Judge Would Appreciate If FSOC Could Be More Systematic About Determining Systematic Importance - Dealbreaker

Judge Would Appreciate If FSOC Could Be More Systematic About Determining Systematic Importance

Not so fast, MetLife.
Author:
Updated:
Original:

Looks pretty important....

In the case of MetLife, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer sees a little more reverse-engineering than she’s comfortable with.

She said the oversight council had first told the public it would conduct an analysis of a company’s vulnerability to financial stress, but then didn't do so in the case of MetLife. “That’s what they said and that isn’t the analysis that was used,” she said.

At another point, she suggested that by assuming serious financial distress at MetLife, the council created a scenario where MetLife had almost no chance to convince regulators that the company doesn’t put the financial system at risk. “That is not a risk analysis,” she said. “That is assuming the worst of the worst.”

U.S. Judge Questions MetLife ‘Systemically Important’ Designation [WSJ]

Related

By Elisa.rolle (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Hillary Clinton’s Supreme Court Shortlist To Decide If MetLife Is Too Big To Fail

MetLife might want to consider writing a few more checks to a Hillary SuperPAC or twelve.

MetLife Win Will Or Will Not Gut Dodd-Frank: NYT

It's either hugely important or totally insignificant.

Kashkari photo: Washington Post/Getty

If He Had To Do It Over Again, Neel Kashkari Would Blow It All Up

The bailer-outer in chief has become a Bernie-fide bomb-thrower.

MetLife Finally Proves That It's A Barely Significant Financial Institution

The insurance giant is making like Steve Martin and preaching "Let's get small!"