Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: Weekend Economists Ring in the Old, Wring Out the New: Dec. 30, 2011 to Jan. 2, 2012 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)9. Treasury Proposes Fee Rule to Cover Financial Watchdog
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204632204577129113149409888.html?mod=dist_smartbrief
The U.S. Treasury issued a proposed rule Thursday for determining fees to be paid by large financial institutions to cover the cost of the recently established financial-stability watchdog and other expenses related to the Dodd-Frank regulatory overhaul. The Treasury plans to start collecting the semiannual fees in July 2012 from U.S. bank holding companies with at least $50 billion in total consolidated assets, foreign banks with at least that amount of assets in U.S. operations, as well as nonbank institutions that fall under the supervision of the Federal Reserve, according to the proposal. The Treasury expects the total amount of fees to top $100 million a year, though the actual amount of the initial assessment will depend on the amount of expenses included in the administration's fiscal 2013 budget proposal, as well as the amount of assets each firm holds on Dec. 31, 2011, according to the proposed rule.
The fees will cover the cost of the Federal Stability Oversight Council, Treasury's new financial research department, as well as expenses related to the implementation of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s orderly-liquidation authorities...The FDIC gained the authority to dismantle large, faltering financial firms in the Dodd-Frank law passed last summer in a bid to end bailouts of "too-big-to-fail" firms because the government lacked an orderly way to wind them down during the crisis. The fees won't go toward any particular bank, but will instead be used for expenses related to developing FDIC policies and procedures.
Based on June 30 figures, a $100 million assessment would mean that a company with just over $50 billion in assets would pay $280,000 for the year, while the largest assessed companywith about $2.3 trillion in assetswould pay an annual fee of about $12.5 million. The pool of assets that could be assessed was estimated at $18.1 trillion as of June 30, Treasury said. Regulators still haven't finished the process of determining which nonbank institutionssuch as hedge funds, private-equity firms, insurance companies, specialty lenders and broker-dealerswould be considered systemically important enough to fall under the Fed's oversight. But the interagency Federal Stability Oversight Council has said a firm must have at least $50 billion in assets and surpass at least one additional threshold in terms of derivative liabilities, short-term debt or other measure.
The proposed rule, posted on the Federal Register at www.regulations.gov, will be open for public comment for 60 days. The Treasury plans to issue the final rule by the end of May 2012 and announce the assessment rate in June.
The U.S. Treasury issued a proposed rule Thursday for determining fees to be paid by large financial institutions to cover the cost of the recently established financial-stability watchdog and other expenses related to the Dodd-Frank regulatory overhaul. The Treasury plans to start collecting the semiannual fees in July 2012 from U.S. bank holding companies with at least $50 billion in total consolidated assets, foreign banks with at least that amount of assets in U.S. operations, as well as nonbank institutions that fall under the supervision of the Federal Reserve, according to the proposal. The Treasury expects the total amount of fees to top $100 million a year, though the actual amount of the initial assessment will depend on the amount of expenses included in the administration's fiscal 2013 budget proposal, as well as the amount of assets each firm holds on Dec. 31, 2011, according to the proposed rule.
The fees will cover the cost of the Federal Stability Oversight Council, Treasury's new financial research department, as well as expenses related to the implementation of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s orderly-liquidation authorities...The FDIC gained the authority to dismantle large, faltering financial firms in the Dodd-Frank law passed last summer in a bid to end bailouts of "too-big-to-fail" firms because the government lacked an orderly way to wind them down during the crisis. The fees won't go toward any particular bank, but will instead be used for expenses related to developing FDIC policies and procedures.
Based on June 30 figures, a $100 million assessment would mean that a company with just over $50 billion in assets would pay $280,000 for the year, while the largest assessed companywith about $2.3 trillion in assetswould pay an annual fee of about $12.5 million. The pool of assets that could be assessed was estimated at $18.1 trillion as of June 30, Treasury said. Regulators still haven't finished the process of determining which nonbank institutionssuch as hedge funds, private-equity firms, insurance companies, specialty lenders and broker-dealerswould be considered systemically important enough to fall under the Fed's oversight. But the interagency Federal Stability Oversight Council has said a firm must have at least $50 billion in assets and surpass at least one additional threshold in terms of derivative liabilities, short-term debt or other measure.
The proposed rule, posted on the Federal Register at www.regulations.gov, will be open for public comment for 60 days. The Treasury plans to issue the final rule by the end of May 2012 and announce the assessment rate in June.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
150 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Weekend Economists Ring in the Old, Wring Out the New: Dec. 30, 2011 to Jan. 2, 2012 [View all]
Demeter
Dec 2011
OP
Put the the bazooka to the transitory unintended consequences from black swan events
Po_d Mainiac
Dec 2011
#10
Krugman is -- and has been -- ivory towered and out of touch for a long time n/t
Tansy_Gold
Dec 2011
#70
Leasing Through the Back Door: The Private Financing of “Public” Prisons By Christopher Petrella
Demeter
Dec 2011
#73
Cities that broke up Occupy camps now face lawsuits over free speech, use of force
Demeter
Jan 2012
#84
Populism Isn't Dead, It's Marching: What 19th Century Farmers Can Teach Occupiers About How to Keep
Demeter
Jan 2012
#116
"We’ve got to change it all, and we’ve got to do it before the ice caps melt"
bread_and_roses
Jan 2012
#132
Lies, Damn Lies And The Four Whoppers Of 2011 (Jonathan Alter is a Bloomberg View columnist)
Demeter
Jan 2012
#99
How Germany Builds Twice as Many Cars as the U.S. While Paying Its Workers Twice as Much
Demeter
Jan 2012
#100
Goodbye "Shop Til You Drop" Mentality: Renegade Band of Economists Call for "Degrowth" Economy
Demeter
Jan 2012
#101
I REPEAT: The original purpose of the Postal Service was to Deliver Democracy!
Demeter
Jan 2012
#108
"The Protester" Becomes Time's Person of the Year, Wants More by: J.A. Myerson, Truthout
Demeter
Jan 2012
#120
What if the SEC investigated Banks the way it is investigating Mutual Funds? By William K. Black
Demeter
Jan 2012
#126
Firefox has completely stopped working...again, and screwed up the machine doing it
Demeter
Jan 2012
#135
GENERAL, OFF-TOPIC QUERY: What has changed so much on DU that it feels like a foreign land?
Demeter
Jan 2012
#140
The Number One Catastrophic Event That Americans Worry About: Economic Collapse
Demeter
Jan 2012
#143
Michael Olenick: Is Shadow Housing Inventory Vastly Larger Than Widely Believed?
Demeter
Jan 2012
#146