????保羅?沃爾克提出的《沃爾克規則》有望最終獲得通過.

????對華爾街來說，《沃爾克規則》（Volcker Rule）可能要比看上去更麻煩。

????這項規則的目的是限制投資銀行通過有風險的內部交易來獲得利潤的能力。過去幾年，大多數華爾街公司都剝離了那些顯然不符合要求的業務。而且，大多數主要投行的首席執行官都表示，他們的公司達到這項規則的要求已經有一段時間了。

????不過，預計本周二針對《沃爾克規則》進行的投票還是讓某些人感到擔心。據彭博（Bloomberg）報道，交易業務給五大華爾街公司——摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）、美銀（Bank of America）、花旗集團（Citigroup）、高盛（Goldman Sachs）和摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）——帶來的年收入高達440億美元。不過，其中很大一部分收入并不是真的有風險。這440億美元中，有一部分來自為客戶執行交易收取的手續費。《沃爾克規則》并沒有對這部分收入下達禁令。

????看來，最終獲得通過的《沃爾克規則》有可能禁止所謂的投資組合對沖（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濟滑坡等宏觀風險的沖擊。摩根大通已經說過，慘淡收場的“倫敦鯨”交易就是投資組合對沖，這家公司因此虧損了60億美元。

????但投行仍然可以從事對沖交易。最終投票結果可能給投行帶來一些好消息?！段譅柨艘巹t》草案提出，所有非客戶交易都必須有“較為緊密的關聯”，以抵消投行為客戶承擔的風險。要求對華爾街加強監管的人士則建議，應該將這條規定修改為所有非客戶交易都必須存在“非常緊密的關聯”。

????不過，消息人士透露，華爾街在這一點上已經占了上風，定于下周投票的最終裁決機構對“關聯”問題只字未提。他們已將這項要求徹底排除在考慮范圍之外。同時，監管部門將通過其他措施來限制非客戶交易。但目前還不清楚這些措施能否奏效。

????此外，雖然股市已經復蘇，而且債市一直較為平穩，上述440億美元收入仍遠遠低于旨在實施金融改革的《多德弗蘭克法案》（Dodd-Frank Act）通過之前的水平，表明大型投行已經放棄了很大一部分非客戶交易。

????但問題在于，最終將遭到禁止的業務在這440億美元中到底占多大比例？當然，和投行的自律條例相比，最終由監管部門執行的《沃爾克規則》將帶來更多的限制。

????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?格拉塞克上周三發表的研究報告認為，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表評論。

????以往高盛的交易業務收入一直高于其他華爾街公司。上個季度外匯業務大幅度滑坡已經開始讓外界對高盛的交易部門感到擔心。

????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.