BNET Insight

The Corner Office

Taking on the big questions facing CEOs, boards, and shareholders.

Needed: Major Financial Reform

February 28th, 2008 @ 1:48 pm

5 Comments

Categories: General

Tags: Bank, Financial, Agency, Problem, Financial Accounting, Finance, William J. Holstein

It seems to me that a very important message in getting the lost in the shuffle of “Will the Fed lower rates or not?” and “How bad will the recession be?”

The important message is that we need deep structural reform in our financial sector. In some ways, what we’re living through is structural in nature, not just cyclical.

Consider:

  • The burst of subprime mortgages getting chopped up and syndicated off around the world is another demonstration that our regulatory structure is out of date. Major elements of the Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller and the Securities and Exchange Commission (there are at least six agencies involved) need to be consolidated. The sheer scale and sophistication of financial activity is outstripping the ability of regulators to exercise prudent, sensible oversight.
  • The role of the rating agencies needs to be revisited. Standard & Poors, Moody’s and Fitch all attached very high ratings to the flood of shoddy debt that the banks were peddling. These same agencies missed Enron. The structural problem is that the investment banks are paying the rating agencies to rate their instruments. It’s an inherent conflict of interest. Of course, S&P is going to attach a high rating to a CDO from Merrill Lynch because tens of millons of dollars are at stake.
  • The corporate governance of the largest financial institutions still hasn’t been fixed. Yes, Citigroup dumped Chuck Prince and Merrill got rid of Stanley O’Neal, but I’m not convinced that a really effective check and balance system has been created between the new CEOs and their boards. In John Thain, we have just another great man who will intimidate his board.
  • Lastly, we need to resolve the moral hazard issue. Banks and other financial institutions took insane risks because they knew they were too big to fail. The feds would have to bail them out. So they were free to go after big profits, which they could keep, and if they failed, so what? They would be bailed out. This is a form of socialism, my friends, in which wealth is transferred, not to the needy, but to the already rich.

What are your thoughts?

 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    petriedn

    02/29/08 | Report as spam

    Financial Reform - Governance Component

    The corporate governance of the largest financial institutions still hasn?t been fixed. Yes, Citigroup dumped Chuck Prince and Merrill got rid of Stanley O?Neal, but I?m not convinced that a really effective check and balance system has been created between the new CEOs and their boards.


    to be truly effective, governance has to be cultural within the organization, and more broadly-focused rather than just (or primarily) financially-focused. Imposing rules and setting up structures may be a start, but in the long term it becomes self-defeating. The banks need a reason to adopt good governance practices and entrench them so they become part of banking culture. Unless and until that happens, governance at the big banks will continue to be "broken".

  •  
    2

    hongell

    02/29/08 | Report as spam

    Corporate Governance and Moral Hazards

    Financial accountability and responsibility are important issues; ones that requires checks and balances, and there should be standards and mandates in business. (There are for individuals.) This is an ethical issue, should be part of cultural responsibility, and needs to be monitored and adhered to by business, government, and the individual taxpayer.

    The moral hazard issue rears its ugly head yet again. Insane risks were taken because banks and financial institutions were not responsible nor held accountable. So, the feds have to bail them out while the taxpayer is paying for it as well. A similar scenario occurred when the Fed bailed the airline industry out a few years ago. We know who is still paying for that and why. The reason it happened is different but wasn't anything learned? That was forced upon us, too. When will it end?

  •  
    3

    LWeller2

    02/29/08 | Report as spam

    When will it end

    It will end when individuals' are held personally and financially liable. The government may still bail out the institition, but the individuals who caused the mess should be heavily, heavily fined and maybe even spend jail time. This will serve to motivate such individuals that the goal is not wealth at the expense of personal responsibility to taxpayers.

  •  
    4

    RickSchultz

    02/29/08 | Report as spam

    Yes, but...

    While I agree with the points, I certainly hope the folks in Congress learned from SOX and don't create a bunch of new, difficult-to-enforce and costly-to-implement laws. That only makes matters worse.

  •  
    5

    Trichard

    02/29/08 | Report as spam

    RE: Needed: Major Financial Reform

    The players in the subprime crisis all behaved exactly as their incentives drove them too. Brokers sold loans to get commissions and were not well regulated, banks offered commissions to sell sub-prime loans because their shareholders wanted growth so the banks chased growth the only place they could in a highly competitive market, investment bankers packaged loans and resold them because they got big bonuses to do it (banks weren't supposed to be left holding the stuff, their teams were supposed to sell it quickly to investors who didn't understand the risks), investors bought the packaged debt because they were chasing yield in a low interest rate environment (and didn't do enough due diligence on the risk) and rating agencies rated loans but get paid by the issuer - that is nuts! All the incentives worked too well! When everybody is making money, people turn a blind eye, even the shareholders.

    You know what underlies everyone item there - greed, chasing work that earns big bonuses and commissions and worrying about the potential consequences later. It is surprising that regulators didn't pick up on it. Even simply banning issuers from paying the credit rating agencies might have made a vast difference in what ratings were assigned to packaged loans.

    But regulation and new CEO's won't make greed go away. That will be with us as long as we are human.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement