Remarks on the Economy and Prioritization of Bank Supervision and Regulation

关于银行监管的经济性和优先顺序的评论

November 09, 2023 · Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System · 原文

At New York Bankers Association's Financial Services Forum, Palm Beach, Florida

在佛罗里达州棕榈滩纽约银行家协会金融服务论坛上

It is a pleasure to join you this morning for the New York Bankers Association's Financial Services Forum.

今天早上很高兴与大家一起参加纽约银行家协会的金融服务论坛。

1 I look forward to hearing your perspectives on the economy, the financial system, and, more recently, the Federal Reserve's regulatory reforms which help to shape my perspective on these issues.

1 我期待听到您对经济、金融体系以及最近美联储监管改革的看法，这有助于形成我对这些问题的看法。

This month marks five years since I joined the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

这个月是我加入美联储理事会五周年。

Over the years, I have drawn heavily upon my experience as a former state bank commissioner and a banker in carrying out my responsibilities, especially as they relate to bank supervision, payments, and consumer and community affairs.

多年来，我在履行职责时充分利用了作为前国家银行专员和银行家的经验，特别是与银行监管、支付以及消费者和社区事务相关的职责。

This perspective informs my views about evolving bank regulations and the real-world impact that changes can have on financial institutions, their local communities, and the broader U.S. economy.

这种观点让我对不断变化的银行监管以及变化可能对金融机构、当地社区和更广泛的美国经济产生的现实影响产生了看法。

As you know, the federal regulatory agenda has been very active lately, with a significant volume of rules, guidance, and supervisory reforms either recently published or in the pipeline.

如您所知，联邦监管议程最近非常活跃，最近发布或正在酝酿大量规则、指导和监管改革。

Today, I will offer my thoughts on some of these developments, to lay a foundation for a discussion about the vital importance of the prioritization of supervisory and regulatory approaches for the banking system.

今天，我将就其中一些进展提出我的想法，为讨论银行体系监管方法优先顺序的至关重要性奠定基础。

As the agencies move forward with an active and potentially disruptive reform agenda, we should pause, reflect upon these changes, and ask several questions: Are these reforms efficient?

当各机构推进积极且可能具有破坏性的改革议程时，我们应该停下来反思这些变化，并提出几个问题：这些改革是否有效？

In totality, do they work together to enhance the regulatory framework, resulting in a rational and efficient framework?

总的来说，它们是否共同努力加强监管框架，从而形成一个合理、高效的框架？

Are the reforms within the scope of our statutory authority?

这些改革是否属于我们的法定权限？

Have we met the appropriate standards of due process and public engagement?

我们是否达到了正当程序和公众参与的适当标准？

And, given the current economic and banking landscape, are we focusing on the appropriate regulatory and supervisory priorities?

而且，考虑到当前的经济和银行业形势，我们是否将重点放在适当的监管和监督优先事项上？

Before I dig a bit deeper into these questions, including the critical importance of prioritizing supervisory and regulatory actions, I'd like to offer a few thoughts on the economy and monetary policy.

在深入探讨这些问题（包括优先考虑监管和监管行动的重要性）之前，我想提出一些关于经济和货币政策的想法。

After sharply tightening monetary policy over the past year and a half to reduce inflation, at our November meeting, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) voted to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 5-1/4 to 5-1/2 percent and continued the run off of the Fed's securities holdings.

在过去一年半大幅收紧货币政策以降低通胀之后，联邦公开市场委员会 (FOMC) 在 11 月会议上投票决定将联邦基金利率目标区间维持在 5-1/4% 至 5-1/2%，并继续减持美联储的证券持有量。

We have seen considerable progress on lowering inflation, but inflation remains high and recent readings have been uneven.

我们在降低通胀方面取得了相当大的进展，但通胀仍然很高，而且最近的数据参差不齐。

The latest personal consumption expenditure (PCE) inflation index data showed 12-month changes in total and core inflation of 3.4 percent and 3.7 percent, roughly similar to the previous month's reading.

最新的个人消费支出(PCE)通胀指数数据显示，12个月总通胀和核心通胀变化分别为3.4%和3.7%，与上个月的数据大致相似。

However, some components of core services inflation have picked up, and I see a continued risk that core services inflation remains stubbornly persistent.

然而，核心服务通胀的某些组成部分已经回升，我认为核心服务通胀仍然存在顽固持续的风险。

In my view, there is also a risk that higher energy prices could reverse some of the progress made to bring overall inflation down.

我认为，能源价格上涨还存在可能逆转降低总体通胀率的部分进展的风险。

The economy has remained strong as the FOMC raised the federal funds rate, and recent data indicate that economic activity has accelerated with real gross domestic product (GDP) growing at a 4.9 percent annual rate in the third quarter.

随着联邦公开市场委员会(FOMC)提高联邦基金利率，经济保持强劲，最近的数据表明经济活动加速，第三季度实际国内生产总值(GDP)年增长率为4.9%。

Consumer spending has also accelerated, and the housing sector appears to be continuing to rebound.

消费者支出也在加速，房地产行业似乎正在继续反弹。

The latest employment report showed a labor market with healthy job gains.

最新的就业报告显示劳动力市场的就业增长良好。

Over the past year, labor force participation has improved with the average pace of job gains slowing somewhat, a sign that labor market supply and demand may be coming into better balance.

过去一年，劳动力参与率有所提高，就业增长的平均速度有所放缓，这表明劳动力市场供需可能正在趋于平衡。

Throughout the past few years, we have seen continued significant data revisions, with the most recent of these revisions reflecting significant changes to employment data.

在过去几年中，我们看到了持续的重大数据修订，其中最近的修订反映了就业数据的重大变化。

Job gains in prior months were revised lower, but average hourly earnings for the past 12-months were revised higher.

前几个月的就业增幅被修正为较低，但过去 12 个月的平均每小时收入被修正为较高。

The frequency and extent of data revisions make the task of predicting how the economy will evolve even more challenging, and I will continue to monitor these data carefully.

数据修改的频率和程度使得预测经济将如何演变的任务变得更具挑战性，我将继续仔细监测这些数据。

While I continue to expect that we will need to increase the federal funds rate further to bring inflation down to our 2 percent target in a timely way, I supported the FOMC's decision last week to hold the target range for the federal funds rate at the current level as we continue to assess incoming information and its implications for the outlook.

虽然我仍然预计我们需要进一步提高联邦基金利率，以便及时将通胀率降至 2% 的目标，但我支持 FOMC 上周决定将联邦基金利率目标范围维持在当前水平，因为我们将继续评估收到的信息及其对前景的影响。

Currently, the federal funds rate appears to be restrictive, and financial conditions have tightened since September.

目前，联邦基金利率似乎受到限制，金融状况自 9 月份以来已经收紧。

Some of this tightening has occurred through longer-term bond yields, which can be volatile over time as conditions change.

这种紧缩政策在一定程度上是通过长期债券收益率实现的，随着时间的推移，随着情况的变化，债券收益率可能会出现波动。

For example, since the November FOMC meeting, the 10-year Treasury yield has declined by around 35 basis points, or a bit more than half of the increase in the 10-year yield since our September meeting.

例如，自 11 月 FOMC 会议以来，10 年期国债收益率下降了约 35 个基点，略高于 9 月会议以来 10 年期国债收益率增幅的一半。

A variety of models attribute a significant portion of the increase in longer-term yields to higher term premiums.

多种模型将长期收益率增长的很大一部分归因于较高的期限溢价。

There are a number of potential factors that may be influencing term premiums, including an improved economic outlook, higher Treasury debt issuance, concerns about future inflation risk, and higher uncertainty about the future path of the economy and monetary policy.

有许多潜在因素可能会影响期限溢价，包括经济前景改善、国债发行量增加、对未来通胀风险的担忧以及未来经济和货币政策路径的不确定性增加。

Any or all of these factors may contribute to the movement of longer-dated yields.

这些因素中的任何一个或全部都可能影响长期收益率的变动。

I will continue to monitor these and the broader financial conditions to observe changing conditions and any potential effects on economic activity and inflation and to better understand the implications for appropriate monetary policy.

我将继续监测这些以及更广泛的金融状况，以观察不断变化的状况以及对经济活动和通胀的任何潜在影响，并更好地了解对适当货币政策的影响。

I am also closely watching liquidity conditions and Treasury market functioning, which have held up well so far even amidst large movements in yields.

我还在密切关注流动性状况和国债市场的运作，即使在收益率大幅波动的情况下，迄今为止这些状况也保持良好。

The U.S. Treasury market plays a central role in the transmission of monetary policy, in financing the federal government, and in providing safe and liquid assets to support the flow of capital and credit to households and businesses.

美国国债市场在货币政策传导、联邦政府融资以及提供安全和流动资产以支持资本和信贷流向家庭和企业方面发挥着核心作用。

Treasury market liquidity strains could be amplified and spill over to related financial markets if longer-dated Treasury securities experience an abrupt selloff and investors reposition their portfolios in response to a rapid increase in long-term Treasury yields.

如果长期国债突然遭到抛售，并且投资者因长期国债收益率快速上升而重新配置其投资组合，国债市场流动性紧张可能会加剧并蔓延至相关金融市场。

Financial market volatility spurred by additional geopolitical shocks could further strain financial market functioning.

额外的地缘政治冲击引发的金融市场波动可能会进一步加剧金融市场运作的压力。

These risks could be exacerbated if bank holding company-affiliated market makers experience balance sheet constraints during periods of volatility.

如果银行控股公司附属做市商在波动期间遭遇资产负债表限制，这些风险可能会加剧。

It is also important that Treasury markets remain resilient and stable.

同样重要的是，国债市场保持弹性和稳定。

More broadly, I believe we should keep in mind that we don't yet know the effects of tightened financial conditions on economic activity and inflation.

更广泛地说，我认为我们应该记住，我们还不知道金融状况收紧对经济活动和通货膨胀的影响。

There is an unusually high level of uncertainty regarding the economy and my own economic outlook, especially considering recent surprises in the data, data revisions, and ongoing geopolitical risks.

经济和我自己的经济前景存在异常高的不确定性，特别是考虑到最近的数据意外、数据修正和持续的地缘政治风险。

But I will be closely watching the incoming data as I assess the implications for the economic outlook and appropriate monetary policy.

但在评估对经济前景和适当货币政策的影响时，我将密切关注即将发布的数据。

It is important to note that monetary policy is not on a preset course.

值得注意的是，货币政策并不是按照预设的路线进行的。

My colleagues and I will make our decisions at each meeting based on the incoming data.

我和我的同事将在每次会议上根据收到的数据做出决定。

I remain willing to support raising the federal funds rate at a future meeting should the incoming data indicate that progress on inflation has stalled or is insufficient to bring inflation down to 2 percent in a timely way.

如果收到的数据表明通胀进展已停滞或不足以及时将通胀率降至 2%，我仍然愿意支持在未来的会议上提高联邦基金利率。

Returning inflation to the FOMC's 2 percent goal is necessary to achieve a sustainably strong labor market and an economy that works for everyone.

为了实现持续强劲的劳动力市场和惠及所有人的经济，必须将通胀率恢复到 FOMC 2% 的目标。

I will turn now to address recent developments in the ongoing reform of the bank regulatory framework.

我现在将谈谈正在进行的银行监管框架改革的最新进展。

While this is by no means a comprehensive list of all recent reforms—or more that may come in the months ahead—I will share some thoughts on capital requirement reforms; the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA); the cap on debit interchange fees; and climate guidance.

虽然这绝不是近期所有改革的全面清单（或者未来几个月可能出现的更多改革），但我将分享一些关于资本要求改革的想法；《社区再投资法》(CRA)；借记交换费的上限；和气候指导。

I will also share my perspectives on the vital importance of prioritization of supervisory and regulatory actions by regulators.

我还将分享我对监管机构优先考虑监管行动的重要性的看法。

It is essential that our actions are driven by data and are specifically designed to address core banking risks or existing shortcomings in our bank regulatory framework.

至关重要的是，我们的行动必须由数据驱动，并专门针对核心银行风险或银行监管框架中的现有缺陷而设计。

Capital Requirements Reform In July of this year, the federal banking agencies proposed significant reforms to capital requirements for banks with more than $100 billion in assets.

Although many banks would not be directly affected based on their asset size, the proposal could have a significant impact on the U.S. banking market and economy.

尽管许多银行因其资产规模不会受到直接影响，但该提案可能对美国银行市场和经济产生重大影响。

The proposal would increase total risk-weighted assets across bank holding companies subject to the rule by an estimated 20 percent.

该提案将使受该规则约束的银行控股公司的总风险加权资产增加约 20%。

These impacts would vary based on firm-specific attributes—but not by asset size.

这些影响会因公司特定属性而异，但不会因资产规模而异。

I have spoken in the past about my concerns with the quantitative and analytical foundations of this proposal.

我过去曾谈到过我对该提案的定量和分析基础的担忧。

It is not designed to address identified regulatory deficiencies and shortcomings and gives insufficient attention to the potential unintended consequences and harm that could result if finalized and implemented in its current form.

它的目的不是解决已发现的监管缺陷和缺点，也没有充分关注如果以目前的形式最终确定和实施可能导致的潜在意外后果和伤害。

In drafting the Basel III capital proposal, it seems clear that the agencies made broad assumptions that the current capital framework is insufficient to support bank and financial market activity.

在起草巴塞尔协议 III 资本提案时，各机构显然做出了广泛的假设，即当前的资本框架不足以支持银行和金融市场活动。

So, as a part of my remarks today, I will address the current state of capital in the banking system, concerns with the proposed changes to the capital framework, and the path forward for fair and efficient capital reform.

因此，作为我今天讲话的一部分，我将讨论银行体系当前的资本状况、对拟议的资本框架改革的担忧，以及公平有效的资本改革的前进道路。

Current State of the Banking System To begin, the U.S. banking system remains strong and resilient.

银行体系的现状首先，美国银行体系仍然强劲且富有弹性。

The system is much better capitalized than after the 2008 financial crisis, with substantially more liquidity.

该体系的资本状况比 2008 年金融危机后要好得多，流动性也大大增加。

U.S. banks are also subject to a range of new supervisory tools that did not exist prior to 2008.

美国银行还受到一系列 2008 年之前不存在的新监管工具的约束。

The current framework represents a risk-based, tailored approach, which strives to align regulation with institution and activity risk, fulfilling the congressional mandate to tailor the prudential regulatory framework.

当前的框架代表了一种基于风险的定制方法，致力于将监管与机构和活动风险结合起来，履行国会定制审慎监管框架的任务。

2 The current level of capital in the U.S. banking system is a strength, not a weakness, which is complemented by liquidity regulations and other prudential requirements that have contributed to the resilience of U.S. banks.

2 美国银行体系目前的资本水平是一种优势，而不是劣势，流动性监管和其他审慎要求对这一水平起到了补充作用，增强了美国银行的韧性。

These banks also continue to play an important role in the U.S. economy by extending credit, providing banking and payment services, and participating in U.S. securities and derivatives markets.

这些银行还通过扩大信贷、提供银行和支付服务以及参与美国证券和衍生品市场，继续在美国经济中发挥重要作用。

Context matters, and when we discuss changes to the bank regulatory framework—including through changes to capital requirements—we need to understand the direct and indirect consequences that may result.

背景很重要，当我们讨论银行监管框架的变化（包括资本要求的变化）时，我们需要了解可能导致的直接和间接后果。

Potential Consequences of Capital Reform One of the key questions I ask when considering regulatory proposals is whether the benefit of the change outweighs the costs of implementation, both for the financial institutions subject to the proposal and for the broader economy.

资本改革的潜在后果在考虑监管提案时，我提出的关键问题之一是，对于受提案约束的金融机构和更广泛的经济而言，变革的好处是否超过实施成本。

On a simplistic level, higher capital levels make the banking system safer.

简单来说，较高的资本水平使银行体系更加安全。

But this must be the beginning of the analysis, not the definitive end.

但这必须是分析的开始，而不是最终的结束。

Increased safety comes at a cost, and the business of banking is built upon risk.

提高安全性是有代价的，而银行业务是建立在风险之上的。

The complete elimination of risk would transform a bank into a public utility.

完全消除风险将使银行转变为公共事业。

Assuming this is not the desired end state of the banking system, we must evaluate a proposal's merit by thoroughly understanding the balance between these benefits and the resulting costs.

假设这不是银行系统期望的最终状态，我们必须通过彻底了解这些收益与由此产生的成本之间的平衡来评估提案的优点。

As I noted earlier, the U.S. banking system continues to be much better capitalized than before the 2008 financial crisis.

正如我之前指出的，美国银行体系的资本状况仍然比 2008 年金融危机之前好得多。

That capital cushion has broadly enhanced the resiliency of the banking system through business, economic, and interest rate cycles, enabling the banking system to continue supporting the U.S. economy, even throughout the pandemic and the related economic stress.

这种资本缓冲在很大程度上增强了银行体系在商业、经济和利率周期中的弹性，使银行体系能够继续支持美国经济，即使在整个大流行和相关经济压力期间也是如此。

While the full extent of "costs" under the proposal are not entirely clear, in the aggregate, those costs—including the direct costs experienced by banks, and the indirect costs experienced by bank customers and the U.S. economy—would be substantial.

虽然该提案中“成本”的全部范围尚不完全清楚，但总的来说，这些成本——包括银行经历的直接成本，以及银行客户和美国经济经历的间接成本——将是巨大的。

Capital increases of this magnitude are likely to have a detrimental impact on U.S. market liquidity and lending, and firms without sufficient scale are likely to exit certain markets.

如此大规模的资本增加可能会对美国市场的流动性和贷款产生不利影响，规模不够的公司可能会退出某些市场。

Increased capital requirements for certain types of loans may also lead to reduced credit availability or increased cost of credit, which could disproportionately harm underserved markets, businesses, and communities.

某些类型贷款的资本要求增加还可能导致信贷可用性减少或信贷成本增加，这可能会对服务不足的市场、企业和社区造成不成比例的损害。

Ultimately, bank customers will bear the cost of these increases.

最终，银行客户将承担这些增加的成本。

The Path Forward for Capital Reform What does the path forward entail?

资本改革的前进道路前进的道路意味着什么？

The agencies have received substantial initial public feedback, and in response, have extended the comment period into mid-January 2024.

这些机构已收到大量初步公众反馈，作为回应，已将意见征询期延长至 2024 年 1 月中旬。

The agencies have also engaged in a parallel effort to gather more information about the potential impact of the proposal's approach and calibrations.

这些机构还开展了并行工作，收集有关该提案的方法和校准的潜在影响的更多信息。

These actions reflect an important recognition of the proposal's length and complexity and are certainly a positive step.

这些行动反映了对该提案的长度和复杂性的重要认识，并且无疑是积极的一步。

While it would be impossible to highlight all the issues in the proposal that raise concerns in my remarks today, I will note several areas that will be necessary to address:

虽然不可能在我今天的发言中强调提案中引起关切的所有问题，但我将指出有必要解决的几个领域：

Policymakers may disagree about the best choices to further supervisory goals, but we have an obligation to understand and assess the true cost of reform, going beyond the direct costs to banks and their customers to include the potential harm to U.S. bank competitiveness in the global economy.

政策制定者可能对进一步实现监管目标的最佳选择存在分歧，但我们有义务了解和评估改革的真正成本，不仅限于银行及其客户的直接成本，还包括对美国银行在全球经济中竞争力的潜在损害。

As I have noted previously, unless we consider reforms with a thorough understanding of their combined and aggregate impact on the institutions subject to the revised regulatory framework, we create a significant risk of arriving at a capital end state that is inefficient, contradictory, and potentially harmful to banks, their customers, and the broader economy.

正如我之前所指出的，除非我们在考虑改革时全面了解其对受修订后的监管框架影响的机构的综合和总体影响，否则我们将面临巨大的风险，导致资本最终状态低效、矛盾，并且可能对银行、银行客户和更广泛的经济造成损害。

I also want to briefly address the role of international coordination in establishing capital standards both in the United States and around the world.

我还想简要谈谈国际协调在美国和世界各地建立资本标准方面的作用。

International bodies and agreements can help foster the creation of similar regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions.

国际机构和协议可以帮助促进跨司法管辖区建立类似的监管框架。

Significant banking activities occur in the international and cross-border context, and we know that financial stability risks can spread throughout global financial markets.

By engaging in international coordination, U.S. regulators can promote minimum standards across jurisdictions, and these minimum standards can improve competitive equity in banking markets and make the financial system safer.

通过参与国际协调，美国监管机构可以推动跨司法管辖区的最低标准，而这些最低标准可以提高银行市场的竞争公平性，并使金融体系更加安全。

While the capital proposal reflects elements of the agreed upon Basel standards, it is not a mere implementation of the Basel standards.

虽然资本提案反映了商定的巴塞尔标准的要素，但它不仅仅是巴塞尔标准的实施。

In this proposal, the calibration—with a large increase in capital requirements for U.S. firms—far exceeds the Basel standards mandate.

在该提案中，对美国公司资本要求的大幅提高进行了校准，远远超出了巴塞尔标准的要求。

Instead, the scale of the increase is driven by deliberate policy choices to significantly increase capital requirements for U.S. banks over $100 billion, even for those that are not internationally active.

As we have seen since the proposal was published, there has been growing support for improving the proposal's quantitative, analytical foundations, including the need for and impact of capital increases of this scale.

Community Reinvestment Act Shifting away from capital rules, late last month, the federal bank regulators adopted a new final rule to implement the Community Reinvestment Act.

The purpose of the CRA is to improve access to credit in all communities where banks are located, especially low- and moderate-income (LMI) communities.

CRA 的目的是改善银行所在的所有社区，特别是中低收入 (LMI) 社区获得信贷的机会。

The CRA was enacted in 1977 shortly after the civil rights movement and against the backdrop of other significant federal laws designed to address financial inclusion and equal access to credit.

I am a strong supporter of these goals and the requirements that banks support their communities to the greatest extent possible.

我坚决支持这些目标以及银行尽最大可能支持其社区的要求。

Unfortunately, as you know, my support for the important goals of CRA did not translate into support for the final rule.

不幸的是，如您所知，我对 CRA 重要目标的支持并没有转化为对最终规则的支持。

While many positive changes are included in the rule, in my view those changes ultimately did not outweigh its shortcomings, including that the agencies arguably exceeded the authority granted by the CRA statute.

The rule is unnecessarily complex, overly prescriptive, and directs outcomes that result in disproportionately greater costs than benefits, adding significantly greater regulatory burden for all banks, but especially for community banks.

该规则不必要地复杂、过于规范，其结果导致成本远大于收益，给所有银行（尤其是社区银行）增加了显着更大的监管负担。

Even the foundational question—are banks doing enough to support their communities?—is left unanswered in the final rule, perhaps because there is no evidence to support the agencies' assumption that broadly speaking, banks are falling short.

Scope and Impact on Community Banks First and foremost, the final rule applies the same regulatory expectations for small banks as it does for the largest banks.

For example, a wide range of community banks—those with more than $2 billion in assets—are treated as "large banks" under the final rule, forcing these banks to comply with the same CRA evaluation standards as a bank with $2 trillion in assets.

The lack of recognition that these banks are fundamentally different, with different balance sheets and business models, misses an important opportunity to appropriately tailor CRA expectations to a bank's size, risk, service area, and business model.

This approach is a radical departure within the regulatory framework where no other provision considers a bank with $2 billion in assets as "large."

As a result of this decision, many community banks will be subject to new and materially enhanced requirements, including a new retail lending test, significantly expanded assessment areas, and increased data and reporting obligations.

As I made clear throughout the development of the original proposal and final rule, instead of requiring these changes, community banks should have had the option, at their discretion, to opt into the new retail lending test and assessment areas, or to continue with the existing framework.

正如我在最初提案和最终规则的制定过程中明确指出的那样，社区银行不应要求进行这些更改，而应自行选择加入新的零售贷款测试和评估领域，或继续使用现有框架。

The significant increases in burden and cost associated with these changes are simply disproportional when applied to community banks, in a way that may constrain the resources community banks can devote to supporting their communities.

当应用于社区银行时，与这些变化相关的负担和成本的显着增加是不成比例的，这可能会限制社区银行可以投入支持其社区的资源。

Lack of Congressional Authorization The final rule also arguably exceeds the authority granted by Congress.

缺乏国会授权最终规则也可以说超出了国会授予的权力。

While the final rule aspires to modernize the CRA to account for changes in the way banks operate—for example, aligning the rule with current practices of extending credit in communities, including through mobile and online banking—there are limits to what the banking agencies can do.

虽然最终规则旨在使 CRA 现代化，以适应银行运营方式的变化——例如，使该规则与当前向社区提供信贷的做法（包括通过移动银行和网上银行）保持一致——但银行机构能做的仍然有限。

Congress alone has the power to modernize the CRA statute, including reflecting the variety of financial institutions that provide credit and financial services in their communities.

In my view, some of the changes made by the agencies, including those that evaluate banks outside of their deposit-taking footprint, are likely beyond the scope of our authority under the statute.

在我看来，这些机构做出的一些改变，包括那些在吸收存款业务之外评估银行的改变，可能超出了我们根据法规规定的权力范围。

Clarity and Transparency If these new standards were in place today, based on data from 2018 through 2020, there would be a nearly tenfold increase in banks with a "Needs to Improve" CRA rating.

In some ways, this highlights a fallacy underlying these rule changes: that the low number of banks with a "Needs to Improve" rating itself demonstrates that the standards of the CRA regulations have been too lax historically, ignoring the more plausible explanation that banks work hard to support their communities.

在某些方面，这突显了这些规则变化背后的一个谬论：获得“需要改进”评级的银行数量较少，这本身就表明CRA监管标准历来过于宽松，而忽略了银行努力支持其社区这一更合理的解释。

It is not appropriate for the banking agencies to materially increase the requirements on banks, resulting in a downgrade of currently satisfactory performance to "Needs to Improve," without a thorough, data-supported analysis that justifies a recalibration evidenced by actual shortcomings in bank activities.

Unintended Consequences and Other Problematic Provisions Perhaps most concerning about the final rule is that it may incentivize banks to reduce their support for certain communities, forcing them to pare back lending in areas where there is a need for credit accessibility.

意想不到的后果和其他有问题的规定也许最终规则最令人担忧的是，它可能会激励银行减少对某些社区的支持，迫使它们削减需要信贷的领域的贷款。

The addition of retail lending assessment areas and outside retail lending areas, coupled with a new requirement for large banks to include an entire county instead of a partial county as an assessment area, may ultimately incentivize firms to pull back lending.

增加零售贷款评估区和外部零售贷款区，再加上对大型银行将整个县而不是部分县纳入评估区的新要求，可能最终会激励企业收回贷款。

There are many other areas of the rule that raise concern—including the odd new publication of already available HMDA data, expanded reliance on summary of deposit data, and an implementation period of two years, which is far too brief in light of the rule's extraordinary complexity.

该规则还有许多其他方面引起了人们的关注，包括奇怪地新发布了现有的 HMDA 数据、对存款数据摘要的依赖扩大以及两年的实施期（鉴于该规则的异常复杂性，这一期限太短了）。

While I have confidence that banks will make the best of this new rule, and continue to support their communities, I regret that the new final rule may complicate, and in some instances frustrate, the important goals of the CRA.

虽然我相信银行将充分利用这项新规则，并继续支持其社区，但我很遗憾新的最终规则可能会使 CRA 的重要目标变得复杂，甚至在某些情况下会受挫。

Interchange Fee Cap Proposal Also, late last month, the Federal Reserve proposed amending the regulatory cap on debit card interchange fees.

交换费上限提案此外，上个月末，美联储提议修改借记卡交换费的监管上限。

For many years, bankers have expressed significant concern about external factors, like fraud, increasing the costs of supporting bank debit card programs—concerns that could be exacerbated by a lower regulatory cap on interchange fees.

多年来，银行家一直对外部因素表示严重担忧，例如欺诈、增加支持银行借记卡项目的成本——而降低交换费监管上限可能会加剧这种担忧。

While the Board's proposed rule suggests that it could result in benefits to consumers, I am concerned that the costs of this fee cap revision for consumers—through the form of increased costs for banking products and services—will be real, while the benefits to consumers—such as lower prices at merchants—may not be realized.

虽然委员会提议的规则表明这可能会给消费者带来好处，但我担心，这种费用上限修订给消费者带来的成本（通过银行产品和服务成本增加的形式）将是真实的，而给消费者带来的好处（例如降低商家的价格）可能无法实现。

At its heart, the proposal is unfair to many issuers and in some ways regressive in its impacts.

从本质上讲，该提案对许多发行人来说是不公平的，并且在某些方面其影响是倒退的。

The proposed rule acknowledges the varied size, business models, and product offerings of banks subject to the interchange fee cap and yet aims to achieve "rough justice" by establishing a single cap that applies to all covered issuers.

拟议的规则承认银行的规模、商业模式和产品供应各不相同，受到交换费上限的影响，但旨在通过建立适用于所有涵盖发行人的单一上限来实现“粗略的正义”。

This approach will disadvantage lower-volume issuers.

这种方法将使小批量发行人处于不利地位。

Retail banking is an essential, core function for many smaller issuers, so this pricing dynamic may not ultimately lead them to abandon their debit card programs.

对于许多小型发卡机构来说，零售银行业务是一项重要的核心功能，因此这种定价动态可能不会最终导致他们放弃借记卡计划。

Under the proposed rule, a staggering one-third of bank issuers would not be able to recover even the partial costs that factor into the interchange fee cap.

根据拟议的规则，惊人的三分之一的银行发行人甚至无法收回纳入交换费上限的部分成本。

For banks that operate debit card programs at a loss, presumably those costs will need to be recovered elsewhere, such as through higher borrowing costs for bank customers or through other fees for services provided, which are also targeted by the banking agencies for elimination.

对于亏损经营借记卡项目的银行来说，这些成本可能需要通过其他方式来收回，例如通过提高银行客户的借贷成本或通过提供服务的其他费用来弥补，这些费用也是银行机构消除的目标。

Higher borrowing costs or fees could be particularly harmful for low-income customers who may not qualify for credit card products or other alternatives, as banks may be forced to discontinue their lowest-margin products, including options designed to increase financial inclusion and access for LMI individuals and families.

较高的借贷成本或费用可能对可能没有资格获得信用卡产品或其他替代品的低收入客户特别有害，因为银行可能被迫停止其利润率最低的产品，包括旨在提高中低收入个人和家庭的金融包容性和获取机会的选项。

I sincerely hope that this is not the case, but it is a real and important risk.

我真诚地希望情况并非如此，但这是一个真实且重要的风险。

I also want to note one other element related to the proposal.

我还想指出与该提案相关的另一个要素。

The proposal applies only to a subset of issuers—those with more than $10 billion in assets—but I expect the fee cap will continue to affect a broader range of issuers, including community banks and small credit unions.

该提案仅适用于一小部分发行人——资产超过 100 亿美元的发行人——但我预计费用上限将继续影响更广泛的发行人，包括社区银行和小型信用合作社。

Issuers of all sizes use the same payment rails, and smaller issuers will inevitably face some pricing pressure, at least indirectly, from the interchange fee cap.

各种规模的发行人都使用相同的支付方式，而规模较小的发行人将不可避免地面临一些定价压力，至少是间接来自交换费上限的压力。

Ultimately, the net result of this proposal may be to simply shift costs from merchants to bank customers, and to make those costs far less transparent (for example, if those costs are recovered through higher loan interest rates).

最终，该提案的最终结果可能只是将成本从商家转移到银行客户，并使这些成本的透明度大大降低（例如，如果这些成本通过更高的贷款利率来收回）。

Of course, this proposal has been published for public comment, and my colleagues and I welcome public feedback on the proposal, particularly on the impacts it may have on financial institutions, including those not directly subject to the rule.

当然，该提案已公开征求公众意见，我和我的同事欢迎公众对该提案提出反馈意见，特别是它可能对金融机构（包括那些不直接受该规则约束的金融机构）产生的影响。

Climate Guidance On October 24, the Federal Reserve—in conjunction with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency—published guidance directing banks' approach to climate-related financial risks.

气候指南 10 月 24 日，美联储与联邦存款保险公司和货币监理署联合发布了指导银行应对气候相关金融风险的指南。

The final guidance will create confusion about supervisory expectations and will result in increased compliance cost and burden, without a commensurate improvement to the safety and soundness of financial institutions or to the financial stability of the United States.

最终的指导意见将造成监管期望的混乱，并导致合规成本和负担增加，而金融机构的安全性和稳健性或美国的金融稳定性却没有相应的改善。

This is another regulatory action that raises questions about need and legal basis, but also about whether the focus of reforms is appropriate in the current economic and supervisory environment.

这是另一项监管行动，引发了有关需求和法律依据的问题，也引发了关于改革重点是否适合当前经济和监管环境的问题。

This guidance represents a departure from sound banking policy and potentially a distraction from more important risk-management objectives.

该指导意见背离了健全的银行政策，并可能分散对更重要的风险管理目标的注意力。

While the guidance adopts a specialized regime for climate risks, it does not explain why this unique treatment for climate risks is warranted.

尽管该指南针对气候风险采用了专门的制度，但它并没有解释为什么需要对气候风险采取这种独特的处理方式。

Without taking stock of risk-management practices today and evaluating whether it is appropriate as it comes to climate-related financial risks—essentially without identifying a problem statement—the guidance goes directly to solutions that are at once unclear and expensive, without clearly promoting safety and soundness or U.S. financial stability.

该指南没有评估当今的风险管理实践，也没有评估其是否适合应对气候相关的金融风险——基本上没有确定问题陈述——就直接提出了既不明确又昂贵的解决方案，没有明确促进安全性和稳健性或美国金融稳定。

Under the guidance, banks must monitor and measure climate-related risks over indefinite time horizons and "develop strategies, deploy resources, and build capacity to identify, measure, monitor, and control for climate-related financial risks." The guidance includes few specifics about this data collection expectation—which surely will expand over time—nor does it clarify how banks are intended to integrate this new information into risk-management programs and policies, and even into lending decisions.

根据该指导意见，银行必须在无限期的时间内监测和衡量与气候相关的风险，并“制定战略、部署资源并建设识别、衡量、监测和控制气候相关金融风险的能力”。该指南几乎没有提及有关数据收集预期的具体细节（随着时间的推移，数据收集预期肯定会扩大），也没有阐明银行打算如何将这些新信息整合到风险管理计划和政策中，甚至整合到贷款决策中。

Indeed, the guidance adopts an intentionally vague standard, with an expectation that data collection and the planning horizon for "scenario analysis" to probe on such risks may extend "beyond the financial institution's typical strategic planning horizon." And yet, the benefit of requiring banks to plan for events that occur far into the future seems limited, as long-dated predictions about the future are likely to be highly speculative and heavily influenced by the underlying assumptions, and therefore of limited or no utility to the bank in managing risk.

事实上，该指南故意采用了模糊的标准，期望用于探讨此类风险的“情景分析”的数据收集和规划范围可能会“超出金融机构典型的战略规划范围”。然而，要求银行为遥远的未来发生的事件制定计划的好处似乎有限，因为对未来的长期预测可能具有高度投机性，并受到基本假设的严重影响，因此对银行管理风险的效用有限或没有作用。

This approach is a significant departure from existing supervisory standards and includes no explanation for the deviation from normal supervisory time horizons.

这种方法明显背离了现有的监管标准，并且没有对偏离正常监管时间范围的情况做出解释。

In addition to being unclear, the guidance will surely be expensive to implement.

除了不明确之外，该指南的实施成本肯定很高。

The costs to implement new data collections will be substantial not only to institutions attempting to comply with uncertain elements of the guidance, but also to bank customers that will be asked to provide more information when seeking credit or other banking products.

实施新数据收集的成本不仅对于试图遵守指南中不确定因素的机构来说是巨大的，而且对于银行客户来说也是如此，因为他们在寻求信贷或其他银行产品时会被要求提供更多信息。

One likely potential consequence could be to discourage banks from lending and providing financial services to certain industries, forcing them to seek credit outside of the banking system from nonbank lenders.

一种可能的潜在后果可能是阻止银行向某些行业放贷和提供金融服务，迫使它们在银行体系之外向非银行贷款机构寻求信贷。

This will undoubtedly result in decreasing or eliminating access to financial services and increasing the cost of credit to these industries.

这无疑将导致减少或消除获得金融服务的机会，并增加这些行业的信贷成本。

I have every confidence that banks will work diligently to try to understand the expectations created under the agencies' climate guidance and will craft an approach that works—despite the uncertainty the guidance itself creates.

我坚信，银行将努力理解各机构气候指导下产生的预期，并制定出行之有效的方法——尽管指导本身会带来不确定性。

However, looking to the future, I am concerned that the scope of this guidance—which is limited to banks with over $100 billion in assets—will trickle down to far smaller institutions by treating approaches adopted by large banks as "best practices" for banks of all sizes, resulting in a much higher regulatory burden for these firms.

然而，展望未来，我担心该指南的范围（仅限于资产超过 1000 亿美元的银行）将通过将大型银行采用的方法视为各种规模银行的“最佳实践”而渗透到规模小得多的机构，从而导致这些公司承担更高的监管负担。

I am also concerned that the actions taken by banks to manage climate risk could have unintended consequences for LMI communities, including increasing the cost of credit or reducing credit availability in those communities.

我还担心银行为管理气候风险而采取的行动可能会给中低收入社区带来意想不到的后果，包括增加这些社区的信贷成本或减少信贷可用性。

Oddly, while the guidance acknowledges this concern, it does not emphasize the obligations banks have under the CRA to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they do business, especially in LMI communities.

奇怪的是，虽然该指南承认了这一担忧，但它并没有强调银行根据 CRA 的义务，帮助满足其开展业务的社区（尤其是中低收入社区）的信贷需求。

While climate change is an important public policy issue in the United States and globally, the Federal Reserve has limited, narrowly focused mandates and responsibilities that are established by statute.

虽然气候变化是美国乃至全球的一个重要公共政策问题，但美联储的法规规定的任务和责任有限且狭隘。

These mandates and responsibilities do not extend to climate policymaking.

这些任务和责任并不延伸到气候政策制定。

6 Although the climate guidance nominally focuses on climate-related "financial risks," I am concerned that the guidance could be used by the Federal Reserve and other federal banking agencies to pursue climate policies leveraging the opacity of the supervisory process, even though such actions would clearly exceed the statutory authorities given to the Board by Congress.

6 尽管气候指南名义上侧重于与气候相关的“金融风险”，但我担心美联储和其他联邦银行机构可能会利用该指南来利用监管过程的不透明性来推行气候政策，尽管此类行动显然会超出国会赋予委员会的法定权限。

Prioritization of Regulation and Supervision I'd also like to spend a few minutes on a topic that has been an undercurrent throughout my remarks so far: prioritization of supervisory and regulatory actions.

监管和监管的优先顺序我还想花几分钟时间谈谈迄今为止在我的发言中一直存在的一个话题：监管和监管行动的优先顺序。

In my view, it is essential that regulators appropriately calibrate and prioritize their supervisory and regulatory actions.

我认为，监管机构必须适当调整其监管行动并确定其优先顺序。

Failing to do so could distract banks, bank management, supervisors, and regulators from focusing on key risks.

如果不这样做，可能会分散银行、银行管理层、监管者和监管机构对关键风险的关注。

As I noted earlier, the banking system remains strong and resilient, and banks are much better capitalized, with substantially more liquidity compared to 2008.

正如我之前指出的，银行体系仍然强劲且富有弹性，银行的资本状况要好得多，与 2008 年相比，流动性也大大增加。

The banking agencies also have substantially more tools available than they did two decades ago.

银行机构可用的工具也比二十年前多得多。

Yet, in light of recent actions taken by regulators, some could be led to question whether this was truly the case.

然而，鉴于监管机构最近采取的行动，一些人可能会质疑情况是否属实。

We have seen several complex and lengthy proposals, rules, and guidance that do not relate to core banking risks and many other regulatory actions that do not appear to be designed to address shortcomings in our existing bank regulatory framework.

我们已经看到了一些与核心银行风险无关的复杂而冗长的提案、规则和指南，以及许多其他监管行动，这些行动似乎并不是为了解决我们现有银行监管框架中的缺陷而设计的。

In addition, our supervisory posture may have overcorrected relative to the risks that some institutions may face following the banking stress earlier this year.

此外，相对于今年早些时候银行业压力后一些机构可能面临的风险，我们的监管姿态可能矫枉过正。

On supervision, the primary focus of supervision should be to address a bank's critical shortcomings in a timely way.

在监管方面，监管的首要重点应该是及时纠正银行的重大缺陷。

To effectively support a well-functioning and stable banking system, bank supervision must not simply pinpoint compliance issues, failed processes, or rule violations.

为了有效支持银行体系运转良好和稳定，银行监管不能简单地查明合规问题、失败的流程或违规行为。

Instead, bank supervision must focus on a bank's risk exposures, while prioritizing core safety and soundness issues in the context of the bank's financial condition.

相反，银行监管必须关注银行的风险敞口，同时根据银行的财务状况优先考虑核心安全性和稳健性问题。

If the supervisory process fails to identify and escalate critical risks or to hold management accountable for known deficiencies, such as excess interest rate risk taking, that raises the potential for supervisory shortcomings, including impacting the ability of supervisors to anticipate how changes in the economy or banking sector could affect a bank's condition.

如果监管过程未能识别和升级关键风险，或未能让管理层对已知缺陷（例如过度承担利率风险）承担责任，就会增加监管缺陷的可能性，包括影响监管者预测经济或银行业变化如何影响银行状况的能力。

At the same time, I have also heard reports, including from a number of state banking regulators, that some recent supervisory actions are excessive in light of the risks posed by certain smaller institutions.

同时，我也听到包括一些国家银行监管机构在内的报道称，鉴于某些规模较小的机构带来的风险，近期的一些监管行动是过度的。

These reports of increased scrutiny, including on community and smaller regional banks—banks that were not responsible for the banking stresses earlier this year—are concerning, as they could undermine the nature of joint supervision between state and federal supervisors under the dual banking system.

这些关于加强审查的报告，包括对社区银行和小型区域银行（这些银行对今年早些时候的银行业压力不负有责任）的报告令人担忧，因为它们可能会破坏双重银行体系下州和联邦监管机构之间联合监管的性质。

Overzealous supervision is just as problematic as inattentive supervision.

过度热心的监管和漫不经心的监管同样会带来问题。

If banks are overwhelmed with remediating issues that do not relate to core supervisory risks, bank management may be distracted from key risks.

如果银行因补救与核心监管风险无关的问题而不堪重负，银行管理层可能会分散对关键风险的注意力。

It is essential that supervisors focus on key and critical issues.

监管者必须关注关键问题。

We have seen a significant number of regulatory and guidance changes this year compressed into a very short time frame.

今年我们看到大量的监管和指导变化被压缩在非常短的时间内。

These changes do not appear to be prioritized based on known shortcomings or deficiencies in our existing regulatory framework.

这些变化似乎并没有根据我们现有监管框架中已知的缺点或缺陷来确定优先顺序。

Several of the rules I just discussed demonstrate that we have missed the mark on prioritizing our regulatory agenda.

我刚才讨论的几条规则表明，我们在优先考虑监管议程方面没有抓住重点。

Instead, some of our actions could distract bank management from focusing on important and key risks.

相反，我们的一些行为可能会分散银行管理层对重要和关键风险的关注。

The Board's new climate guidance is emblematic of this, but it is not the only example.

理事会的新气候指南就是这一点的象征，但这并不是唯一的例子。

While climate change is an important issue, climate change is not a core risk to the safety and soundness of financial institutions.

尽管气候变化是一个重要问题，但气候变化并不是金融机构安全稳健的核心风险。

The lessons learned from supervisory failures during the bank stress in the spring clearly illustrate that bank examiners and bank management should focus on core issues, like credit risk, interest rate risk, and liquidity risk.

春季银行压力期间监管失败的教训清楚地表明，银行审查人员和银行管理层应重点关注信用风险、利率风险和流动性风险等核心问题。

I am concerned that focusing our regulatory reform and guidance efforts on issues like climate change that do not represent core banking risks will only serve to further distract bank management and supervisors.

我担心，将监管改革和指导工作的重点放在气候变化等不代表银行业核心风险的问题上，只会进一步分散银行管理层和监管者的注意力。

Finally, regulatory reform can also pose significant financial stability risks.

最后，监管改革也可能带来重大的金融稳定风险。

The cumulative effects of recent proposed and final rules remain to be seen, but these significant regulatory changes could present ongoing risks to the health of certain institutions and the U.S. banking system.

最近拟议的和最终的规则的累积影响仍有待观察，但这些重大的监管变化可能会给某些机构和美国银行体系的健康带来持续的风险。

Many of the rules will be costly and burdensome to implement and are not based on any identified deficiencies in our regulatory toolkit.

许多规则的实施成本高昂且繁琐，并且并非基于我们监管工具包中已发现的任何缺陷。

For example, the Basel III proposal increases capital for the largest banks, but there has yet to be a data-driven analysis demonstrating that capital levels in the banking system are currently deficient or improperly calibrated.

例如，巴塞尔协议III提案增加了最大银行的资本，但尚未有数据驱动的分析表明银行体系中的资本水平目前不足或校准不当。

In addition, while the CRA serves a tremendously important purpose, there was no urgency to finalize this rule at a time when we have yet to fully address potential shortcomings in our regulatory and supervisory tools stemming from the banking stress earlier this year.

此外，虽然 CRA 具有极其重要的目的，但在我们尚未完全解决今年早些时候银行业压力造成的监管和监督工具的潜在缺陷之际，并不迫切需要最终确定这一规则。

Conclusion The recent volume and materiality of new reforms implemented and under consideration by the federal banking agencies is significant.

结论联邦银行机构最近实施和考虑的新改革的数量和重要性都很重要。

The rules and guidance total over 5,000 pages since July.

自 7 月以来，规则和指南总计超过 5,000 页。

While the unintended consequences of these reforms may not be clear at the outset, our ability to predict these consequences is even more limited when the reforms overlap or conflict.

虽然这些改革的意外后果在一开始可能并不明显，但当改革重叠或冲突时，我们预测这些后果的能力就更加有限。

The sheer volume of change presents significant challenges for banks, who will be required to prioritize the implementation of new and revised requirements, with the risk of being distracted from more material concerns or supervisory issues.

巨大的变化给银行带来了巨大的挑战，银行将被要求优先实施新的和修订的要求，并有可能分散对更多实质性问题或监管问题的注意力。

My voting record on these proposals is a reflection of my concern about the path of regulatory reform, particularly in the wake of the bank failures and banking system stress earlier this year, which highlighted that some reforms may be warranted, where they address specific problems or clearly identified shortcomings.

我对这些提案的投票记录反映了我对监管改革路径的担忧，特别是在今年早些时候发生的银行倒闭和银行体系压力之后，这突显出一些改革可能是必要的，只要它们解决了具体问题或明确指出的缺点。

Regulators, like banks, should never shy away from improving and evolving as the underlying conditions evolve.

监管机构和银行一样，永远不应该回避随着基本条件的变化而改进和发展。

But taking our focus away from potentially more pressing matters, like interest rate and liquidity risk management, could result in supervisors and banks that are less prepared and able to deal with emerging stresses.

但将我们的注意力从利率和流动性风险管理等潜在更紧迫的问题上转移开，可能会导致监管机构和银行准备不足，无法应对新出现的压力。

In my view, our regulatory agenda should focus on evolving conditions and data-driven, identified risks.

在我看来，我们的监管议程应侧重于不断变化的条件和数据驱动的、已识别的风险。

When we are distracted by risks and matters that are tangential to our mandates and areas of statutory responsibility, we may inadvertently miss other, more pressing areas that require our attention.

当我们因与我们的任务和法定责任领域无关的风险和事项而分心时，我们可能会无意中错过其他需要我们关注的更紧迫的领域。

The views expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee or the Board of Governors.

这里表达的观点是我自己的观点，不一定是联邦公开市场委员会或理事会同事的观点。

Return to text

返回正文

Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.

经济增长、监管救济和消费者保护法，Pub。

L。

No. 115-174, 132 Stat.

第 115-174 号，第 132 号统计。

1296 (2018).

1296（2018）。

Return to text

返回正文

See Regulatory Capital Rule: Large Banking Organizations and Banking Organizations with Significant Trading Activity (PDF) , 88 Fed.

请参阅监管资本规则：大型银行组织和具有重大交易活动的银行组织 (PDF)，88 Fed。

Reg.

64,028, at 64,168 (proposed September 18, 2023).

64,028，至 64,168（2023 年 9 月 18 日提议）。

Return to text

返回正文

Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.

经济增长、监管救济和消费者保护法，Pub。

L。

No. 115-174, 132 Stat.

第 115-174 号，第 132 号统计。

1296 (2018).

1296（2018）。

Return to text

返回正文

The Board memo discussing the proposed revisions to the interchange fee cap suggests that "[m]erchants, …

讨论交换费上限拟议修订的董事会备忘录表明，“商家……

may pass on some portion of their savings from lower interchange fees to consumers." See " Proposed Revisions to Regulation II's Interchange Fee Cap (PDF) ", memorandum, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems and Legal Divisions, October 18, 2023, p.

可能会将较低的交换费节省的一部分转嫁给消费者。”请参阅“对法规 II 交换费上限的拟议修订 (PDF)”，备忘录，联邦储备系统理事会、储备银行运营和支付系统以及法律部门，2023 年 10 月 18 日，第 17 页。

Return to text

返回正文

While the climate guidance was released shortly after the U.S. Department of the Treasury's pronouncements about net-zero financing and investment, the climate guidance is silent about "net-zero" commitments.

尽管气候指南是在美国财政部宣布净零融资和投资后不久发布的，但气候指南对“净零”承诺只字不提。

See U.S. Department of the Treasury, Principles for Net-Zero Financing & Investment (PDF) (Washington: U.S. Treasury Department, September 2023).

请参阅美国财政部，净零融资和投资原则 (PDF)（华盛顿：美国财政部，2023 年 9 月）。

Return to text

返回正文

中文为机器翻译，仅供参考。