By Sheila Bair, contributor
FORTUNE – A lot of fingers are pointing in a lot of directions in the Libor price-fixing affair. Tim Geithner is pointing his finger at the Bank of England. Republicans in Congress are pointing their fingers at Geithner. The big banks are pointing their fingers at one another. But one party to this fiasco is not a regulator or a bank but a law: the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA).
We have a lot of financial regulators with different responsibilities. Like Lou Costello in the old vaudeville baseball skit "Who's on First," it can be hard for us to sort out the identities of the key players. We have "safety and soundness" regulators, who basically focus on an institution's profitability, and we have "market" regulators, who focus on trading and look out for things like manipulation and fraud.
In 2000, during the heyday of deregulation, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan and Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin told Congress that we didn't need market regulation over the massive and rapidly growing off-exchange derivatives markets because the Federal Reserve Board System provided safety and sound oversight of the major derivatives dealers. Congress agreed and passed the CFMA, which took the nation's derivatives market regulator, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), out of the game. It left the off-exchange derivatives markets unregulated, including the massive $350 trillion Libor-based interest rate swap market. No one had responsibility for monitoring the markets as a whole to make sure pricing was transparent and reflected market realities. To the extent there was oversight, it was done dealer by dealer. The markets themselves were a free-for-all.
The folly of the CFMA can be seen in how the New York Federal Reserve Bank reacted when alerted to potential rate rigging and fraud by Barclays (BCS) employees in 2007 and 2008. (Much of the rate rigging appears to have occurred on Barclays' New York trading desk.) The allegations did not immediately relate to safety and soundness. Indeed, the bank's low-balling of the rate in 2008 arguably helped its financial position by making it look healthier than it was. Instead of launching a thorough investigation, the New York Fed sent a memo to the Bank of England recommending policy reforms. But the Bank of England had no regulatory authority. (In the U.K. at that time all regulatory power rested with the Financial Services Authority.) So it dutifully forwarded the memo to the British Bankers Association, the unregulated trade group that surveyed the banks to set Libor.
But it was the CFTC that led the investigation unearthing the Libor scandal. Fortunately for us, there was a smart, alert CFTC enforcement attorney by the name of Vince McGonagle, who in 2008 read an article in the Wall Street Journal about the suspected gaming of Libor. Unlike the New York Fed, he had no insider tips or monitors present at the big derivatives dealers to help him see what was going on. And he had no apparent jurisdiction. But a few Libor-based derivatives were traded on-exchange, and the CFTC prohibited filing false reports on the price of a "commodity." So McGonagle found a loophole and, aided by his colleagues Gretchen Lowe and Anne Termine, launched an investigation, which they doggedly pursued for four years.
The CFTC launched an investigation, and the New York Fed wrote a memo. Why the difference in response? It just reflects the difference in each regulator's DNA. The Dodd-Frank Act restored much of the CFTC's authority over derivatives, though it will take years to rein in these markets where deregulation is well entrenched.
No agency is perfect, and the CFTC has had its own problems. But amid all the finger-pointing, let's give credit where credit is due. The New York Fed was "on first" in this case and bobbled the ball. It took three CFTC enforcement attorneys who had been relegated to the dugout to find a way to enter the game and protect us all.
This story is from the September 3, 2012 issue of Fortune.
The ratings changes might further consolidate Wall Street's riskiest business into the hands of JPMorgan and Goldman.
Fortune -- There's plenty of irony in the Moody's downgrade of big U.S. banks. But here's the biggest one: The lower ratings, which acknowledge that banks aren't as safe as we thought they were, might actually make the banks riskier.
In one sense, the downgrades will do something that regulations have yet to accomplish. They'll MOREStephen Gandel, senior editor - Jun 22, 2012 12:27 PM ET
Could a Greek default ripple through the U.S. financial system?
It seems like a long shot. U.S. banks hold just $7.3 billion in loans to Greece and numbers disclosed by Bank of America (BAC), for instance, show a Greek government default would barely dent quarterly profits, such as they are.
Yet no one can safely predict that a Greek default would be contained. For this we can thank the risk-hiding magic of MOREColin Barr - Jun 9, 2011 6:25 AM ET
Wall Street banks are lining up against a derivatives regulation in the Dodd-Frank Act. Teaming up with Republicans, they may prove that procrastination ultimately prevails.
By Cyrus Sanati, contributor
FORTUNE -- Nearly a year after passage of the landmark Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act, the battle over the future of financial regulation in the United States continues in the lobbies of Washington. Major provisions of the law, most notably those connected with MOREJun 6, 2011 10:23 AM ET
As regulators start to scrutinize the proposed combination of the NYSE and the Deutsche Börse, they'll need to take into account much more than just equity trading.
By Cyrus Sanati, contributor
The battle for the soul of Wall Street continues as the fate of the New York Stock Exchange remains up in the air. The NYSE's tentative $10 billion sale to Germany's Deutsche Börse will need to pass through a regulatory gauntlet MOREMar 2, 2011 10:13 AM ET
Score one for Warren Buffett in his crusade against the financial world's worship of mathematical mumbo jumbo.
One of Buffett's most controversial bets -- a bubble-era wager on the long-term value of stock market indexes, using tools he once scorned as "weapons of financial mass destruction" -- started to pay off in the fourth quarter.
Berkshire (BRKA) posted a $222 million gain after its trading counterparty asked to unwind eight derivatives contracts MOREColin Barr - Feb 26, 2011 7:57 AM ET
The nation's top antitrust cop urged regulators to stiffen derivatives trading rules -- or risk having giant banks join up to make a mockery of financial reform.
The Justice Department said Tuesday that rulemaking proposals floated this fall by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission "may not sufficiently protect and promote competition in the industry."
Justice took issue with how the SEC and CFTC would restrict Wall Street ownership MOREColin Barr - Dec 29, 2010 1:27 PM ET
Richard Bookstaber, adviser to the SEC on risk, discusses how to regulate it, how Wall Street ran amok, and what needs to happen to make markets work.
By Nancy Miller, contributor
Richard Bookstaber, veteran Wall Street risk manager and hedge fund manager, made a splash on the eve of the financial meltdown with the publication of Demon of Our Own Design, a book that warned the markets had grown too complex and MOREDec 23, 2010 5:00 AM ET
Chalk up another vote against Blanche Lincoln's crackdown on the financial weapons of mass destruction.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said in a speech in Washington Tuesday that the regulatory reform bill passed by the Senate last week "goes too far" in proposing to bar the biggest banks from dealing in derivatives.
Five bank holding companies -- JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Goldman Sachs (GS), Citigroup (C) and Morgan Stanley (MS) MOREColin Barr - May 25, 2010 4:58 PM ET
Earth to the White House. The Dodd bill is a dud when it comes to the most explosive issue in finance: defusing the ticking derivatives time bomb.
Democrats are trying to muscle their financial reform package through the Senate before Memorial Day. Larry Summers, the Clinton-era Treasury secretary who now advises President Obama on economics, tried this week to give the bill a hasty shove.
He urged Senate Democrats Tuesday evening to MOREColin Barr - May 20, 2010 12:00 PM ET
|McDonald's gives Charles Ramsey free food for a year|
|4 federal agencies to shut Friday|
|Mailbox comes to the iPad|
|Chrysler jabs Tesla over loan repayment|
|Stocks claw back from steep losses|