In a scathing self-assessment, the Federal Reserve’s autopsy on Silicon Valley Bank’s failure puts blame partially on its own doorstep, as regulator reports on Signature Bank’s collapse cite the lender’s “poor management.”
The autopsy on failure has been released ahead of schedule.
The 114-page unflinching and, at times, self-critical post-mortem review of the central bank’s oversight and regulation of SVB, which was promised by the Fed’s vice chair for supervision, Michael Barr, during contentious congressional hearings last month, was compiled in just over six weeks and published Friday (April 28).
Both the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) also released their own respective reports Friday on Signature Bank’s subsequent failure.
“These collapses represent a massive failure in supervision over our nation’s banks,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said.
While the FDIC and NYDFS lay much of their blame for Signature’s failure at the bank’s own feet, the Fed’s latest report reads in line with Warren’s assessment.
Read more: SVB Hearing: Lawmakers Allege Top Banking Regulators Asleep At The Wheel
The mea culpa review, conducted by Barr, documented how lax supervision and loosened regulation, combined with poor executive management, led to SVB’s collapse.
SVB “failed because of a textbook case of mismanagement by the bank,” the review stated. “Its senior leadership failed to manage basic interest rate and liquidity risk. Its board of directors failed to oversee senior leadership and hold them accountable. And Federal Reserve supervisors failed to take forceful enough action…”
All three regulatory reviews concluded that the banking industry needs stricter policing across multiple fronts in order to prevent future failures.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand