Dimon Slams Regulators Over 'Fictional' Capital Requirements, Says Rules Unfair to JPMorgan
0xBroomberg
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon used the bank's quarterly earnings call to publicly attack the Fed's draft capital rules, saying regulators are artificially inflating numbers and tilting the playing field against large diversified banks — the real fight is over who pays more capital and who gets a break.
What exactly is Dimon angry about?
Under the Fed's March draft, JPMorgan's capital requirement rises roughly 4%, while rivals see an average decline of about 4.8%.
This means → the same new rulebook forces JPMorgan to lock up more capital while its competitors get to free some up — a gap of nearly 9 percentage points.
Dimon's own words: "They shouldn't be making up the number in a false way… the number should be the number."
In plain terms = Dimon believes regulators gamed the calculation method rather than openly asking banks to hold more capital.
GSIB surcharge — where is the dispute?
The GSIB surcharge — an extra capital buffer imposed on banks deemed "too big to fail" — is the core mechanism in dispute.
Dimon wants the Fed to factor in economic growth since 2015, when the surcharge framework was created. A bigger economy makes each bank's relative footprint look smaller, which would lower the surcharge.
The new draft also proposes reducing the weight of short-term wholesale funding (money banks borrow from financial markets, not from depositors) in the surcharge formula.
This means → trading-heavy firms like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — far more reliant on wholesale funding — stand to benefit directly, while deposit-rich banks like JPMorgan gain little.
What is JPMorgan's own argument?
CFO Jeremy Barnum stated: "I don't understand why this would be a desirable policy outcome — it is disproportionately impairing banks' ability to serve the real economy."
In plain terms = JPMorgan's logic is straightforward: tie up more of our capital, and we lend less — the real economy pays the price.
Barnum added: "If that's not what they want, they shouldn't let it happen inadvertently." This reflects JPMorgan's view that the bias may be unintentional — a byproduct of the formula, not a deliberate policy choice.
Where does the rulemaking stand?
The Fed and two other federal bank regulators are jointly working to finalize Basel risk-weight rules and the GSIB surcharge.
Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman has said she hopes to complete the rules by year-end.
Banks have submitted formal comment letters flagging issues including double-counting of certain risks and new capital charges on unused credit lines.
The Fed declined to comment on Dimon's latest remarks.
Why does this matter?
Dimon chose to go public on the same day JPMorgan reported its highest-ever quarterly profit — This means → even at peak earnings, the bank's resistance to the rules has not softened.
How the rules are finalized will directly determine the capital-cost gap between JPMorgan and rivals like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
This reflects a deeper question: are the new rules making the financial system safer, or are they inadvertently redrawing the competitive map of Wall Street?
Content is for reference only, not financial advice.