About Research Events Centers Newsroom Currency of Ideas
 
Milken Institute | Research | Publications | Viewpoints: Examining the Impact of the Volcker Rule on Markets, Businesses, Investors, and Job Creation, Part II
 Examining the Impact of the Volcker Rule on Markets, Businesses, Investors, and Job Creation, Part II
Examining the Impact of the Volcker Rule on Markets, Businesses, Investors, and Job Creation, Part II
December 13, 2012
Banking | Public Policy | U.S. Economy
Publisher: Milken Institute

On December 13, 2012, Milken Institute Senior Finance Fellow James R. Barth testified before the United States House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services about section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, also known as the Volcker Rule.

Noting that his opinions are his own, Barth said, "I believe the Volcker Rule is based on an incorrect premise, will be extremely difficult to implement, and, worse, will produce harmful economic effects."

According to Barth, "There is no evidence to support the belief that proprietary trading was a cause of the recent or any other financial crisis. In fact, all the evidence points to the contrary. The most recent crisis was triggered by poor lending and underwriting practices in the real estate sector, and excessive leverage by and insufficient liquidity at banking entities, not by proprietary trading by banks." He went on to discuss the difficulty he foresees in implementing the Volcker Rule, because it would require regulators to distinguish between permissible activities and prohibited ones that appear similar.

"As banks are denied the opportunity to engage in profitable trading activities, they may be driven to engage in ever more risky activities in an attempt to provide investors with an acceptable return. The Volcker Rule may therefore lead to riskier, not less risky, banks," Barth said.

He pointed out that among large trading losses (greater than $1 billion) since 1990, only four of the 15 institutions involved were banks. The rest were investment banks, hedge funds, a local government, or manufacturing or petrochemical firms.

Barth concludes, "The focus of regulation should therefore be on ensuring that banking entities have sufficient capital commensurate with their risk, not on separating some investment bank activities from commercial banking," To read his full testimony, click here.

 
Search All Publications
Paper or pixels?
2 ways to subscribe to
the Milken Institute Review
Download the app for
iPhone, iPad and Kindle

Buy new digital editions of our quarterly economics journal for $1.99, purchase back issues for 99 cents or get a year's subscription for $5.99. Access links to related video and other content.
Order a 1-year subscription
Receive hard copies for $59, a small price to pay for our edgy, accessible and expert take on the latest in economics.
About Us
  Careers
  Contact
  Download Annual Report
  FAQs
  Locations
  Our Team

Blog


Topics

Events
  Associates
  Conferences
  Global Conference
  State of the State
  Summits
  Atlanta / California / London
  Forums
  Labs
  Young Leaders

Experts
Newsroom
  Latest News
  News Videos
  Press Releases

Research
  Centers
    Asia
    California
    FasterCures
    Financial Markets
    Israel Center
    Public Health

Initiatives

Publications
  Books
  Financial Innovations Labs
  Milken Institute Review
   Amazon Apps
   App Store
  Research Reports
  Viewpoints
  Search All Publications
Support MI
  Associates
  Donate
  Sponsorships
  Strategic Partners

Follow Us
  @Twitter
  Facebook
  YouTube
  Google+
  LinkedIn
  iTunes U

Related Sites
  Partnering For Cures 2013
  Celebration of Science
  Chairman's Corner
  Melanoma Research Alliance
  FasterCures

©2014 Milken Institute