XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.republicans, sac.politics   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: federal.thieves@yahoo.com   
      
   On 25 Aug 2021, Bad Biden  posted some   
   news:sg5kpi$m9j$1@news.dns-netz.com:   
      
   > Siri Cruise wrote   
   >   
   >> Democrats are incompetent pieces of shit.   
      
   In a hotly anticipated banking report released Friday morning, the Federal   
   Reserve said it failed to take sufficient action to prevent the collapse   
   of Silicon Valley Bank, while detailing serious management oversights by   
   the lender’s executives.   
      
   The Fed, which is SVB’s primary regulator, took responsibility for its own   
   lapses, saying that supervisors “did not fully appreciate the extent of   
   the vulnerabilities as Silicon Valley Bank grew in size and complexity”   
   and “did not take sufficient steps” to ensure that SVB address its   
   problems quickly.   
      
   Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse on March 10 — followed two days later by   
   that of Signature Bank — sent shock waves through the global banking   
   system. Regional banks have been hit especially hard, and investors are   
   still bracing for pain six weeks later as First Republic Bank teeters on   
   the edge.   
      
   “Regulatory standards for SVB were too low, the supervision of SVB did not   
   work with sufficient force and urgency, and contagion from the firm’s   
   failure posed systemic consequences not contemplated by the Federal   
   Reserve’s tailoring framework,” the Fed report states.   
      
   It recommended a sweeping re-evaluation of its regulatory and supervisory   
   functions.   
      
   “Following Silicon Valley Bank’s failure, we must strengthen the Federal   
   Reserve’s supervision and regulation based on what we have learned,” said   
   Michael Barr, the Fed’s vice chair for supervision. “This review   
   represents a first step in that process.”   
      
   Barr, who oversaw the Fed’s self-assesment, said that the central bank   
   would welcome external reviews of SVB’s failure, including from Congress.   
      
   The report offers four key takeaways:   
      
   Silicon Valley Bank’s leadership failed to manage risks.   
   The Fed’s own supervisors didn’t fully appreciate SVB’s vulnerabilities.   
   Supervisors were too slow to act on problems.   
   A 2019 shift in Fed policy “impeded effective supervision.”   
   The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation released a similar report on   
   Signature Bank, blaming its demise on “poor management.”   
      
   Supervisory shortcomings   
   The Fed report adds greater detail to many of SVB’s shortcomings that   
   became apparent soon after the bank’s collapse, including its highly   
   concentrated business model that catered to the tech and venture capital   
   industries, lax risk management practices, and its reliance on uninsured   
   deposits.   
      
   But the report is perhaps most notable for its recognition of the Fed’s   
   own institutional flaws. In a letter accompanying the report, Vice Chair   
   Barr offers a frank critique of his own agency.   
      
   “We need to develop a culture that empowers supervisors to act in the face   
   of uncertainty,” he wrote.   
      
   He warned that the Fed must “guard against complacency” after more than a   
   decade of banking stability that “may have led bankers to be overconfident   
   and supervisors to be too accepting.”   
      
   The report notes that SVB’s breakneck growth — it more than tripled in   
   size between 2019 and 2021 — far outpaced the abilities of its board of   
   directors and senior management.   
      
   “They failed to establish a risk-management and control infrastructure   
   suitable for the size and complexity of SVBFG when it was a $50 billion   
   firm, let alone when it grew to be a $200 billion firm,” the report   
   states.   
      
   Supervisors put in place by the Fed, meanwhile, continued to assess the   
   board of directors and senior management as “effective” despite clear   
   signs that governance and risk management were not matching the bank’s   
   growth.   
      
   At the time of its failure, SVB had 31 unaddressed “safe and soundness   
   supervisory warnings” — triple the average number of peer banks, according   
   to the Fed.   
      
   Rethinking deregulation   
   As SVB was growing rapidly, its own executives and other banking leaders   
   lobbied Congress to roll back regulations that would have increased   
   scrutiny on banks of certain size.   
      
   A 2010 law signed by President Barack Obama, widely known as Dodd-Frank,   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)