Tarp inspector general calls for more clarity on banks' use of funds
The US Treasury's special inspector general for the Troubled Assets Relief Program (Tarp), Neil Barofsky, has called on the Treasury to force banks to report their use of the Tarp's bailout funds. But the Treasury is reluctant to do so.
The inspector general's office carried out a survey of banks that had received Tarp funds - most said they had used them to expand lending, increase capital levels or buy mortgage-backed securities, it found. Given the high level of compliance - 98% responded to the survey - the inspector general argued that continuing to monitor banks' use of the Tarp funds would be practical.
"These responses demonstrate that banks can provide useful information to improve transparency over how they use TARP funds," the report, published today, said. In order "to meet the Treasury's stated goal of bringing transparency to the TARP program and informing the American people and their representatives in Congress on what is being done with their investment", the Treasury should order banks to report regularly on their use of the funds.
But so far, although the inspector general's office has recommended this before, the Treasury has not done so. The assistant secretary for financial stability, Herbert Allison, argued in a letter to the inspector general on July 15 that it was impossible for banks to trace Tarp money to specific loans or investments. "Even if Tarp investments could be traced to particular uses, those uses cannot be said to be attributable to the Tarp investment if the same expenditures would have been made from other sources...in the absence of Tarp funding," he wrote.
But, the inspector general's report responded, "For the Treasury to discount wholly [the survey's] results because a particular bank may not be able to say which dollar was used for a specific purpose substantially underestimates a bank's capacity - on a practical level - to know how its resources are being utilized."
Allison was missing the point, it continued. The fact banks had been able to reply to the survey showed they were able to link, through budgeting, Tarp funds with specific loans or capital buildups. "The fact that there may be some limitations on the precision of the data that could be collected by requiring use of funds reporting does not mean that such reporting could not generate meaningful information," the report added.
See also: US Treasury failing on Tarp oversight, report finds
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
FRTB start dates must align globally, says European Commission
Lawmaker could trigger delay to market risk rules in Europe if US implementation drags on
Fed green lights more capital relief trades
Five US banks authorised to issue repeat credit-linked notes backed by financial guarantees
Basel III endgame: why moving fast might prove better for banks
Republicans are pushing for reproposal, but a rapid finalisation may prove less far-reaching
Isda pushes to ‘decouple’ Simm calibration from model changes
Emir 3.0 prompts effort to separate risk-weight revisions from methodology updates
Basel war on window-dressing may smooth liquidity, at a price
Changes to G-Sib charge could curb year-end repo volatility, but also cut balance sheet capacity
One year on, regulators still want a cure for bank runs
Broad support for higher outflow assumptions on uninsured deposits, but that won’t save insolvent banks
Watchlist and adverse media monitoring solutions 2024: market update and vendor landscape
This Chartis report updates Watchlist monitoring solutions 2022 and focuses on solutions for sanctions (name and transaction) screening and monitoring adverse media and its related elements
Basel Committee reviewing design of liquidity ratios
Focus on LCR and NSFR after Silicon Valley Bank and Credit Suisse, but assumptions may not change
Most read
- Too soon to say good riddance to banks’ public enemy number one
- Breaking out of the cells: banks’ long goodbye to spreadsheets
- Basel III endgame: why moving fast might prove better for banks