Unwelcome Wall Street Reform

Emily Holbrook


March 1, 2012

When the Dodd-Frank Act passed in July 2010, many had high hopes that there was a change on the horizon. No more shady investment practices. No more cover ups. No more "too big to fail."

Most of those within the financial industry, however, have long felt that Dodd-Frank was something else entirely: an unnecessary, onerous burden. That same sentiment still holds true in 2012, according to a recent survey conducted jointly by consultancy Rule Financial and financial software provider Calypso Technology.

Their findings show that only 50% of those surveyed feel that the regulatory changes in the financial sector will reduce systemic risk. As far as collateral requirements go, a mere 26% of firms surveyed said that their firms have centralized their collateral management systems, highlighting how unprepared the industry is for new regulations around collateral requirements.

"It is clear that the effectiveness of new [over-the-counter] clearing reforms and the final set of rules that will come into effect are still open to debate," said David Field, executive director of Rule Financial.

Though there is a general consensus throughout the investment banking community that there is a need for financial reform and regulatory changes, exactly what those changes should be remains a subject of debate.
Emily Holbrook is the founder of Red Label Writing, LLC, a writing, editing and content strategy firm catering to insurance and risk management businesses and publications, and a former editor of Risk Management.