Does regulation single out hedge funds?

The too-big-to-fail bill that has generated much discussion. It has singled out large hedges as required contributors to a special fund that would be used to wind down large firms. Bloomberg reports that the industry is chafing because the systemic-risk legislation in the house anyway requires hedge funds with more than $10 billion in assets to pay while other firms "get assessed at $50 billion."

The article notes that if the asset threshold was raised to $50 billion, no hedge fund would be required to contribute, which the industry would love. This provision is hardly set in stone. There is time to fight--on both sides. There are certainly different angles to this. Many would argue that it's only fair for hedge funds to contribute. The big ones are certainly capable of causing systemic problems. Varying thresholds, however, may be appropriate, some would argue, given that hedge funds assets tend to be leveraged to a much greater degree. 

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
More aggressive probes of hedge funds coming?
The new hedge fund industry
Citi's new hedge fund strategy?
The nightmare hedge fund employee
Hedge fund implodes before it gets started
Fund managers, better to own shares in own fund?

Post a comment