????保羅?沃爾克提出的《沃爾克規(guī)則》有望最終獲得通過(guò).

????對(duì)華爾街來(lái)說(shuō)，《沃爾克規(guī)則》（Volcker Rule）可能要比看上去更麻煩。

????這項(xiàng)規(guī)則的目的是限制投資銀行通過(guò)有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的內(nèi)部交易來(lái)獲得利潤(rùn)的能力。過(guò)去幾年，大多數(shù)華爾街公司都剝離了那些顯然不符合要求的業(yè)務(wù)。而且，大多數(shù)主要投行的首席執(zhí)行官都表示，他們的公司達(dá)到這項(xiàng)規(guī)則的要求已經(jīng)有一段時(shí)間了。

????不過(guò)，預(yù)計(jì)本周二針對(duì)《沃爾克規(guī)則》進(jìn)行的投票還是讓某些人感到擔(dān)心。據(jù)彭博（Bloomberg）報(bào)道，交易業(yè)務(wù)給五大華爾街公司——摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）、美銀（Bank of America）、花旗集團(tuán)（Citigroup）、高盛（Goldman Sachs）和摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）——帶來(lái)的年收入高達(dá)440億美元。不過(guò)，其中很大一部分收入并不是真的有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。這440億美元中，有一部分來(lái)自為客戶(hù)執(zhí)行交易收取的手續(xù)費(fèi)?！段譅柨艘?guī)則》并沒(méi)有對(duì)這部分收入下達(dá)禁令。

????看來(lái)，最終獲得通過(guò)的《沃爾克規(guī)則》有可能禁止所謂的投資組合對(duì)沖（portfolio hedging）。它是一種覆蓋范圍很廣的交易，目的是避免投行受到經(jīng)濟(jì)滑坡等宏觀風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的沖擊。摩根大通已經(jīng)說(shuō)過(guò)，慘淡收?qǐng)龅摹皞惗伥L”交易就是投資組合對(duì)沖，這家公司因此虧損了60億美元。

????但投行仍然可以從事對(duì)沖交易。最終投票結(jié)果可能給投行帶來(lái)一些好消息?！段譅柨艘?guī)則》草案提出，所有非客戶(hù)交易都必須有“較為緊密的關(guān)聯(lián)”，以抵消投行為客戶(hù)承擔(dān)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。要求對(duì)華爾街加強(qiáng)監(jiān)管的人士則建議，應(yīng)該將這條規(guī)定修改為所有非客戶(hù)交易都必須存在“非常緊密的關(guān)聯(lián)”。

????不過(guò)，消息人士透露，華爾街在這一點(diǎn)上已經(jīng)占了上風(fēng)，定于下周投票的最終裁決機(jī)構(gòu)對(duì)“關(guān)聯(lián)”問(wèn)題只字未提。他們已將這項(xiàng)要求徹底排除在考慮范圍之外。同時(shí)，監(jiān)管部門(mén)將通過(guò)其他措施來(lái)限制非客戶(hù)交易。但目前還不清楚這些措施能否奏效。

????此外，雖然股市已經(jīng)復(fù)蘇，而且債市一直較為平穩(wěn)，上述440億美元收入仍遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)低于旨在實(shí)施金融改革的《多德弗蘭克法案》（Dodd-Frank Act）通過(guò)之前的水平，表明大型投行已經(jīng)放棄了很大一部分非客戶(hù)交易。

????但問(wèn)題在于，最終將遭到禁止的業(yè)務(wù)在這440億美元中到底占多大比例？當(dāng)然，和投行的自律條例相比，最終由監(jiān)管部門(mén)執(zhí)行的《沃爾克規(guī)則》將帶來(lái)更多的限制。

????而且，某些公司受到的影響要比其他公司大。摩根士丹利分析師貝琪?格拉塞克上周三發(fā)表的研究報(bào)告認(rèn)為，高盛可能是受影響最大的華爾街投行。高盛方面拒絕就此發(fā)表評(píng)論。

????以往高盛的交易業(yè)務(wù)收入一直高于其他華爾街公司。上個(gè)季度外匯業(yè)務(wù)大幅度滑坡已經(jīng)開(kāi)始讓外界對(duì)高盛的交易部門(mén)感到擔(dān)心。

????Wall Street may have a bigger Volcker problem than it's letting on.

????Most Wall Street firms have spent the past few years shedding businesses that clearly don't comply with Volcker, which is supposed to limit the banks' ability to make money on risky, in-house trading. What's more, most big bank CEOs say their firms have been Volcker-compliant for a while now.

????Nonetheless, this week's vote on the Volcker rule, which is supposed to come on Tuesday, has some worried. Bloomberg reported that the nation's five Wall Street firms -- JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Goldman Sachs (GS), and Morgan Stanley (MS) -- generate as much as $44 billion a year from trading. A lot of that money, though, is not really at risk. That number includes some of the fees the firms get from executing clients' transactions. That business is not banned by Volcker.

????It looks likely that the final rule could ban so-called portfolio hedging, which are broad trades that are supposed to protect a bank against a macro-risk, like an economic downturn. JPMorgan has said the failed London Whale trade, which lost the bank $6 billion, was a portfolio hedge.

????But banks will still be allowed to hedge. There could be some good news for the banks in the final rule. The draft of the rule said that all non-client trades had to be "reasonably correlated" to offset a risk the bank was taking for a client. Some advocates of more Wall Street regulation pushed for that to be reworded to "highly correlated."

????But, sources say, in a win for Wall Street, that the final rule regulators will vote on next week says nothing about correlation. That requirement is out all together. Instead, regulators will use other measures to try to limit non-customer trading. It's not clear those measures will be effective.

????Also, the $44 billion figure is down significantly from what it was before financial reform law Dodd-Frank was passed, despite the fact that the stock market has come back and the bond market has been relatively stable. That suggests that the big banks have jettisoned much of their non-client trading businesses.

????Still, the question is how much of that $44 billion is generated by the big banks in trading that will eventually be banned. Surely, when the final rule is enforced by regulators, it will be more restrictive than the way in which banks have been policing themselves.

????And the impact will be bigger for some firms than others. In a research note out last Wednesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Betsy Graseck said Goldman would be the most affected among Wall Street banks. Goldman declined to comment.

????Goldman has traditionally made more of its money trading than other Wall Street firms. And a big drop in its currencies business in the past quarter has reignited concerns about Goldman's trading operations.