Regulators
in sentence
982 examples of Regulators in a sentence
Indeed, this arrangement – albeit informal – can be viewed as the way
regulators
manage the systemic risk posed by new entrants.
The
regulators
and law-enforcement officials are letting us down – and jeopardizing the safety of the financial system – on a regular basis.
Building support for legislation to simplify the biggest banks would greatly strengthen the hand of those
regulators
who want to require more shareholder equity and better regulation for the shadows.
But in social media, as in banking, the regulated tend to stay one step ahead of the
regulators.
They will note that analysts and
regulators
were narrowly focused on fixing the financial system by strengthening national oversight regimes.
And new markets can emerge that offer huge payoffs for early adopters or investors, who benefit from remaining several steps ahead of national and international
regulators.
But
regulators
were unable to keep up with the innovations, which ended up generating risks that affected the entire economy.
In the meantime, China’s securities and insurance
regulators
have cracked down on activities like hostile takeovers.
Austrian, Italian, and Swiss regulators, seeing that their banks’ assets and liabilities were in their own currencies, looked the other way.
For example, effective risk management and longer-term policy objectives would be better aligned if
regulators
reduced capital requirements for banks that extend loans for climate-resilient and environmentally friendly investments.
Regulators
generally turned a blind eye to these suspicions.
Economies of scope arise because a single regulator can tackle cross_sector issues more efficiently and effectively than a multiplicity of
regulators.
The importance of giving clear incentives, so that
regulators
are innovative and facilitate innovation in financial services, must not be underestimated.
Regulators
must be held to account for doing so.
In other words, he clearly believed that regulation created “artificial barriers,” and that “competition between jurisdictions” – that is, between
regulators
– was to be welcomed.
And growing support for Warren’s ideas helps the Federal Reserve and other responsible
regulators
in their efforts to prevent big banks from taking on dangerous levels of risk.
But there is a risk for
regulators
and central banks.
The tighter their controls on risk in banks, the more frontier police the
regulators
will need.
And, instead of combating this trend, northern European
regulators
are amplifying it by limiting financial institutions’ exposure to southern European banks.
In the US, the relevant
regulators
are the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), whose primary role is to ensure fair market operation and the protection of investors against scams in commodity derivative markets, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which oversees how securities are issued to the investing public across all financial markets.
That fall in confidence affected banks, the stock market, and the government and its
regulators.
Nor can it achieve consistency between different standard setters’ approaches, or, indeed, consistency of implementation by different national
regulators.
Drug companies want to sell their drugs to everyone who could possibly benefit, and the idea of serving only a limited customer base for each drug disturbs them – even as
regulators
also may be slow to understand the benefits of individual drug-targeting and may not approve reimbursements for the relevant tests.
In this surreal world, the United Kingdom takes on disproportionate influence, because London is still a top financial center – and because the biggest banks in the United States and Europe have proved very effective at playing off American and British
regulators
against one another.
Such a low loss-absorption capacity would get you run out of town in the US, where
regulators
are weighing a 5-6% leverage ratio (twice as much equity on a non-risk-weighted basis), and some responsible officials are still pushing for 10% or higher.
In other words, the banks can change how they calculate risk – for example, by tweaking their own models – in ways that will make them look better as far as
regulators
are concerned.
Whether deliberately or not,
regulators
seem to have missed their chance to implement serious changes to the rules of global finance, and governments are now so weakened that they are at the mercy of those who, not long ago, were begging them for help.
Just as we have learned to distinguish between governments as shareholders and as
regulators
– which must be done carefully, because the actions of one do not necessarily coincide with the interests of the other – today we must distinguish between governments as borrowers and as financial
regulators.
CAMBRIDGE – When the financial crisis of 2008 hit, many shocked critics asked why markets, regulators, and financial experts failed to see it coming.
First, both cyber-security and financial stability are extremely complex topics with which government
regulators
can hardly keep up.
Back
Related words
Financial
Banks
Their
Should
Which
Other
Market
Would
Capital
Crisis
System
Central
Bankers
Risks
Markets
Could
Government
National
Rules
Investors