logo
Big banks all pass the Federal Reserve's stress tests, but the tests were less vigorous this year

Big banks all pass the Federal Reserve's stress tests, but the tests were less vigorous this year

Independent5 hours ago

All the major banks passed the Federal Reserve 's annual 'stress tests" of the financial system, the central bank said Friday, but the test conducted by the central bank was notably less vigorous than it had been in previous years.
All 22 banks tested this year would have remained solvent and above the minimum thresholds to continue to operate, the Fed said, despite absorbing roughly $550 billion in theoretical losses. In the Fed's scenario, there would be less of a rise in unemployment, less of a severe economic contraction, less of a drop in commercial real estate prices, less of a drop in housing prices, among other metrics compared to what they tested in 2024.
All of these less harmful, but simulated, drops mean there would be less damage to these banks' balance sheets and less risk of these banks of potentially failing. Since the banks passed the 2024 tests, it was expected that the banks would pass the 2025 tests.
'Large banks remain well capitalized and resilient to a range of severe outcomes,' said Michelle Bowman, the bank's vice chair for supervision, in a statement. An appointee of President Trump, Bowman became the Fed's vice chair of supervision earlier this month.
It's not clear why the Fed chose to go with a less vigorous test this year. In a statement, the bank said previous tests had shown 'unintended volatility' in the results and it plans to seek public and industry comment to adjust stress tests in future years. The Fed also chose to not test the banks as heavily on their exposure to private equity assets, arguing that private equity assets are typically held for the long term and are not typically sold at times of distress.
The Fed also didn't test for any bank exposure to private credit, a $2 trillion asset class that even Fed researchers themselves have observed to be growing alarmingly quickly. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston recently pointed out that private credit could be a systemic risk to the financial system under a severe adverse scenario, which is exactly what the stress tests are supposed to test for.
There was no wording or phrasing in the Fed's press release, reports or methodology about testing or measuring private credit or private debt in this year's test.
The Fed's 'stress tests' were created after the 2008 financial crisis as a way to gauge whether the nation's 'too big to fail' banks could withstand another financial crisis like the once that happened nearly 20 years ago. The tests are effectively an academic exercise, where the Fed simulates a scenario in the global economy and measures what that scenario would do to bank balance sheets.
The 22 banks that are tested are the biggest names in the business, such as JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, which hold hundreds of billions of dollars in assets and have wide-ranging businesses that touch every part of the U.S. and global economy.
Under this year's hypothetical scenario, a major global recession would have caused a 30% decline in commercial real estate prices and a 33% decline in housing prices. The unemployment rate would rise to 10% and stock prices would fall 50%. In 2024, the hypothetical scenario was a 40% decline in commercial real estate prices, a 55% decline in stock prices and a 36% decline in housing prices.
With their passing grades, the major banks will be allowed to issue dividends to shareholders and buy back shares of stock to return proceeds to investors. Those dividend plans will be announced next week.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

We love the Glazers here (even if our stadium leaks too!): Welcome to Tampa, home of Manchester United's unpopular owners - and where a local fanbase is besotted with their thriving sports team
We love the Glazers here (even if our stadium leaks too!): Welcome to Tampa, home of Manchester United's unpopular owners - and where a local fanbase is besotted with their thriving sports team

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

We love the Glazers here (even if our stadium leaks too!): Welcome to Tampa, home of Manchester United's unpopular owners - and where a local fanbase is besotted with their thriving sports team

At the Glazer Children's Museum in Tampa, they know all about their benefactors' ownership of Manchester United. 'Sometimes I open my emails and there will be a flood of messages which can be pretty critical, asking me to tell the Glazer family certain things,' explains Sarah Cole, the facility's president and chief executive.

Warren Buffett donates record $6 billion Berkshire shares
Warren Buffett donates record $6 billion Berkshire shares

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Warren Buffett donates record $6 billion Berkshire shares

June 27 (Reuters) - Warren Buffett donated on Friday another $6 billion of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKa.N), opens new tab stock to the Gates Foundation and four family charities, his biggest annual donation since he began giving away his fortune nearly two decades ago. The donation of about 12.36 million Berkshire Class B shares boosted Buffett's overall giving to the charities to well over $60 billion. He donated 9.43 million shares to the Gates Foundation; 943,384 shares to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation; and 660,366 shares to each of three charities led respectively by his children Howard, Susie, and Peter: the Howard G. Buffett Foundation, Sherwood Foundation and NoVo Foundation. Warren Buffett still owns 13.8% of Berkshire's stock, based on reported shares outstanding. His $152 billion net worth prior to Friday's donations made him the world's fifth-richest person, according to Forbes magazine. Buffett would rank sixth after the donations, which surpassed the $5.3 billion he donated last June. He donated another $1.14 billion to the family charities last November. In a statement, Buffett maintained he does not intend to sell any Berkshire shares. Now 94, Buffett began giving away his fortune in 2006. He changed his will last year, designating 99.5% of his remaining fortune after his death to a charitable trust overseen by his children. They will have about a decade to distribute, opens new tab the money, and must decide where it goes unanimously. Susie Buffett is 71, Howard Buffett is 70, and Peter Buffett is 67. Warren Buffett has led Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire since 1965. The $1.05 trillion conglomerate owns close to 200 businesses including Geico car insurance and the BNSF railroad, and dozens of stocks including Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab and American Express (AXP.N), opens new tab. Susie Buffett leads the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which funds reproductive health and is named for her mother, who was Warren Buffett's first wife. The Sherwood Foundation supports Nebraska nonprofits and early childhood education. The Howard G. Buffett Foundation focuses on global hunger, combating human trafficking and mitigating conflicts. The NoVo Foundation has initiatives focused on marginalized girls and women, and on indigenous communities. Buffett said last June that donations to the Gates Foundation would end when he dies.

California energy regulator recommends pause on plan to penalize excess oil profits
California energy regulator recommends pause on plan to penalize excess oil profits

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

California energy regulator recommends pause on plan to penalize excess oil profits

California should pause Gov. Gavin Newsom 's plan to penalize oil companies if their profits climb too high, a top energy regulator said Friday while unveiling proposals aimed at addressing high gas prices. The Democratic governor signed a law in 2023 giving the California Energy Commission the authority to penalize oil companies for excess profits, declaring the state had 'finally beat big oil.' More than two years later, the commission hasn't imposed a single penalty or determined what counts as an excessive profit. Now, Siva Gunda, the energy commission's vice-chair, says the state should pause the effort in favor of pursuing other policies to lower prices and maintain a steady oil supply — all while pushing to phase out reliance on fossil fuels over the next two decades. 'Together, we will evolve California's strategy to successfully phase out petroleum-based fuels by 2045 while protecting communities, workers, and consumers, and foster market conditions that support the industry's ability to operate safely, reliably, and successfully to meet demand through the transition,' Gunda wrote in a letter to Newsom. Gunda's recommended pause of the penalty would have to be agreed upon by the full commission. Newsom has pitched the penalty as a way to rein in profits by oil companies, but critics said it would only raise prices. California has the highest gas prices in the nation, largely due to taxes and environmental regulations. Regular unleaded gas prices were $4.61 a gallon Friday, compared to a national average of $3.20, according to AAA. The commission still plans to set rules that would require oil refineries to keep a minimum level of fuel on hand to avoid shortages when refineries go offline for maintenance, Gunda said. That proposal came out of a law Newsom signed last year after convening a special session aimed at preventing gas price spikes. Gunda's recommendations come months after Newsom in April directed energy regulators to work with refiners on plans to ensure the state maintains a reliable fuel supply as it transitions away from fossil fuels. Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said in an email that the governor would review the recommendations and 'advance solutions that maintain a safe, affordable, and reliable supply of transportation fuels for California.' Two major oil companies announced plans over the past year to shut down refineries in the state, further driving uncertainty about how the state should maintain a stable fuel supply as California transitions toward renewable energy. Phillips 66 announced plans to shut down its Los Angeles-area refinery, and Valero said it would cease operations at its Benicia refinery. The two refineries combined account for more than 17% of the state's refining capacity, according to the energy commission. A group of about 50 environmental and consumer groups penned a letter to Newsom and legislative leaders Friday criticizing the proposal to pause implementing a penalty on oil company profits. 'California oil refiners do not need a bailout,' they wrote, adding that the state should 'finish the job' it started to prevent prices at the pump from spiking. ___

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store