Regulators
in sentence
982 examples of Regulators in a sentence
The likely failure of attempts to impose a Financial Transactions Tax, for example, should serve to motivate
regulators
to become more ambitious, not less, in efforts to advance financial-sector reform.
Likewise, Volkswagen’s close relationship with the German government has led to accusations that
regulators
went easy on the company, setting the stage for the emissions-testing scandal in which the carmaker is now embroiled.
The need for revolving doors, whether of personnel or ideas, between government and business cannot be a reason to allow companies to gain undue influence on public policy or for
regulators
to be kept weak.
An important inquiry set up by the United Kingdom's drug
regulators
in mid-2003 will soon report its findings.
This may help, it but won't address the real issue: how could
regulators
have allowed this problem to recur after so much bitter experience, and why should they now be allowed to investigate themselves?
That is why a growing number of governments, regulators, standard-setters, and market actors are starting to incorporate rules concerning sustainability into the financial system.
And in countries like Singapore and South Africa, companies listed on the stock market are obligated to disclose their environmental and social performance, a requirement that investors and
regulators
increasingly view as essential to the efficient functioning of financial markets.
But they are set to be applied more broadly as financiers and
regulators
alike recognize the full consequences of environmental dislocation.
The shadow banking system, which is beyond the reach of bank
regulators
and deposit insurance, fed the boom in home prices by helping provide more credit to buyers.
Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the subcommittee that heard their testimony, evidently seeing eye to eye with Kaufman, was just as tough after a year-long investigation of Washington Mutual, Goldman, and the abject failures of bank
regulators
and credit rating agencies.
We cannot merely rely on
regulators
to do the right thing.
In particular,
regulators
have no chance to look over the horizon and act preventively when markets are opaque, and when powerful Wall Street interests (and their Capitol Hill allies) can circle the wagons and claim that there is no problem.
In practice, their implementation was, until recently, left to national regulators, who applied very different standards.
In other words,
regulators
should consider these innovations’ public-health costs and benefits, and expedite their review.
In Singapore,
regulators
are developing an innovative Electricity Vending System to give 1.2 million consumers real-time price signals so that they can learn to conserve electricity during peak periods.
The key to neutralizing the geopolitical advantage that Russia enjoys is to establish a unified energy policy with a Europe-wide regulatory authority which has precedence over national
regulators
and a Europe-wide distribution network.
Of course, if
regulators
do decide to tailor patents to different types of innovations, they must take care not to complicate patent regimes excessively.
The question for
regulators
is whether, in responding to the financial crisis, they have created perverse incentives that are working against a recovery in long-term private-sector investment.
The EU’s proposed “college of supervisors,” even with the addition of a European “systemic risk board,” is only a partial solution, because it endorses the leadership of the home-country regulator and fails to address the potential conflict of interests between home-country and host-country
regulators.
It would allow host countries to impose restrictions on credit expansion, regardless of how a financial institution chooses to channel capital to its market, and would strengthen host countries’ rights to request information from home-country
regulators.
Yet, though Rupert Murdoch’s companies have been telling us about themselves for years, many, from board members to regulators, have been effectively covering their ears.
News Corp and 21st Century Fox should serve as a cautionary tale for regulators, independent board members, and investors alike.
Given that this is a legal question of contract definition and enforcement, it should be answered in the courts or arbitration tribunals, not by
regulators.
This includes ensuring that borrowers are accountable and that their liabilities are transparent; deleveraging municipal debt through asset sales and more transparent financing; and shifting the burden of resolving property-rights disputes from
regulators
to arbitrators and, eventually, to the judiciary.
Stein delivered a far-reaching speech in June, in which she argued that systemic risk must become a more central responsibility for financial-market
regulators.
Bank
regulators
are starting to take these issues more seriously – an encouraging change from the 1990s and early 2000s, when the Fed was among the cheerleaders for unfettered financial innovation, without adequate consideration for systemic risk.
But securities
regulators
also need to start thinking along the same lines – and this is where Kara Stein wants them to go.
Similarly,
regulators
should start to think about how and when the structure of particular financial transactions creates a potential systemic risk.
There is also some friction among the various
regulators
in the US, and we surely need more coordination across national borders – including with Europe.
Because financial markets are prone to create asset bubbles,
regulators
must accept responsibility for preventing them from growing too big.
Back
Next
Related words
Financial
Banks
Their
Should
Which
Other
Market
Would
Capital
Crisis
System
Central
Bankers
Risks
Markets
Could
Government
National
Rules
Investors