This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Prompt corrective action provisions: are insurance companies and investment banks next?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Tatom, John / A.

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In 1991, Congress passed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA). The Act provided for risk-based deposit insurance premiums, put explicit limits on the application of a “too big to fail” principle for banks and required that examiners implement “prompt corrective action” (PCA) standards for banks. Essentially these steps were to improve the functioning of the FDIC, especially removing discretion of the examiners in the process of addressing the risk of failure of banks and providing explicit requirements of managing the deteriorating risk of failure and providing for rising insurance premiums for such banks. In particular, PCA established a set of capital benchmarks and required regulator actions that removed privileges for banks to manage their capital and payments of income to share holders and bank creditors as the capital position of the bank deteriorated and the risk of failure rose. In effect regulators could take preemptive action to keep banks from depleting their capital as their capital positions deteriorate. These provisions have drawn increasing public attention in the past year for very different reasons. First, Senate Bill 40, The National Insurance Act (NIA), which provides new opportunities for insurance companies to obtain their charters and to be regulated by a federal government entity instead of only the state governments, also requires that the new federal regulator develop and apply prompt corrective action provisions to the supervision of federally chartered insurance companies. The second reason that these provisions have drawn attention recently is the near failure and sale of Bear Stearns. The Federal Reserve helped arrange the sale of Bear Stearns in March 2008, with the sale to be completed shortly, to preempt its failure and consequent effects on other financial institutions. At about the same time the U.S. Department of Treasury released it long awaited “Blueprint for a Modernized Federal Financial Regulatory Structure,” that called for the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to have broad regulatory power over all financial institutions on issues related to financial market stability. These actions call attention to the absence of regulatory oversight powers by the Fed, in particular, enabling legislation that would allow the Fed to close investment banks or other failed or failing institutions in the same way that they can or must close such banks. PCA is on the horizon for insurance companies, investment banks and other financial institutions subject to regulation.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/9327/
File Format:
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 9327.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 30 May 2008
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Research Buzz Issue 5 (May).Vol. 4 (2008): pp. 1-8
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:9327

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

Related research
Keywords: Prompt corrective action capital requirements financial regulatory reform Basel II

Find related papers by JEL classification:
G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies
G28 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Government Policy and Regulation
G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Mortgages

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Apart from a small start up grant in the 1990's, RePEc has received no funding and lives on the help of volunteers.

This page was last updated on 2008-11-18.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.