background preloader

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub.L. 111–203, H.R. 4173; commonly referred to as Dodd-Frank) was signed into federal law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010 at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, DC.[1] Passed as a response to the Great Recession, it brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in the United States since the regulatory reform that followed the Great Depression.[2][3][4] It made changes in the American financial regulatory environment that affect all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation's financial services industry.[5][6] As with other major financial reforms, a variety of critics have attacked the law, some arguing it was not enough to prevent another financial crisis or more "bail outs", and others arguing it went too far and unduly restricted financial institutions.[7] Origins and proposal[edit] Share in GDP of U.S. financial sector since 1860[9] Overview[edit] Duties[edit]

Related:  EconomyFinancials

In Climbing Income Ladder, Location Matters ATLANTA – Stacey Calvin spends almost as much time commuting to her job — on a bus, two trains and another bus — as she does working part-time at a day care center. She knows exactly where to board the train and which stairwells to use at the stations so that she has the best chance of getting to work on time in the morning and making it home to greet her three children after school. “It’s a science you just have to perfect over time,” said Ms. Value-at-Risk (VaR) EmailShare Value-at-risk (VaR) is a prob­a­bilis­tic met­ric of mar­ket risk (PMMR) used by banks and other or­ga­ni­za­tions to mon­i­tor risk in their trad­ing port­fo­lios. For a given prob­a­bil­ity and a given time hori­zon, value-at-risk in­di­cates an amount of money such that there is that prob­a­bil­ity of the port­fo­lio not los­ing more than that amount of money over that hori­zon. For ex­am­ple, if a port­fo­lio has a one-day 90% value-at-risk of USD 3.2 mil­lion, such a port­fo­lio would be ex­pected to not lose more than USD 3.2 mil­lion, nine days out of ten. Dif­fer­ent choices for the prob­a­bil­ity and time hori­zon cor­re­spond to dif­fer­ent value-at-risk met­rics.

The Benefits of Economic Expansions Are Increasingly Going to the Richest Americans Economic expansions are supposed to be the good times, the periods in which incomes and living standards improve. And that’s still true, at least for some of us. But who benefits from rising incomes in an expansion has changed drastically over the last 60 years. Pavlina R. Tcherneva, an economist at Bard College, created a chart that vividly shows how. (The chart appears in print in the Fall 2014 edition of the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, in her article “Reorienting fiscal policy: A bottom-up approach.”)

Sarbanes–Oxley Act The bill was enacted as a reaction to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals including those affecting Enron, Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems and WorldCom. These scandals cost investors billions of dollars when the share prices of affected companies collapsed, and shook public confidence in the US securities markets. The act was approved by the House by a vote of 423 in favor, 3 opposed, and 8 abstaining and by the Senate with a vote of 99 in favor, 1 abstaining. President George W. Bush signed it into law, stating it included "the most far-reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin D.

Glass–Steagall Act The term Glass–Steagall Act usually refers to four provisions of the U.S. Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations within commercial banks and securities firms.[1] Congressional efforts to “repeal the Glass–Steagall Act” referred to those four provisions (and then usually to only the two provisions that restricted affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms).[2] Those efforts culminated in the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms.[3] [edit] Poor kids who do everything right don’t do better than rich kids who do everything wrong Source: Data from Richard Reeves and Isabel Sawhill Not a day seems to go by where we're not reminded that inequality is growing in America. But it's not just outcomes that matter; it's opportunity. Last month, we looked at startling new research that showed that poor kids who do what they need to do -- go to college -- make just about as much money later in life as wealthy kids who don't even graduate high school. America is the land of opportunity, just for some more than others.

Back Testing Value-at-Risk by Romain Berry J.P. Morgan Investment Analytics & Consulting This article is the sixth in a series of articles exploring risk management for institutional investors. Over the past five articles, we have covered the basics about computing Value-at-Risk (VaR) to assess the market risk of a portfolio of traditional financial instruments. We explained at a high level the pros and cons of the three main methodologies, namely Analytical, Historical and Monte Carlo Simulations. In our last article we described how one can stress test a portfolio to perform some sensitivity analysis or to account for extreme movements in the markets. 17 Things We Learned About Income Inequality in 2014 The Atlantic's Business editors break down the year's most divisive economic conversation. Lucas Jackson/Reuters Earnings growth for the richest Americans has been outpacing the income growth of the lower and middle classes since the 1970s, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities's analysis of data from the Congressional Budget Office. That means that income inequality is not a new concept. So why does it suddenly feel like such a big deal? Well, in the wake of the recession, the pinch of sluggish wages and the lackluster job market are more acute for more Americans.

Financial Risk Management 1.9.4 Emer­gence of Risk Man­age­ment In 1990, risk man­age­ment was novel. Many fi­nan­cial firms lacked an in­de­pen­dent risk man­age­ment func­tion. This con­cept was prac­ti­cally un­heard of in non­fi­nan­cial firms. The term “risk man­age­ment” was not new. Obama v. Reagan: Fun Comparison I Did To Piss Off Wingnuts on Reagan's B-day Yesterday was Reagan's birthday. I share this post for with those who start dripping with sentimentality forgetting what he did, what his legacy is still doing, and worst of all, (for my conservative friends), that they wouldn't have liked him today anyway: Imagine a world that never knew Ronald Reagan: