Why Banks Aren't Afraid of Financial Reform

Yes, banks led us to the edge of global financial collapse, and yes, lawmakers are determined to rein them in with new rules. So why do bankers seem so cocky?

So is it just standard-issue Wall Street arrogance, or does JPMorgan Chase (JPM, news, msgs) know something?

Read more on where reform stands

Meanwhile, Congress is pressing ahead with a financial-reform bill that includes the so-called Volcker rule, which would limit banks' own trading and limit their relationships with hedge funds and private-equity vehicles.

JPMorgan Chase already controls Highbridge Capital Management, a $21 billion hedge fund, and private-equity group One Equity Partners.Msn.Video.createWidget('PlayerAd1Container', 'PlayerAd', 300, 213, {"configCsid": "MSNmoney", "configName": "player-money-articles-16x9", "player.vcq": "videoByUuids.aspx?uuids=c0448b9b-7454-46b5-bfae-5e889e7c1600,0dbafe48-9816-44f1-81dc-4a22979ec86a,96c359ea-2121-4241-8f97-d71cfaa638a9,1ad97511-f842-4960-8236-5221fd4300ba,6b9aab94-4058-4d8e-88c1-0b6d7d654e46,195fbaf6-ba8f-4771-8767-aa29beac0867,0ea68152-77b5-4f2a-8151-b862a60c3b1b,dd7d0a0f-8e54-4c93-b16c-c75b1a5a7e8d,f2fc2209-647e-476b-ab2e-b0583e57ac66,c346b631-6280-4dad-a396-bdcf8902aaaf,342a129a-d6ef-42d4-a289-5a47b2a9efc6,a6e652e6-4a1a-4927-85b4-3f2b9e4c1636,10d111fb-ef64-44d3-a110-28f38f264eb7,70f08d96-df4f-4e52-b71c-5b960d474b69", "player.fr": "iv2_en-us_money_article_16x9-Investing-JubaksJournal"}, 'PlayerAd1');Msn.Video.createWidget('Gallery4Container', 'Gallery', 304, 150, {"configCsid": "MSNmoney", "configName": "gallery-money-articles", "gallery.linkbackLocation": "bottom_left", "gallery.numColsGrid": "3", "gallery.categoryRequests": "videoByUuids.aspx?uuids=c0448b9b-7454-46b5-bfae-5e889e7c1600,0dbafe48-9816-44f1-81dc-4a22979ec86a,96c359ea-2121-4241-8f97-d71cfaa638a9,1ad97511-f842-4960-8236-5221fd4300ba,6b9aab94-4058-4d8e-88c1-0b6d7d654e46,195fbaf6-ba8f-4771-8767-aa29beac0867,0ea68152-77b5-4f2a-8151-b862a60c3b1b,dd7d0a0f-8e54-4c93-b16c-c75b1a5a7e8d,f2fc2209-647e-476b-ab2e-b0583e57ac66,c346b631-6280-4dad-a396-bdcf8902aaaf,342a129a-d6ef-42d4-a289-5a47b2a9efc6,a6e652e6-4a1a-4927-85b4-3f2b9e4c1636,10d111fb-ef64-44d3-a110-28f38f264eb7,70f08d96-df4f-4e52-b71c-5b960d474b69;videoByTag.aspx%3Ftag%3Dmoney_dispatch%26ns%3DMSNmoney_Gallery%26mk%3Dus%26vs%3D1;videoByTag.aspx%3Ftag%3Dbest%2520of%2520money%26ns%3DMSNmoney_Gallery%26mk%3Dus%26vs%3D1"}, 'Gallery4');Does JPMorgan just have a lot of faith that the banking industry's army of lobbyists will once again prevail and remove anything truly dangerous to the status quo from the bill? (The bill is now in front of a joint House-Senate committee working to reconcile separate legislation from the two houses.)

Or does JPMorgan know that the fix is in and that no matter what our elected officials vote to do, when the rules are finally written by the folks who theoretically regulate the financial sector, the result will be change that banks can believe in.

I'd pick the latter. 2 chances to mute reform The financial industry knows it gets two shots at this. The first, in the halls of Congress, isn't likely to prevent passage of something with a few teeth -- enough so that representatives and senators can tell voters in November that they fought for them against big, bad Wall Street. (But not so many teeth, of course, that members of Congress will jeopardize their ability to fund their campaigns with Wall Street money or find work in the financial industry once they are out of office.)

The second shot, out of public view, will take place in the halls and offices of the regulatory bodies that write the rules that implement the often-vague laws that Congress passes. JPMorgan Chase and other big banks are betting that when the rules are written, they will permit the activities that banks deem crucial.

The track record suggests the big banks are almost certainly right. If that's true, it means there are some bargains out there among bank stocks that have been sold off because investors think financial regulation might have real teeth.

Let me start by explaining why financial regulation with teeth is unlikely. And then I will end this column by identifying three U.S. bank stocks to put on your watch list for purchase during the summer doldrums to come. (To keep track of my watch list called, cleverly enough, Jim's Watch List, go here.)Minimal exceptions that add up The Volcker rule, first proposed in January by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, an adviser to President Barack Obama, is a great example of why the damage to financial-industry profits is likely to be less than many investors now fear.

The proposal would restrict proprietary trading by banks for their own accounts, unrelated to customers' needs. It would bar them from sponsoring hedge funds or private-equity funds. The stakes would seem to be huge. More than a quarter of all private-equity investments between 1983 and 2009 involved bank-affiliated private-equity groups, a recent study from Harvard Business School and global business school Insead found.

Banking lobbyists are fighting hard for an exemption. Big banks such as State Street (STT, news, msgs), Goldman Sachs (GS, news, msgs), Morgan Stanley (MS, news, msgs) and, yes, JPMorgan Chase want the rule changed to allow "de minimus" investments by banks in private-equity deals.

No big deal, right? Allowing minimal investments by banks wouldn't add significant risk to the financial system, and it would allow banks to invest in deals alongside clients. And that would convince bank customers that such deals were safe because the bank had its own money at risk. The interests of customers and banks would be aligned, the banks argue.

It's hard to imagine that even the banks buy that argument. If the investment is truly minimal, so minimal that it wouldn't increase a bank's risk, then how could it possibly convince the participants in a deal that the bank had significant skin in the game?

Continued: Stuffing the legislative sausageMore from MSN Money and MoneyShow.com

Wall Street versus your 401k

Jubak on video: Key themes at the G20 meeting

Time bombs put portfolios in peril

Jubak on video: Housing's new threat to the recovery

For investors, the future is on hold

3 financial reforms that would cripple recovery

 1 | 2 | next >

Rate this Article Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowThank you for rating.UGR('ratCntrl')High var avgRating=0;avgRating=7.952381; if(avgRating!=0){avgRating=avgRating/2;avgRating=Math.round(avgRating*100)/100;var sDisplayText="Average rating: " + avgRating + " from ";var usersCount=42;sDisplayText = sDisplayText + usersCount;if (usersCount==1)sDisplayText=sDisplayText + " user";else sDisplayText=sDisplayText + " users";avgRatingElem=document.getElementById("averageRating");avgRatingElem.innerText=sDisplayText;} View all top-rated articlesE-mail us your comments on this article Discuss in a message board Stock PicksJubak's Picks

Check out Jim's top stocks for the next 12 months.

Jubak's How To Start

Read how to invest with Jubak's showcase portfolio.

Jubak Picks 50

Follow the long-term portfolio from Jim's book "The Jubak Picks."

Dividend stocks for income investors

See Jim's new portfolio to help navigate the treacherous interest-rate environment.

Connect with JimBecome a fan on FacebookSubscribe to his e-mail newsletterDecision CentersStart InvestingMutual FundsFind Hot StocksSimple StrategiesPower ToolsInvesting for IncomeReal Estate InvestingRecent Articles by Jim JubakFor investors, the future is on hold 06/21/2010Time bombs put portfolios in peril 06/17/2010When to buy emerging-market stocks 06/14/2010More...Jim's Most Recent Top Stocks PostsSame old worries weighing down ChinaUK's new budget is a house of horrorsStill on track, just not the fast trackFund data provided by Morningstar, Inc. © 2009. All rights reserved.StockScouter data provided by Gradient Analytics, Inc.Quotes supplied by Interactive Data.MSN Money's editorial goal is to provide a forum for personal finance and investment ideas. Our articles, columns, message board posts and other features should not be construed as investment advice, nor does their appearance imply an endorsement by Microsoft of any specific security or trading strategy. An investor's best course of action must be based on individual circumstances.Msn.Video.createWidget('Gallery8Container', 'Gallery', 500, 230, {"configCsid": "MSNmoney", "configName": "gallery-money-article-site-wide"}, 'Gallery8');msft.msn._ic.cid='38k626e5hnjqgxkfg58uc6fdjj5a54ey';msft.msn._ic.pst=false;msft.msn._ic.pgn=1; Join the discussion!Add a commentShow commentsSort by:Newest firstOldest first_uc2f12('iucGo');1 - 1 of 1PreviousNextchaps99 #1Thursday, June 24, 2010 11:56:49 PMI wont buy a bank stock till it pays a 50% dividend to make up for the next bubble they blow up the world with. ReplyReport Abuse1 - 1 of 1PreviousNext_ucf13('0'); _iuc2Om1('MSNPortalInlineComments','Initial_Load_Comment_View','http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/why-banks-are-not-afraid-of-reform.aspx?','en-us');Are you sure you want to delete this comment?Report AbusePlease help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease notify us using the Report abuse form below. We will investigate your report and take appropriate action against offenders. We report all illegal activity to authorities.CategoriesSpam or advertisingChild pornography or exploitationProfanity, vulgarity or obscenityCopyright infringementHarassment or threatOtherAdditional comments(optional)100 character limit To add a comment, pleasesign in/*MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertiseRSSHelpFeedbackSite mapAbout our ads© 2010 Microsoft/*

Or does JPMorgan know that the fix is in and that no matter what our elected officials vote to do, when the rules are finally written by the folks who theoretically regulate the financial sector, the result will be change that banks can believe in.

I'd pick the latter. 2 chances to mute reform The financial industry knows it gets two shots at this. The first, in the halls of Congress, isn't likely to prevent passage of something with a few teeth -- enough so that representatives and senators can tell voters in November that they fought for them against big, bad Wall Street. (But not so many teeth, of course, that members of Congress will jeopardize their ability to fund their campaigns with Wall Street money or find work in the financial industry once they are out of office.)

The second shot, out of public view, will take place in the halls and offices of the regulatory bodies that write the rules that implement the often-vague laws that Congress passes. JPMorgan Chase and other big banks are betting that when the rules are written, they will permit the activities that banks deem crucial.

The track record suggests the big banks are almost certainly right. If that's true, it means there are some bargains out there among bank stocks that have been sold off because investors think financial regulation might have real teeth.

Let me start by explaining why financial regulation with teeth is unlikely. And then I will end this column by identifying three U.S. bank stocks to put on your watch list for purchase during the summer doldrums to come. (To keep track of my watch list called, cleverly enough, Jim's Watch List, go here.)Minimal exceptions that add up The Volcker rule, first proposed in January by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, an adviser to President Barack Obama, is a great example of why the damage to financial-industry profits is likely to be less than many investors now fear.

The proposal would restrict proprietary trading by banks for their own accounts, unrelated to customers' needs. It would bar them from sponsoring hedge funds or private-equity funds. The stakes would seem to be huge. More than a quarter of all private-equity investments between 1983 and 2009 involved bank-affiliated private-equity groups, a recent study from Harvard Business School and global business school Insead found.

Banking lobbyists are fighting hard for an exemption. Big banks such as State Street (STT, news, msgs), Goldman Sachs (GS, news, msgs), Morgan Stanley (MS, news, msgs) and, yes, JPMorgan Chase want the rule changed to allow "de minimus" investments by banks in private-equity deals.

No big deal, right? Allowing minimal investments by banks wouldn't add significant risk to the financial system, and it would allow banks to invest in deals alongside clients. And that would convince bank customers that such deals were safe because the bank had its own money at risk. The interests of customers and banks would be aligned, the banks argue.

It's hard to imagine that even the banks buy that argument. If the investment is truly minimal, so minimal that it wouldn't increase a bank's risk, then how could it possibly convince the participants in a deal that the bank had significant skin in the game?

Continued: Stuffing the legislative sausageMore from MSN Money and MoneyShow.com

 1 | 2 | next >

Check out Jim's top stocks for the next 12 months.

Read how to invest with Jubak's showcase portfolio.

Follow the long-term portfolio from Jim's book "The Jubak Picks."

See Jim's new portfolio to help navigate the treacherous interest-rate environment.

Read Full Article »