LyrArc Article Gist
Moody's Ratings company downgraded banks in the U.S. and Europe on June 21, 2012. Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup were downgraded two notches. Morgan Stanley managed to stave off a three notch downgrade. Credit Suisse was downgraded three notches. Bank of America was down one notch, and Wells Fargo which has only a small trading operation was not reviewed. This is the first time since 2007 that Moody's has conducted a sweeping downgrade of banks. About 100 banks were reviewed by Moody's. Banks being downgraded have large trading operations or investment banking business that is subject to higher risks. Greg Bauer, a managing director of global banking at Moody's said in his statement: All of the banks affected by today's actions have significant exposure to the volatility and risk of outsized losses inherent to capital-markets activities." For Moody's the main issue was that the capital bases of banks are maintained, considering that government support is less likely than before, according to Mr. Wassenberg, Moody's managing director for European banks. The impact on banks will be fewer opportunities for trading revenues for some banks, and will raise borrowing costs for banks. Moody's also cut the ratings of large European banks with significant trading operations. This includes Deutsche Bank, Barclays, HSBC, RBS, BNP Paribas, Credit Agricole, Societe Generale, UBS, and Royal Bank of Canada....

LyrArc Article Gist
The high cost of fines is likely to affect recapitalization of UK banks. Fines for Libor-rigging and compensations for customers on Payment Protection Insurance may cost the UK banking industry about 20 billion pounds, says Nixon. Other fines such as the $1.9 billion fine for money laundering activities of HSBC have to be added to this. This means less money for meeting stronger capital requirements and for lending to business and households. Higher compliance costs will mean higher costs in future years. HSBC estimates of the anti money laundering systems are about $990 million a year. The Bank of England has raised concerns about the need for additional capital to safeguard British banks.

LyrArc Article Gist
New UBS CEO, Sergio Ermotti, plans to scale down UBS investment banking operations because of stricter regulations and a changing market environment. He said in an interview that UBS will go back to what it was in the 1990's, that he now sees the investment banking boom of the last ten years as an aberration. He also sees rival banks taking the same route. The plan is to shrink risk-weighted assets from 300 billion Swiss francs today to 145 billion Swiss francs by scaling back or exiting in areas such as asset securitization, complex fixed income structured products and trading in some equity products. UBS will cut 2000 investment banking jobs to 16,500 in 2013. The focus will shift to foreign exchange, commodities and mergers and acquisitions. Investment banking made a profit for only one of the last 4 years, taking up two thirds of the bank's capital and earning 26% of the group's the pretax profit in the last year. The new plan will reduce the size of the investment bank so that it makes up less than half of the group assets by 2016....

LyrArc Article Gist
Banking regulation in the U.S. after the Dodd-Frank legislation differs from banking regulation rules proposed by the Independent Commission on Banking in Britain. Britain has a much bigger financial sector relative to the size of its economy than the U.S., posing larger systemic risks. The commission in Britain is proposing structural changes that would separate investment banking from deposit taking at banks. Banks would have separate balance sheets for these two activities- and operate them as separate subsidiaries- even though they are part of one holding company. This means it would be harder to raise money cheaply for risktaking in investment banking. Under the Volcker Rule in the U.S., banks investment banking and deposit taking would not be separated in a structural separation- there would still be one balance sheet- only banks ability to trade with their own capital and run hedge funds would be constrained. Some banks have spun off trading operations in the U.S. and the the rules banks have to follow have not been clearly defined. Too big to fail is still a problem under current American regulation, though its effects are mitigated to some extent. As one expert puts it, its hard to regulate the banks because too much money is involved and the banks have the money and the lawyers to prevent or dilute new rules. The argument made by the banks in Britain is that universal international banking provides a public benefit and efficiencies. But John Vickers, the former chief economist of the Bank of England, and chairman of the Independent Commission on Banking, has a different view. He said recently, "it seems quite hard to identify and quantify real efficiencies as distinct from purely private gains."...

LyrArc Article Gist
UBS presents the losses at the London trading desk as a result of a rogue trading scandal. Stewart points to the culture a the UBS's investment banking operation that is partly responsible. Investment bankers he has talked to at UBS say there is a culture at UBS that encourages individuals to work separately in isolation from others, to make their own deals for advancement, a sort of every person for himself. There is no emphasis on team effort and thinking of the bank first.