Over the past few days, Members of Congress have engaged in intensive debate over the terms of the bailout package, now commonly referred to as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”). Both Democrats and Republicans have offered criticisms and alternatives to the original Treasury proposal which are summarized below.

Senator Dodd Proposal

Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs has drafted a 100 page bill that encompasses many of the Democratic proposals discussed to date. His bill would:

Yesterday, FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair, the keynote speaker at the Institute of International Bankers Cross-Border Insolvency Issues Conference in New York, stressed the need to end the “too big to fail” mentality by “eliminating the belief that the government will always support large, interconnected financial firms.” Chairman Bair noted that in order to do so, “we need an effective mechanism to close large, financial intermediaries when they get into trouble.”

Given the absence of any mandatory set-off rights on insolvency in the current UAE Bankruptcy Law, the application and effectiveness of netting provisions in financial market contracts made with a UAE counterparty has historically been uncertain.

Australian banks have historically relied on formal liquidation, voluntary administration and receivership processes available under the under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and under general law where informal restructurings have failed. There has been little appetite for exploring alternative methods to exit distressed situations by debt trading.

The financial crisis has brought significant regulatory changes for credit institutions, many of them aimed at strengthening their capital requirements and creating safety buffers to absorb losses and recapitalise unsound and failing institutions.

The latest is an instrument known as senior non-preferred debt, which is midway between senior debt and subordinated/Tier 2 debt. This instrument will not qualify as Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital, but will be eligible to compute for purposes of TLAC/MREL requirements and will be cheaper for banks than pure subordinated debt.

The banking reform package marks an important step toward the completion of the European post-crisis regulatory reforms

Regulatory capital requirements for prudentially supervised financial services companies across Europe are complex and changing rapidly. To keep track of the regulatory framework in the region, we have brought together the essential features of bank regulation in our EMEA Regulatory Capital wall chart.

This article was first published on the Practical Law website and in the PLC Magazine in June 2016.

Challenger banks, which are set up to compete with the larger traditional banks, have seen rapid growth in the wake of increased openness to change in the banking sector and a desire for more consumer choice. Their clever targeting of niche markets is opening up plenty of scope for growth. While this opportunity does not come without difficulties, the rewards for challenger banks that succeed can be considerable.

PRA consults on capital adequacy. The UK Prudential Regulation Authority proposed changes to the PRA’s Pillar 2 framework for the banking sector, including changes to rules and supervisory statements. The proposed policy is intended to ensure that firms have adequate capital to support the relevant risks in their business and that they have appropriate processes to ensure compliance with the Capital Requirements Regulation and Capital Requirements Directive.

Today, HM Treasury announced the conclusion of discussions with Lloyds Banking Group (Lloyds) and Royal Bank of Scotland Plc (RBS), regarding their participation in the U.K.