Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dashboy
Judge,
I think we were looking for a little more input than that. What is your take on this point that has been codified concerning:
Final Rule:
Definition of Terms in and Specific Exemptions for Banks, Savings Associations, and Savings Banks Under Sections 3(a)(4) and 3(a)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Securities and Exchange Commission
17 CFR Part 240
dashboy~
|
The 2003 final rules are relevant to the bank entities being allowed further into the securities business than they had been previously, such that they don't have to register with the SEC as "dealers" and "brokers" for certain types of transactions. It also expanded their ability to deal in asset-backed securities.
The banks, in general, have always had a dim view of the limitations some of their non or less-regulated competitors don't have and are constantly working in Washington to expand their scope of operations. Typically, the regulations promulgated in this environment have little regard for how these quasi-regulated businesses can abuse consumers. It is much like seeing sausage being made; once you've seen it, you'd probably never eat it again.
Our elected representatives frequently abbrogate their responsibility to protect consumers; they point to the extant regulators and say "draft rules and regulations" and then pat themselves on the back while those supposedly regulated play footsie with the regulators in getting what they want.