Signature Bank’s Downfall: A Tale of Mismanagement and Contagion, FDIC Report Reveals

"Federal Bank Regulator Blames Mismanagement and Contagion Effects for Signature Bank's Fall"

A new report released by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) on Friday has highlighted the mismanagement of officers and the “contagion effects” following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the wind-down of Silvergate Bank as the primary reasons for the fall of Signature Bank. The report revealed that Signature Bank relied heavily on uninsured deposits, lacked strong liquidity risk-management practices, and had poor risk management in general. The bank was also serving the crypto industry, which was cited as a significant risk factor. The FDIC report stated that Signature Bank failed to understand the risk of its association with and reliance on crypto industry deposits, leaving it vulnerable to contagion from crypto industry turmoil that occurred in late 2022 and into 2023.

The FDIC has been reviewing its oversight of Signature Bank since shortly after the New York Department of Financial Services seized the bank in March. Despite industry claims that Signature was shut down specifically for serving crypto customers, NYDFS Superintendent Adrienne Harris has repeatedly said the bank had other issues.

The Federal Reserve and Government Accountability Office also published the results from their own reviews of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature on the same day as the FDIC report. The Federal Reserve attributed SVB’s collapse to serial mismanagement made worse by unaccounted-for risks, which came from interest-rate hikes and liquidity issues. The GAO noted that Signature had “reduced its exposure to deposits” from the crypto industry over the 12 months prior to its collapse. Both reports pointed to a lack of action from federal regulators as a contributing factor, saying the banks’ supervisors could have acted sooner to request more information or otherwise manage the banks and their risks.

The collapse of Signature Bank has raised concerns about the stability of crypto-friendly banks and the risks associated with serving the crypto industry. The FDIC’s report highlighted the need for banks to have strong liquidity risk-management practices and to understand the risks associated with serving the crypto industry. The report also emphasized the importance of federal regulators taking action to manage the risks associated with banks and their deposits.

The crypto industry has faced increased scrutiny from regulators in recent years, with concerns about the potential for fraud, money laundering, and other illicit activities. The collapse of Signature Bank has highlighted the need for greater oversight of banks serving the crypto industry and the risks associated with such services. As the crypto industry continues to grow and evolve, it is likely that regulators will continue to focus on managing the risks associated with crypto-related services and products.

Martin Reid

Martin Reid

Leave a Replay

Scroll to Top