
Divided Fed proposes rule to ease capital requirements for big Wall Street banks
The Federal Reserve on Wednesday proposed easing a key capital rule that banks say has limited their ability to operate, drawing dissent from at least two officials who say the move could undermine important safeguards.
Known as the enhanced supplementary leverage ratio, the measure regulates the quantity and quality of capital banks should be keeping on their balance sheets. The rule emanated from a post-financial crisis effort to ensure the stability of the nation's largest banks.
However, in recent years as bank reserves have built and concerns have grown over Treasury market liquidity, Wall Street executives and Fed officials have pushed to roll back the requirements.
The Fed will be voting on the new capital rules at 2 p.m. ET Wednesday.
"This stark increase in the amount of relatively safe and low-risk assets on bank balance sheets over the past decade or so has resulted in the leverage ratio becoming more binding," Fed Chair Jerome Powell said in a statement. "Based on this experience, it is prudent for us to reconsider our original approach."
In its draft form, the measure would call for reducing the top-tier capital big banks must hold by 1.4%, or some $13 billion, for holding companies. Subsidiaries would see a larger drop, of $210 billion, which would still be held by the parent bank. The standard applies the same rules to so-called globally systemic important banks as well as their subsidiaries.
On the whole, the plan seeks to loosen up banks to take on more lower-risk inventory such as Treasurys, which are now treated essentially the same as high-yield bonds for capital purposes. Fed regulators essentially are looking for the capital requirements to serve as a safety net rather than a bind on activity.
However, governors Adriana Kugler and Michael Barr, the former vice chair of supervision, said they would oppose the move.
"Even if some further Treasury market intermediation were to occur in normal times, this proposal is unlikely to help in times of stress," Barr said in a separate statement. "In short, firms will likely use the proposal to distribute capital to shareholders and engage in the highest return activities available to them, rather than to meaningfully increase Treasury intermediation."
Current Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman and Governor Christopher Waller released statements supporting the changes.
The leverage ratio has come under criticism for essentially penalizing banks for holding Treasurys. Official documents released Wednesday say the new regulations align with so-called Basel standards, which set standards for banks globally.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Miami Herald
41 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Rare event could derail S&P 500 record-setting rally
The stock market has had a record-setting run following President Trump's decision to pause reciprocal tariffs on April 9. The move to de-escalate trade tensions reversed a brutal selloff in the S&P 500 that at its worst had sent the benchmark index tumbling 19%, nearly into bear market drop territory. The market decline was severe enough to trigger oversold readings on most sentiment measures, and many market watchers were savvy enough to recommend buying into the fear. However, far fewer likely expected the rally to persist amid a tidal wave of economic concerns and global uncertainty. Yet, that's precisely what the S&P 500 has done. Rather than backfill gains, it has essentially beelined higher, creating a V-shaped bottom that has surprised many who remain with cash on the sidelines watching, hoping for a chance to buy. The index's advance is remarkable, but stocks don't rise or fall in a straight line, and mounting evidence suggests that the S&P rally could stall soon, especially after one particularly rare signal flashed on Friday. Weiss/Getty Images A raging bull market lifted the S&P 500 by over 20% in back-to-back years in 2023 and 2024, including a robust 24% gain last year. The gains were fueled by optimism that the Federal Reserve would switch to market-friendly interest rate cuts, thanks to falling inflation, and abandon the hawkish monetary policy it adopted in 2022 in its war against inflation. Related: Jim Cramer sends strong message on Nvidia stock at all-time highs A tsunami of artificial intelligence spending also supported gains as companies raced to develop AI chatbots and agentic AI apps. Those bullish arguments looked much flimsier this spring. The Fed cut interest rates in September, November, and December last year; however, it paused additional reductions this year because it feared tariffs would spark price increases. In May, Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) price index, excluding energy and food because of their volatility, showed inflation was 2.7%, up from 2.6% in April, and over the Fed's 2% inflation target. The Fed's pause removed some excitement that lower rates would spark business investment and lower interest expenses on variable debt-bad news for corporate sales and earnings growth that contributes to higher stock prices. Similarly, earlier this year, fears mounted that major hyperscalers, including Amazon's AWS, Meta Platforms, Google Cloud, and Microsoft's Azure, would pare back AI spending on servers and AI chips after two years of huge spending growth. Those concerns strengthened after the launch of the Chinese-built Deepseek-R1, a rival to OpenAI's ChatGPT and Google's Gemini, in January. DeepSeek was reportedly built for only $6 million using cheaper, legacy semiconductor chips, rather than Nvidia's latest fastest Blackwell lineup of graphic processing units (GPUs). However, concerns over the Fed and AI spending have decreased since April. Cloud network providers, including hyperscalers, have mostly reinforced their capex plans for this year. Amazon has affirmed a capex run rate of over $100 billion. Meta Platforms increased its planned spend to as much as $72 billion from $65 billion previously. Microsoft confirmed in June that it still plans to spend $80 billion. And Google will likely spend about $75 billion. More Experts Analyst makes bold call on stocks, bonds, and goldTheStreet Stocks & Markets Podcast #8: Common Sense Investing With David MillerVeteran fund manager sends dire message on stocks Meanwhile, while the Fed didn't cut rates again in June, it maintained its closely-watched dot-plot forecast plans to cut rates twice before year-end. Some Fed members have also recently expressed interest in cutting as soon as July, and most believe a Fed cut will likely happen in September, suggesting lower rates are getting closer by the day. With rates potentially heading lower soon and AI spending mostly intact, tariff worries are the last remaining hurdle, and those concerns have also ratcheted back following trade progress with the UK and China. The S&P 500 has clearly climbed the proverbial wall of worry, closing at a new all-time high of 6,173.07 on June 27. The bad news, however, is that the rally has lifted the S&P 500's valuation back toward levels seen when the index made its previous all-time high in February. The S&P 500's forward price to earnings (P/E) ratio is 21.9, up from about 19 in April. In February, it was above 22, according to FactSet. Related: Fannie Mae chief Pulte sends savage one-word message to Fed's Powell The index's average P/E ratio over the past five and ten years is 19.9 and 18.4, respectively. Unfortunately, it's historically harder to come by gains in the year following a P/E ratio above 22 Clearly, the S&P 500 isn't as cheap as it was in April, and that could create a headwind for stocks, particularly given sentiment measures aren't oversold like they were then. CNN's Fear/Greed Index registered "Extreme Fear" in April, but it's at "Greed" now. The American Association of Individual Investors survey saw bearish outlooks for the coming six months surge to 61.9% in April, the third highest on record and the highest reading since the stock market bottomed in March 2009 during the Great Financial Crisis. Now, bearishness is more neutral at 40%. Increasing investor giddiness may make it harder for the S&P 500 to continue rallying, at least in the short term. This is especially true given that another relatively rare signal, a relative strength index (RSI) (14) reading above 70, flashed a warning on Friday. RSI (14) measures price action over the preceding 14 trading periods and can signal when stocks become overbought and oversold. An RSI above 70 on the S&P 500 signals buyer beware, while a reading below 30, like in April when the RSI on the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) dropped to about 21, suggests selling is overdone. Currently, the RSI on the S&P 500 is 70.2. For perspective, it last exceeded 70 on December 4, before a 4% retreat through January 10. It reached 69.97 on May 19, before a short-and-fast 2.7% drop. Of course, nothing is guaranteed. Stocks can always fall further than anyone expects and remain overbought for a while. John Maynard Keynes famously wrote, "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent." Nevertheless, the high RSI reading may suggest that the S&P 500 rally may stall in the coming weeks. In the intermediate or long term, well, gains or losses will likely depend on whether high tariffs fuel inflation, causing the Fed to stay on the sidelines, and whether business spending forecasts stay strong or weaken. Related: Legendary fund manager issues stock market prediction as S&P 500 tests all-time highs The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
This week in Trumponomics: Dueling Fed chairs
When it comes to the Federal Reserve, President Trump can't get no satisfaction. He wants the Fed to cut interest rates, and it continually declines to do so. He mused about firing Fed Chair Jerome Powell earlier this year, but the Supreme Court quashed that idea. He routinely trolls Powell anyway, to no effect. So now Trump says he may choose a replacement for Powell months before Powell's term expires in May 2026. Powell would stay in his job until next May, while the 'shadow chair' offered a kind of alternative view of what the central bank's monetary policy could be, or would be once Powell was gone. That might telegraph to markets that lower rates and looser monetary policy are coming once Powell exits. Read more: How the Fed rate decision affects your bank accounts, loans, credit cards, and investments Like much of what Trump does, the idea is unprecedented and jarring. The Fed is the most powerful financial institution in the world, fully able to move markets and drive the direction of the economy. Investors parse every word the Fed chair utters, looking for signs of future action. Two voices saying contradictory things about Fed policy couldn't possibly be helpful. But is the idea really that crazy? Corporations do CEO succession planning all the time, and it's actually considered mismanagement if they don't plan for the departure of key executives. Warren Buffett said in May that he finally plans to step down as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway at the end of this year, with longtime deputy Greg Abel taking the job. Buffett and his now deceased partner, Charlie Munger, had been talking up Abel for several years, so shareholders expected and welcomed the news. There's a difference, however, between prudent succession planning and what Trump seems to have in mind. Abel is not going to spend the rest of 2025 going on TV to call out all the mistakes he thinks Buffett might be making and promising to shake things up the moment Buffett is gone. He could make subtle changes over time, but investors broadly expect him to manage Berkshire much as Buffett has. Trump wants regime change at the Fed, not continuity. Whoever he picks will undoubtedly be more dovish than Powell and far more willing to cut rates. Powell and a majority of the Fed's policymakers have been holding off on rate cuts since last December, waiting to see if inflation picks up. Many economists think that's prudent, given that Trump's tariffs are a tax pushing up costs, which could add a full percentage point or more to the inflation rate. The Fed normally raises rates to head off inflation, and cutting rates amid rising inflation can make a price surge worse. Read more: How jobs, inflation, and the Fed are all related Trump seems not to care about the inflationary threat. He may also believe that lower rates will stimulate growth and offset the depressant effect of his tariffs. Trump, in his second term, has also overlooked expertise and staffed the government with loyalists willing to fight all his fights and attack all his enemies with the vigor of Trump Trump's shadow chair would likely be somebody who parrots Trump's claims that Powell is a 'numbskull' and a 'dummy' who doesn't know what he's doing. Every time Powell gives testimony or holds a press conference, the anti-Powell could hold his own public event, rebutting Powell and treating investors to frothy dreams of how much richer they'll get once Powell is out of the way. Maybe the shadow chair will show up at Jackson Hole in August and heckle Powell during his annual economic speech. This all sounds kind of silly, but it may already be affecting markets. After Trump floated the idea of a shadow chair, market expectations changed from two Fed interest rate cuts this year to three, according to the CME Group's FedWatch tool. Changing interest rate expectations can affect stock prices, since lower rates sometimes correlate with higher corporate profits. Frontrunners for the shadow job supposedly include Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, White House economist Kevin Hassett, Fed governor Chris Waller, and former Fed governor Kevin Warsh. Those are all pretty serious people not known for the kind of mudslinging Trump may be looking for. Bessent generally declines to say much about the Fed's current policy, which is exactly what markets expect from a Treasury Secretary. The others have argued for a looser policy, but within the normal confines of respectful disagreement. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is more of a bomb-thrower willing to trash-talk the Fed, a la Trump. He recently posted a tweet explaining 'why President Trump calls Powell a loser,' for anybody wanting a tutorial. But Lutnick is the bad cop to Bessent's good cop, and investors would not find comfort in Lutnick's barroom demeanor if he were in line for the Fed job. If Trump's shadow chair spooked markets, it would be counterproductive. There's also the small problem that the Fed chair isn't a dictator unilaterally deciding whether to cut rates. There are 12 members of the Fed's policymaking committee, each with one vote at each policymaking meeting. The chair can be influential, but not autocratic. Powell isn't even the most hawkish voting member, dead-set against rate cuts. He's more of a moderate lodged between hawks resisting rate cuts and doves who think the Fed should be cutting now or soon. As many analysts pointed out when Trump was talking about firing Powell earlier this year, a new chair would still leave the current policymaking board intact. Even Powell would stay. While his term as chairman expires in 2026, his term as a voting member of the policymaking committee runs to 2028. A shadow chair wouldn't have any voting power until the Senate confirmed him or her to the job next May. The best such a person could do is amplify the chorus of voices vilifying Powell. Maybe that would be good enough for Trump. Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Bluesky and X: @rickjnewman. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices.


Politico
5 hours ago
- Politico
Alaskan whaling captains score special tax cut in GOP megabill
Senate Republicans have included compromises on key Medicaid and tax issues in updated text for their sweeping domestic policy bill. In an effort to placate GOP moderates on the fence on the legislation, Senate Republicans are planning to provide a $25 billion stabilization fund for rural hospitals over five years. It's a significant bump up from the $15 billion offer Senate Republican leadership had made to a group of Medicaid moderates, who have balked at the steep cuts to the health program contained in the marque legislation. Senate Republicans would also delay planned cuts to provider taxes that fund state obligations to Medicaid. The changes would still incrementally lower the allowable provider tax in Medicaid expansion states from 6 percent down to 3.5 percent. But the drawdown would begin in 2028, one year later than planned — in a nod to concerns from senators like Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who warned this week that resulting cuts to Medicaid could have disastrous electoral consequences in the midterms. The changes come as Senate Republicans are racing ahead with plans to hold a vote on their legislation Saturday. President Donald Trump still wants the bill on his desk by July 4, though Republicans, as of Friday evening, did not have the votes to start debate . The language also reflects changes to the state and local tax deduction sought by blue state House Republicans. The New York, New Jersey and California Republicans have been in prolonged negotiations with Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent over a boost to the deduction, which Senate Republicans universally want lowered. The new Senate text keeps House Republicans' plan to increase the deduction from $10,000 to $40,000, but it would snap back to current levels after 2029. The new language likely shaves off at least $100 billion from the approximately $350 billion price tag of the House plan. It's still unclear, though, if the compromise would get all of the hardcore SALT Republicans to 'yes.' In a Friday lunch with Senate Republicans, House Speaker Mike Johnson said he still had one holdout on the SALT deal -— a likely reference to Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), who indicated on Friday that, if there had been a deal, he was not part of it. The text for the Finance committee, which has jurisdiction over tax policy and Medicaid, could still see major changes. That's because the language still hasn't been fully updated to reflect rulings from the parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, on whether the contained provisions comply with strict budget rules. The tax panel had their final meetings with MacDonough Friday night, but it's unclear how she would weigh in, if at all, on tax provisions enacted under a novel accounting tactic called 'current policy baseline. That tactic takes the unprecedented step of zeroing out trillions of tax cut extensions. Senate Republicans are relying on it to make a slew of provisions, from individual to business tax cuts, permanent. David Lim contributed to this report.