Regulatory: Implementation of the financial reform law accelerates
Agencies are now translating policy decisions into specific business requirements.
August 03, 2011 at 01:20 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
As the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill marks its first anniversary, the pace of rulemakings to implement its provisions has accelerated significantly. The agencies are now translating the statute's broad policy decisions into specific requirements that will define how major parts of the financial services industry must be reconfigured.
On June 29, the Federal Reserve Board (Fed) issued a landmark rule that establishes the maximum interchange fee that banks that issue debit cards may charge merchants per transaction. Under the proposed rule, fees paid to the banks would have been reduced by more than $12 billion annually. The final rule increased the maximum permissible fee from the proposed level, but in excess of $6 billion annually still will be transferred to merchants. The Fed also defined how payment card networks must enable a non-captive network by which merchants may route debit card transactions so that vendors can benefit from price competition.
On July 21, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) began operations and will send examiners to the largest banks to determine their compliance with consumer protection obligations. President Obama finally nominated the initial CFPB director, but Senate Republicans announced they will block his confirmation unless the law is amended to have the agency run by a five-person board. Without a confirmed director, the CFPB lacks legal authority to exercise many powers delegated by Dodd-Frank, including the power to issue rules for, and examine compliance by, the many types of nondepository institutes (e.g., payday lenders) that will be regulated at the federal level for the first time.
On July 20, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a rule clarifying its position on when state consumer protection laws are pre-empted as applied to national banks and federal thrifts. The rule narrowed the situations in which the OCC will claim state laws conflict with federal statutes by deleting proposed language asserting that state laws are preempted if they “obstruct, impair, or condition” a national bank's authority. The OCC acted in response to an unusual action by its nominal parent, the Department of the Treasury, which joined state representatives who criticized the proposal as a blatant violation of Dodd-Frank. The precise effects of this amendment are still unclear, but it opens the way for broader state regulation and enforcement against national banks.
The Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has granted itself an extension until Dec. 31 to issue the 50-plus rules it must promulgate under Dodd-Frank. The most important rules will regulate the trading of swaps and derivatives. The agency already has issued a rule defining what types of swaps must be cleared through exchanges. It recently proposed rules that would establish margin and capital requirements, position limits, and the criteria for reporting and transparency by the swap execution facilities on which these instruments will trade. The recent decision by the D.C. Circuit in Business Roundtable v. SEC, No.10-1305 (July 22, 2011), overturning a proxy rule because the SEC failed to conduct a proper cost-benefit analysis, may have spillover effects and may indicate that the CFTC's rules will face similarly intensive review.
Implementation of Dodd-Frank has been an expensive proposition. The General Accountability Office estimates that the 11 covered agencies will have spent $1.3 billion by Sept.30, 2012 to carry out its requirements. The largest outlays will be incurred by the CFPB, OCC and SEC. The largest outlays as a percentage of the agency's budget will be incurred by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, which will spend more than 25% of its budget on drafting rules required by Dodd-Frank.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGCs Jettisoning Zero-Based Budgeting in Quest to Be Nimble, More Efficient
3 minute readFoley & Lardner Litigator Joins Brewers Roster as Legal Chief
Mary O'Carroll on Her Move to Goodwin: Law Firms Are at the Heart of Industry Disruption
'This Is a Huge Miss!': More Companies Requiring JDs for Legal Ops Roles, a Trend Vets of the Field Call Nonsensical
7 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250