Core Viewpoint - The Federal Reserve indicates that overall capital requirements for banks remain unchanged [1] Group 1 - The Federal Reserve's decision reflects a stable regulatory environment for the banking sector [1] - Maintaining capital requirements may influence banks' lending capabilities and overall financial stability [1]

Core Viewpoint - The Federal Reserve, represented by Governor Bowman, will hold a meeting in July to discuss potential changes to bank capital requirements, including GSIB surcharges and Basel III regulations [1] Group 1 - The meeting will focus on the implications of adjusting capital requirements for banks [1] - Discussion will include the Global Systemically Important Banks (GSIB) surcharge, which is a critical component of the capital framework [1] - The review will also address the Basel III framework, which sets international standards for bank capital adequacy [1]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government is preparing to announce the largest reduction in bank capital requirements in over a decade, signaling a continuation of the Trump administration's deregulation agenda [1][2] Group 1: Regulatory Changes - Regulatory agencies are expected to lower the Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) in the coming months, which requires large banks to hold a preset amount of high-quality capital against their total leverage [1][2] - The SLR was established in 2014 as part of reforms following the 2008-09 financial crisis, aimed at preventing systemic risks in the banking sector [1][3] - Current U.S. regulations require major banks to maintain at least 5% of their total leverage in Tier 1 capital, while international standards are lower, ranging from 3.5% to 4.25% [3][4] Group 2: Industry Implications - Lowering the SLR could benefit the U.S. Treasury market and help the Trump administration achieve its goal of allowing banks to purchase more government bonds, potentially lowering borrowing costs [2][3] - Analysts suggest that this move may encourage banks to play a larger role in Treasury trading, as post-financial crisis regulations have diminished their competitive edge against high-frequency traders and hedge funds [2][3] - The banking lobby argues that penalizing banks for holding low-risk assets like U.S. Treasuries undermines their ability to support market liquidity during times of stress [2][3] Group 3: Potential Outcomes - If the SLR is adjusted to exclude low-risk assets like Treasuries and central bank deposits from the leverage calculation, it could free up approximately $2 trillion in balance sheet space for large U.S. banks [3][4] - However, this exclusion could create a disconnect with international standards, raising concerns among European regulators about similar capital treatment for Eurozone sovereign debt [3][4] - Most large U.S. banks are already constrained by other regulations, such as stress tests and risk-weighted capital requirements, which may limit the benefits they could derive from SLR reforms [4]