Description
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the major provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed by the US Congress and signed
into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010.
Journal of Financial Economic Policy
US enacts sweeping financial reform legislation
J ames Barth J ohn J ahera
Article information:
To cite this document:
J ames Barth J ohn J ahera, (2010),"US enacts sweeping financial reform legislation", J ournal of Financial
Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 3 pp. 192 - 195
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011085412
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:37 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 252 times since 2010*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Ross Levine, (2010),"An autopsy of the US financial system: accident, suicide, or
negligent homicide", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 3 pp. 196-213 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011085421
David Tripe, (2010),"Using DEA to investigate bank safety and soundness – which
approach works best?", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 3 pp. 237-250 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011085449
Eleftherios Giovanis, (2010),"Application of logit model and self-organizing maps (SOMs) for the prediction
of financial crisis periods in US economy", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 2 pp. 98-125
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011070184
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
EDITORIAL
US enacts sweeping ?nancial
reform legislation
James Barth and John Jahera
Co-Editors
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the major provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed by the US Congress and signed
into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010.
Design/methodology/approach – This does not offer any empirical analysis of the new law given
that it has just been adopted. The paper does provide discussion of the major provisions with some
commentary on the arguments for an against each provision.
Findings – The new law represents the most sweeping changes in ?nancial regulation and
supervision in the USA since the Great Depression. The role of the Federal Government is greatly
expanded in almost all aspects of the ?nancial sector of the economy and will affect consumers,
investors, and managers of ?nancial service ?rms. Many feel that the effect of the law will be to
adversely affect the competitive environment while others feel the additional regulation is necessary to
prevent another ?nancial crisis.
Research limitations/implications – As the provisions of this law become more clear, much
research will be needed to assess the true economic impact of the law and whether it is indeed
providing the additional safeguards against a ?nancial crisis.
Originality/value – This review of the new law offers a concise discussion of the major provisions
of the recently passed law. This review is of value to those seeking an introduction to the law and its
provisions and implications.
Keywords Economic reform, Legislation, Regulation, United States of America
Paper type General review
1. Introduction
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the most sweeping changes of the
?nancial services industry in the USA since the Great Depression. The new law, titled
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, was fairly quickly
passed in response to the ?nancial crisis that began in the Summer of 2007 and covers
all aspects of the ?nancial sector through substantially greater governmental
oversight. While the full effects of the legislation remain to be seen, many already view
the additional oversight provisions as negatively impacting the pro?tability of
?nancial ?rms and curtailing the availability and affordability of credit to consumers
and businesses. Further criticism of the new law lies in the fact that no attention
is paid to reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-sponsored
enterprises that back a large proportion of mortgages made in the USA. Without a
doubt, the ?nancial crisis was something of a “perfect storm” with blame being placed
on a range of ?nancial institutions. Furthermore, there is a concern among some that
the effects of the legislation may well reduce the competitiveness of US ?nancial ?rms
in the global ?nancial marketplace.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-6385.htm
JFEP
2,3
192
Journal of Financial Economic Policy
Vol. 2 No. 3, 2010
pp. 192-195
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1757-6385
DOI 10.1108/17576381011085412
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Given its importance, we provide an overview of some of the major provisions of the
new law and a very brief discussion of some of the potential implications for various
stakeholders in the ?nancial system. It is important to emphasize at the outset,
however, that there is still substantial uncertainty because the different ?nancial
regulatory agencies must implement regulations based on their interpretation of the
new law. That is to say, the law itself does not specify in detail all the regulations that
must now be implemented but instead delegates that task to the appropriate regulatory
agencies. This process will not only be stretched out over a number of years in many
cases but also provides ample time for the affected parties to lobby the agencies for a
less stringent interpretation of the legislation.
2. Greater governmental oversight and restrictions
The Federal Government will assume an even greater role in addressing the issue
of overall ?nancial stability than it has in the past with the establishment of a
new oversight body. In particular, a new governmental entity, the Financial Stability
Oversight Council, is charged with the task of focusing on the extent to which systemic
risk exists in the ?nancial sector. This entity will work through the Federal Reserve to
adopt the necessary measures to mitigate or prevent any systemic risk that is emerging
in the ?nancial sector. The council will be comprised of nine members drawn from the
various regulatory agencies. The law further allows for greater governmental
authority to take control of troubled institutions by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation. The intent of this provision is to take prompt action before adverse effects
could spread to other ?nancial ?rms.
The law also includes tight restrictions on the proprietary trading that may be
undertaken by ?nancial ?rms. Additional restrictions are also imposed on swap
activity by ?nancial institutions. The presumption is that such restrictions will prevent
excessive risk taking by ?nancial ?rms that may lead to ?nancial problems and
potentially even taxpayer bailouts. Of course, some argue that it will be dif?cult to
distinguish between proprietary and non-proprietary trading and that swap
restrictions will needlessly hamper the ability of ?rms to hedge risks that they face.
Also, the associated regulatory compliance costs may adversely affect the pro?tability
of institutions and lead to even greater consolidation of banks as smaller institutions
?nd themselves unable to compete effectively under new and tightened regulations.
More importantly, the law fails to address the problems associated with Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, the two big government-sponsored agencies that contributed in a
signi?cant manner to the mortgage meltdown in the USA. The government takeover of
these agencies and their continuing losses remain an unresolved issue. Concern
remains that with such a large portion of US mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac that reform of those agencies is needed to minimize the likelihood of
a future mortgage crisis.
3. Greater protection for consumers
To better protect consumers than in the recent past, the law provides for the
establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Just as the name suggests,
this new agency will have responsibility for better ensuring that ?nancial ?rms
provide clearer and more accurate information to consumers when offering their
products and services. The bureau will also have broad authority to implement new
US ?nancial
reform
legislation
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
rules to better protect consumers when dealing with both bank and non-bank entities.
Many of the current protections afforded consumers through other government
regulatory agencies will be now housed within this new bureau. Many ?nancial ?rms,
however, are concerned that the new agency may unduly restrict the types of products
and services they now provide as well as those that may be provided in the future, and
thereby actually be detrimental to ?nancial markets.
4. Effect on investors
For investors, the new law adopts additional regulatory oversight of the derivatives
market through the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as well as the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Many have blamed the rapid
growth of some types of derivatives, such as credit default swaps, at least in part for the
?nancial crisis. Proponents of the use of such ?nancial instruments argue that they are
merely tools and serve a legitimate purpose in terms of proper risk management, while
others contend that some, if not all, derivatives are more akin to “gambling.” The new
law assigns greater responsibility to both the SEC and the CFTC in terms of
monitoring and regulating the market for all derivatives. Furthermore, hedge funds
with over $100 million under management will now have to register with the SEC and
provide greater disclosure of ?nancial information.
Another new entity that will be created is the Of?ce of Credit Rating Agencies
within the SEC. This agency will provide oversight for credit rating agencies and
will have the authority to examine them, to impose ?nes when deemed appropriate,
and insure greater disclosure of speci?c rating methodologies. This provision in the
law was in response to what many felt was a failure on the part of such agencies to
assign more appropriate ratings to asset-backed securities, especially those related to
real estate mortgages. The legislation also calls for improved management of the SEC
itself through annual assessment of its management systems.
5. Effect on ?nancial ?rms
For corporations, additional rights are being provided to shareholders in terms of input
on executive compensation. Shareholders will now be allowed a non-binding vote on
executive pay as well as any golden parachute provisions to better ensure that pay will
be in accordance with actual performance. In addition, ?rms must report the
relationship between executive compensation and ?rm performance. Furthermore,
compensation committees must now be comprised of only independent directors.
Another aspect of the new law provides for greater proxy access to be developed by the
US SEC. Again, the views of this provision are mixed with some feeling this will
empower special interest groups and create dif?culty for ?rms while others are of the
view that such broadening of access is necessary to insure strong corporate
governance. Insurance ?rms too are affected by the new law with the establishment of
the Of?ce of National Insurance which will work with the states to insure proper
oversight of insurance ?rms.
6. Summary
Much remains unknown about the ultimate effects of the new law, particularly as
regards the numerous regulations that will eventually be implemented by the various
regulatory agencies involved. Clearly, the lawrepresents, at a minimum, a move towards
JFEP
2,3
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
greater and stricter regulation of the ?nancial industry in the USA in the hope of
minimizing, if not preventing, the severity of any future crises in our ?nancial markets.
Much debate will continue on the merits of the law and whether the regulatory
restrictions will provide the needed protections or serve to impede competition in the
global ?nancial marketplace. A concern remains about the broad authority granted
under the law to a number of government agencies. Now is the time for much more
research to evaluate the newlawas well as provide a more research-based guide to what
regulatory regime actually works best in different countries to promote well-functioning
?nancial systems. We would encourage and welcome new policy-oriented research
articles as they relate to the new legislation.
7. Papers in this issue
We are pleased to have four articles for Vol. 2, Issue 3 of the journal. Several of the
papers have particular relevance given the passage of the ?nancial reform legislation
in the USA. The ?rst paper, “An autopsy of the US ?nancial system: accident, suicide,
or negligent homicide” by Ross Levine, provides a most timely and important
discussion of the ?nancial policies in place during the latter part of the 1990s and early
2000s with the conclusion that many of the policies created adverse incentives that
were fundamental contributors to the ?nancial crisis. This type of examination should
help guide policymakers in working to ensure that future crises do not occur or at least
are less likely to occur. The second paper in this issue is “Limits to relative
performance evaluation: evidence from bank executive turnover” by Irina Barakova
Ajay Palvia and. It provides a nice analysis of the relationship between performance
and executive turnover for community banks. The ?ndings indicate that bad economic
times reveal important information about overall managerial quality. Interestingly,
executive turnover seems more prevalent during economic downturns for banks
deemed to have stronger governance. The third paper, “Using DEA to investigate bank
safety and soundness – which approach works best?” by David Tripe, presents
methodologies for assessing bank safety and soundness and focuses on New Zealand,
which is a country of particular concern given there is no formal deposit insurance
system. The fourth and last paper, “The impact on performance of IPO allocation
reform: an event study of Shanghai Stock Exchange A-shares,” by Fei Jiang and
Lawrence A. Leger addresses IPO underpricing in the rapidly growing Chinese stock
markets, taking into account changes in underpricing over time as regulations
have changed.
Erratum
We have been informed by Carolyn Sissoko, author of the paper entitled “The legal
foundations of ?nancial collapse” published in the Journal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2
No. 2, of a typesetting error in her acknowledgment at the bottom of page 5. It should read
“A comment made anonymously at the blog [. . .]”. We have since corrected the online version
of the paper, available from: www.emeraldinsight.com/jfep.htm. We apologise to the author
and readers for this error.
US ?nancial
reform
legislation
195
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Bibliography . [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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_788995944.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the major provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed by the US Congress and signed
into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010.
Journal of Financial Economic Policy
US enacts sweeping financial reform legislation
J ames Barth J ohn J ahera
Article information:
To cite this document:
J ames Barth J ohn J ahera, (2010),"US enacts sweeping financial reform legislation", J ournal of Financial
Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 3 pp. 192 - 195
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011085412
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:37 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 252 times since 2010*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Ross Levine, (2010),"An autopsy of the US financial system: accident, suicide, or
negligent homicide", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 3 pp. 196-213 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011085421
David Tripe, (2010),"Using DEA to investigate bank safety and soundness – which
approach works best?", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 3 pp. 237-250 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011085449
Eleftherios Giovanis, (2010),"Application of logit model and self-organizing maps (SOMs) for the prediction
of financial crisis periods in US economy", J ournal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2 Iss 2 pp. 98-125
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17576381011070184
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
EDITORIAL
US enacts sweeping ?nancial
reform legislation
James Barth and John Jahera
Co-Editors
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the major provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed by the US Congress and signed
into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010.
Design/methodology/approach – This does not offer any empirical analysis of the new law given
that it has just been adopted. The paper does provide discussion of the major provisions with some
commentary on the arguments for an against each provision.
Findings – The new law represents the most sweeping changes in ?nancial regulation and
supervision in the USA since the Great Depression. The role of the Federal Government is greatly
expanded in almost all aspects of the ?nancial sector of the economy and will affect consumers,
investors, and managers of ?nancial service ?rms. Many feel that the effect of the law will be to
adversely affect the competitive environment while others feel the additional regulation is necessary to
prevent another ?nancial crisis.
Research limitations/implications – As the provisions of this law become more clear, much
research will be needed to assess the true economic impact of the law and whether it is indeed
providing the additional safeguards against a ?nancial crisis.
Originality/value – This review of the new law offers a concise discussion of the major provisions
of the recently passed law. This review is of value to those seeking an introduction to the law and its
provisions and implications.
Keywords Economic reform, Legislation, Regulation, United States of America
Paper type General review
1. Introduction
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the most sweeping changes of the
?nancial services industry in the USA since the Great Depression. The new law, titled
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, was fairly quickly
passed in response to the ?nancial crisis that began in the Summer of 2007 and covers
all aspects of the ?nancial sector through substantially greater governmental
oversight. While the full effects of the legislation remain to be seen, many already view
the additional oversight provisions as negatively impacting the pro?tability of
?nancial ?rms and curtailing the availability and affordability of credit to consumers
and businesses. Further criticism of the new law lies in the fact that no attention
is paid to reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-sponsored
enterprises that back a large proportion of mortgages made in the USA. Without a
doubt, the ?nancial crisis was something of a “perfect storm” with blame being placed
on a range of ?nancial institutions. Furthermore, there is a concern among some that
the effects of the legislation may well reduce the competitiveness of US ?nancial ?rms
in the global ?nancial marketplace.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-6385.htm
JFEP
2,3
192
Journal of Financial Economic Policy
Vol. 2 No. 3, 2010
pp. 192-195
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1757-6385
DOI 10.1108/17576381011085412
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Given its importance, we provide an overview of some of the major provisions of the
new law and a very brief discussion of some of the potential implications for various
stakeholders in the ?nancial system. It is important to emphasize at the outset,
however, that there is still substantial uncertainty because the different ?nancial
regulatory agencies must implement regulations based on their interpretation of the
new law. That is to say, the law itself does not specify in detail all the regulations that
must now be implemented but instead delegates that task to the appropriate regulatory
agencies. This process will not only be stretched out over a number of years in many
cases but also provides ample time for the affected parties to lobby the agencies for a
less stringent interpretation of the legislation.
2. Greater governmental oversight and restrictions
The Federal Government will assume an even greater role in addressing the issue
of overall ?nancial stability than it has in the past with the establishment of a
new oversight body. In particular, a new governmental entity, the Financial Stability
Oversight Council, is charged with the task of focusing on the extent to which systemic
risk exists in the ?nancial sector. This entity will work through the Federal Reserve to
adopt the necessary measures to mitigate or prevent any systemic risk that is emerging
in the ?nancial sector. The council will be comprised of nine members drawn from the
various regulatory agencies. The law further allows for greater governmental
authority to take control of troubled institutions by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation. The intent of this provision is to take prompt action before adverse effects
could spread to other ?nancial ?rms.
The law also includes tight restrictions on the proprietary trading that may be
undertaken by ?nancial ?rms. Additional restrictions are also imposed on swap
activity by ?nancial institutions. The presumption is that such restrictions will prevent
excessive risk taking by ?nancial ?rms that may lead to ?nancial problems and
potentially even taxpayer bailouts. Of course, some argue that it will be dif?cult to
distinguish between proprietary and non-proprietary trading and that swap
restrictions will needlessly hamper the ability of ?rms to hedge risks that they face.
Also, the associated regulatory compliance costs may adversely affect the pro?tability
of institutions and lead to even greater consolidation of banks as smaller institutions
?nd themselves unable to compete effectively under new and tightened regulations.
More importantly, the law fails to address the problems associated with Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, the two big government-sponsored agencies that contributed in a
signi?cant manner to the mortgage meltdown in the USA. The government takeover of
these agencies and their continuing losses remain an unresolved issue. Concern
remains that with such a large portion of US mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac that reform of those agencies is needed to minimize the likelihood of
a future mortgage crisis.
3. Greater protection for consumers
To better protect consumers than in the recent past, the law provides for the
establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Just as the name suggests,
this new agency will have responsibility for better ensuring that ?nancial ?rms
provide clearer and more accurate information to consumers when offering their
products and services. The bureau will also have broad authority to implement new
US ?nancial
reform
legislation
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
rules to better protect consumers when dealing with both bank and non-bank entities.
Many of the current protections afforded consumers through other government
regulatory agencies will be now housed within this new bureau. Many ?nancial ?rms,
however, are concerned that the new agency may unduly restrict the types of products
and services they now provide as well as those that may be provided in the future, and
thereby actually be detrimental to ?nancial markets.
4. Effect on investors
For investors, the new law adopts additional regulatory oversight of the derivatives
market through the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as well as the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Many have blamed the rapid
growth of some types of derivatives, such as credit default swaps, at least in part for the
?nancial crisis. Proponents of the use of such ?nancial instruments argue that they are
merely tools and serve a legitimate purpose in terms of proper risk management, while
others contend that some, if not all, derivatives are more akin to “gambling.” The new
law assigns greater responsibility to both the SEC and the CFTC in terms of
monitoring and regulating the market for all derivatives. Furthermore, hedge funds
with over $100 million under management will now have to register with the SEC and
provide greater disclosure of ?nancial information.
Another new entity that will be created is the Of?ce of Credit Rating Agencies
within the SEC. This agency will provide oversight for credit rating agencies and
will have the authority to examine them, to impose ?nes when deemed appropriate,
and insure greater disclosure of speci?c rating methodologies. This provision in the
law was in response to what many felt was a failure on the part of such agencies to
assign more appropriate ratings to asset-backed securities, especially those related to
real estate mortgages. The legislation also calls for improved management of the SEC
itself through annual assessment of its management systems.
5. Effect on ?nancial ?rms
For corporations, additional rights are being provided to shareholders in terms of input
on executive compensation. Shareholders will now be allowed a non-binding vote on
executive pay as well as any golden parachute provisions to better ensure that pay will
be in accordance with actual performance. In addition, ?rms must report the
relationship between executive compensation and ?rm performance. Furthermore,
compensation committees must now be comprised of only independent directors.
Another aspect of the new law provides for greater proxy access to be developed by the
US SEC. Again, the views of this provision are mixed with some feeling this will
empower special interest groups and create dif?culty for ?rms while others are of the
view that such broadening of access is necessary to insure strong corporate
governance. Insurance ?rms too are affected by the new law with the establishment of
the Of?ce of National Insurance which will work with the states to insure proper
oversight of insurance ?rms.
6. Summary
Much remains unknown about the ultimate effects of the new law, particularly as
regards the numerous regulations that will eventually be implemented by the various
regulatory agencies involved. Clearly, the lawrepresents, at a minimum, a move towards
JFEP
2,3
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
greater and stricter regulation of the ?nancial industry in the USA in the hope of
minimizing, if not preventing, the severity of any future crises in our ?nancial markets.
Much debate will continue on the merits of the law and whether the regulatory
restrictions will provide the needed protections or serve to impede competition in the
global ?nancial marketplace. A concern remains about the broad authority granted
under the law to a number of government agencies. Now is the time for much more
research to evaluate the newlawas well as provide a more research-based guide to what
regulatory regime actually works best in different countries to promote well-functioning
?nancial systems. We would encourage and welcome new policy-oriented research
articles as they relate to the new legislation.
7. Papers in this issue
We are pleased to have four articles for Vol. 2, Issue 3 of the journal. Several of the
papers have particular relevance given the passage of the ?nancial reform legislation
in the USA. The ?rst paper, “An autopsy of the US ?nancial system: accident, suicide,
or negligent homicide” by Ross Levine, provides a most timely and important
discussion of the ?nancial policies in place during the latter part of the 1990s and early
2000s with the conclusion that many of the policies created adverse incentives that
were fundamental contributors to the ?nancial crisis. This type of examination should
help guide policymakers in working to ensure that future crises do not occur or at least
are less likely to occur. The second paper in this issue is “Limits to relative
performance evaluation: evidence from bank executive turnover” by Irina Barakova
Ajay Palvia and. It provides a nice analysis of the relationship between performance
and executive turnover for community banks. The ?ndings indicate that bad economic
times reveal important information about overall managerial quality. Interestingly,
executive turnover seems more prevalent during economic downturns for banks
deemed to have stronger governance. The third paper, “Using DEA to investigate bank
safety and soundness – which approach works best?” by David Tripe, presents
methodologies for assessing bank safety and soundness and focuses on New Zealand,
which is a country of particular concern given there is no formal deposit insurance
system. The fourth and last paper, “The impact on performance of IPO allocation
reform: an event study of Shanghai Stock Exchange A-shares,” by Fei Jiang and
Lawrence A. Leger addresses IPO underpricing in the rapidly growing Chinese stock
markets, taking into account changes in underpricing over time as regulations
have changed.
Erratum
We have been informed by Carolyn Sissoko, author of the paper entitled “The legal
foundations of ?nancial collapse” published in the Journal of Financial Economic Policy, Vol. 2
No. 2, of a typesetting error in her acknowledgment at the bottom of page 5. It should read
“A comment made anonymously at the blog [. . .]”. We have since corrected the online version
of the paper, available from: www.emeraldinsight.com/jfep.htm. We apologise to the author
and readers for this error.
US ?nancial
reform
legislation
195
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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Bibliography . [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
:
3
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_788995944.pdf