Regulatory: The arrival of the first major financial reform rules
Federal agencies are starting to roll out the first major rules to implement the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation. Their promulgation will trigger efforts in Congress to overturn or delay the regulations, which are not likely to be successful, and a decade of legal challenges similar to the wave of cases...
June 22, 2011 at 09:42 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Federal agencies are starting to roll out the first major rules to implement the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation. Their promulgation will trigger efforts in Congress to overturn or delay the regulations, which are not likely to be successful, and a decade of legal challenges similar to the wave of cases that followed the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Financial institutions are focused on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's issuance of multiple rules governing the derivatives market, whose notional value exceeds $500 trillion. The regulations will address fundamental issues, such as the requirement that certain derivatives must be traded over exchanges; regulation of swap dealers, including capital and margin requirements; standards of business conduct; and record-keeping and reporting obligations.
The CFTC is lagging behind the statutory directive that its implementing rules be issued by July 21. Congress does not think in systemic terms and did not consider the consequences of imposing a tight deadline on issuance of rules to transform an important line of business or how financial institutions would express their opposition to the proposals. Congress provided the agency with no additional funds to formulate policy or analyze the highly sophisticated comments about the operation of financial markets that the country's leading law firms and economists have submitted. In April, the CFTC was forced to expand the comment period on its proposed rules by one month. It is now confronting the task of reading the comments, deciding how best to carry out its statutory mandates while minimizing unintended consequences, and preparing a response to the comments so that the rules can be defended successfully in court.
In light of these delays, CFTC lawyers likely are considering its authority to create safe harbors for regulated entities during the interim period between when the Dodd-Frank provisions become effective and when financial institutions reasonably could come into compliance with the rules. Financial firms also are arguing that significant transition periods will be necessary for them to come into compliance with new rules. If lengthy implementation periods are provided, the industry may obtain a lottery ticket on the possibility that the 2012 elections will product a more sympathetic Congress.
A second major rule will be released on June 29, the Federal Reserve Board's much anticipated regulation on the interchange fees that may be charged on debit card transactions. Release of the proposed rule prompted a hard-fought battle in Congress, and 54 senators ultimately voted to end a filibuster and delay issuance of the final rule. The terms of the rule have been bitterly contested between large banks that issue debit cards and large retailers that accept them.
As agencies release their final rules, it will be interesting to see if regulated entities determine it is in their self-interest to begin their involuntary relationship under Dodd-Frank by suing their regulator. If litigation is filed as rules are issued, the courts are likely to experience a flurry of motions for preliminary injunctions, especially if the transition periods are not extensive, and motions for accelerated briefing schedules and oral arguments. The litigation will impose substantial burdens on the regulatory agencies to prepare promptly and submit the administrative records on which the cases will be decided. Depending on where opponents decide to file their cases, judges in the D.C. Circuit and the 2nd Circuit may be tested as never before to understand arguments concerning the dynamics of cutting edge financial markets and the possible consequences of government intervention.
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
© 2025 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 AllBest Practices for Adopting and Adapting to AI: Mitigating Risk in Light of Increasing Regulatory and Shareholder Scrutiny
7 minute readCrypto Groups Sue IRS Over Decentralized Finance Reporting Rule
SEC Penalizes Wells Fargo, LPL Financial $900,000 Each for Inaccurate Trading Data
US Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
Trending Stories
- 1A&O Shearman Lost 15 Asia Partners in a Year
- 2Spin-Off Firm Leaves Reed Smith Without Richmond Lobbying Practice
- 3DC's Birchstone Moore Combines With Chicago-Founded Wealth Planning Firm
- 4White Castle GC Becomes Chain's First President From Outside Family
- 5Braverman Greenspun Acquires NY Real Estate Boutique
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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