The Clearing House (TCH), SIFMA and FSR commented on the Basel Committee’s second consultative document to revise the standardized approach to credit risk. Among other things, the letter: (i) raises concerns about disparate treatment between calibrations for risk weighting under the external credit rating, and non-credit rating approaches; (ii) suggests aligning the determination of “investment grade” with the process set forth by the U.S. Agencies; (iii) suggests that credit conversion factors (CCFs) for retail and wholesale commitments are too conservative and are not supported by historical experiences; (iv) recommends that the final rule differentiate applicable CCFs by product to increase risk sensitivity; and (v) identifies the credit risk mitigation framework’s haircuts for equity and corporate debt securities as too high. TCH previously submitted a comment letter in response to the initial consultation on March 26, 2015.
You Might Also Be Interested In...
Bank Capital and Stress Testing
U.S. Bank Capital Levels: Aligning With or Exceeding Midpoint Estimates of Optimal
Basel Finalization
BPI’s Greg Baer Testifies on Basel Endgame Before House Financial Services Subcommittee
Basel Finalization
New BPI Ad Campaign Encourages Americans to Demand Accountability from Regulators for Higher Loan Prices
More Posts by This Author
Bank Capital and Stress Testing
U.S. Bank Capital Levels: Aligning With or Exceeding Midpoint Estimates of Optimal
Central Bank Digital Currency
BPI’s Paige Pidano Paridon Testifies on CBDC Before House Subcommittee
Bank Activities and Structure
BPI Statement Before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion
Bank Activities and Structure
BPI Statement Before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy