
?nancial system reform initiatives and provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act and the G20 agenda.
Keywords United States of America, Legislation, World economy, International ?nance,
Financial institutions, G20, Dodd-Frank Act, Financial Stability Board, Financial system reform,
Global ?nancial system, Systemically important ?nancial institutions, G-SIFI, G-SIB
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-6385.htm
The author thanks Mark Levonian, David Nebhut, Susan Quill, Dilip Patro, Tara Rice,
Mark Carey, Lamont Black, Mark Van Der Weide, James Barth, and International Finance
Workshop participants at the Federal Reserve Board for helpful comments and suggestions. The
views expressed in this paper are solely the responsibility of the author and should not be
interpreted as re?ecting the views of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, any
other person associated with the Federal Reserve System, the Of?ce of the Comptroller of the
Currency, or the United States Treasury Department.
JFEP
4,2
160
Journal of Financial Economic Policy
Vol. 4 No. 2, 2012
pp. 160-197
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1757-6385
DOI 10.1108/17576381211229005
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
I. Introduction
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is the keystone US
?nancial system reform policy response to the ?nancial crisis of 2007-2009[1]. Less in the
limelight, but conceptually akin to much of the ?nancial systemreformagenda codi?ed in
the Dodd-FrankAct (DFA), is the policy response of the Group of Twenty (G20) nations[2].
Indeed, G20 policydeliberations on?nancial systemreform, to which USauthorities made
substantial contributions, proceeded largely in tandem with the domestic debate
culminating in the enactment of the DFA in July 2010. Furthermore, although the G20
policy measures to which Member nations committed at the Leaders’ Summit in Seoul,
Korea in November 2010 do not, as does the DFA, have the force of law, they represent an
important element of the “international side” of US?nancial systemreformpolicy[3]. That
raises the question of whether the G20 and DFA ?nancial reform agendas are “in sync.”
The purpose of this study is to answer that question, at least for one portion of the policy
agenda. The paper focuses speci?cally on policies to address risks to the ?nancial system
posed by systemically important ?nancial institutions (SIFIs)[4]. The study compares the
substance and timetable of speci?c DFA and G20 SIFI-oriented policy initiatives and
ascertains the extent to which those policies are consistent with each other. The analysis
concludes overall that the G20 and DFA SIFI agendas are substantively consistent and
complementary. However, that conclusion is quali?ed in two ways. First, the two agendas
differ in their relative emphasis on the coverage of both banks and nonbanks. The
G20/Financial Stability Board (FSB) focus, at least over the near-term, is bank-centric
compared with the DFA, which consistently addresses both bank and nonbank ?nancial
?rms. Second, implementation of DFA provisions is subject to long-established US law
mandatingthat there be suf?cient opportunityfor public input into the rulemakingprocess,
whereas the G20/FSB process has been less systematic and transparent on public
consultation and feedback. The lesser emphasis on transparency and public input
characterizing the G20/FSB policy development process may be attributable in part to the
somewhat more rapidpace of the G20/FSBagendarelative tocorrespondingDFAtimelines.
The study is organized as follows. The background discussion in Section II brie?y
chronicles the ?nancial crisis-induced emergence of the G20 as the premier forum for
international ?nancial system policy development, and outlines the rapid evolution of
the G20’s ?nancial system reform agenda from November 2008 through early-2011.
Of particular note are policies aimed at reducing risks to the ?nancial system posed by
SIFIs: the G20 Leaders have committed to an ambitious “SIFI Project,” under the
auspices of the FSB, and Section II concludes by describing the major dimensions of that
project. With that as context, Section III presents comparisons of G20/FSB and DFA
policy actions and proposals to improve SIFI safety and soundness. Section IV
summarizes the detailed comparisons, focusing in particular on answering the question
of whether the G20/FSB and DFA agendas and timetables are in sync with each other.
Section Vconcludes by identifying several considerations relevant to the current debate
about the appropriate speed and scope of DFA implementation measures, and the issue
of the international competitiveness of US banks and nonbank ?nancial ?rms.
II. The recent emergence of the G20 and the Financial Stability Board in
International Financial System Policy
The globalized nature of the ?nancial crisis that began in 2007 had, by the September
2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers, become a universally acknowledged fact[5].
Global ?nancial
system reform
161
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Less clear at that time was in what forum ?nance ministers and central bankers could
most effectively respond. Prior to the fall of 2008, the Group of Seven (G7) Finance
Ministers and Central Bank Governors would have been the consensus choice for
coordinating international response to any crisis with the world’s largest commercial
and investment banks at its center, inasmuch as most of those institutions are
headquartered, and regulated, in a G7 country[6]. In these circumstances, G7 Members
decided to defer to the G20’s leadership in developing and coordinating the international
agenda on reforming the functioning and regulation of the global ?nancial system.
Although relatively unheralded at the time, that “hand-off” constituted a major change
in how, and by whom, international economic and ?nancial policy coordination is
undertaken[7].
II.A. The rapid evolution of the G20’s ?nancial system reform agenda: the 2008
Washington Summit to the 2010 Seoul Summit
Meeting November 15, 2008, in Washington, DC at what can be argued was the zenith
of ?nancial market panic and the nadir of ?nancial market stability, the G20 Leaders
strongly concurred in their desire for “rapid action” and committed to a 47-point
“action plan”[8]. Action plan items were designated as either priorities for “immediate
action” by the end of the ?rst quarter of 2009, or as “medium-term actions” to be fully
addressed thereafter. The ?nance ministers of the G20 were given overall
responsibility for getting the action plan off the ground, with the assistance of the
Financial Stability Forum (FSF), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the
“international standard setting bodies”[9].
Most analysts now agree that the global ?nancial system began to emerge, albeit
fragilely, from the depth of the crisis by the end of the second quarter of 2009
(IMF, 2009). However, when G20 Leaders reconvened at the London Summit at the
beginning of the second quarter, there was as yet no clarity about the depth, breadth,
or duration of the ?nancial crisis. Indeed, the London Communique´ begins by asserting
that “We face the greatest challenge to the world economy in modern times; a crisis
which has deepened since we last met” (Group of Twenty, 2009c). The G20 Leaders
then noted that, amid trying circumstances, Members had made progress, albeit
limited, in addressing many of the 47 action items outlined at the Washington Summit.
The group went on to reaf?rm the importance of the November 2008 action plan, but
rationalized the lengthy, 47-point agenda into a more limited set of highest priority
“major reforms” (Group of Twenty, 2009a).
The London Summit Declaration also unveiled a signi?cant structural change for
the G20, in that it announced the reconstitution of the old FSF as the new FSB. The
FSB’s (2009, p. 1) mission is to:
[. . .] coordinate at the international level the work of national ?nancial authorities and
international standard setting bodies in order to develop and promote the implementation of
effective regulatory, supervisory, and other ?nancial sector policies [to] address
vulnerabilities affecting ?nancial systems in the interest of global ?nancial stability.
At a stroke, the new FSB became the in?uential policy development arm of the G20,
a substantial contrast with the role of the old FSF as multilateral “think tank” lacking
formal backing from the major ?nancial center countries for policy development[10].
To give teeth to the FSB’s policy development and coordination efforts, Members
agreed on a process to encourage compliance with the G20 policies to which
JFEP
4,2
162
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
they commit[11]. That process consists of periodic “peer reviews,” along the lines of the
IMF’s Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP), using as “evidence IMF/World
Bank public Financial Sector Assessment Program reports.” The FSB also committed
to publishing peer review results[12]. Under those circumstances, although the FSB has
no legal authority to impose compliance, it is likely that a non-compliant Member
would ?nd its ability to shape G20 policies diminished. It is also possible that ?nancial
market participants around the globe would question the reliability of national policies
enacted by a non-compliant Member. Possibly the most important factor likely to impel
countries toward compliance, however, was incipient as of the publication of this
paper: FSB ?nancial system reform policy decisions may come to be widely perceived
in the same light as are Basel Committee capital requirements[13].
Although the G20 made important progress in London, one could still characterize
the period from the November 2008 Washington Summit through the April 2009
London Summit as the “?re?ghting” phase of the international response to the global
?nancial con?agration. In contrast, by September 2009, as G20 Leaders met again in
summit, repair and reconstruction were the clear order of the day. In that environment,
Leaders took decisive steps in three respects at the Pittsburgh Summit. First, in the
Summit Communique´ they explicitly designated the G20 as “the premier forum” for
international economic and ?nancial policy cooperation (Group of Twenty, 2009b,
point #19, p. 3). Second, Leaders’ anointing of the G20 as the premier international
?nancial policy group also “of?cially” rati?ed the G20’s lead role across the whole
spectrum of ?nancial sector reform work in which the international standard setting
bodies, the IMF, and World Bank engage.
The third major decision by the G20 was to ?rm up the ?nancial reform policy
agenda set out in the London Communique´. Keeping that document’s focus on a limited
set of fundamental objectives, Leaders agreed in Pittsburgh on timetables and action in
six key priority areas[14]:
(1) Capital. Relying on the work of the Basel Committee, the G20 committed to
developing by end-2010 internationally agreed rules to improve both the
quantity and quality of bank capital, discourage excessive leverage, and
mitigate pro-cyclicality.
(2) SIFIs. The primary goal is to eliminate the too-big-to-fail view and the moral
hazard/excessive risk-taking behavior it elicits by subjecting SIFIs to higher
capital requirements and heightened prudential standards. In addition, Leaders
agreed that Members should cooperate in developing policies for the orderly
cross-border resolution of global SIFIs.
(3) Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives. To reduce systemic risks from OTC
derivatives activities, Leaders emphasized the development of policies to
improve transparency and regulatory oversight.
(4) Compensation. Leaders endorsed the (then new) compensation standards
developed by the FSB aimed at aligning employee compensation at ?nancial
?rms with long-term value creation, rather than excessive risk taking, and
tasked the FSB with monitoring Members’ implementation of those standards.
(5) Non-cooperative jurisdictions. Leaders committed to developing global
standards for dealing with tax havens, money laundering, proceeds of
corruption, terrorist ?nancing, and prudential standards.
Global ?nancial
system reform
163
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
(6) International Accounting Standards. Leaders asserted that international
accounting bodies should achieve a single set of high quality, global
accounting standards within the context of their independent standard setting
processes, and complete convergence to single standard before end-2011[15].
By the time of the November 2010 Summit in Seoul, barely two years after their urgent
gathering in Washington, G20 Leaders were con?dent that a strong international
consensus had been established on each major objective[16]. In that environment, they
approved the Basel Committee’s comprehensive framework for strengthening capital
and liquidity standards; and the public release by the Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision (BCBS) of its “Basel III” framework document a few weeks after the Seoul
Summit marked the completion of the ?rst major ?nancial system reform goal of the
G20[17]. In Seoul, Leaders also rati?ed the FSB’s recommendations for detailed work
plans to address the remaining ?ve major priorities over the 2011-2012 period.
II.B. Focus on SIFIs
Prominent among the FSB’s work plan recommendations was its so-called “SIFI Project,”
onwhichthe rest of this paper focuses[18]. Because of the obvious cross-border importance
of SIFIs with a large international presence, the G20 agreed in Seoul that FSB work focus
initially on “global” systemically important ?nancial institutions (G-SIFIs). By year-end
2010, the FSBhad settled upon three interrelated work streams dealing with, respectively,
prudential standards, supervision, and resolution. The “supervision” workstream
essentially looks for the FSB to coordinate the work of international standards setters to
reconsider, and as necessary, update their “core principles” documents and standards for
supervision, in consultation with national authorities. The “resolution” workstream is
focusedonensuring that the failure and unwinding of large, cross-border SIFIs will unfold
in such a way that it will not become a systemically-destabilizing or taxpayer-burdening
event; as a corollary, ?nancial ?rms and market participants will understand that no ?rm
is too big to fail. The third major dimension of the SIFI project targets improvements in
regulations applying to SIFIs. This “heightened prudential standards” part of the overall
SIFI project, including the development of criteria for identifying and designating which
?rms are SIFIs, is the primary focus of the comparison between G20/FSB SIFI initiatives
and corresponding initiatives under the DFA to which the paper now turns[19].
III. Dodd-Frank policies to improve SIFI safety and soundness vis-a` -visG20
commitments
Much of the DFA targets the same ?nancial stability goals as does the G20/FSB
agenda, which the USA helped develop and to which it has committed itself. A major
objective of both agendas is the development of effective policies to address SIFIs. This
section of the paper compares G20/FSB and DFA measures to improve SIFI safety and
soundness in order to answer the question: Are US policy commitments on SIFIs –
both those mandated under the DFA, as well as those agreed to in the international
arena – consistent with each other?[20],[21].
Table I compares relevant policy initiatives under the G20/FSB agenda
(left-hand side) and under the DFA (right-hand side) across two basic dimensions:
(1) identi?cation and designation of SIFIs (Row 1); and
(2) measures to improve SIFI regulation or “prudential standards” (Rows 2, 3, and 4).
JFEP
4,2
164
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
S
I
F
I
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
F
S
B
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
s
o
n
g
l
o
b
a
l
l
y
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
“
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
”
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
b
,
P
a
r
a
.
3
0
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
c
,
P
a
r
a
.
4
3
,
4
8
F
S
B
P
R
1
d
,
p
.
7
F
S
B
P
R
2
,
k
p
.
3
F
S
B
P
R
3
a
,
p
.
2
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
”
g
N
o
d
i
s
t
i
n
c
t
i
o
n
m
a
d
e
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
a
n
d
“
d
o
m
e
s
t
i
c
”
S
I
F
I
s
A
p
p
l
i
e
s
t
o
b
a
n
k
s
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
B
H
C
s
:
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
(
a
s
o
f
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
)
,
B
H
C
s
w
i
t
h
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
t
h
a
n
$
5
0
b
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
a
s
s
e
t
s
a
r
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
a
s
S
I
F
I
s
(
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
”
)
g
Q
3
2
0
1
1
:
N
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
a
s
S
I
F
I
s
,
a
t
e
n
d
o
f
a
3
-
s
t
e
p
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
:
(
1
)
b
y
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
,
A
P
N
R
,
w
i
t
h
3
0
-
d
a
y
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
;
(
2
)
b
y
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
1
,
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
R
u
l
e
(
N
P
R
)
,
w
i
t
h
3
0
-
d
a
y
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
;
(
3
)
F
i
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
i
s
s
u
e
d
a
s
e
x
p
e
d
i
t
i
o
u
s
l
y
a
s
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
,
a
n
d
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
a
s
f
r
o
m
i
s
s
u
a
n
c
e
d
a
t
e
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
:
F
I
O
:
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
1
3
o
f
T
i
t
l
e
V
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
s
t
h
e
F
I
O
a
s
o
f
D
F
A
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
d
a
t
e
.
I
t
s
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
t
o
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
,
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
e
o
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
,
t
h
e
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
,
b
u
t
i
n
t
h
a
t
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
t
h
e
F
I
O
c
a
n
m
a
k
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
n
g
a
n
i
n
s
u
r
e
r
a
s
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
s
i
g
n
i
?
c
a
n
t
.
T
h
e
F
I
O
a
l
s
o
i
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
g
a
p
s
i
n
t
h
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
;
i
t
a
l
s
o
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
n
g
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
-
l
e
v
e
l
e
f
f
o
r
t
s
o
n
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
o
f
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
m
a
t
t
e
r
s
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
:
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
C
F
T
C
a
n
d
S
E
C
t
o
d
e
?
n
e
t
e
r
m
s
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
t
o
a
s
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
s
i
g
n
i
?
c
a
n
c
e
o
f
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
?
r
m
s
;
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
a
r
e
:
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
7
2
1
(
C
F
T
C
)
a
n
d
7
6
1
(
S
E
C
)
,
g
i
v
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
e
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
t
h
e
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
d
e
?
n
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
s
“
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
,
”
“
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
r
i
s
k
,
”
a
n
d
“
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
t
e
r
m
”
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
S
u
b
t
i
t
l
e
A
a
n
d
B
t
h
a
t
a
m
e
n
d
s
p
r
e
-
D
F
A
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
l
a
w
O
t
h
e
r
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
:
S
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
F
M
U
s
a
n
d
P
C
S
s
:
j
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
a
n
d
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
:
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
b
y
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
o
f
F
M
U
s
a
n
d
P
C
S
,
a
t
e
n
d
o
f
t
h
r
e
e
-
s
t
e
p
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
:
(
1
)
b
y
e
n
d
-
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
,
A
P
N
R
o
n
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
a
n
d
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
f
o
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
n
g
F
M
U
s
a
n
d
P
C
S
,
w
i
t
h
6
0
-
d
a
y
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
;
(
2
)
b
y
M
a
r
c
h
2
1
,
2
0
1
1
,
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
R
u
l
e
,
w
i
t
h
a
3
0
-
d
a
y
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
;
(
3
)
b
y
e
n
d
-
J
u
n
e
,
2
0
1
1
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
i
s
s
u
e
d
T
i
t
l
e
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
1
1
3
,
1
1
5
,
1
1
7
,
1
6
5
T
i
t
l
e
V
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
1
3
M
o
s
t
2
0
1
1
G
-
S
I
F
I
w
o
r
k
f
o
c
u
s
e
s
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
/
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
g
r
o
u
p
s
:
G
-
S
I
B
s
[
g
l
o
b
a
l
l
y
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
b
a
n
k
s
]
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
0
:
B
C
B
S
t
o
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
a
l
G
-
S
I
B
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
t
o
F
S
B
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
7
2
1
,
7
6
1
M
i
d
-
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
B
C
B
S
,
a
f
t
e
r
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
f
r
o
m
F
S
B
,
d
r
a
f
t
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
f
o
r
q
u
a
n
t
i
t
a
t
i
v
e
a
n
d
q
u
a
l
i
t
a
t
i
v
e
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s
f
o
r
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
G
-
S
I
B
s
;
B
C
B
S
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
f
r
o
m
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
G
-
S
I
B
s
.
[
N
o
t
e
:
A
l
o
n
g
w
i
t
h
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
,
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
o
n
a
m
o
u
n
t
a
n
d
c
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
h
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
f
o
r
G
-
S
I
B
s
(
s
e
e
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
,
b
e
l
o
w
i
n
t
h
i
s
t
a
b
l
e
)
]
M
i
d
-
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
B
C
B
S
t
o
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
v
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
o
n
G
-
S
I
B
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
[
a
n
d
G
-
S
I
B
s
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
]
L
a
t
e
-
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
d
u
e
o
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
v
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
B
C
B
S
s
u
b
m
i
t
s
?
n
a
l
i
z
e
d
G
-
S
I
B
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
G
2
0
L
e
a
d
e
r
s
a
h
e
a
d
o
f
C
a
n
n
e
s
S
u
m
m
i
t
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
3
a
n
d
4
,
2
0
1
1
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
(
P
o
s
t
-
G
2
0
C
a
n
n
e
s
S
u
m
m
i
t
)
:
B
C
B
S
t
o
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
,
j
o
i
n
t
w
/
F
S
B
,
G
-
S
I
B
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
a
n
d
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
b
y
G
2
0
L
e
a
d
e
r
s
N
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
:
B
r
o
a
d
l
y
:
“
A
s
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
d
i
s
g
a
i
n
e
d
,
t
h
e
F
S
B
w
i
l
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
h
o
w
t
o
e
x
t
e
n
d
t
h
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
t
o
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
m
a
r
k
e
t
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
,
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
n
o
t
p
a
r
t
o
f
a
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
g
r
o
u
p
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
”
(
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
p
.
1
)
c
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
:
T
h
e
F
S
B
n
o
t
e
d
i
n
i
t
s
F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
1
5
,
2
0
1
1
P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
t
h
e
G
2
0
t
h
a
t
i
t
e
x
p
e
c
t
s
t
o
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
i
n
p
u
t
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
I
A
I
S
o
n
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
t
h
a
t
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
t
o
i
n
s
u
r
e
r
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
e
d
a
s
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
;
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
S
B
’
s
A
p
r
i
l
1
0
,
2
0
1
1
P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
n
o
t
e
s
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
“
I
A
I
S
i
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
a
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
a
l
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
a
n
d
s
e
t
o
f
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s
f
o
r
a
s
s
e
s
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
g
l
o
b
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
c
e
o
f
i
n
s
u
r
e
r
s
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
I
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
8
0
5
,
8
0
6
,
8
1
0
a
s
i
n
p
u
t
t
o
t
h
e
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
b
y
t
h
e
F
S
B
a
n
d
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
o
f
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
”
a
n
d
t
h
a
t
“
t
h
e
I
A
I
S
e
x
p
e
c
t
s
t
o
?
n
a
l
i
z
e
i
t
s
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
i
n
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
”
l
N
o
t
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
I
A
I
S
p
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
0
I
A
I
S
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
p
a
p
e
r
,
w
h
i
c
h
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
e
d
s
i
g
n
i
?
c
a
n
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
c
o
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
t
h
a
t
“
F
o
r
t
h
e
m
o
s
t
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
o
f
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
[
.
.
.
]
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
l
i
t
t
l
e
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
o
f
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
e
i
t
h
e
r
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
o
r
a
m
p
l
i
f
y
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
r
i
s
k
,
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
t
s
e
l
f
o
r
i
n
t
h
e
r
e
a
l
e
c
o
n
o
m
y
.
”
e
[
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
:
I
O
S
C
O
i
s
w
o
r
k
i
n
g
o
n
G
-
S
I
F
I
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
h
i
g
h
e
r
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
i
s
s
u
e
s
,
b
u
t
a
s
o
f
M
a
r
c
h
3
1
,
2
0
1
1
t
h
e
r
e
w
a
s
n
o
s
p
e
c
i
?
c
a
n
d
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
o
r
t
i
m
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
e
f
f
o
r
t
s
]
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table I.
G20 and DFA policy
agendas and timetables
on SIFIs
Global ?nancial
system reform
165
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
S
I
F
I
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
H
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
H
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
f
o
r
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
:
S
a
m
e
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
a
s
f
o
r
G
-
S
I
F
I
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
s
a
b
o
v
e
;
b
u
t
l
i
k
e
l
y
t
o
d
e
a
l
o
n
l
y
w
i
t
h
G
-
S
I
B
s
a
n
d
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
s
u
r
c
h
a
r
g
e
A
s
p
e
r
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
7
,
“
[
H
]
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
d
r
a
w
n
f
r
o
m
a
m
e
n
u
o
f
v
i
a
b
l
e
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
a
n
d
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d
b
y
a
c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
s
u
r
c
h
a
r
g
e
s
,
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
,
a
n
d
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
(
a
b
l
e
)
d
e
b
t
[
.
.
.
]
”
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
,
P
a
r
a
.
3
0
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
P
a
r
a
.
9
,
1
1
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
7
F
S
B
P
R
2
k
,
p
.
2
B
o
t
h
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
1
1
5
a
n
d
1
6
5
c
o
v
e
r
s
p
e
c
i
?
c
c
a
t
e
g
o
r
i
e
s
o
f
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
a
n
d
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
a
n
d
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
(
t
h
e
F
R
B
)
m
a
y
w
i
s
h
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
c
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
r
i
s
k
s
t
o
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
p
o
s
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
e
n
c
e
a
n
d
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
I
F
I
s
(
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
”
)
.
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
1
5
f
o
c
u
s
e
s
o
n
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
’
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
m
a
k
i
n
g
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
t
h
e
F
R
B
;
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
f
o
c
u
s
e
s
o
n
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
F
R
B
c
a
n
t
a
k
e
e
i
t
h
e
r
i
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
F
S
O
C
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
o
r
“
o
n
i
t
s
o
w
n
,
”
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
h
e
i
g
h
t
e
n
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
.
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
2
0
g
i
v
e
s
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
t
h
e
d
i
s
c
r
e
t
i
o
n
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
h
i
g
h
e
r
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
n
o
t
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
l
y
e
n
u
m
e
r
a
t
e
d
i
n
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
1
5
.
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
1
d
e
a
l
s
a
t
l
e
n
g
t
h
w
i
t
h
l
e
v
e
r
a
g
e
a
n
d
r
i
s
k
-
b
a
s
e
d
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
T
i
t
l
e
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
1
1
5
,
1
2
0
,
1
6
5
,
1
7
1
,
1
7
4
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
6
0
6
,
6
1
9
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
i
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
f
o
r
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
’
p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
/
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
e
q
u
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
o
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
r
i
s
k
s
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
6
1
9
)
:
I
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
a
n
d
/
o
r
q
u
a
n
t
i
t
a
t
i
v
e
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
e
d
b
y
F
R
B
,
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
r
i
s
k
s
t
o
a
n
d
c
o
n
?
i
c
t
s
o
f
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
d
u
e
t
o
t
h
e
i
r
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s
w
i
t
h
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
s
a
n
d
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
e
q
u
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
s
E
n
d
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
1
:
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
d
f
o
r
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
–
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
d
a
t
e
s
a
s
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
:
m
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
U
n
d
e
r
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
,
t
h
e
F
R
B
m
u
s
t
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
F
S
O
C
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
n
g
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
w
h
i
c
h
h
e
i
g
h
t
e
n
e
d
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
w
o
u
l
d
a
p
p
l
y
,
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
r
i
s
k
-
b
a
s
e
d
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
,
l
e
v
e
r
a
g
e
,
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
,
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
r
i
s
k
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
,
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
,
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
l
i
m
i
t
s
;
a
n
d
i
t
m
a
y
a
l
s
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
,
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
d
p
u
b
l
i
c
d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
L
e
v
e
r
a
g
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
[
j
]
)
:
F
R
B
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
F
S
O
C
,
t
o
p
r
o
m
u
l
g
a
t
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
e
1
5
-
t
o
-
1
l
e
v
e
r
a
g
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
h
a
s
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
s
u
c
h
a
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
b
a
n
k
s
–
T
o
b
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
.
U
n
d
e
r
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
1
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
,
b
u
t
F
R
B
m
a
y
a
s
s
e
r
t
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
a
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
d
a
t
e
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
4
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
G
A
O
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
t
h
e
u
s
e
o
f
h
y
b
r
i
d
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
s
T
i
e
r
I
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
b
y
b
a
n
k
s
a
n
d
B
H
C
s
,
a
n
d
o
n
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
U
S
i
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
h
o
l
d
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
o
f
f
o
r
e
i
g
n
b
a
n
k
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
B
H
C
s
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
2
:
F
S
O
C
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
a
d
v
i
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
n
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
A
f
t
e
r
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
2
:
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
:
F
R
B
m
a
y
i
s
s
u
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
t
o
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
a
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table I.
JFEP
4,2
166
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
S
I
F
I
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
/
l
i
m
i
t
s
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
,
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
s
,
e
t
c
.
A
s
p
e
r
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
7
“
t
h
e
F
S
B
m
a
y
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
[
.
.
.
]
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
s
u
r
c
h
a
r
g
e
s
,
t
i
g
h
t
e
r
l
a
r
g
e
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
l
e
v
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
”
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
7
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
V
o
l
c
k
e
r
R
u
l
e
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
6
1
9
)
:
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
(
F
R
B
,
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
F
D
I
C
)
,
O
C
C
)
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
S
E
C
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
a
n
d
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
F
S
O
C
,
t
o
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
i
n
o
r
s
p
o
n
s
o
r
s
h
i
p
o
f
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
s
a
n
d
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
e
q
u
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
s
b
y
i
n
s
u
r
e
d
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
y
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
T
i
t
l
e
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
1
1
5
,
1
2
0
,
1
2
1
,
1
2
3
,
1
6
4
,
1
6
5
,
1
7
1
,
1
7
4
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
6
1
9
,
6
2
0
,
6
2
2
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
S
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m
d
e
b
t
l
i
m
i
t
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
[
g
]
)
:
F
R
B
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
F
S
O
C
,
m
a
y
p
r
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
l
i
m
i
t
s
o
n
s
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m
d
e
b
t
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
o
f
f
-
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
s
h
e
e
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
s
,
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
2
:
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
(
F
R
B
,
F
D
I
C
,
O
C
C
)
t
o
(
1
)
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
a
n
d
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
w
h
i
c
h
a
“
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
e
n
t
i
t
y
”
m
a
y
e
n
g
a
g
e
u
n
d
e
r
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
a
n
d
s
t
a
t
e
l
a
w
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
r
i
s
k
s
a
n
d
r
i
s
k
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
;
a
n
d
(
2
)
m
a
k
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
a
n
y
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
n
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
o
n
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
s
a
f
e
t
y
a
n
d
s
o
u
n
d
n
e
s
s
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
6
2
0
)
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
3
:
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
l
i
m
i
t
s
a
n
d
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
s
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
[
e
]
)
:
F
R
B
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
F
S
O
C
,
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
b
y
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
l
i
m
i
t
s
o
n
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
s
t
o
a
n
y
u
n
a
f
?
l
i
a
t
e
d
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
S
I
F
I
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
O
t
h
e
r
i
s
s
u
e
s
E
n
d
-
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
e
t
t
e
r
s
f
,
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
a
n
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
f
o
r
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
f
G
-
S
I
F
I
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
:
(
i
)
t
h
e
w
a
y
s
i
n
w
h
i
c
h
h
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
c
a
n
b
e
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
i
n
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
;
(
i
i
)
o
t
h
e
r
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
s
u
r
c
h
a
r
g
e
s
,
l
a
r
g
e
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
s
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
o
r
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
l
e
v
i
e
s
;
a
n
d
(
i
i
i
)
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
l
e
g
a
l
f
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
c
o
u
l
d
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
a
n
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
’
s
r
e
s
o
l
v
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
a
P
R
C
,
c
o
m
p
r
i
s
i
n
g
s
e
n
i
o
r
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
o
f
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
i
n
t
h
e
i
r
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
;
F
S
B
S
t
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
t
o
d
r
a
w
u
p
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
f
o
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
i
s
P
R
C
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
P
a
r
a
.
4
8
,
4
9
,
5
0
,
5
1
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
7
A
t
E
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
,
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
;
A
N
D
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
1
(
O
F
R
)
;
A
N
D
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
:
C
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
F
S
O
C
,
t
h
e
O
F
R
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
O
f
?
c
e
o
f
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
(
F
I
O
)
.
T
h
e
F
S
O
C
,
c
h
a
i
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
S
e
c
r
e
t
a
r
y
,
i
s
m
a
d
e
u
p
o
f
n
i
n
e
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
a
n
i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
m
e
m
b
e
r
,
a
n
d
?
v
e
n
o
n
v
o
t
i
n
g
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
;
i
t
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
t
o
e
m
e
r
g
i
n
g
r
i
s
k
s
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
I
F
I
s
;
t
h
e
F
S
O
C
i
s
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
.
T
h
e
O
F
R
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
a
n
a
l
y
z
i
n
g
d
a
t
a
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
r
i
s
k
(
a
n
d
i
s
t
o
b
e
f
u
l
l
y
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
n
o
l
a
t
e
r
t
h
a
n
1
y
e
a
r
f
r
o
m
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
D
F
A
)
.
T
h
e
F
I
O
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
n
g
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
f
o
r
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
r
i
s
k
s
T
i
t
l
e
I
,
S
u
b
t
i
t
l
e
s
A
a
n
d
B
;
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
(
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
)
A
s
o
f
E
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
,
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
:
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
o
l
i
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
5
)
:
T
h
e
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
(
o
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
e
)
i
s
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
t
o
“
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
a
l
l
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
o
l
i
c
y
c
h
a
n
n
e
l
s
”
o
n
“
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
a
s
t
h
o
s
e
f
o
u
n
d
i
n
U
S
l
a
w
r
e
l
a
t
i
n
g
t
o
l
i
m
i
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
c
o
p
e
,
n
a
t
u
r
e
,
s
i
z
e
,
s
c
a
l
e
,
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
n
e
s
s
o
f
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
,
”
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
.
T
h
e
F
S
O
C
i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
“
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
l
y
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
w
i
t
h
”
c
o
u
n
t
e
r
p
a
r
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
o
t
h
e
r
c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
m
a
t
t
e
r
s
r
e
l
a
t
i
n
g
t
o
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
r
i
s
k
o
f
t
h
e
g
l
o
b
a
l
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
;
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
F
R
B
a
n
d
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
S
e
c
r
e
t
a
r
y
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table I.
Global ?nancial
system reform
167
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
2
:
P
R
C
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
s
i
t
s
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
G
-
S
I
F
I
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
i
n
2
0
1
2
:
A
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
(
a
l
l
B
H
C
s
w
i
t
h
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
e
d
a
s
s
e
t
s
o
f
$
5
0
b
i
l
l
i
o
n
o
r
m
o
r
e
,
a
n
d
a
l
l
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
a
s
S
I
F
I
s
)
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
,
i
n
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
I
O
.
A
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
t
o
b
e
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
h
:
S
I
F
I
S
e
l
f
-
S
t
r
e
s
s
T
e
s
t
s
:
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
b
e
i
s
s
u
e
d
b
y
e
a
c
h
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
,
i
n
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
F
R
B
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
I
O
,
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
t
h
a
t
:
(
1
)
e
a
c
h
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
t
s
o
w
n
s
e
m
i
-
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
;
a
n
d
(
2
)
a
l
l
o
t
h
e
r
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
t
o
t
a
l
c
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
e
d
a
s
s
e
t
s
o
f
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
$
1
0
b
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
d
b
y
a
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
y
t
o
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
.
S
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
t
o
b
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
a
n
d
t
o
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
y
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
:
R
i
s
k
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
[
h
]
)
:
A
l
l
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
t
r
a
d
e
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
a
n
d
a
l
l
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
t
r
a
d
e
d
B
H
C
s
o
v
e
r
$
1
0
b
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
a
s
s
e
t
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
F
R
B
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
a
“
r
i
s
k
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
”
N
o
t
e
s
:
A
s
o
f
A
p
r
i
l
3
0
,
2
0
1
1
u
n
l
e
s
s
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
;
n
o
t
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
e
d
a
s
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
v
i
e
w
s
o
f
t
h
e
O
f
?
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
C
u
r
r
e
n
c
y
,
t
h
e
U
S
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
,
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
;
a
s
e
e
w
w
w
.
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
b
o
a
r
d
.
o
r
g
/
p
r
e
s
s
/
p
r
_
1
1
0
2
1
9
.
p
d
f
f
o
r
l
i
n
k
s
t
o
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
d
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
F
S
B
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
w
o
r
k
s
t
r
e
a
m
s
;
s
e
e
w
w
w
.
t
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
.
g
o
v
/
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
/
P
a
g
e
s
/
F
S
O
C
-
i
n
d
e
x
.
a
s
p
x
f
o
r
l
i
n
k
s
t
o
d
e
t
a
i
l
e
d
D
F
A
-
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
g
e
n
d
a
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
;
b
G
r
o
u
p
o
f
T
w
e
n
t
y
(
2
0
1
0
a
,
b
)
;
c
“
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
”
:
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
b
)
;
d
“
F
S
B
P
R
1
”
:
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
a
,
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
8
)
;
e
t
h
e
F
S
B
F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
1
P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
i
s
a
s
u
n
d
e
r
n
o
t
e
k
b
e
l
o
w
;
t
h
e
I
A
I
S
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
p
a
p
e
r
i
s
:
I
A
I
S
(
2
0
1
0
)
;
f
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
e
t
t
e
r
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
t
h
e
B
C
B
S
,
I
O
S
C
O
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
I
A
I
S
;
g
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
u
s
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
“
S
I
F
I
s
,
”
r
e
f
e
r
r
i
n
g
i
n
s
t
e
a
d
t
o
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
”
;
h
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
e
l
f
-
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
,
D
F
A
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
n
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
b
u
t
t
h
e
F
R
B
m
a
y
a
s
s
e
r
t
t
h
a
t
a
n
1
8
-
m
o
n
t
h
-
a
f
t
e
r
-
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
(
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
2
)
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
a
p
p
l
i
e
s
;
i
n
o
t
l
a
t
e
r
t
h
a
n
1
5
m
o
n
t
h
s
a
f
t
e
r
t
h
e
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
d
a
t
e
,
b
u
t
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
a
m
a
n
d
a
t
e
d
F
S
O
C
s
t
u
d
y
a
n
d
c
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
6
1
9
;
j
a
n
F
M
U
i
s
d
e
?
n
e
d
a
s
a
m
u
l
t
i
-
l
a
t
e
r
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
o
f
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
r
i
n
g
,
c
l
e
a
r
i
n
g
,
o
r
s
e
t
t
l
i
n
g
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
,
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
,
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
t
r
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
m
o
n
g
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
o
r
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
M
U
;
a
P
C
S
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
i
s
a
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
o
u
t
b
y
o
n
e
o
r
m
o
r
e
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
t
h
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
o
f
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
t
r
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
;
k
“
F
S
B
P
R
2
”
:
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
1
b
)
;
l
“
F
S
B
P
R
3
”
:
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
1
c
)
;
m
B
e
r
n
a
n
k
e
(
2
0
1
1
,
p
.
2
)
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
W
a
l
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
R
e
f
o
r
m
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
(
P
u
b
l
i
c
L
a
w
1
1
1
-
2
0
3
,
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
W
a
l
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
R
e
f
o
r
m
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
R
o
a
d
m
a
p
,
F
S
O
C
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
1
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
C
o
p
e
l
a
n
d
(
2
0
1
0
)
;
T
h
e
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
S
u
m
m
i
t
L
e
a
d
e
r
s
’
D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
1
1
-
1
2
,
2
0
1
0
(
“
S
e
o
u
l
S
u
m
m
i
t
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
q
u
e ´
”
)
;
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
a
,
b
,
2
0
1
1
b
,
c
)
;
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
a
n
d
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
S
I
F
I
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
d
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
F
S
B
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
I
M
F
(
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
C
o
r
e
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
f
o
r
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
B
a
n
k
i
n
g
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
B
C
B
S
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
0
6
)
;
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
C
o
r
e
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
a
n
d
M
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
,
I
A
I
S
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
0
3
)
;
B
e
r
n
a
n
k
e
(
2
0
1
1
)
;
S
I
F
I
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
Table I.
JFEP
4,2
168
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Also indicated in Table I are the most pertinent and signi?cant G20/FSB documents or
DFA titles and sections and, in selected instances, the speci?c authority or authorities
charged with lead roles[22]. The timeframes under consideration in both sections run
through 2012 (except as explicitly noted)[23].
III.A. SIFI identi?cation
The top substantive row of Table I (Row 1) summarizes major work and corresponding
timetables under each agenda for the identi?cation of SIFIs, a necessary ?rst step in
addressing the risks they pose to the ?nancial system. One difference immediately
apparent between the two programs is that the current focus for the FSB is on G-SIFIs,
a perspective formally approved by the G20 at the Seoul Summit in November 2010, as
discussed in Section II. There is not an explicitly separate focus in the DFA on large,
interconnected ?nancial ?rms that are “globally” signi?cant. Nevertheless, ?rms that
will be designated as “globally signi?cant” constitute a ?nancially powerful subset of
the large, interconnected ?nancial institutions with which the Act concerns itself[24].
Moreover, the G20 continues to encourage national authorities to proceed expeditiously
with the identi?cation (and development of plans for oversight) of all SIFIs. As
indicated on the right-hand side of Table I, Title I of the DFA does just that. In fact,
Title I addresses both bank and nonbank SIFIs; as explained directly, that wider scope
likely represents a meaningful difference with the G20 agenda.
For banks, as of the July 21, 2010 enactment date, Section 165 of the DFA
speci?cally designates banks/bank holding companies (BHCs) with consolidated assets
of $50 billion or greater as “large, interconnected ?nancial institutions” for which the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is to “establish prudential
standards” that “are more stringent than the standards and requirements applicable to
(bank and nonbank) ?nancial companies that do not present similar risks [. . .] to the
?nancial stability of the United States,” either because of the nature of such bank SIFIs’
“ongoing activities,” or in the event of their “material ?nancial distress or failure.”
For nonbanks, there is not a corresponding, clear-cut size criterion, although size,
measured in several ways, is listed under Section 113 among the criteria that the
Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) “shall consider” in its determination of
nonbank SIFIs[25]. The stated intention of Section 113 is for the FSOC to choose
criteria that result in the identi?cation of nonbank ?nancial ?rms whose “material
?nancial distress” would jeopardize the ?nancial stability of the USA. As with most
such rulemakings, ahead of the issuance and implementation of the ?nal rule, the DFA
follows a multi-phase process for taking account of public input[26]. In the case of the
designation of nonbank SIFIs, that process involved, ?rst, issuance of an Advanced
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (APNR) in October 2010 followed by a public comment
period; second, issuance by the FSOC of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) in late
January 2011, followed by an additional public comment period ending in late
February 2011[27]. The NPR explains in detail the nature of the public comments
received in response to the APNR, as well as how those comments ?gure into the
construction of the revised rulemaking proposal. The NPR also explains how the
11 statutory factors listed in the DFA are addressed by its proposed criteria for
nonbank SIFI designation. Those criteria include: leverage, size (taking account of on-
and off-balance sheet exposures as well as credit extension), interconnectedness,
liquidity risk and maturity mismatch, lack of substitutes, and degree of existing
Global ?nancial
system reform
169
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
regulatory scrutiny[28]. The FSOC is expected to issue the ?nal rule on the designation
of nonbank SIFIs sometime during the third quarter of 2011.
As indicated on the Dodd-Frank side of Row 1 in Table I, the Act includes three
other titles addressing nonbank SIFI identi?cation and prudential standards
issues[29]. Title VII (“Wall Street Transparency and Accountability”) assigns
securities industry SIFI responsibilities to the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Title V deals with
the insurance industry. Although the Federal Insurance Of?ce (FIO) created under
Title V has limited oversight authority for the insurance industry, it is charged with
providing advice to the FSOC in the determination of insurance companies to be
designated as SIFIs. Finally, Title VIII deals with payment, clearing, and settlement
systems designated as systemically signi?cant. Title VIII assigns responsibility to the
FSOC for identifying systemically important ?nancial market utilities (FMUs), and
payment, clearing, and settlement activities (PCSs). Once designated as SIFIs, those
?rms or entities, and the activities in which they engage, are subject to heightened
oversight by the Federal Reserve.
Conceptually, as indicated on the left-hand side of Row 1, the FSB agenda also
addresses nonbanks, but in fact that agenda is bank-centric. Speci?cally, the FSB
asked the Basel Committee to take the lead on developing a methodology for
identifying global signi?cantly important banks (G-SIBs) – an important subset of
G-SIFIs[30]. In April 2011, the BCBS completed a comprehensive draft of its G-SIBs
identi?cation methodology, based on quantitative indicators grouped into ?ve
equally-weighted areas: global activity, size, interconnectedness, substitutability, and
complexity (FSB, 2011c, p. 2). As reported in periodic FSB “Progress Reports,”
revisions to the initial framework has proceeded according to schedule, amid ongoing
dialogue with and feedback from the FSB; as of mid-June 2011 it appeared likely that,
at least for the banking sector, the FSB’s declared timetable for G-SIFI identi?cation
and designation would play out as indicated in Table I.
Nonbank G-SIFIs are a somewhat different matter however. The FSB originally
indicated, in its October 2010 SIFI Report, that its ambitious G-SIFI identi?cation
timetable applied to banking companies only, and that, “as experience is gained, the
FSB will review how to extend the identi?cation framework to nonbanks” (FSB, 2010b,
p. 1). Subsequently, the FSB’s (2011b) Progress Report amended the banks-only scope
to include the insurance industry. Speci?cally, the FSB requested that the International
Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS) propose, by end-March 2011, a provisional
methodology for identifying insurance G-SIFIs; and, after feedback on that proposal by
the FSB, the amended schedule calls for ?nal methodology for insurance ?rms to be
ready by the same mid-summer 2011 deadline applying to G-SIBs identi?cation.
That said, as of mid-June 2011 it appeared that the insurance industry work would,
ultimately, be far less de?nitive than the G-SIBs work, for at least two reasons. First, as
noted in Row1, the IAIS indicated up front that its starting point is its June 2010 position
paper, which concluded that “there is little evidence of insurance either generating or
amplifying systemic risk, within the ?nancial system itself or in the real economy”[31].
Second, and seemingly in recognition of this categorical de-emphasis on the systemic
risk posed by insurance ?rms, the FSB’s SIFI project update on December 31, 2010 noted
that the “work effort underway within the IAIS to develop a methodology [. . .] might
JFEP
4,2
170
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
help to identify insurance companies who carry out activities which are
potentially systemic”[32].
Beyond insurance, it is unclear how much emphasis the FSB will place over the
near-term on G-SIFI identi?cation methodology and designation of nonbank ?nancial
service ?rms. In this vein, the FSB’s December 31, 2010 project update notes that input
from the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the
Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS) will “in due course” help to
“identify other types of ?rms that carry out potentially systemic activities”[33].
III.B. Heightened prudential standards for SIFIs
Broadly, public policy to promote the safe and sound functioning of ?nancial ?rms can
be divided into two closely-related categories:
(1) regulation (the development of rules and laws under which SIFIs must operate);
and
(2) supervision (the governmental oversight of SIFI activities in relation to the
regulations under which they are required to operate).
The G20 ?nancial reform agenda and the DFA address both categories. The remainder
of this paper focuses on a comparison of policies dealing with regulation; nevertheless,
as Appendix Table AIII illustrates, many supervision-focused policy initiatives map
from one agenda to the other.
Under the auspices of the G20, the FSB aims to be an independent voice in the
development of ?nancial sector regulations with signi?cant cross-border implications.
Of central interest are regulations affecting the safe and sound operation of G-SIFIs.
The remainder of this section focuses on a comparison of the DFA and the G20
?nancial reform agendas as they apply to a core regulatory concern: heightened
prudential standards for SIFIs.
Both the DFA and the G20/FSB agenda emphasize the perceived necessity of
rethinking and, as necessary, revising or even overhauling existing regulatory
schemes for SIFIs. Both policy agendas also agree that SIFIs should be subject to
higher prudential standards than other ?nancial ?rms. Broadly, higher prudential
standards for SIFIs can be categorized into two complementary groups: those aimed at
strengthening the ability of SIFIs to withstand ?nancial shocks by absorbing ?nancial
losses rather than failing or looking for a public bail-out; and those aimed at reducing,
restricting, or otherwise circumscribing SIFI activities in order to reduce the likelihood
of facing large ?nancial shocks. The G20/FSB agenda and the DFA address both of
these sets of heightened prudential standards, but differ in both scope and timing.
III.B.1. Heightened prudential standards: higher loss absorbency for SIFIs. The
central focus of the FSB’s “heightened prudential standards for SIFIs” workplan is on
increasing the loss absorbency ability of G-SIFIs. The emphasis on higher loss
absorbency underlines a policy commitment to reduce the moral hazard associated
with too-big-to-fail. Speci?cally:
.
SIFIs must have suf?cient capital to weather substantial ?nancial stress.
.
SIFIs’ owners and investors should understand that it is their funds, rather than
taxpayers’, ultimately at risk.
Global ?nancial
system reform
171
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
As indicated in Row 2 on the left-hand side of Table I, the FSB’s workplan relies
heavily on Basel Committee work. That work, the outline of which was made public by
the Basel Committee at the end of 2010, focuses speci?cally on the question of how
much additional capital the largest banks should be required to hold, beyond that
established under the Basel III framework for all internationally active banks[34]. It is
important to emphasize that Basel Committee loss absorbency work, as with its
identi?cation methodology work, deals only with the largest banking organizations –
G-SIBs – and does not cover nonbank SIFIs. Details for the construction of the
so-called “capital surcharge” are to be included in the same consultative paper
containing the Basel Committee methodology for the identi?cation of G-SIBs, expected
to be published in mid-summer 2011. The loss absorbency work has two main
dimensions:
(1) the appropriate amount of additional capital that G-SIBs should be required to
have, expressed in the same manner as many of the Basel III capital
requirements, i.e. as a percent of risk-weighted assets; and
(2) the composition of the capital surcharge, that is whether, and to what extent,
instruments other than common equity capital could be used.
At least in the early stages of Basel Committee deliberations, contingent capital and
bail-in debt were of?cially considered as part of the “menu of viable alternatives”[35].
DFA provisions also address higher loss absorbency for SIFIs, covering both banks
and nonbanks, as outlined in Row 2 on the right-hand side of Table I. Title I targets a
range of prudential-standards issues for “large, interconnected” ?nancial ?rms. In
concert with the FSB agenda, many of the provisions focus on higher loss absorbency
for SIFIs; the DFA also mentions contingent capital as a possible instrument. But the
DFA goes beyond the FSB agenda in that, throughout Title I provisions, nonbank
SIFIs are included.
Another difference, small but worth noting, between the higher loss absorbency
initiatives is the basic timeline for action. The FSB’s (2010b) original timeline, proposed
in October and rati?ed the following month by the G20 Leaders at the Seoul Summit,
set an end-2011 date for completion of the SIFI identi?cation and higher loss
absorbency work. However, the FSB (2011a) announced in April that members had
“agreed [to] an accelerated timetable and processes,” targeting completion ahead of the
G20 Leaders Summit in France, November 3-4, 2011; the announcement did not include
an explanation for the stepped up pace. Corresponding DFA implementation deadlines
are January 2012, but that slightly later date incorporates suitable time for public input
on proposed rules anticipated to be made public by end-June 2011[36].
III.B.2. Heightened prudential standards: restrictions/limitations on SIFIs. Requiring
higher loss absorbency capacity increases SIFIs’ incentives to more carefully manage
their risk exposures and, in particular, has the advantage of relying on market discipline
imposed by investors and creditors. Another prudential policy tack is to prohibit, or at
least limit, particular activities. The imposition of restrictions or limitations on some
activities, although arguably a rather blunt policy approach, nevertheless could be
justi?ed, in selected circumstances, on the grounds that the bene?ts ?owing from the
interplay of marketplace forces might be outweighed by the costs imposed on society if
market forces, however intensively bolstered by market discipline, do not do the job.
JFEP
4,2
172
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Historically, regulators have imposed restrictions onselectedactivities when attempting
to achieve certain public policy objectives.
The current G20/FSB agenda does not include a SIFI workstream dedicated to the
development of recommendations for speci?c SIFI activities restrictions, as the
left-hand side of Row 3 in Table I reveals. The G20 has however explicitly endorsed
deliberations on the use of activities restrictions by national regulatory authorities. For
example, FSB (2010a, p. 7) progress report states that:
In some circumstances, the FSB may recognize that further (prudential) measures, including
[. . .] tighter large exposures [. . .] and structural measures could reduce the risks or
externalities that a G-SIFI poses.
In contrast, the DFA includes a number of speci?c provisions limiting the nature
and/or scope of SIFI activities. The right-hand side of Row 3 in Table I highlights four
restrictions of particular note. Among the most discussed restrictions is the so-called
“Volcker Rule,” on which Sections 619 and 622 of Title VI focus. The Volcker Rule
requires regulators to implement regulations for BHCs, and nonbank SIFIs prohibiting
or greatly restricting “proprietary trading” (the use of their own funds to trade in
selected ?nancial markets), and investment in hedge funds and private equity funds.
The Volcker Rule also restricts the size and nature of banks’ investments in hedge
funds and private equity funds, entities whose primary activity consists of
“proprietary trading” in ?nancial markets. The Volcker Rule extends to nonbank
SIFIs supervised by the Federal Reserve, subjecting such nonbank SIFIs to additional
capital requirements and/or quantitative limits on proprietary trading and ownership
stakes in hedge funds and private equity funds. Section 619 instructs the federal
banking agencies, along with the SEC and CFTC, to develop and implement speci?c
regulations to implement those restrictions. The timeline includes two parts:
(1) within six months of the enactment of the DFA, i.e. no later than January 2011,
the FSOC was to have completed a study of the impact of the Volcker Rule, and
issued recommendations for its implementation; and
(2) no later than nine months thereafter, i.e. by October 2011, the federal banking
agencies and the SEC and CFTC are to have implemented regulations based on
those recommendations[37].
Section 620 of Title VI requires the federal banking agencies to review and rethink the
whole range of activities in which “banking entities” should be allowed to engage, and
to contemplate corresponding prohibitions, restrictions, or limitations needed to ensure
that banks adhere to permitted activities. The agencies have until March 2012 to report
to the FSOC and Congress on their review of banking practices and recommendations
for new regulatory measures.
Section 165 of Title I addresses two major restrictions that are to be applied to bank
and nonbank SIFIs. As indicated in Row 3 on the right-hand side, the Federal Reserve
Board (FRB) may prescribe limits on the amount and nature of short-termdebt for SIFIs,
restrictions that may, at the discretion of the FRB, extend to off-balance sheet exposures.
In addition, by July 2012, the FRB, in consultation with the FSOC, is to develop and issue
regulations aimed at limiting the risks that the failure of an individual company could
pose to a bank or nonbank SIFI; the implementation date for those regulations is July
2013. Speci?cally, the regulations are to address credit exposure concentration for SIFIs
Global ?nancial
system reform
173
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
by prohibiting them from having credit exposure to any single unaf?liated company in
excess of 25 percent of the capital stock the company[38].
III.B.3. Heightened prudential standards: other considerations. The bottom row of
Table I outlines several other policy initiatives included in either the FSB workplan or
in the DFA that, while less easily classi?ed than those discussed in the preceding two
subsections, nevertheless bear on the development and implementation of heightened
prudential standards. Broadly, the measures included in Row 4 of Table I deal with the
issues of determining which authorities are responsible for policy development and/or
policy implementation, and ensuring the necessary accountability for implementation
progress and compliance. G20 and DFA perspectives differ on these “responsibility
and/or accountability” policy measures, but those perspectives appear to be
complementary rather inconsistent with each other.
The left-hand side of Row 4 lists three closely related FSB initiatives. First, by
end-November 2011, the FSBintends to have codi?ed a framework or terms-of-reference
by means of which it can will be able to review and compare G-SIFI identi?cation and
prudential standards policies of Member countries. As indicated in Row 4, the
international standard setting bodies will participate in that initiative. Shortly
thereafter, under its Peer Reviewprogram, the FSB will establish a Peer ReviewCouncil
(PRC), staffed by senior authorities fromMembers’ national regulatory and supervisory
agencies, which will use the G-SIFI evaluation framework to review Members’ SIFI
policies. That review, and assessment, of Members’ G-SIFI policies is slated to be
completed by the end of 2012.
DFA measures highlighted on the right-hand side of Row 4 suggest that the USA
should be well-prepared on a number of fronts for such an evaluation. First, in what is
arguably one of the most noteworthy changes in the US ?nancial regulatory regime since
just after the great depression, the DFAestablisheda single entity, the FSOC, chargedwith
coordination of all federal level ?nancial sector oversight. Furthermore, the establishment
of the new Of?ce of Financial Research (OFR), operating under the auspices of the FSOC,
has an important role in data collection and analytic work in the policy development
process. The DFA also explicitly recognizes the necessity for coordinating policies with
authorities in other countries, especially as they bear on the safe and sound operation of
large, interconnected ?nancial ?rms operating across national borders.
Finally, the right-hand side of Row4 highlights three provisions in Dodd-Frank aimed
at enhancing the transparency of prudential requirements, and ensuring that ?nancial
institutions themselves assume greater responsibility and accountability for safety and
soundness. Title I, Section 165 (i) requires stress tests for bank and nonbank SIFIs,
conducted from two different perspectives. Beginning in 2012, the FRB, in coordination
with the appropriate federal bank and nonbank regulatory authorities, are required to
conduct annual stress tests of SIFIs. Section 165 speci?es the basic parameters of such
tests, and mandates that the results of those annual stress tests be made public. In
addition, Section 165 requires bank and nonbank SIFIs to conduct self-stress tests on a
semi-annual basis[39]. The FRB and primary federal regulators have until January 2012
to developandissue speci?c regulations onhowthe self-stress tests are to be constructed,
implemented, and reported. In a conceptually similar vein, Section 165 also requires that
all publicly-traded bank and nonbank SIFIs establish a risk committee. A SIFI’s risk
committee is responsible for enterprise-wide risk management, and as such, represents
JFEP
4,2
174
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
another major concrete means of encouraging ?nancial institutions to take increased
responsibility for safety and soundness[40].
IV. Are G20 and Dodd-Frank SIFI agendas in sync?
As the previous section makes clear, the G20 and DFA SIFI agendas are broadly
compatible. Equally clear, however, is that there are differences across the two agendas.
This section highlights two in particular: the substance of both policy agendas –
including in particular their scope – and their timelines.
IV.A. SIFI identi?cation in sync?
Table II highlights where and how the SIFI policy initiatives agree with or differ from
each other. The left-hand side Row 1 indicates that both the G20/FSB agenda and DFA
agree in their emphasis on the importance of developing an appropriate SIFI
identi?cation methodology, and designating speci?c ?nancial institutions. However,
there are signi?cant differences in the ground each agenda proposes to cover. In
particular, over the near-term time horizon on which most of the FSB ?nancial reform
workplan focuses, the DFA’s scope is wider than the G20/FSB scope. The FSB agenda
focuses heavily on banks (G-SIBs), whereas the DFA’s SIFI provisions apply to both
banks and nonbanks. The DFA’s nonbank universe encompasses securities industry
brokers and dealers, hedge funds, money market funds, and others, as well as the
insurance industry. As explained above, it is far from clear whether the FSB’s G-SIFI
work in the near-term will go beyond the banking industry in any meaningful sense.
Another substantive difference between the two agendas, as noted at the bottom of
Row 1 in Table II, concerns the nature of the policy development process. Issuance of
new or revised regulations under the DFA is subject to the same Administrative
Procedure Act process under which pre-DFA ?nancial sector regulations were
promulgated[41]. That process guarantees that interested private sector parties,
including those directly affected by the proposed regulation, will have an opportunity
to provide input to the implementing agencies; the Administrative Procedure Act also
requires that implementing agencies to explain how they have taken account of public
comments in shaping the ?nal rule. The underlying justi?cation for this process is of
course, in part, to allow members of the public “to have their say,” in accord with the
principles of a democratic society. Moreover, by increasing the number of “eyes”
focused on the development of a given regulation, the process decreases the chances of
unintended consequences emerging from a new regulation.
The FSB also (generally) requests public input into its policy development process.
However, the FSB as yet has no formalized, systematic, and transparent public comment
process with standardized deadlines, clear guidance on submission procedures, or
codi?ed and publicly-available responses to comments received. The FSB has been
operatingat full capacityfor a veryshort periodof time, andit is too soontodetect whether
unintended consequences of the kind that traditionally follow upon regulatory and legal
changes have emerged. Nevertheless, the more systematic and transparent the public
input process becomes, the less potential there will be for unintended consequences[42].
IV.B. Heightened prudential standards for SIFIs in sync?
The left-hand side of Row 2 in Table II indicates that both the G20/FSB agenda and the
DFA are in fundamental agreement about the importance of requiring SIFIs to hold
Global ?nancial
system reform
175
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
P
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
S
c
o
p
e
T
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
s
S
I
F
I
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
S
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
/
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
:
T
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
s
f
o
r
b
a
n
k
s
b
a
s
i
c
a
l
l
y
i
n
s
y
n
c
:
B
o
t
h
D
F
A
a
n
d
F
S
B
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
e
k
e
y
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
o
f
s
i
z
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
n
e
s
s
,
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
i
t
y
D
F
A
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
a
s
o
f
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
;
F
S
B
e
x
p
e
c
t
t
o
h
a
v
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
e
d
G
-
S
I
B
s
b
e
f
o
r
e
e
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
:
F
S
B
l
i
k
e
l
y
t
o
l
a
g
i
n
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
:
N
o
D
F
A
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
p
e
r
s
e
,
f
o
r
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
(
b
u
t
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
i
l
y
t
h
e
d
o
m
i
n
a
n
t
s
u
b
s
e
t
o
f
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
.
”
)
F
S
B
p
l
a
n
n
e
d
t
o
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
,
b
u
t
I
A
I
S
a
n
d
I
O
S
C
O
l
a
g
B
C
B
S
G
-
S
I
B
s
w
o
r
k
D
F
A
:
b
r
o
a
d
e
r
s
c
o
p
e
:
L
a
r
g
e
s
t
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
a
s
S
I
F
I
s
a
s
f
r
o
m
D
F
A
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
d
a
t
e
;
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
b
y
n
u
m
e
r
o
u
s
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
D
F
A
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
g
u
i
d
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
w
i
d
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
s
i
g
n
i
?
c
a
n
c
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
i
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
t
o
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
b
a
n
k
s
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
s
,
b
u
t
n
e
a
r
-
t
e
r
m
a
g
e
n
d
a
i
s
h
e
a
v
i
l
y
b
a
n
k
-
c
e
n
t
r
i
c
D
F
A
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
m
o
r
e
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
:
D
F
A
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
t
o
s
e
e
k
p
u
b
l
i
c
i
n
p
u
t
o
n
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
d
r
a
f
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
g
e
s
o
f
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
/
g
u
i
d
a
n
c
e
;
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
e
d
a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
t
o
s
y
s
t
e
m
a
t
i
c
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
;
m
a
n
d
a
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
t
h
a
t
?
n
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
/
g
u
i
d
a
n
c
e
e
x
p
l
a
i
n
t
h
e
n
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
p
u
b
l
i
c
i
n
p
u
t
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
a
n
d
h
o
w
t
h
e
?
n
a
l
d
r
a
f
t
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
s
t
o
t
h
a
t
i
n
p
u
t
S
I
F
I
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
S
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
/
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
:
T
i
m
e
f
r
a
m
e
s
n
o
t
i
n
s
y
n
c
:
F
S
B
n
a
r
r
o
w
e
r
s
c
o
p
e
m
o
r
e
a
m
b
i
t
i
o
u
s
t
h
a
n
D
F
A
H
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
S
I
F
I
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
m
o
r
e
d
e
m
a
n
d
i
n
g
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
c
o
m
b
i
n
e
s
G
-
S
I
B
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
?
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
h
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table II.
Are G20 and DFA
agendas and timetables
in sync?
JFEP
4,2
176
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
P
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
S
c
o
p
e
T
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
s
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
:
D
F
A
s
c
o
p
e
l
i
k
e
l
y
b
r
o
a
d
e
r
o
v
e
r
n
e
a
r
-
t
e
r
m
(
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
2
0
1
1
a
n
d
e
a
r
l
y
2
0
1
2
)
B
a
n
k
/
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
c
o
v
e
r
a
g
e
:
F
S
B
b
a
n
k
-
c
e
n
t
r
i
c
f
o
c
u
s
o
v
e
r
n
e
a
r
-
t
e
r
m
m
e
a
n
s
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
w
i
l
l
a
p
p
l
y
t
o
b
a
n
k
s
,
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
t
o
t
h
e
D
F
A
;
b
u
t
D
F
A
m
a
y
b
e
a
h
e
a
d
o
f
F
S
B
i
n
a
p
p
l
y
i
n
g
h
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
F
S
B
t
a
r
g
e
t
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
f
o
r
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
o
n
t
h
e
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
d
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
o
f
G
-
S
I
B
s
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
G
-
S
I
B
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
a
b
l
e
t
o
u
s
e
t
o
m
e
e
t
h
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
C
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
D
F
A
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
s
:
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
D
F
A
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
r
u
l
e
s
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
d
a
r
o
u
n
d
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
t
i
m
e
a
s
F
S
B
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
,
b
u
t
D
F
A
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
d
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
d
e
l
i
b
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
,
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
a
b
o
u
t
,
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
a
n
d
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
h
i
g
h
e
r
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
:
P
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
i
n
s
c
o
p
e
s
c
o
u
l
d
p
e
r
s
i
s
t
D
F
A
m
a
y
g
i
v
e
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
s
t
o
t
h
e
r
o
l
e
o
f
c
o
m
m
o
n
e
q
u
i
t
y
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
n
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
b
e
n
c
y
;
F
S
B
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
“
m
e
n
u
”
o
f
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
S
I
F
I
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
/
l
i
m
i
t
s
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
,
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
,
e
t
c
.
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
:
D
F
A
s
c
o
p
e
b
r
o
a
d
e
r
:
D
F
A
c
o
m
m
i
t
s
u
p
f
r
o
n
t
t
o
w
i
d
e
r
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
/
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
/
o
r
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
D
F
A
’
s
V
o
l
c
k
e
r
R
u
l
e
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
T
i
m
e
f
r
a
m
e
s
:
u
n
c
l
e
a
r
i
f
i
n
s
y
n
c
D
F
A
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
s
i
n
2
0
1
2
a
n
d
2
0
1
3
D
F
A
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
s
a
l
l
o
w
t
i
m
e
f
o
r
F
S
B
t
o
c
a
t
c
h
u
p
,
b
u
t
l
i
t
t
l
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
c
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
F
S
A
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
a
f
t
e
r
2
0
1
1
D
F
A
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
l
i
m
i
t
s
o
n
s
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m
d
e
b
t
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
o
f
f
-
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
s
h
e
e
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
s
D
F
A
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
l
i
m
i
t
s
o
n
S
I
F
I
s
’
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
t
o
u
n
a
f
?
l
i
a
t
e
d
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
N
o
c
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
,
b
u
t
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
i
n
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
a
b
o
u
t
a
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
,
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
g
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
S
I
F
I
s
u
n
d
e
r
s
e
l
e
c
t
e
d
c
i
r
c
u
m
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table II.
Global ?nancial
system reform
177
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
P
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
S
c
o
p
e
T
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
s
S
I
F
I
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
O
t
h
e
r
i
s
s
u
e
s
S
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
/
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
:
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
n
d
D
F
A
a
r
e
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
,
a
n
d
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
:
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
n
d
D
F
A
h
a
v
e
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
f
o
c
u
s
:
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
f
o
c
u
s
e
s
o
n
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
M
e
m
b
e
r
s
’
G
-
S
I
F
I
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
v
i
a
i
t
s
P
e
e
r
R
e
v
i
e
w
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
D
F
A
f
o
c
u
s
e
s
o
n
a
s
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
a
n
d
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
F
A
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
f
o
r
e
n
s
u
r
i
n
g
S
I
F
I
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
:
T
i
m
e
f
r
a
m
e
s
:
N
o
c
l
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
g
i
v
e
n
t
h
e
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
f
o
c
u
s
o
f
e
a
c
h
a
g
e
n
d
a
F
S
B
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
-
o
f
-
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
t
o
b
e
?
n
a
l
i
z
e
d
b
y
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
F
S
B
p
e
e
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
o
f
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
e
d
d
u
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
2
D
F
A
S
I
F
I
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
i
n
p
l
a
c
e
d
u
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
2
l
i
k
e
l
y
m
e
a
n
U
S
a
s
s
e
s
s
e
d
a
s
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
v
i
s
-
a `
-
v
i
s
F
S
B
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
a
n
d
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
B
U
T
m
a
n
y
D
F
A
d
e
l
i
b
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
a
n
d
?
r
s
t
r
o
u
n
d
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
e
f
f
o
r
t
s
a
n
d
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
,
t
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
A
F
T
E
R
F
S
B
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
a
n
d
r
a
t
i
?
e
d
,
l
i
k
e
l
y
r
e
d
u
c
i
n
g
t
h
e
n
a
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
U
S
i
n
p
u
t
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
F
S
B
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
F
R
B
a
n
d
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
s
,
a
n
d
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
S
I
F
I
s
e
l
f
-
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
s
s
e
m
i
-
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
E
v
e
r
y
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
t
r
a
d
e
d
S
I
F
I
m
u
s
t
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
r
i
s
k
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
w
i
t
h
c
l
e
a
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
e
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
-
w
i
d
e
r
i
s
k
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
N
o
t
e
s
:
T
h
e
D
F
A
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
u
s
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
s
“
S
I
F
I
”
b
u
t
r
a
t
h
e
r
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
”
;
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
n
d
D
F
A
S
I
F
I
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
T
a
b
l
e
I
;
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
s
o
f
A
p
r
i
l
3
0
,
2
0
1
1
u
n
l
e
s
s
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
;
n
o
t
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
e
d
a
s
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
v
i
e
w
s
o
f
t
h
e
O
f
?
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
C
u
r
r
e
n
c
y
,
t
h
e
U
S
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
,
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
Table II.
JFEP
4,2
178
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
extra capital in order to diminish too-big-to-fail moral hazard behavior, and to
eliminate or at least greatly diminish taxpayer burden in the event of failure. As with
SIFI identi?cation, however, Row 2 shows that on this issue the DFA’s scope is wider,
at least in the near term, i.e. as of mid-June 2011, it appeared increasingly likely that the
FSB would have in hand, by the November 2011 G20 Summit, only the loss absorbency
recommendations developed by the BCBS for G-SIBs. In contrast, under Dodd-Frank,
any nonbanks designated as SIFIs face the distinct possibility of having to adhere to
the same kind of higher capital requirement that will be applied to bank SIFIs.
Row 3 of Table II also highlights the broader scope of the DFA. The DFA covers
a wider range of heightened prudential requirements for SIFIs than currently
contemplated under the FSB workplan and, in general, regulations enacted in response
to DFA mandates will cover both bank and nonbank SIFIs. For other prudential issues,
Row 4 indicates that despite their different focuses, the G20/FSB and DFA agendas are
complementary.
IV.C. FSB and DFA timeframes in sync?
The right-hand side of Table II highlights FSB and DFA SIFI-initiatives timeframes.
The right-hand side of Row 1 shows that for the banking industry, the identi?cation
methodology timetables under both agendas are basically in sync. In contrast, the
right-hand side of Row 2, focusing on higher loss absorbency requirements, indicates
that FSB and DFA timeframes are not fully in sync. The FSB’s narrower focus on the
loss absorbency issue is paired with slightly more ambitious deadlines than under the
DFA. The FSB has targeted November 2011 for publication of standards
recommendations on the amount and composition of higher loss absorbency
requirements, while corresponding DFA deadlines occur in January 2012.
Conclusions about the compatibility of policy timeframes have to be drawn in
context. The usual sequencing of events includes a lag between the not-legally-binding
policy development process in an international forum such as the FSB or the BCBS,
and the subsequent legally-required adoption and implementation process in each
country. Because of this, one does not generally look for the timetables in an
international forum and in a given country to be the same or even closely aligned.
Furthermore, differing legal requirements across countries almost ensure that
countries’ implementation schedules will different.
That said, the current case is a something of an exception to the normal sequencing.
As of its enactment in July 2010, the DFA’s policy development and implementation
schedules were set in motion; at that time, the FSB was in the process of formulating
proposals for speci?c workplans, with the expectation that those plans would be given
the go-ahead by the G20 Leaders at the November 2010 Seoul Summit. As a
consequence, much of the deliberation “on the ground” for both agendas was
proceeding roughly in tandem. However, the accelerated schedule for the SIFI project,
announced (but not explained) in FSB (2011a), means that in key areas the deliberative
process in the USA, including in particular the public feedback process, will be ?nished
after the FSB has decided upon, and published, its ?nal standards. To the extent the
rulemaking process in the USA yields valuable ideas and perspectives after the FSB
process has been completed, the FSB’s recommendations will not have the full bene?t
of those insights.
Global ?nancial
system reform
179
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
V. Conclusions and policy considerations
The purpose of this paper is to answer the question of whether US “international” and
“domestic” ?nancial reform policy commitments, as re?ected in, respectively, the
G20/FSB agenda and the DFA, are in sync. The comparisons in this paper of G20/FSB
and DFA ?nancial reform policies to address risks posed by SIFIs to the ?nancial
system and the economy leads to the following answer: “yes – but hold on a second.”
The “yes” part of the answer is based on the conclusion that the policy
commitments the USA has made in the G20 forum are fundamentally consistent with
the safety and soundness aims of the DFA. The “hold on a second” part of the answer is
due to the paper’s identi?cation of two differences. First, in key respects, the DFA’s
scope is wider. In particular, the G20/FSB agenda is primarily bank-centric, at least
over the near-term, while the DFA’s SIFI provisions generally apply to both banks and
nonbanks. Second, under US law, rulemaking under the DFA is subject to a process
that emphasizes the important role of public input, whereas the FSB’s somewhat more
aggressive policy making process is less systematic and transparent.
How meaningful are those differences? A de?nitive answer to that follow-on
question is beyond the scope of this paper, but several observations may be useful in
guiding further thinking.
First, the “in sync” question on which this paper focuses has a bearing on the
current debate within the USA on the implementation of the DFA[43]. Opponents
increasingly focus on two closely related criticisms:
(1) the deliberative process underlying the law, especially in Congress, was hasty
and hence ?awed; and
(2) regulatory authorities charged with implementation are moving too quickly[44].
For those arguing DFA implementation timetables are too ambitious, the somewhat
more ambitious timeframe under which the FSB is operating is likely to be an
additional source of concern. On the other side, for those who believe implementation
should proceed as expeditiously as possible, the fact that a parallel policy agenda is
moving somewhat faster in the international arena might be cited as all the more
reason to “keep up the pace” on DFA implementation.
A second implication of the not-in-sync conclusion has to do with concerns about
the international competitiveness of US ?nancial ?rms. There are at least two
dimensions to such concerns. First, the differences between the two agendas in their
emphasis on nonbanks could alter the competitive landscape for US nonbank ?nancial
?rms relative to their foreign counterparts. Might the result be higher regulatory
burdens and costs for US nonbank ?nancial ?rms? Or, would US nonbank ?nancial
?rms bene?t, on net, from perceptions of greater relative stability ?owing from
Dodd-Frank implementation? Second, how big a burden is the policy mismatch likely
to be for the largest US banks – the G-SIBs? Whether US G-SIBs face large costs from
having to sort through two not-quite-identical sets of requirements depends on how
similar those requirements turn out to be.
A third consideration centers on the nature of the policy development process in the
G20 forum. As pointed out repeatedly, for all the criticism leveled against it, the DFA
policy development process is guided by a clear set of rules designed to allow for – and
to explicitly respond to – public input. The process is intended to reduce the likelihood,
and mitigate the impact, of unintended consequences emerging fromthe implementation
JFEP
4,2
180
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
of new regulations and rules. US representatives in international ?nancial policy fora,
cognizant of those bene?ts, uniformly advocate a deliberative process consistent with
the emphasis on transparency and opportunity for public input re?ected in US law.
Of course it is not necessary to look to the US case to see that establishing clear
guidelines for reasonable timeframes and public input is both feasible and ef?cacious.
In particular, it is widely acknowledged that the deliberative and consultative norms
under which the Basel Committee has operated for decades were crucial to the
successful construction of the new Basel III capital and liquidity framework. Especially
given the complex challenges to be addressed in developing standards to be
implemented by diverse nations, FSB deliberations would probably be signi?cantly
improved by the establishment of clear ground rules on the pace and transparency of
the process. Doing so, even at the expense of slowing down the current timetables
somewhat, would seem to be a high priority matter given the stakes.
Improving the operation, safety and soundness, and supervision of the increasingly
complex and globalized ?nancial system is an urgent task and, as the saying goes “No
one ever said it was going to be easy.” The fact that it is necessary to address issues in
overlapping andsometimes con?icting domestic andinternational arenas does not make
it any easier. It is therefore very important to investigate how “in sync” policy
developments are in different but interrelated arenas. This paper has focused on a subset
of the case of the DFA and the G20/FSB ?nancial system reform agendas. Ascertaining
the degree of consistency is, however, merely a starting point. Research to better
understand the effects of proposed and soon-to-be-implemented measures is urgently
needed. That analysis should focus in particular on the combined effects of, and
interactions between, policies developed in both the domestic and international spheres.
Notes
1. The G20 is made up of the ?nance ministers and central bank governors of 19 countries and
the European Union. Country members are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China,
France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russian, Saudi Arabia, South
Africa, the Republic of Korea, Turkey, the UK, and the USA. “Institutional Members” include
the European Central Bank, the IMF, the World Bank, and the FSB. See www.g20.org/index.
aspx for a comprehensive description of the G20.
2. In order for the USA to of?cially implement the policy commitments it makes in the G20
forum, it must follow the same set of procedures applying to commitments made in other
international fora, including, e.g. those made at the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision.
Section II explains that inthe USA, the Administrative Procedures Act governs the process for
the legal adoption andimplementation of policycommitments made insuch international fora;
Appendix Table AII highlights the major steps in the Administrative Procedures Act. Note
that the other G20 countries also require follow-on regulatory and/or legislative action.
3. The DFA does not use the terms “SIFIs,” but rather “large, interconnected ?nancial
companies.” Nevertheless, the term “SIFI” is now so widely used in discussions and analyses
of the ?nancial systemthat it has essentiallytaken on a generic status. See for example Tarullo
(2011). The current paper uses “SIFI” in reference to both the G20 policy agenda and the DFA.
4. The consensus view, as re?ected in the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report (2011,
p. xvi), is that “the collapse of the housing bubble [in the U.S.] [. . .] was the spark” that
triggered the ?nancial crisis, but the crisis quickly expanded across ?nancial instruments,
markets, networks, and national borders, exposing ?nancial system vulnerabilities that had
been building in many countries. For detailed timelines of major events, including those
Global ?nancial
system reform
181
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
marking the early stages of the crisis in 2007, both from US-centered and international
perspectives, respectively, see Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) (n.d.a, b). For a
blow-by-blow description of the role of the US subprime mortgage market in the crisis see
Barth et al. (2009); see also Robertson (2011) for an analysis focused on the role of structured
?nance markets in the crisis. Clasessens et al. (2011) provides a wide-ranging analysis of the
fundamental causes of the crisis.
5. The G7 includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the USA Note that the
BCBS has been a major, and well-known, forum for international banking and ?nancial
system policy developments for decades; it continues to play a key role in shaping
international stabilization efforts, most recently by the development of the so-called “Basel III”
capital framework. In response to the pervasive and expansive nature of the global ?nancial
crisis, the BCBS and sister “international standard setting bodies” agreed to followthe lead of
the G20 in international ?nancial systemreformpolicy development. In addition to the BCBS,
international standard setting bodies include the IOSCO for the securities industry, for the
insurance industry the IAIS, and for accounting the IASB; www.?nancialstabilityboard.org/
members/links.htm includes information on international standard setters.
6. Indeed, as of mid-June 2011, it still appeared that the signi?cance of the change was widely
underappreciated. For example, Moody’s (2011) asserts “There are two sweeping regulatory
changes underway: the DFA and Basel III.” Consider also the statement by Representative
Bachus, Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who remarked that “[T]here is
no need to rush and meet arbitrary deadlines (under the DFA) when the rest of the world is at
least 18 months behind the United States” in ?nancial system reform legislation and policy
implementation (Holzer and Sparshott, 2011). On a country-speci?c basis the Congressman’s
observation are broadly accurate but, as this paper shows, developments are unfolding
rapidly in the G20-multilateral arena.
7. Group of Twenty (2008). See Appendix Table AI for the complete list of the 47 points, and a
mapping of those points into what emerged over the year following the Washington Summit
as major priorities.
8. See footnote [6] for a list of the international standard setting bodies.
9. In addition to the G20 members listedinfootnote [2], FSBMember countries include HongKong
SAR, the Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland. Additional international organizations include
the BIS, the European Commission, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development, the Committee on the Global Financial System the CPSS, and the international
standard setting bodies. Note that the FSB’s charter includes provisions for accepting new
members at the discretion of existing Members.
10. Note that the issue of noncompliance and its consequences is an open one and remains on the
G20 “to-do” list as indicated, for example, in the Communique´ following the April 2011 G20
meeting in Washington, DC (Group of Twenty, 2011, p. 2).
11. FSB (2009, p. 3). Peer reviews take one of two main forms: a review of a range of ?nancial
sector policies and practices in a speci?c country (see, e.g. the 2010 peer review of Mexico at
www.?nancialstabilityboard.org/publications/r_100927.pdf); and “thematic reviews”
focusing on policies and practices on a speci?c issue across multiple Members (see, e.g. the
2011 thematic review of mortgage underwriting practices at www.?nancialstabilityboard.
org/publications/r_110318a.pdf). For a description of the IMF/World Bank FSAP (www.imf.
org/external/np/exr/facts/fsap.htm)
12. The term “requirements” is used throughout Basel Committee documents on capital
standards; see for example BCBS (2010a). All Basel Committee members understand that the
term is not meant to convey any sense of being legally binding. Indeed, as noted above
JFEP
4,2
182
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
(see footnote [3]), every country has its own legislative and/or regulatory process for
adoption and implementation of BCBS “requirements.”
13. Group of Twenty (2009b, pp. 7-10); see especially “Strengthening the international ?nancial
regulatory system.” A seventh major objective of a very near-term nature can be
characterized as “recouping the cost of responding to the ?nancial crisis.” Leaders agreed
that national authorities should ensure that their ?nancial sectors make “a fair and
substantial contribution” toward repaying the costs borne by governments in dealing with
the ?nancial crisis and subsequent repair of the ?nancial system.
14. The IASB is the main international accounting standard setter; it was tasked with working
in cooperation with the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the entity that sets US
accounting standards, to reach convergence on a single set of standards.
15. Relative emphases within the Pittsburgh agenda shifted somewhat over the ensuing year in
response to ongoing changes in the global ?nancial system, as well as in recognition of
progress made in national jurisdictions. In particular, the G20 increased its focus on the role
of CRAs, agreeing on the goal of reducing what was perceived to have become excessive
reliance by regulatory authorities and market participants on credit ratings from the major
CRAs; and Leaders endorsed the FSB’s recommendation to “expand the perimeter” of
?nancial system oversight, including examining the role, composition, and supervision of
the “shadow banking system.” Nevertheless, the Pittsburgh Summit agenda remained the
central anchor of G20 ?nancial reform policy through the 2010 Seoul Summit.
16. BCBS (2010a). BCBS (2010b) provides a useful summary of the main elements of Basel III
capital framework.
17. The FSB initially laid out its multi-faceted work plan on SIFIs in FSB (2010b); see also FSB
(2010c), which identi?es ?ve “major features the policy framework for SIFIs should
combine:” heightened prudential standards, with emphasis on higher loss absorbency
capacity; making SIFI resolution a viable option; strengthening supervision of SIFIs;
strengthening core infrastructures; and ensuring effective and consistent implementation of
national policies. “Core infrastructures” are “payment systems, securities settlement
systems, and central counterparties” (FSB, 2010b, p. 8).
18. Appendix Table AIII offers comparisons of the other major dimensions of SIFI work,
including the major G-SIFI resolution initiatives of the FSB and the “OLA” measures under
Title II of the DFA. The table also compares G20/FSB and DFA initiatives which, while not
directly categorized as “SIFI” work, nevertheless deal with systemic issues.
19. That US policy-makers care about consistency is illustrated by remarks senior regulatory
authorities have made comparing the DFA and Basel III. See, e.g. Tarullo (2010) and
Walsh (2011b). In the latter, Acting Comptroller Walsh makes the noncontroversial but basic
point that “the two frameworks do not mesh perfectly” (Walsh, 2011b, p. 3).
20. Although beyond the scope of the analysis in the body of this paper, the DFA includes many
provisions squarely addressing “resolution” issues, and other measures dealing with
systemically signi?cant ?nancial issues. Appendix Table AIII highlights DFA “orderly
liquidation” provisions as they compare to G20/FSB resolution initiatives; it also includes a
comparison of DFA to G20 measures on OTC derivatives, FMUs, executive compensation at
?nancial ?rms, CRAs, and shadow banking.
21. It is worth noting that the FSB routinely relies on input from G20 Members’ national
regulatory and supervisory authorities and/or from bodies independent of the G20,
particularly the so-called international “standard setters” (including BCBS, IOSCO, and
IAIS).
Global ?nancial
system reform
183
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
22. The DFA includes references to statutory deadlines as from the enactment date, July 21, 2010
through July 21, 2015, but the vast majority of explicit deadlines are scheduled in 2011 and
2012. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2011b) for a glossary
explaining the precise meaning of DFA timeline terminology.
23. As of mid-June, 2011, no publicly-available document describing identi?cation methodology
existed, nor had the G20 (or any other authority) published a list of ?rms of?cially
designated as “G-SIFIs.”
24. Section 113 instructs the FSOC to consider: (1) leverage; (2) size and nature of off-balance
sheet exposures; (3) interconnectedness with other bank and nonbank SIFIs; (4) importance
of the company as a source of credit and liquidity throughout the economy, including; (5) for
low income, minority, or underserved communities; (6) the extent to which assets are
managed rather than owned; (7) the mix of the companies activities along a number of
dimensions; (8) existing degree of regulation on the company; (9) the amount and nature of
?nancial assets of the company; (10) the amount and types of liabilities, including the degree
of reliance on short-term funding; and (11) other risk-related factors.
“Nonbank ?nancial companies” are: (1) a US nonbank ?nancial company organized under
the laws of the US, or any State, that is predominantly engaged in ?nancial activities; and (2)
a “foreign nonbank ?nancial company” that is organized in a country other than the US and
is predominantly engaged in ?nancial activities.
“Predominantly engaged” means a company either has annual gross revenues derived from
?nancial activities representing 85 percent or more of its consolidated gross revenues, or has
consolidated assets relating to ?nancial activities that are 85 percent or more of its
consolidated assets.
25. Section 102(a)(7) of the DFA assigns responsibility to the FRB for de?ning the terms
“signi?cant bank holding company” and “signi?cant nonbank holding company”. See Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2011b) for frequently updated information on
the status of DFA initiatives in which the Federal Reserve plays a role.
26. See Appendix Table AII for a summary of the major steps in the rulemaking process.
27. See FSOC (2011a). Note that this sort of rulemaking process, summarized in Appendix
Table AII, applies quite broadly across DFA provisions; as discussed brie?y in the
concluding section of this paper, one could argue that the routine requirement to follow such
a process constitutes a signi?cant difference between the DFA and the G20/FSB agendas
because it fosters greater deliberation and transparency in the implementation of important
public policy measures.
28. See in particular Table, p. 4561, in FSOC (2011a).
29. Note that DFA Title II deals with SIFIs as well in that it covers the orderly liquidation of
nonbanks (as well as banks), including in particular SIFIs.
30. How important G-SIBs are as a subset of G-SIFIs varies across countries because the range
of ?nancial activities permitted to, and engaged in, by banks varies across countries. For
example, banks in some countries are permitted to engage in a full range of securities
brokering and dealing activities, while in other countries there are substantial restrictions, or
prohibitions, on such activities for banks. As a consequence, the proportion of total ?nancial
services activities accounted for by the banking industry differs widely across countries. To
the author’s knowledge, no one has yet analyzed how big the G-SIBs subset is, either for a
given country, or globally. Hence, it is impossible to say with any degree of accuracy how
much systemically important ?nancial activity would be left unaccounted for under a policy
of designating only G-SIBs.
JFEP
4,2
184
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
31. IAIS (2010, p. 1). The Geneva Association (2010), which describes itself as “the leading
international insurance ‘think tank’,” included in its December 2010 newsletter an
explanation of the issue running along the same lines.
32. FSB (2010c); author’s emphasis added. Note that the issue of the “SIFI-ness” of large
insurance ?rms had, by early-Q2 2011, become a signi?cant element of the debate within the
USA over the appropriate implementation of Dodd-Frank provisions. Some analysts
expected that at least four US-headquartered insurance ?rms would be among the ?rst set of
nonbanks designated as “large, interconnected ?nancial companies” under Dodd-Frank. See
Braithwaite (2011).
33. FSB (2010c, p. 2). As indicated in the parenthetical statement at the end of Row 1 in Table I,
as of mid-June 2011, for the securities industry there was no publicly-available information
on the nature or timing of IOSCO work on G-SIFI identi?cation.
34. BCBS (2010c). To be clear, BCBS work on higher loss absorbency requirements centers on
establishing an additional amount of capital that global systemically important banks
(G-SIBs) should be required to hold. What has come to be called the “SIFI capital surcharge”
is in addition to the other elements of the Basel III framework, which applies to all
internationally active banks.
35. See for example the speech by Walter (2010, p. 3), Secretary General of the Basel Committee,
who states that “we expect this additional loss absorbing capacity will be met through some
combination of common equity, contingent capital, and bail-in debt.” The exact same
wording was used by the Chairman of the Basel Committee in his January 17, 2011 speech
(Wellink, 2011, p. 4).
Contingent capital (also called “co-cos”) and bail-in debt are variations on the same
underlying concept. Both are instruments issued by a bank that can be converted into equity
in circumstances under which the bank needs to raise capital rapidly. Contingent capital
would be issued as non-equity capital, and bail-in debt as a form of bond. In the event a bank
fails, it creditors, including in particular bond holders, stand ahead of owners of the bank’s
equity capital (stockholders) in liquidation proceedings; because, therefore, they are more
likely to get paid off if the bank fails, bondholders have somewhat less incentive to monitor
the bank’s performance than do stockholders. Advocates of the use of contingent capital
and/or bail-in debt argue that the convertibility provisions will increase the incentives for
holders of those instruments to impose market discipline on the bank, and hence the
instruments ought to count partially toward ful?lling bank capital ratio requirements.
Opponents of a reliance on contingent capital and/or bail-in debt point to the paucity of
real-world experience with the use of such instruments, and are concerned that they might
not function as advertised. For a detailed discussion of capital requirements and convertible
debt, see Pazarbasioglu et al. (2011).
36. As of June 21, 2011, the FRB’s web site listed enhanced prudential standards proposals under
the “Initiatives Planned: April to June 2011” (www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/reform_
milestones201104htm). That information basically corresponds to Federal Reserve Chairman
Bernanke’s (2011, p. 2) statement in his May 12 Congressional testimony that “we anticipate
putting out a package of proposed rules for comment this summer” in order “to meet the
January 2012 implementation deadline for these enhanced standards.”
37. The FSOC’s study was published on January 18, 2011: see FSOC (2011b). As of April 1, 2011,
the Federal Reserve’s ?nal rule became effective on the “conformance period” (essentially,
timeframe) under which SIFIs will be required to comply with all Volcker Rule provisions.
As of end-March 2011, the federal ?nancial regulatory agencies expected to formally request
public comments during the April-June 2011 period on proposed inter-agency rules to: (1)
implement Volcker Rule restrictions on proprietary trading, hedge fund, and private equity
fund activity by insured depository institutions and their af?liates including BHCs
Global ?nancial
system reform
185
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
(Section 619); and (2) to implement Volcker Rule concentration limits prohibiting a ?nancial
company from making an acquisition if the liabilities of the combined company would
exceed 10 percent of the liabilities of all ?nancial companies (Section 622).
38. The 25 percent ?gure is the upper limit; the FRB can decide on a lower concentration limit.
39. For ?rms in the $10 billion to $50 billion assets range the required frequency is annual.
40. For banking companies, the risk committee requirement augments a range of risk
management measures that federal banking regulators have traditionally required.
41. See Appendix Table AII for a summary of the major steps required under the Administrative
Procedure Act.
42. As of mid-April 2011, there was at least some (publicly-available) indication that the FSB
might address this issue in the future: as noted in the Group of Twenty (2011), the FSB had
submitted to the G20 “preliminary proposals [. . .] to strengthen its [the FSB’s] capacity,
resources, and governance;” the last term was possibly meant to encompass the public
consultation process.
43. That debate has become increasingly animated, as a sampling of headlines in the business
press indicates. See Davidson (2011a, b), The New York Times (2011), Hopkins (2011) and
Drawbaugh (2011).
44. With respect to the pace at which regulatory authorities are moving, some critics appear to
ignore (or perhaps do not understand) the fact that the implementation schedule is largely
mandated by the DFA, leaving relatively little discretion on timing to the regulators. Other
critics do indeed understand that fact, but charge that regulators are insuf?ciently receptive
to industry comment. See for example McGrane and Randall (2011). Note that one need not
be a DFA critic to hold the view that implementation timetables are demanding. For
example, Acting Comptroller of the Currency Walsh (2011a, p. 8) observed that “[t]he
Dodd-Frank Act, in particular, requires the drafting of a huge number of rules and reports,
and sets extremely aggressive deadlines.”
References
Barth, J.R., Li, T., Lu, W., Phumiwasana, T. and Yago, G. (2009), The Rise and Fall of the US
Mortgage and Credit Markets, The Milken Institute, Santa Monica, CA.
BCBS (2010a), “Basel III: a global regulatory framework for more resilient banks and banking
systems”, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Bank for International Settlements,
Basel, December.
BCBS (2010b), “Group of governors and heads of supervision announces higher global minimum
capital standards”, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, press release, Bank for
International Settlements, September 12.
BCBS (2010c), “Results of the December 2010 meeting of the Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision”, press release, Bank for International Settlements, December 1, available at:
www.bis.org/press/p101201a.htm
Bernanke, B.S. (2011), “Dodd-Frank implementation: monitoring systemic risk and promoting
?nancial stability”, statement before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs, US Senate, May 12, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents.htm
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2011a), “Regulatory reform: milestones”,
available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/reform_milestones.htm
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2011b), “The Federal Reserve’s response to
the crisis”, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_crisisresponse.htm
(accessed April 5, 2011).
JFEP
4,2
186
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Braithwaite, T. (2011), “Financial groups seek to avoid ‘important’ list”, The Financial Times,
April 3.
Clasessens, S., Pazarbasioglu, C., Laeven, L., Dobler, M., Valencia, F., Nedelescu, O. and
Seal, K. (2011), “Crisis management and resolution: early lessons from the ?nancial crisis”,
IMF Staff Discussion Note, SDN/11/05, International Monetary Fund, Washington,
DC, March 9.
Copeland, C.W. (2010), “Rulemaking requirements and authorities in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act”, Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC,
November 3.
Davidson, K. (2011a), “Apoplexy at Dodd-Frank”, American Banker, March 31.
Davidson, K. (2011b), “Wolin: Treasury moving at right pace in implementing Dodd-Frank”,
American Banker, April 20.
Drawbaugh, K. (2011), “Top banker and regulator offer dueling agendas”, Reuters, March 30.
FDIC (2011), Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
available at: www.fdic.gov/regulations/resources/TLGP/index.html (accessed April 4).
Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) (n.d.a), Financial turmoil timeline
( June 2007-November 2009), available at: www.newyorkfed.org/research/global_
economy/Crisis_Timeline.pdf
Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) (n.d.b), International responses to the ?nancial
crisis (September 2008-October 2008), available at: www.newyorkfed.org/research/global_
economy/IRCTimelinePublic.pdf
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (2011), “The ?nancial crisis inquiry report”, ?nal report of
the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the
United States, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Washington, DC, January.
FSB (2009), Financial Stability Board Charter, FSB, Basel, September, available at: www.
?nancialstabilityboard.org/publications/r_090925d.pdf
FSB (2010a), “Progress since the Washington Summit in the implementation of the G20
recommendations for strengthening ?nancial stability”, report of the Financial Stability
Board to G20 Leaders, FSB, Basel, November 9.
FSB (2010b), “Reducing the moral hazard posed by systemically important ?nancial institutions:
FSB recommendations and time lines”, FSB, Basel, October 20.
FSB (2010c), “SIFI Project – taking forward work on identi?cation, higher loss absorbency, and
consistent implementation of national policies”, report of the Financial Stability Board to
G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, FSB, Basel, December 31.
FSB (2011a), Meeting of Financial Stability Board, FSB, Basel, press release, April 5, available at:
www.?nancialstabilityboard.org/press/pr_110405.pdf
FSB (2011b), “Progress in the implementation of the G20 recommendations for strengthening
?nancial stability”, report of the Financial Stability Board to G20 Finance Ministers and
Central Bank Governors, FSB, Basel, February 15.
FSB (2011c), “Progress in the implementation of the G20 recommendations for strengthening
?nancial stability”, report of the Financial Stability Board to G20 Finance Ministers and
Central Bank Governors, FSB, Basel, April 10.
FSOC (2011a), “Authority to require supervision and regulation of certain nonbank ?nancial
companies”, Federal Register, Vol. 76 No. 17, pp. 4555-67, notice of proposed rulemaking,
January 26.
Global ?nancial
system reform
187
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
FSOC (2011b), Study & recommendations on prohibitions on proprietary trading & certain
relationships with hedge funds & private equity funds, January, available at:
www.treasury.gov/initiatives/Documents/Volcker sec 619 study ?nal 1 18 11rg.pdf
Geneva Association (2010), “Editorial: global regulatory developments”, Progres, Geneva
Association Information Newsletter, No. 52, December.
Group of Twenty (2008), Leaders’ Declaration – Summit on Financial Markets and the World
Economy, Washington Communique´, Washington, DC, November 15.
Group of Twenty (2009a), Declaration on Strengthening the Financial System (together with the
London Summit – Leaders’ Statement), London Communique´, London, April 2.
Group of Twenty (2009b), Leaders’ Statement – The Pittsburgh Summit, Pittsburgh
Communique´, Pittsburgh, PA, September 24-25.
Group of Twenty (2009c), London Summit – Leaders’ Statement (together with the Declaration on
Strengthening the Financial System), London Communique´, London, April 2.
Group of Twenty (2010a), Seoul Summit Document (together with The G20 Summit Leaders’
Declaration), Seoul Communique´, Seoul, November 11-12.
Group of Twenty (2010b), The G20 Summit Leaders’ Declaration (together with the Seoul Summit
Document), Seoul Communique´, Seoul, November 11-12.
Group of Twenty (2011), Communique´ – Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank
Governors, April 14-15.
Holzer, J. and Sparshott, J. (2011), “UPDATE: Obama administration: must move ahead with wall
street overhaul”, Dow Jones Newswires, April 19.
Hopkins, C. (2011), “Dodd-Frank pummeled at chamber of commerce event”, American Banker,
March 31.
IAIS (2010), IAIS Position Statement on Key Financial Stability Issues, International Association
of Insurance Supervisors, Basel, June 4.
IMF (2009), Global Financial Stability Report: Navigating the Financial Challenges Ahead,
International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC, October.
McGrane, V. and Randall, M.J. (2011), “Bair defends ?nancial overhaul”, The Wall Street Journal,
March 22.
Moody’s (2011), Banking System Outlook: United States of America, May 12.
(The) New York Times (2011), “Who will rescue ?nancial reform?”, March 27.
Pazarbasioglu, C., Zhou, J., Lesle, V.L. and Moore, M. (2011), “Contingent capital: economic
rationale and design features”, IMF Staff Discussion Note, SDN/11/01, International
Monetary Fund, Washington, DC, January 25.
Robertson, D. (2011), “So that’s operational risk (How operational risk in mortgage-backed
securities almost destroyed the world’s ?nancial markets and what we can do about it)”,
Economics Working Paper No. 2011-1, Of?ce of the Comptroller of the Currency,
Washington, DC, March.
Rottier, S. and Veron, N. (2010), An Assessment of the G20’s Initial Action Items, Bruegel Policy
Contribution, Issue 2010/08, Bruegel Institute, Brussels, September.
Tarullo, D.K. (2010), “Next steps in ?nancial regulatory reform”, paper presented at the George
Washington University Center for Law, Economics, and Finance Conference, Washington,
DC, November 12, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents.htm
Tarullo, D.K. (2011), “Capital and liquidity standards”, statement before the Committee on
Financial Services, US House of Representatives, June 16, available at: www.
federalreserve.gov/newsevents.htm
JFEP
4,2
188
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Walsh (2011a), Remarks Before the American Bankers Association Government Relations
Summit, Of?ce of the Comptroller of the Currency, Washington, DC, March 15.
Walsh, J. (2011b), Remarks by John Walsh, Acting Comptroller of the Currency, before
the Exchequer Club, Of?ce of the Comptroller of the Currency, Washington, DC, January 19.
Walter, S. (2010), “Basel III and ?nancial stability”, paper presented at the 5th Biennial
Conference on Risk Management and Supervision, Financial Stability Institute, Basel,
November 3-4.
Wellink, N. (2011), “Basel III and beyond”, paper presented at High Level Meeting on Better
Supervision and Better Banking in a Post-crisis Era, FSI and EMEAP Working Group
on Banking Supervision hosted by Bank Negara Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
January 17, available at: www.bis.org/speeches/sp110118.pdf
(The Appendix follow overleaf.)
About the author
Daniel E. Nolle is a Senior Financial Economist at the Of?ce of the Comptroller of the Currency.
This study was completed while the author was a Visiting Economist in the Division of
International Finance at the Federal Reserve Board, and a slightly different version was
published in July, 2011 as “US Domestic and International Finance Reform Policy: Are G20
Commitments and the Dodd-Frank Act in Sync?” International Finance Discussion Papers,
Number 1024, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Daniel E. Nolle can be
contacted at: [email protected]
Global ?nancial
system reform
189
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Appendix
A
c
t
i
o
n
i
t
e
m
(
b
y
G
2
0
m
a
j
o
r
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
)
a
L
e
a
d
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
i
n
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
b
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
.
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y
a
n
d
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
f
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
,
r
e
d
u
c
e
p
r
o
c
y
c
l
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
e
d
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
B
C
B
S
H
a
r
m
o
n
i
z
e
d
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
d
e
?
n
i
t
i
o
n
B
C
B
S
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
p
r
o
c
y
c
l
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
B
C
B
S
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
r
i
s
k
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
B
C
B
S
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
r
i
s
k
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
B
C
B
S
S
I
F
I
s
.
E
l
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
t
o
o
-
b
i
g
-
t
o
-
f
a
i
l
m
o
r
a
l
h
a
z
a
r
d
,
e
n
s
u
r
e
o
r
d
e
r
l
y
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
I
F
I
s
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
a
l
l
S
I
F
I
s
B
C
B
S
,
I
A
I
S
,
I
O
S
C
O
O
r
d
e
r
l
y
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
I
M
F
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
c
r
i
s
i
s
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
F
S
B
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
d
r
i
s
k
d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
o
n
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
b
a
s
i
s
F
S
B
R
o
b
u
s
t
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
o
f
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
b
a
n
k
s
B
C
B
S
E
a
r
l
y
w
a
r
n
i
n
g
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
s
I
M
F
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
r
i
s
k
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
R
e
a
s
s
e
s
s
r
i
s
k
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
m
o
d
e
l
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
s
t
r
e
s
s
t
e
s
t
m
o
d
e
l
s
B
C
B
S
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
r
i
s
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
A
s
s
e
s
s
n
e
e
d
s
f
o
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
c
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
F
S
B
C
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
y
c
o
l
l
e
g
e
s
B
C
B
S
O
T
C
D
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
.
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
,
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
,
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
o
f
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
m
a
r
k
e
t
s
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
O
T
C
a
n
d
C
D
S
m
a
r
k
e
t
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
F
S
B
B
e
s
t
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
f
o
r
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
D
i
l
i
g
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
d
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
B
C
B
S
a
n
d
I
O
S
C
O
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
v
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
F
S
B
C
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
.
A
l
i
g
n
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
l
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
e
x
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
r
i
s
k
-
t
a
k
i
n
g
N
o
e
x
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
r
i
s
k
i
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
F
S
B
N
o
n
-
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
g
l
o
b
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
d
e
a
l
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
t
a
x
h
a
v
e
n
s
,
m
o
n
e
y
l
a
u
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
,
p
r
o
c
e
e
d
s
o
f
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
i
o
n
,
t
e
r
r
o
r
i
s
t
?
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
f
r
o
m
n
o
n
-
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
A
n
t
i
-
m
o
n
e
y
l
a
u
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
F
A
T
F
T
a
x
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
O
E
C
D
C
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
r
i
n
g
F
S
B
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table AI.
G20’s initial response
to the ?nancial crisis
JFEP
4,2
190
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
A
c
t
i
o
n
i
t
e
m
(
b
y
G
2
0
m
a
j
o
r
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
)
a
L
e
a
d
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
i
n
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
b
F
S
A
P
e
v
e
r
y
?
v
e
y
e
a
r
s
I
M
F
C
o
m
b
a
t
m
a
r
k
e
t
m
a
n
i
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
r
a
u
d
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
e
c
t
o
r
s
u
r
v
e
i
l
l
a
n
c
e
I
M
F
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
t
o
a
s
i
n
g
l
e
s
e
t
o
f
g
l
o
b
a
l
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
S
i
n
g
l
e
s
e
t
o
f
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
I
A
S
B
a
n
d
F
A
S
B
C
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
A
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
-
s
e
t
t
i
n
g
b
o
d
i
e
s
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
I
A
S
B
D
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
f
o
r
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
I
A
S
B
a
n
d
F
A
S
B
A
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
o
f
f
-
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
s
h
e
e
t
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
I
A
S
B
a
n
d
F
A
S
B
A
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
I
A
S
B
a
n
d
F
A
S
B
C
r
e
d
i
t
r
a
t
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
(
C
R
A
s
)
.
R
e
d
u
c
e
r
e
l
i
a
n
c
e
o
n
C
R
A
s
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
i
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
f
o
r
C
R
A
s
B
C
B
S
a
n
d
I
O
S
C
O
A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
I
O
S
C
O
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
b
y
C
R
A
s
I
O
S
C
O
R
e
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
R
A
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
[
I
t
e
m
s
t
h
a
t
d
o
n
o
t
m
a
p
c
l
e
a
r
l
y
i
n
t
o
a
p
o
s
t
-
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
S
u
m
m
i
t
m
a
j
o
r
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
]
D
r
a
w
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
c
r
i
s
i
s
I
M
F
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
a
s
s
e
t
p
r
i
c
e
s
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
c
r
i
s
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
e
x
i
t
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
A
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
f
o
r
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
I
M
F
a
n
d
W
o
r
l
d
B
a
n
k
R
e
s
t
o
r
e
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
?
o
w
s
t
o
e
m
e
r
g
i
n
g
m
a
r
k
e
t
s
W
o
r
l
d
B
a
n
k
E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
M
u
l
t
i
l
a
t
e
r
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
B
a
n
k
a
n
d
i
t
s
?
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
W
o
r
l
d
B
a
n
k
R
e
f
o
r
m
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
o
f
B
r
e
t
t
o
n
W
o
o
d
s
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
I
M
F
a
n
d
W
o
r
l
d
B
a
n
k
B
u
i
l
d
u
p
o
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
I
M
F
N
o
t
e
s
:
a
P
h
r
a
s
i
n
g
o
f
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
a
c
t
i
o
n
i
t
e
m
s
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
R
o
t
t
i
e
r
a
n
d
V
e
r
o
n
(
2
0
1
0
)
;
a
u
t
h
o
r
’
s
j
u
d
g
m
e
n
t
i
n
c
a
t
e
g
o
r
i
z
i
n
g
i
t
e
m
s
u
n
d
e
r
G
2
0
m
a
j
o
r
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
e
m
e
r
g
i
n
g
a
f
t
e
r
t
h
e
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
S
u
m
m
i
t
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
a
s
p
e
r
t
h
e
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
9
P
i
t
t
s
b
u
r
g
h
S
u
m
m
i
t
a
n
d
t
h
e
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
0
T
o
r
o
n
t
o
S
u
m
m
i
t
;
s
e
e
t
h
e
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
I
.
A
o
f
t
h
e
m
a
i
n
t
e
x
t
;
b
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
l
e
a
d
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
R
o
t
t
i
e
r
a
n
d
V
e
r
o
n
(
2
0
1
0
)
;
B
C
B
S
,
B
a
s
e
l
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
o
n
B
a
n
k
i
n
g
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
;
F
S
B
,
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
S
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
B
o
a
r
d
;
I
A
I
S
,
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
s
;
I
O
S
C
O
,
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
;
F
A
T
F
,
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
T
a
s
k
F
o
r
c
e
;
I
M
F
,
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
M
o
n
e
t
a
r
y
F
u
n
d
;
O
E
C
D
,
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
C
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
;
F
A
S
B
,
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
A
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
B
o
a
r
d
;
I
A
S
B
,
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
A
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
B
o
a
r
d
;
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
8
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
S
u
m
m
i
t
a
c
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
R
o
t
t
i
e
r
a
n
d
V
e
r
o
n
(
2
0
1
0
)
a
n
d
G
r
o
u
p
o
f
T
w
e
n
t
y
(
2
0
0
8
)
Table AI.
Global ?nancial
system reform
191
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
1. APNR This is an optional step, but one that is routinely
followed by the federal ?nancial regulatory
authorities. The agency responsible for the new
regulation (or substantially revised existing
regulation) publishes its initial analysis of the
subject matter. The APNR includes a request for
public input on key issues, a ?rm deadline for agency
receipt of such input (allowing, at a minimum, 30
days for public comments), and speci?c instructions
for how to convey comments to the agency. Ahead of
the next rulemaking step, the agency typically
makes the submitted comments publicly available
2. NPR The agency responsible for the new regulation
publishes its proposed regulatory language in the
Federal Register
a
. The proposed actual regulatory
language is accompanied by (and generally preceded
by) a thorough summary of the nature of public
comments received in response to the APNR (if
applicable), as well as a clear discussion of the
reasoning underlying the rule. The NPR also
announces the opening of a public comment period,
and speci?es the duration of that public input period
3. Public comment period The public comment period of?cially commences as
of the date of the publication of the NPR in the
Federal Register (which can be several days to a
week after the agency makes the NPR publicly
available via its own publication process). Members
of the public are invited to submit written comments
to the agency on any aspect of the NPR of interest to
them. The public comment period typically last
between 30 and 180 days, depending on the
complexity of the rule. The rulemaking agency is
required to consider the issues and concerns raised
during the comment period
4. Final rule The ?nal rule includes any modi?cations the agency
deems appropriate in light of its consideration of
comments received during the public comment
period. Similar to the NPR, the ?nal rule also
includes the agency’s response to issues raised by
public comments, and any updates to the discussion
of the underlying justi?cation for the rule. In the
event the agency judges that public comments
warrant changes to the NPR making it
fundamentally different from the original proposal, it
may publish a second proposed rule and initiate
another public comment period. The ?nal rule is
codi?ed in the Code of Federal Regulations
Notes: Unless speci?ed otherwise, DFA rulemaking requirements follow the Administrative
Procedure Act rulemaking process; this table draws heavily on information included in Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Integrated Implementation Roadmap, FSOC
(October 1, 2010) at: www.treasury.gov/initiatives/Pages/FSOC-index.aspx;
a
see the Federal Register
at: www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html
Table AII.
Summary of the
Administrative
Procedure Act
rulemaking process
JFEP
4,2
192
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
S
I
F
I
r
e
s
o
l
v
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
/
o
r
d
e
r
l
y
l
i
q
u
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
E
n
d
-
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
:
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
,
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
B
C
B
S
’
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
g
r
o
u
p
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
S
B
(
d
r
a
f
t
)
K
e
y
A
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
o
f
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
R
e
g
i
m
e
s
,
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
h
e
i
r
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
S
I
F
I
r
e
s
o
l
v
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
i
r
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
:
(
i
)
t
h
e
i
r
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
t
o
r
e
s
o
l
v
e
S
I
F
I
s
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
i
n
t
h
e
i
r
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
i
r
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
i
m
e
s
;
a
n
d
(
i
i
)
a
n
y
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
v
e
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
t
o
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
i
m
e
s
a
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
(
1
)
t
o
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
h
a
m
p
e
r
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
r
t
r
i
g
g
e
r
a
u
t
o
m
a
t
i
c
c
o
n
s
e
q
u
e
n
c
e
s
a
s
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
o
f
i
n
t
e
r
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
o
t
h
e
r
j
u
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
;
(
2
)
t
o
o
b
l
i
g
e
s
e
e
k
i
n
g
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
f
o
r
e
i
g
n
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
;
a
n
d
(
3
)
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
t
h
e
p
o
w
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
t
o
a
n
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
’
s
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
b
P
a
r
a
.
3
2
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
c
,
P
a
r
a
.
2
1
,
2
2
,
2
3
,
2
4
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
n
e
w
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
t
o
w
i
n
d
d
o
w
n
a
f
a
i
l
i
n
g
b
a
n
k
o
r
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
?
r
m
.
F
D
I
C
c
a
n
a
c
t
p
r
e
e
m
p
t
i
v
e
l
y
t
o
c
l
o
s
e
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
i
f
j
u
d
g
e
d
t
o
t
h
r
e
a
t
e
n
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
.
P
o
w
e
r
t
o
?
r
e
c
u
l
p
a
b
l
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
i
p
e
o
u
t
s
h
a
r
e
h
o
l
d
e
r
s
a
n
d
,
i
f
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
,
c
r
e
d
i
t
o
r
s
.
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
t
o
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
t
h
e
o
r
d
e
r
l
y
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
?
r
m
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
f
o
r
e
i
g
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
t
o
t
h
e
e
x
t
e
n
t
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
s
:
D
F
A
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
t
h
e
F
R
B
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
j
o
i
n
t
r
u
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
?
r
m
s
t
o
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
s
u
b
m
i
t
p
l
a
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
i
r
r
a
p
i
d
a
n
d
o
r
d
e
r
l
y
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
F
S
O
C
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
(
b
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
a
n
d
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
)
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
(
F
R
B
a
n
d
F
D
I
C
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
)
:
a
g
e
n
c
y
r
u
l
e
m
a
k
i
n
g
a
s
f
r
o
m
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
O
r
d
e
r
l
y
l
i
q
u
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
(
O
L
A
)
:
D
F
A
g
i
v
e
s
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
t
h
e
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
w
r
i
t
e
r
u
l
e
s
a
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
t
o
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
e
O
L
A
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
C
r
e
d
i
t
o
r
r
i
g
h
t
s
:
F
i
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
b
y
F
D
I
C
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
/
F
S
O
C
d
u
e
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
;
t
w
o
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
s
o
n
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
r
u
l
e
,
e
x
t
e
n
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
l
i
m
i
t
:
F
i
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
b
y
F
D
I
C
a
n
d
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
/
F
S
O
C
d
u
e
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
;
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
o
n
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
r
u
l
e
i
n
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
:
“
R
i
s
k
m
a
t
r
i
x
”
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
b
y
F
S
O
C
d
u
e
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s
/
r
e
c
o
u
p
m
e
n
t
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
b
y
F
D
I
C
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
d
u
e
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
;
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
n
A
p
r
i
l
o
n
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
r
u
l
e
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
2
:
A
g
e
n
c
y
(
F
D
I
C
,
F
R
B
,
O
C
C
,
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
A
g
e
n
c
y
(
F
H
F
A
)
,
C
F
T
C
,
S
E
C
)
r
u
l
e
m
a
k
i
n
g
,
j
o
i
n
t
w
i
t
h
F
S
O
C
,
o
n
S
I
F
I
r
e
c
o
r
d
-
k
e
e
p
i
n
g
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
T
i
t
l
e
I
I
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
2
0
3
,
2
0
4
,
2
0
5
,
2
0
6
,
2
1
6
,
a
n
d
2
1
7
T
i
t
l
e
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
5
E
n
d
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
t
o
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
k
e
y
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
o
f
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
i
m
e
s
f
o
r
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
l
e
g
a
l
h
a
r
m
o
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
l
e
g
a
l
p
r
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
m
a
k
e
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
I
n
l
i
g
h
t
o
f
t
h
e
F
S
B
’
s
K
e
y
A
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
,
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
t
o
s
e
t
o
u
t
t
h
e
i
r
p
l
a
n
s
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
a
n
y
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
l
e
g
a
l
o
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
i
r
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
i
m
e
s
a
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
D
u
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
2
:
F
S
B
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
B
a
s
e
l
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
’
s
C
r
o
s
s
-
B
o
r
d
e
r
B
a
n
k
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
t
o
u
n
d
e
r
t
a
k
e
a
t
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
p
e
e
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
n
M
e
m
b
e
r
s
’
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
o
f
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
i
m
e
s
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
a
n
d
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
s
“
B
a
i
l
-
i
n
”
d
e
b
t
r
e
f
e
r
s
t
o
d
e
b
t
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
w
h
i
c
h
w
o
u
l
d
a
b
s
o
r
b
l
o
s
s
e
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
t
o
r
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
e
x
t
r
e
m
e
c
i
r
c
u
m
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
i
n
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
b
e
f
o
r
e
a
b
a
n
k
b
e
c
o
m
e
s
a
“
g
o
n
e
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
,
”
a
n
d
i
n
a
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
c
o
n
t
e
x
t
.
B
a
i
l
-
i
n
d
e
b
t
w
o
u
l
d
c
o
n
v
e
r
t
t
o
e
q
u
i
t
y
w
h
e
n
t
h
e
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
o
f
a
b
a
n
k
’
s
e
q
u
i
t
y
a
n
d
s
u
b
d
e
b
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
s
e
x
c
e
e
d
e
d
.
T
h
e
c
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
“
t
r
i
g
g
e
r
”
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
e
d
b
y
“
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
”
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
,
s
u
c
h
t
h
a
t
b
a
n
k
s
a
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
f
u
n
d
a
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
o
f
r
i
s
k
-
w
e
i
g
h
t
e
d
a
s
s
e
t
s
b
y
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
c
o
n
v
e
r
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
“
a
u
t
o
m
a
t
i
c
a
l
l
y
”
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
i
r
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
t
e
r
m
s
;
o
r
t
h
e
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
“
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
,
”
s
u
c
h
t
h
a
t
w
r
i
t
e
-
d
o
w
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
o
n
s
p
e
c
i
?
e
d
n
o
n
-
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
f
u
n
d
s
a
r
e
i
m
p
o
s
e
d
b
y
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
’
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
s
M
a
y
-
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
B
a
i
l
-
I
n
W
o
r
k
i
n
g
G
r
o
u
p
t
o
e
x
a
m
i
n
e
t
h
e
l
e
g
a
l
a
n
d
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
o
f
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
s
,
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
F
S
B
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
G
2
0
o
n
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
u
s
e
o
f
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
d
e
b
t
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
P
a
r
a
.
3
0
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
P
a
r
a
.
1
0
,
1
1
,
2
5
F
S
B
P
R
1
d
,
p
.
8
N
o
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
D
F
A
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
d
e
b
t
a
s
a
l
o
s
s
a
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
e
M
i
d
-
2
0
1
2
:
F
S
O
C
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
t
h
e
a
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
a
n
d
d
i
s
a
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
o
f
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
T
i
t
l
e
I
I
e
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table AIII.
G20 and DFA ?nancial
system reform agendas
and timetables
Global ?nancial
system reform
193
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
-
s
p
e
c
i
?
c
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
-
s
p
e
c
i
?
c
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
F
o
r
a
l
l
G
-
S
I
F
I
S
,
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
h
o
m
e
a
n
d
h
o
s
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
d
r
a
w
u
p
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
-
s
p
e
c
i
?
c
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
o
r
d
e
r
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
y
i
n
g
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
r
o
l
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
a
t
a
l
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
o
f
a
c
r
i
s
i
s
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
t
o
a
s
s
e
s
s
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
i
n
t
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
-
s
p
e
c
i
?
c
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
a
n
d
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
G
-
S
I
F
I
s
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
t
a
k
e
n
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
r
e
s
o
l
v
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
i
n
g
o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
b
o
o
k
i
n
g
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
,
g
l
o
b
a
l
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
,
i
n
t
r
a
-
g
r
o
u
p
g
u
a
r
a
n
t
e
e
s
,
a
n
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
P
a
r
a
.
3
1
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
P
a
r
a
.
2
6
a
n
d
2
7
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
9
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
F
R
B
a
n
d
F
D
I
C
t
o
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
i
s
s
u
e
r
u
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
t
o
s
u
b
m
i
t
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
a
n
d
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
x
p
o
s
u
r
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
2
:
F
R
B
m
a
y
p
r
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
p
u
b
l
i
c
d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
f
o
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
b
a
n
k
a
n
d
n
o
n
b
a
n
k
S
I
F
I
s
t
o
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
m
a
r
k
e
t
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
r
i
s
k
p
r
o
?
l
e
,
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
a
d
e
q
u
a
c
y
,
a
n
d
r
i
s
k
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
c
a
p
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
2
:
Q
u
a
l
i
?
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
(
Q
F
C
)
R
e
c
o
r
d
k
e
e
p
i
n
g
:
J
o
i
n
t
r
u
l
e
s
b
y
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
S
E
C
,
C
F
T
C
,
a
n
d
F
H
F
A
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
,
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
t
o
Q
F
C
s
(
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
m
a
r
k
e
t
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
,
d
e
e
m
e
d
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
a
s
s
i
s
t
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
a
s
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
r
f
o
r
a
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
N
o
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
s
p
e
c
i
?
e
d
:
P
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
i
o
n
a
g
a
i
n
s
t
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
G
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
B
a
i
l
o
u
t
s
o
f
S
w
a
p
s
E
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
:
A
b
a
n
k
s
w
a
p
e
n
t
i
t
y
i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
t
s
s
w
a
p
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
s
a
f
e
t
y
a
n
d
s
o
u
n
d
n
e
s
s
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
r
i
s
k
s
.
D
F
A
t
e
x
t
p
r
e
s
u
m
e
s
t
h
e
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
w
i
l
l
i
m
p
o
s
e
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
b
y
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
1
6
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
a
r
u
l
e
m
a
k
i
n
g
,
o
r
a
n
y
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
s
t
o
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
T
i
t
l
e
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
6
5
T
i
t
l
e
I
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
1
0
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
I
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
1
6
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
E
n
d
-
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
1
:
I
O
S
C
O
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
o
f
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
o
f
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
a
n
d
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
p
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
s
t
h
a
t
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
u
s
e
d
f
o
r
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
o
f
a
m
a
r
k
e
t
t
h
a
t
m
a
k
e
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
o
r
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
p
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
b
l
e
,
t
h
e
b
e
n
e
?
t
s
a
n
d
c
o
s
t
s
o
f
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
o
r
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
p
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
m
a
y
b
e
a
d
v
i
s
a
b
l
e
t
o
s
h
i
f
t
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
t
o
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
o
r
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
p
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
s
E
n
d
-
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
:
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
v
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
m
a
r
k
e
t
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
;
a
n
d
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
F
i
n
a
l
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
m
a
r
k
e
t
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
M
i
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
c
o
u
n
t
e
r
p
a
r
t
y
(
C
C
P
)
a
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
M
i
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
i
s
s
u
e
o
f
n
u
m
b
e
r
a
n
d
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
C
P
s
a
n
d
t
r
a
d
e
r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
,
P
a
r
a
.
3
7
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
P
a
r
a
.
4
0
,
4
1
,
4
2
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
p
.
1
2
,
1
3
F
S
B
O
T
C
f
,
p
.
2
N
e
w
a
n
d
s
t
r
o
n
g
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
E
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
m
o
v
e
t
o
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
a
n
d
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
l
y
c
l
e
a
r
e
d
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
t
r
a
d
e
d
o
n
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
p
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
s
C
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
e
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
a
n
d
m
a
r
g
i
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
N
e
w
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
r
e
g
i
m
e
s
f
o
r
d
e
a
l
e
r
s
,
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
,
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
,
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
m
a
r
k
e
t
s
,
a
n
d
c
l
e
a
r
i
n
g
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
A
i
m
i
s
t
o
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
g
r
o
w
t
h
o
f
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
,
b
u
t
w
h
e
r
e
n
o
t
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
,
s
e
t
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
a
n
d
m
a
r
g
i
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
c
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
e
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
t
o
d
i
s
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
o
v
e
r
u
s
e
S
e
t
s
u
p
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
o
f
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
m
a
r
k
e
t
s
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
l
m
o
s
t
a
l
l
s
w
a
p
s
t
o
b
e
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
l
y
c
l
e
a
r
e
d
E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
s
n
e
w
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
r
e
g
i
m
e
f
o
r
d
e
a
l
e
r
s
,
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
,
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
,
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
m
a
r
k
e
t
s
,
a
n
d
c
l
e
a
r
i
n
g
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
S
w
a
p
s
p
u
s
h
-
o
u
t
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d
t
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
f
a
l
l
-
o
u
t
f
r
o
m
b
a
n
k
s
’
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
N
o
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
m
a
y
b
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
o
a
n
y
s
w
a
p
s
e
n
t
i
t
y
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
b
a
n
k
s
[
“
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
”
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
(
1
)
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
s
f
r
o
m
F
e
d
d
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
w
i
n
d
o
w
,
a
n
d
(
2
)
F
D
I
C
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
o
f
e
n
g
a
g
i
n
g
i
n
s
w
a
p
s
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
]
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
0
:
C
F
T
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
l
i
m
i
t
s
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
r
u
l
e
s
o
n
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
l
i
m
i
t
s
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
s
o
n
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
d
e
n
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
6
1
)
,
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
2
1
)
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
s
T
i
t
l
e
V
I
I
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
o
f
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
d
a
t
a
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d
f
o
r
m
a
t
s
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
a
n
d
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
f
o
r
a
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
d
a
t
a
o
n
a
g
l
o
b
a
l
b
a
s
i
s
f
o
r
m
a
r
k
e
t
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
t
o
t
r
a
d
e
r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
t
r
a
d
e
r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
t
o
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
d
-
2
0
1
1
:
I
O
S
C
O
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
C
P
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
n
a
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
l
e
v
e
l
,
a
n
d
a
n
y
e
x
e
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
o
s
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
O
n
g
o
i
n
g
:
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
c
o
m
m
o
n
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
s
f
o
r
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
a
r
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
r
i
n
g
a
m
o
n
g
t
h
e
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
t
r
a
d
e
r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s
a
n
d
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
C
C
P
s
M
i
d
-
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
O
T
C
D
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
W
o
r
k
i
n
g
G
r
o
u
p
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
d
e
?
n
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
s
s
u
e
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
,
b
y
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
,
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
“
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
.
”
T
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
f
o
r
d
e
?
n
i
n
g
o
t
h
e
r
k
e
y
t
e
r
m
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table AIII.
JFEP
4,2
194
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
E
n
d
-
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
:
C
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
s
f
r
o
m
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g
a
r
o
a
d
m
a
p
w
i
t
h
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
m
i
l
e
s
t
o
n
e
s
f
o
r
a
c
h
i
e
v
i
n
g
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
,
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
v
o
l
u
m
e
s
o
f
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
l
y
c
l
e
a
r
e
d
t
r
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
d
i
s
p
u
t
e
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
,
a
n
d
p
o
r
t
f
o
l
i
o
r
e
c
o
n
c
i
l
i
a
t
i
o
n
E
n
d
-
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
e
x
t
e
n
t
t
o
w
h
i
c
h
G
2
0
M
e
m
b
e
r
s
a
r
e
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
i
r
c
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
F
S
B
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
c
l
e
a
r
i
n
g
,
e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
o
r
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
p
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
t
o
t
r
a
d
e
r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s
“
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
t
e
r
m
,
”
“
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
,
”
a
n
d
“
m
a
j
o
r
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
-
b
a
s
e
d
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
.
”
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
s
i
n
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
0
a
n
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
6
4
)
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
3
1
)
,
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
e
a
c
h
o
t
h
e
r
,
t
h
e
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
t
h
e
F
C
A
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
F
H
F
A
,
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
R
u
l
e
m
a
k
i
n
g
s
f
o
r
,
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
,
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
-
b
a
s
e
d
s
w
a
p
d
e
a
l
e
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
j
o
r
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
-
b
a
s
e
d
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
s
w
a
p
d
e
a
l
e
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
.
R
u
l
e
s
t
o
c
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
:
(
1
)
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
r
d
k
e
e
p
i
n
g
;
(
2
)
d
a
i
l
y
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
;
(
3
)
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
;
(
4
)
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
;
(
5
)
d
u
t
i
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
o
f
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
a
n
t
i
t
r
u
s
t
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
;
a
n
d
(
6
)
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
c
h
i
e
f
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
o
f
?
c
e
r
s
o
f
s
w
a
p
d
e
a
l
e
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
s
o
n
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
a
n
d
m
a
r
g
i
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
a
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
,
C
F
T
C
,
F
D
I
C
,
F
R
B
,
O
C
C
,
F
H
F
A
,
a
n
d
F
a
r
m
C
r
e
d
i
t
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
s
f
o
r
s
w
a
p
d
e
a
l
e
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
s
m
a
r
k
e
t
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
f
o
r
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
;
a
n
d
i
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
a
n
d
m
a
r
g
i
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
n
s
w
a
p
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
n
o
t
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
l
y
c
l
e
a
r
e
d
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
N
o
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
:
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
h
a
r
m
o
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
–
t
h
e
S
E
C
,
C
F
T
C
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
p
r
u
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
d
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
w
i
t
h
f
o
r
e
i
g
n
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
o
n
t
h
e
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
o
f
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
s
w
a
p
s
,
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
-
b
a
s
e
d
s
w
a
p
s
,
s
w
a
p
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
-
b
a
s
e
d
s
w
a
p
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
.
N
o
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
r
u
l
e
s
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
a
n
d
t
w
i
c
e
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
t
h
e
r
e
a
f
t
e
r
:
T
h
e
C
F
T
C
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
2
7
)
a
n
d
S
E
C
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
6
3
)
,
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
,
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
a
s
e
m
i
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
p
o
r
t
,
t
o
m
a
k
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
,
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
c
l
e
a
r
i
n
g
i
n
m
a
j
o
r
s
w
a
p
c
a
t
e
g
o
r
i
e
s
,
o
n
s
w
a
p
m
a
r
k
e
t
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
m
a
r
k
e
t
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
.
I
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
B
a
n
k
f
o
r
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
(
B
I
S
)
,
a
n
d
s
u
c
h
U
S
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
a
s
m
a
y
b
e
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
R
e
d
u
c
e
r
e
l
i
a
n
c
e
o
n
C
R
A
s
E
n
d
-
M
a
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
e
t
t
e
r
s
a
n
d
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
n
e
x
t
s
t
e
p
s
t
o
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
F
S
B
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
g
E
n
d
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
1
:
R
e
p
o
r
t
f
r
o
m
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
e
t
t
e
r
s
t
o
F
S
B
o
n
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
i
n
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
“
n
e
x
t
s
t
e
p
s
”
E
n
d
-
S
e
p
t
.
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
G
2
0
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
M
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
s
a
n
d
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
o
n
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
F
S
B
p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
,
P
a
r
a
.
3
7
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
2
9
F
S
B
C
R
A
g
,
p
.
7
A
s
o
f
E
n
a
c
t
m
e
n
t
,
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
:
L
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
(
1
)
I
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
i
n
v
e
s
t
o
r
s
c
a
n
n
o
t
s
u
e
C
R
A
s
;
(
2
)
R
a
t
e
d
?
r
m
s
c
a
n
o
n
l
y
c
i
t
e
a
r
a
t
i
n
g
i
n
p
u
b
l
i
c
o
f
f
e
r
i
n
g
s
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
y
g
i
v
e
s
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
;
a
n
d
b
y
g
i
v
i
n
g
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
y
o
p
e
n
s
i
t
s
e
l
f
t
o
p
r
o
s
e
c
u
t
i
o
n
u
n
d
e
r
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
l
a
w
f
o
r
“
k
n
o
w
i
n
g
l
y
a
n
d
r
e
c
k
l
e
s
s
l
y
”
f
a
i
l
i
n
g
t
o
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
r
e
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
i
n
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
t
h
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
R
e
m
o
v
e
r
e
l
i
a
n
c
e
o
n
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
a
t
i
n
g
s
f
r
o
m
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
m
u
s
t
r
e
m
o
v
e
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
t
o
,
o
r
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
r
e
l
y
o
n
,
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
a
t
i
n
g
s
f
r
o
m
a
l
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
o
f
c
r
e
d
i
t
-
w
o
r
t
h
i
n
e
s
s
.
E
a
c
h
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
y
m
u
s
t
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
a
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
f
a
l
l
s
u
c
h
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
.
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
i
s
s
u
e
d
a
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
r
u
l
e
i
n
A
u
g
u
s
t
2
0
1
0
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
n
d
e
d
i
n
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
T
i
t
l
e
I
X
,
S
u
b
t
i
t
l
e
C
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table AIII.
Global ?nancial
system reform
195
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
s
o
n
(
1
)
D
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
a
n
d
d
u
e
d
i
l
i
g
e
n
c
e
;
a
n
d
(
2
)
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
?
i
c
t
s
o
f
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
:
C
R
A
s
m
u
s
t
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
t
o
g
o
v
e
r
n
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
,
a
n
d
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
f
o
r
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
i
n
g
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
a
t
i
n
g
s
,
a
n
d
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
t
a
k
e
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
t
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
c
o
n
?
i
c
t
s
o
f
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
n
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
C
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
T
h
e
F
S
B
’
s
S
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
o
n
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
C
S
I
)
t
o
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
a
r
e
p
o
r
t
,
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
F
S
B
’
s
p
e
e
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
,
o
n
M
e
m
b
e
r
s
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
a
s
t
h
o
s
e
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
b
e
a
r
o
n
S
I
F
I
r
i
s
k
-
t
a
k
i
n
g
.
S
C
S
I
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
a
n
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
a
n
d
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
n
a
i
r
e
b
y
e
n
d
-
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
1
;
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
t
h
e
s
u
r
v
e
y
i
n
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
;
d
r
a
f
t
t
h
e
p
e
e
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
r
e
p
o
r
t
b
y
e
n
d
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
1
F
R
B
P
R
1
,
p
p
.
2
0
-
1
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
U
n
d
e
r
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
9
5
6
,
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
S
E
C
,
F
H
F
A
,
a
n
d
N
C
U
A
t
o
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
i
s
s
u
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
o
n
:
(
1
)
N
o
E
x
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
I
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
-
B
a
s
e
d
C
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
–
P
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
i
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
-
b
a
s
e
d
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
i
s
e
x
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
o
r
m
a
y
l
e
a
d
t
o
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
l
o
s
s
;
a
n
d
(
2
)
C
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
D
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
–
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
n
d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
t
o
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
s
o
n
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
o
f
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
a
d
v
i
s
e
r
v
o
t
e
s
o
n
e
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
;
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
s
h
a
r
e
h
o
l
d
“
s
a
y
o
n
p
a
y
”
v
o
t
e
s
;
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
l
a
t
e
2
0
1
0
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
;
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
2
0
1
1
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
“
p
a
y
v
s
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
;
”
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
T
i
t
l
e
I
X
,
S
u
b
t
i
t
l
e
E
S
h
a
d
o
w
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
E
n
d
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
,
i
n
c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
e
t
t
e
r
s
,
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
n
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
o
f
s
h
a
d
o
w
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
,
a
n
d
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
s
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
i
n
g
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
.
R
e
a
c
h
i
n
g
a
c
o
n
s
e
n
s
u
s
d
e
?
n
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
w
h
a
t
c
o
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
s
t
h
e
s
h
a
d
o
w
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
i
s
a
k
e
y
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
B
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
G
2
0
2
0
1
1
(
T
B
D
)
:
I
A
I
S
g
u
i
d
a
n
c
e
p
a
p
e
r
o
n
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
u
n
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
d
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
l
e
a
r
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
c
r
i
s
i
s
2
0
1
1
(
T
B
D
)
:
F
S
B
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
a
d
e
q
u
a
c
y
o
f
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
s
c
o
p
e
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
s
h
a
d
o
w
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
,
P
a
r
a
.
4
1
F
S
B
P
R
1
,
p
.
2
5
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
d
v
i
s
e
r
s
t
o
H
e
d
g
e
F
u
n
d
s
a
n
d
O
t
h
e
r
s
;
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
t
h
e
A
s
s
e
t
-
B
a
c
k
e
d
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
:
D
F
A
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
t
a
r
g
e
t
t
h
e
“
s
h
a
d
o
w
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
s
y
s
t
e
m
,
”
p
e
r
s
e
L
a
r
g
e
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
a
n
d
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
e
q
u
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
g
i
s
t
e
r
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
S
E
C
F
u
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
r
s
m
u
s
t
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
b
o
u
t
t
r
a
d
e
s
a
n
d
p
o
r
t
f
o
l
i
o
s
t
o
t
h
e
S
E
C
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
m
a
n
a
g
e
r
s
o
f
l
a
r
g
e
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
s
a
n
d
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
e
q
u
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
s
t
o
r
e
g
i
s
t
e
r
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
S
E
C
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
f
u
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
b
o
u
t
t
r
a
d
e
s
a
n
d
p
o
r
t
f
o
l
i
o
s
t
o
t
h
e
S
E
C
T
i
t
l
e
I
V
T
i
t
l
e
I
X
,
S
u
b
t
i
t
l
e
D
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
f
u
n
d
e
r
l
y
i
n
g
a
s
s
e
t
s
a
n
d
d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
r
e
p
s
a
n
d
w
a
r
r
a
n
t
i
e
s
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
1
:
F
S
O
C
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
e
f
f
e
c
t
s
o
f
r
i
s
k
r
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
?
n
a
l
i
z
e
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
t
o
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
“
a
c
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
d
i
n
v
e
s
t
o
r
”
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Table AIII.
JFEP
4,2
196
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
r
e
f
o
r
m
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
G
2
0
/
F
S
B
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
D
F
A
a
g
e
n
d
a
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
t
a
b
l
e
a
D
F
A
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
1
:
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
i
s
k
r
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
b
y
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
z
e
r
s
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
9
4
1
)
–
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
9
4
1
(
b
)
d
i
r
e
c
t
s
t
h
e
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
S
E
C
t
o
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
i
s
s
u
e
r
u
l
e
s
:
(
1
)
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
z
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
t
a
i
n
a
n
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
i
n
“
a
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
i
s
k
”
f
o
r
a
n
y
a
s
s
e
t
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
z
e
d
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
m
o
r
t
g
a
g
e
s
;
(
2
)
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
a
s
s
e
t
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
w
i
t
h
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
r
u
l
e
s
f
o
r
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
o
f
a
s
s
e
t
s
;
a
n
d
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
c
l
a
s
s
,
t
o
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
u
n
d
e
r
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
y
i
n
g
l
o
a
n
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
i
v
e
o
f
l
o
w
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
i
s
k
.
I
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
o
t
h
e
r
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
S
E
C
,
t
h
e
F
R
B
t
o
s
t
u
d
y
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
t
h
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
n
e
w
c
r
e
d
i
t
r
i
s
k
r
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
o
n
e
a
c
h
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
c
l
a
s
s
o
f
a
s
s
e
t
-
b
a
c
k
e
d
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
i
e
s
[
F
R
B
i
s
s
u
e
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
0
,
a
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
9
4
1
(
c
)
]
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
a
n
d
C
F
T
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
o
n
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
r
s
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
i
s
s
u
e
?
n
a
l
r
u
l
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d
t
o
e
x
c
l
u
d
e
“
b
a
d
a
c
t
o
r
s
”
i
n
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
o
f
f
e
r
i
n
g
s
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
e
a
r
l
y
-
2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
1
:
S
E
C
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
o
n
d
a
t
a
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
h
e
d
g
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
;
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
t
h
e
r
e
a
f
t
e
r
N
o
t
e
s
:
A
s
o
f
M
a
r
c
h
1
,
2
0
1
1
u
n
l
e
s
s
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
;
n
o
t
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
e
d
a
s
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
v
i
e
w
s
o
f
t
h
e
O
f
?
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
C
u
r
r
e
n
c
y
,
t
h
e
U
S
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
,
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
,
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
;
a
s
e
e
w
w
w
.
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
b
o
a
r
d
.
o
r
g
/
p
r
e
s
s
/
p
r
_
1
1
0
2
1
9
.
p
d
f
f
o
r
l
i
n
k
s
t
o
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
d
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
F
S
B
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
w
o
r
k
s
t
r
e
a
m
s
;
s
e
e
w
w
w
.
t
r
e
a
s
u
r
y
.
g
o
v
/
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
/
P
a
g
e
s
/
F
S
O
C
-
i
n
d
e
x
.
a
s
p
x
f
o
r
l
i
n
k
s
t
o
d
e
t
a
i
l
e
d
D
F
A
-
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
g
e
n
d
a
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
;
a
s
n
o
t
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
u
s
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
s
“
S
I
F
I
s
”
b
u
t
r
a
t
h
e
r
“
l
a
r
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
”
;
b
G
r
o
u
p
o
f
T
w
e
n
t
y
(
2
0
1
0
a
,
b
)
;
c
“
S
I
F
I
R
e
p
o
r
t
”
:
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
b
)
;
d
“
F
S
B
P
R
1
”
:
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
a
,
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
8
)
;
e
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
u
s
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
s
“
b
a
i
l
-
i
n
d
e
b
t
”
o
r
“
b
a
i
l
i
n
-
a
b
l
e
d
e
b
t
,
”
b
u
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
l
y
r
u
l
e
o
u
t
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
o
s
e
r
u
b
r
i
c
s
;
f
“
F
S
B
O
T
C
”
:
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
g
O
T
C
D
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
M
a
r
k
e
t
s
R
e
f
o
r
m
s
,
F
S
B
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
g
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
f
o
r
R
e
d
u
c
i
n
g
R
e
l
i
a
n
c
e
o
n
C
R
A
R
a
t
i
n
g
s
,
R
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
G
2
0
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
M
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
s
a
n
d
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
,
F
S
B
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
7
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
c
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
o
f
p
o
l
i
c
y
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
f
o
r
S
I
F
I
r
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
,
O
T
C
d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s
,
C
R
A
s
,
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
s
h
a
d
o
w
b
a
n
k
i
n
g
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
W
a
l
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
R
e
f
o
r
m
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
(
P
u
b
l
i
c
L
a
w
1
1
1
-
2
0
3
,
J
u
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
D
o
d
d
-
F
r
a
n
k
W
a
l
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
R
e
f
o
r
m
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
R
o
a
d
m
a
p
,
F
S
O
C
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
1
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
C
o
p
e
l
a
n
d
(
2
0
1
0
)
;
T
h
e
G
2
0
S
e
o
u
l
S
u
m
m
i
t
L
e
a
d
e
r
s
’
D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
1
1
-
1
2
,
2
0
1
0
(
“
S
e
o
u
l
S
u
m
m
i
t
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
q
u
e ´
”
)
;
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
b
)
;
F
S
B
(
2
0
1
0
a
)
;
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
a
n
d
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
S
I
F
I
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
d
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
F
S
B
i
n
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
I
M
F
(
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
,
2
0
1
0
)
;
C
o
r
e
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
f
o
r
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
B
a
n
k
i
n
g
S
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
B
C
B
S
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
0
6
)
;
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
C
o
r
e
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
a
n
d
M
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
,
I
A
I
S
(
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
0
3
)
T
h
e
D
F
A
i
s
t
h
e
m
a
j
o
r
l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
v
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
t
h
e
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
c
r
i
s
i
s
,
b
u
t
a
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
g
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
w
e
r
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
t
o
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
t
o
t
h
e
c
r
i
s
i
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
T
r
o
u
b
l
e
d
A
s
s
e
t
R
e
l
i
e
f
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
,
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
?
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
m
a
r
k
e
t
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
e
f
f
o
r
t
s
b
y
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
,
a
n
d
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
b
y
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
;
f
o
r
a
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
’
s
c
r
i
s
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
s
e
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
(
2
0
1
1
a
)
;
f
o
r
a
d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
F
D
I
C
’
s
l
i
q
u
i
d
i
t
y
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
e
e
F
D
I
C
(
2
0
1
1
)
Table AIII.
Global ?nancial
system reform
197
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Daniel E. Nolle. 2015. Who's in Charge of Fixing the World's Financial System? The Un[?]der-
Appreciated Lead Role of the G20 and the FSB. Financial Markets, Institutions & Instruments 24:10.1111/
fmii.2015.24.issue-1, 1-82. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y

U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y

A
t

2
1
:
4
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)

doc_360577969.pdf