????上周末,，全球銀行業(yè)監(jiān)管部門(mén)公布一項(xiàng)新的重大方案,，意在終結(jié)銀行“大到不能倒”的現(xiàn)象。該方案提議，那些最重要的金融機(jī)構(gòu)持有的資本金,，至少應(yīng)該和其他銀行相當(dāng),，以確保納稅人再也不需要向它們伸出援手。

????金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)（Financial Stability Board）代表20國(guó)集團(tuán)（G20）主要經(jīng)濟(jì)體,，協(xié)調(diào)全球監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)共同應(yīng)對(duì)2008年金融危機(jī),。該委員會(huì)表示，剔除風(fēng)險(xiǎn)因素后,，全球系統(tǒng)性重要銀行（G-SIB）今后用于吸收損失的資本,，必須達(dá)到自身總資產(chǎn)的16-20%。

????2011年出臺(tái)的《巴塞爾協(xié)議III》（Basel III）對(duì)此類(lèi)資本的要求是8%,。這項(xiàng)計(jì)劃正在全球范圍內(nèi)分階段推進(jìn),，預(yù)計(jì)到2018年全面落地。而金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)提出的要求高了一倍多,。同時(shí),，實(shí)際比例可能會(huì)更高，因?yàn)榘凑者@個(gè)方案,，如果各國(guó)監(jiān)管部門(mén)認(rèn)為有必要,，還可以進(jìn)一步提高對(duì)銀行的資本支出要求。

????這項(xiàng)新規(guī)要求的資本金水平在一定程度上表明,，監(jiān)管部門(mén)基本上未能解決與處理【曾經(jīng)的雷曼兄弟（Lehman Brothers）】那樣的全球性銀行有關(guān)的法律和政治問(wèn)題,。此類(lèi)銀行倒閉后，債權(quán)人往往遍布各地,，而且對(duì)倒閉銀行的資產(chǎn)擁有同樣的索賠權(quán),。

????這項(xiàng)新規(guī)定將影響被金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)列為全球系統(tǒng)性重要銀行的30家銀行，包括摩根大通（JP Morgan Chase）,、花旗集團(tuán)（Citigroup）,、高盛（Goldman Sachs）、摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）,、道富集團(tuán)（State Street）,、富國(guó)銀行（Wells Fargo）、所有歐洲和日本最大的銀行,，以及兩家中國(guó)銀行,。

????周一，金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)主席,、英國(guó)央行行長(zhǎng)馬克?卡尼向英國(guó)廣播公司（BBC）表示,，金融危機(jī)前的機(jī)制迫使政府斥資數(shù)十億美元救助銀行業(yè)，以避免金融災(zāi)難,，這“毫無(wú)公平可言”,。

????卡尼說(shuō)：“情況良好時(shí)，銀行及其股東和債權(quán)人得到好處；而當(dāng)他們犯了錯(cuò)誤,，卻由公眾和下幾代人買(mǎi)單,。必須結(jié)束這種局面?！?/p>

????《巴塞爾協(xié)議III》出臺(tái)以來(lái),，銀行方面一直怨聲載道，稱新的資本金要求將使其難以盈利,。但這種說(shuō)法已經(jīng)失去了可信度,，因?yàn)殡S著經(jīng)濟(jì)上行，銀行業(yè)利潤(rùn)已經(jīng)反彈,，在美國(guó)這種現(xiàn)象尤為明顯,。

????新規(guī)定不一定意味著銀行必須大量發(fā)行新股以稀釋現(xiàn)有股東基數(shù)。就融資而言,，銀行對(duì)債券的依賴程度通常遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)股票,。更有可能出現(xiàn)的情況是，銀行必須降低對(duì)“高級(jí)”債券的依賴,，并更多地轉(zhuǎn)向“次級(jí)”債券。如果銀行的虧損規(guī)模超過(guò)了自身股本,，監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)可以把次級(jí)債券的價(jià)值減記為零,。

????金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)預(yù)計(jì)，銀行至少可以利用此類(lèi)“可自救”的債務(wù)證券,，滿足三分之一的資本金要求,。

????按照金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)的方案，銀行滿足新要求的最終期限是2019年,。如果屆時(shí)未能達(dá)到要求,，監(jiān)管部門(mén)就可能限制或禁止銀行發(fā)放獎(jiǎng)金或紅利，直到后者達(dá)標(biāo),。

????此項(xiàng)新規(guī)定稿前,，金融穩(wěn)定委員會(huì)還將根據(jù)銀行方面的反饋，以及2015年初的“量化影響研究”結(jié)果,，對(duì)相關(guān)要求進(jìn)行微調(diào),。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：Charlie

????審校：Hunter

????The world’s banking regulators unveiled at the weekend their last great plan for ending the phenomenon of banks that are ‘too-big-to-fail’, proposing that the most important institutions should carry at least as much as capital as other banks to ensure that taxpayers don’t ever have to rescue them again.

????The Financial Stability Board, which coordinates the global regulatory response to the 2008 financial crisis on behalf of the Group of 20 major economies, said that Global Systemically Important Banks, or G-SIBs, should in future have to hold loss-absorbing capital equivalent to between 16%-20% of their total assets, adjusted for risk.

????That’s more than double the 8% ratio that was prescribed in the so-called “Basel III” accords in 2011, which are being phased in around the world by 2018. The actual ratio required may even be higher than the basic range of 16%-20% range, as the plan allows national regulators to add on further capital charges if they deem it necessary.

????The scale of the new requirements reflects, in part, the fact that regulators have largely failed to crack the legal and political problems of resolving a global bank (such as Lehman Brothers was), if its collapse leaves a trail of creditors in numerous jurisdictions, all with competing claims on its assets.

????The new requirements would hit 30 banks that the FSB considers G-SIBs. They include JP Morgan Chase Inc. JPM 0.75% , Citigroup C 0.26% , Goldman Sachs , Morgan Stanley MS 0.62% , State Street STT 0.40% and Wells Fargo Inc. WFC -0.02% , as well as all of the largest European and Japanese banks, plus two Chinese lenders.

????Mark Carney, chairman of the FSB and governor of the Bank of England, told the BBC Monday that the pre-crisis system, which forced governments to carry out multi-billion dollar bail-outs to avert financial disaster, had been “totally unfair.”

????“The banks and their shareholders and their creditors got the benefit when things went well,” Carney said. “But when they went wrong the…public and subsequent generations picked up the bill–and that’s going to end.”

????Banks have complained ever since the Basel III accords that stringent new capital requirements would make it difficult for them to turn a profit, but such claims have lost credence as bank profits–especially in the U.S.–have rebounded with the economic upturn.

????The new rules wouldn’t necessarily mean that banks will have to issue floods of new shares that would dilute their existing shareholder base. More likely is that banks–which typically depend to a far greater extent on bonds than equity to finance themselves–will have to rely less on “senior” debt, and switch more of it for “subordinated” debt that regulators can write down to zero if a bank’s losses exceed its equity base.

????The FSB said it expects that banks will be able to use such ‘bail-in-able’ debt securities to meet at least one-third of the requirement.

????Under the FSB’s proposals, banks would have until 2019 to meet the requirements. If they fail to do so, then regulators could restrict or ban bonus payments or dividends until a bank met them.

????The final terms of the requirement will be fine-tuned after feedback from the banks themselves, and from a ‘Quantitative Impact Study’ in early 2015.