The same product carries the same price—except for a loan. Due to risk premiums, some borrowers pay more than others for the same loans to protect lenders from the possible consequences of high-risk lending. The current approach ignores that paid instalments reduce the risk over time. After full payment of the principal the risk is reduced to zero. Is it time to rethink this process to ensure that human rights are not violated and resources are rerouted to meet pressing needs?
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS)
Beyond Checking Boxes: A New Approach to Operational Risk Management Will Create Value for Financial Institutions
The COVID-19 pandemic upended almost all industries, including investment banking. Once bustling trading floors quickly transformed into a dispersed network of home offices and new operational risk challenges arose. Technological innovations and an ever-evolving regulatory landscape have made archaic approaches to operational risk management ill-suited to tackle the complexity posed.
Despite being mooted more than a decade ago, widespread regulation mandating banks to adopt real-time cash-balance liquidity reporting has not materialised. With the exception of a handful of the world’s largest banks, few have taken it upon themselves to adopt these processes.
The mandate of financial institutions is to process financial transactions for individuals and businesses, but unfortunately, these institutions are sometimes used for illicit purposes, such as money laundering and terrorist financing. Effective, accurate risk assessment is the foundation of a financial firm’s risk management and regulatory compliance, and there are a number of manual and automated methods available to assess risks. Detecting and acting against suspicious activities is a must for banks today.
The Great Recession produced a number of aftershocks, including a tidal wave of regulations (with the?) intent on preventing the same event from ever happening again. A mismatch between increasingly complex and detailed international standards and ever more uneven implementation by national authorities ensued. Consistent, harmonized adoption of financial standards by all involved is necessary to ensure smooth global processes. Some suggestions are presented in this article.
Shariah Non-compliance Risk in Islamic Banks, and What It Means for Meeting Capital Adequacy Requirements
Islamic banks, which operate according to Shariah principles, are growing rapidly worldwide, claiming billions in assets. IBs appeal to conservative Muslims worldwide because of their adherence to concepts such as profit-and-loss sharing instead of taking interest. But what happens when an Islamic bank fails to fully comply with Shariah rules? One consequence of this risk of loss is that it can limit the bank’s ability to meet capital requirements.
For the 28 jurisdictions that are members of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, adopting Basel banking standards is a given. But why are some non-member developing countries embracing the reforms when they don’t have to? The answers vary by country, but the final lesson is that regulators should carefully evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of adopting Basel regulations in whole or in part for their nation’s unique situation.