Daniel Indiviglio is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist, based in Washington, where he covers the intersection of politics and business. He joined from The Atlantic, where he covered a similar beat, providing analysis on topics such as financial regulation, housing finance policy, the Treasury, and the Fed. He also wrote for Forbes. He is a 2011 Robert Novak Journalism Fellow through the Phillips Foundation. Prior to becoming a journalist, Dan spent several years working as an investment banker and a consultant for financial services firms. He holds a BA from Cornell University, where he triple majored in economics, philosophy and physics. Follow Dan on Twitter @indiviglio
- Tel: + 1 202 354 5885
- E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
A deal reached between the House and Senate replaces $63 bln in planned cuts and slices another $23 bln from deficits – but it fails to deal with long-term issues. It’s as close as this dysfunctional Congress gets to compromise, just in time for a midterm election year.
It bans U.S. banks from outright prop trading and from London Whale-style hedging. But banks have plenty of room to mint coin, including being allowed to bet on government bonds. Wall Street might still complain. But the onus is on regulators to prove if banks step over the line.
Wall Street firms are suing the CFTC for bypassing standard practice when it issued tough guidance last month on overseas buying and selling of derivatives. U.S. dealers may suffer as a result. Absent the usual analyses and consultation, it’s hard for the agency to make its case.
- Volcker Rule looking too complex to be practical
- New U.S. mortgage supremo set to be step backwards
- U.S. consumer watchdog doesn't deserve GOP's wrath
- U.S. Senate foists partisan watchdogs on markets
- Bitcoin attention may flip its investor base
- Derivatives detail could sink bank wind-down plans
- Geithner smartly passes on a big bank job, barely