With the global financial crisis accelerating calls for regulatory reform in the United States, new plans for how best to revamp the U.S. system seem to emerge nearly every day. The latest to enter the fray of those offering their two cents on how to overhaul financial regulation is Commodity Futures Trading Commission Acting Chairman Walter Lukken, who, not surprisingly, took the opportunity to shoot down the renewed calls for a merger between his agency and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Speaking to the Futures Industry Association’s Futures and Options Expo in Chicago on Nov. 11, Lukken said a merger between the two agencies—an idea that seems to resurface every time talk turns to regulatory reform—would be “ineffective” and would only reinforce the United States’ “outdated regulatory structure.”
“In Washington, this is code for the larger SEC—along with its rules-based model and culture—taking over the principles-based CFTC,” Lukken said in prepared remarks. Even if proposed as an interim step, he said the difficulty of a merger—both politically and substantively—would likely “transform a provisional action into a final one.”
Calls for a merger between the two agencies have re-emerged amid concerns about how best to regulate new financial products that blur the lines between SEC-regulated equities and CFTC-regulated futures. The idea was floated again in March, before the financial crisis was full-blown, as part of a plan released by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson for revamping U.S. regulation. That same month, the SEC and CFTC signed a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a permanent regulatory liaison between them as part of efforts to increase their cooperation. Both agencies have come under fire in recent months for not doing enough to prevent the financial crisis.
Outgoing SEC chairman Christopher Cox has said he supports such a merger. However, Lukken, who announced that he’ll leave the CFTC shortly after the new administration enters the White House, said a merger alone doesn’t address the problems that plague the U.S. economy or the “shortcomings” in its regulatory system.
Rather, he said the United States should scrap its current outdated regulatory framework in favor of an objectives-based regulatory system, similar to that called for by Paulson, comprised of three primary authorities: a new systemic risk regulator, a new market integrity regulator, and a new investor protection regulator.
A new systemic risk regulator would have responsibility for policing the entire financial system and take preventative action against “black swan” risks that could cause a contagion event. Lukken said such a regulator “is absolutely necessary given the witnessed interconnections of our financial markets and the speed of the current global crisis.”
A new market integrity regulator would oversee the safety and soundness of key financial institutions, including exchanges, investment firms, and commercial banks whose failure may jeopardize the integrity of the markets, while a new investor protection regulator would broadly oversee investor protection and business conduct across all firms. The different functions of the CFTC, the SEC, and various banking regulators would be dispersed among the three regulatory authorities.
Lukken said regulation by “objective rather than function will ensure that all products and institutions are properly overseen based on identified public risks rather than futile and difficult determinations of whether an instrument is a security, a future, or a swap contract.”
Such a structure would require certain reporting of exchange and over-the-counter market data to regulators, particularly when such products begin playing a public pricing role or when their size creates the risk of a systemic event. The credit default swaps market would “meet this threshold,” said Lukken. He suggested Congress look to the model adopted in the Farm Bill for the OTC energy swaps market, which triggers additional oversight and transparency when a product begins to serve a significant price discovery function.
Lukken also called for a “complete rewrite and modernization of the laws and regulations governing the financial markets,” including the securities and futures laws, to adopt a more consistent principles-based regulatory approach.
He also supported the creation of a bipartisan select Congressional committee to study financial reform—an idea that’s been bandied about in recent Congressional hearings on regulatory reforms and suggested the creation, in the interim, of a unified regulatory board consisting of the heads of the Federal Reserve, the SEC, and the CFTC—that would facilitate the sharing of market information and be armed with joint rulemaking and exemptive authority to eliminate regulatory gaps and duplications in the current system.
He also supported efforts to create a clearinghouse for credit default swaps, noting that clearing has worked “extraordinarily well” in managing credit risk for futures contracts.
Lukken also said global regulators should consider standardizing the sharing of international market data among regulators and common standards for the bankruptcy treatment of customer assets around the world.