Skip to content

Too Big to Fail

Too Big to Fail

  • banking supervision

    Keeping a Watchful Eye

    Thursday, January 29, 2015

    The Federal Reserve’s banking supervision process has changed considerably over the past 100 years, with perhaps the greatest changes coming in the past five years.

  • Central Banker article

    Central View: On the "Too Big To Fail" Debate: Implications of the Dodd-Frank Act

    Summer 2013 | Central Banker

    It is common knowledge that the banking industry has become increasingly consolidated over the past 25 years. In 1990, prior to a number of banking law changes, the nation housed around 12,500 charters. Today, there are roughly 6,000 charters, with consolidated assets of the top 10 U.S. banking firms representing approximately 64 percent of U.S. banking assets. Without question, operations of these large firms magnified the financial crisis, emphasizing their systemic importance. The resulting landmark legislation—the Dodd-Frank Act—is intended to reduce systemic risk and, ultimately, end “too big to fail.”


  • Central Banker article
  • Regional Economist article

    Too Big To Fail: The Pros and Cons of Breaking Up Big Banks

    October 2012 | Regional Economist

    Many people want to put size limits on “too big to fail” banks, given their risks to the broader economy.  Such limits, however, could raise the cost of providing banking services by preventing banks from exploiting economies of scale.


  • Central Banker article
  • Central Banker article

    In-Depth: The Big Banks: Too Complex To Manage?

    Winter 2012 | Central Banker

    Five years after the financial crisis, regulators and lawmakers are still attempting to deal with the big banks—those considered “too big to fail.” Recent “misbehaviors” associated with big banks have invigorated the debate: Are these organizations too complex to effectively manage?