Safe Harbor assets can be repurchased.
" Fourth, the fact that FIBA perpetuates the safe harbors for
repurchase agreements, derivatives, and other qualified
financial contracts, despite substantial evidence that the safe
harbors should be modified or eliminated."
TESTIMONY OF BRUCE GROHSGAL
Mr. Grohsgal. Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Marino, Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking
Member Cicilline, Member Schneider, and the other Members of
the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today with
respect to the Financial Institution Bankruptcy Act of 2017,
often referred to as FIBA.
First, the ``no liability'' safe harbor protection that Mr.
Hessler just referred to for directors under FIBA.
Second, the provisions of FIBA that will significantly
weaken the balance sheet of the bridge bank, making its
obtaining financing in the credit markets less likely and
making taxpayer bailouts more likely.
Third, the illusory and opaque nature of the restructuring,
all of which will occur within 48 hours, with most creditors
and other parties left out of the process and with minimal, if
any, knowledge of it or what happened in those 2 days.
Fourth, the fact that FIBA perpetuates the safe harbors for
repurchase agreements, derivatives, and other qualified
financial contracts, despite substantial evidence that the safe
harbors should be modified or eliminated.
And fifth, the necessity of retaining the orderly
resolution authority of Dodd-Frank Title II as a last but
crucial resort if the financial institution's bankruptcy
nonetheless poses substantial risk to the financial system. I
note with respect to that point that this bill does not end
Title II authority, but other bills that are being repeatedly
introduced before Congress do.