新西兰联储周三宣布，在对2019年出台的规则进行评估后，将降低该国银行业的部分资本要求，但整体 要求仍将高于国际水平。国内四大澳资银行需持有的一级资本比例将从16%降至12%，但二级资本要求 将从2%提高至3%，并需持有6%的内部损失吸收能力。小型银行的总资本要求将从16%降至14%，但指 出这些变化"与国际相比仍相对保守"。 ...

Group 1 - UBS shares have reached a 17-year high, driven by a proposal from influential Swiss lawmakers to relax capital requirements, allowing UBS to utilize junior debt known as AT-1 bonds [1][4] - The Swiss government previously required UBS to set aside $26 billion in additional capital to ensure a safer banking system, which UBS deemed unacceptable as it would hinder competitiveness [3][4] - There has been speculation about UBS potentially relocating its headquarters out of Switzerland, which would significantly impact the Swiss banking landscape, as UBS is the last major global bank in the country [2] Group 2 - The investment banking sector is experiencing a resurgence in deal-making activity, contributing to a positive outlook for major banks, despite concerns about the broader economy [4][5] - Major banks are reporting resilient operations and a strong pipeline of deals, indicating a healthy investment banking environment [5][6] - There is a discussion about whether there is a bubble in bank stocks, but the current sentiment suggests that the banking sector does not exhibit obvious signs of being in bubble territory [6][8]

The stock rose to its highest point in 17 years, after legislators proposed reducing capital requirements on Swiss banks. ...

Group 1: Federal Reserve Regulations - The Federal Reserve plans to introduce new regulations that significantly relax capital requirements for large banks, with estimates suggesting an overall capital increase of only 3% to 7% for most large banks, which is lower than the previously proposed increases of 19% and 9% [1] - Banks with larger trading portfolios may experience even smaller capital increases or potential decreases under the new requirements [1] Group 2: U.S. National Debt - The total U.S. national debt has surpassed $38 trillion for the first time, marking a significant increase from $37 trillion just two months prior [3][4] - Concerns about the overall fiscal health of the U.S. persist, despite the national debt not being the sole indicator of financial stability [5] Group 3: Government Shutdown - The U.S. federal government shutdown has entered its 22nd day, with no signs of compromise between the two parties, affecting various sectors including the National Nuclear Security Administration, which has placed approximately 1,400 employees on unpaid leave [7] - The shutdown has delayed the release of key economic reports, including the Consumer Price Index and employment data, which could negatively impact decision-making by the Federal Reserve and other institutions [9][10]

Core Viewpoint - The Federal Reserve Governor Barr emphasizes the need to separate bank capital levels from stress test results and customize them more closely based on individual bank conditions [1] Group 1: Stress Testing and Capital Requirements - Barr is seeking ways to maintain the rigor of stress tests amid industry calls for easing these tests [1] - He opposes increasing the transparency of stress tests and linking them to formulaic capital requirements, arguing it could lead to less targeted capital levels that do not adequately reflect a bank's unique business model, risk exposure, and risk profile [1] - Stress tests were introduced after the 2008 financial crisis to enhance banks' ability to withstand future economic shocks and assess their performance during hypothetical economic downturns [1] Group 2: Regulatory Approach - Barr believes that regulators should not weaken the stress testing process but should maintain its rigor [1] - He advocates for personalized capital requirements based on factors such as a bank's capital structure, risk level, complexity, and financial activities [1] - Barr has been a strong supporter of these stress tests [1]

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]