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 new leverage limit requires the eight largest to add another $68 bln in padding, on top of other rules on capital and liquidity. Janet Yellen still isn’t certain that’s enough. Sure, it’s the Fed’s job to worry. But big banks and their investors are already feeling the pinch.
A retiring lawyer who helped sue the bank slammed the U.S. regulator for going easy on Wall Street bosses. The criticism backs widespread suspicion that watchdogs were timid in pursuing financial-crisis misconduct. His words are a useful warning for the agency’s current regime.
U.S. watchdogs are considering floating values, limits on withdrawals and other measures to crisis-proof the investment vehicles, often seen as a nearly riskless alternative to cash holdings. But simply requiring each fund to pick – and publicize – its path could do the trick.
- U.S. finance star chamber could use some diversity
- Market health gives Obamacare long life
- Banking goliaths can indeed be tamed
- Official attention will make or break bitcoin
- Fed offers too little, too late on too big to fail
- U.S. financial reform is still on "to do" list
- Fed's D.C. neighbors also need its jobs dashboard