????聽！你聽到了嗎？圣誕假期臨近，你聽到從美國首都華盛頓傳來的響亮的鐘聲了嗎？那是基督教組織救世軍的圣誕老人的街頭游行？還是教會的鐘樓在播放經典的圣誕節歌曲《鐘聲頌歌》（Carol of the Bells）？又或者是像圣誕節經典影片《美好人生》（It's a Wonderful Life）所講述的那樣，是天使們得到了翅膀？

????都不是。它是美國游說人士投身金融行業反對金融改革的最新斗爭，同時按下計時收費器的聲音。我說的改革是監管規模達數萬億美元的資產管理行業的初期努力。這場斗爭有望比大型銀行早前針對沃爾克法則中禁止投機交易這個提議發起的斗爭更激烈。

????華盛頓官場上聽到的響聲是政府研究團隊——美國財政部金融研究辦公室（Office of Financial Research, OFR）發布的一份看起來似乎無關痛癢的報告。OFR由多德-弗蘭克金融改革法案創建，職責包括開展、贊助與“金融穩定”相關的研究。這么做似乎合情合理，畢竟，2008年的金融危機幾乎拖垮了整個全球經濟。

????OFR受到上級機構——金融穩定監督委員會（Financial Stability Oversight Council，簡稱FSOC）的指示，要求密切關注與資產管理公司相關的風險。FSOC是一個由全球金融機構監管者組成的國際組織。共同基金、私募資本、對沖基金、各大保險公司的資產管理部門以及銀行共同管理著總額高達53萬億美元的資產。其中有10家公司的資產管理額均超過1萬億美元。貝萊德（BlackRock）是目前為止最大的資本管理公司，資本高達4.1萬億美元。

????雖然OFR的報告缺少足夠的數據，不那么讓人信服，但是，如果仔細分析下資產管理公司，我們就會不寒而栗地發現，他們和當年金融危機中的銀行業如此相像。類似過度杠桿化（為了更多收益而不加思考的放大杠桿）、為獲取收益而承擔巨大風險、資產與負債比例不當、將資產隱藏在多個賬戶從而逃脫監管機構和大眾投資者……這些毛病資產管理公司一個不落，全染上了。

????OFR發布的這份報告是不是完美無缺？不。不過話說回來，有什么事情是完美的？我認為，這份報告的根本目的不過是幫助金融穩定監督委員會拓寬視野，不要只盯著已經受到監管的銀行體系，還要增進對資產管理公司的業務以及活動的了解，以便判斷是否存在任何可能危及市場和經濟的風險。這是金融穩定監督委員會和OFR的職責所在。

????人們（包括我在內）對大銀行總是喜歡落井下石，但信不信由你，大銀行并不是2008年金融危機所有問題的根源所在。資產管理公司和保險公司也同樣脫不了干系。回首5年前，納稅人提心吊膽地看著聯邦政府掏出上萬億美元去救助深陷泥潭的美國國際集團（ American Insurance Group，AIG），金融市場和共同基金產業，難道這些錢不會打水漂？不過，我們要明白，政府救助的不僅僅是銀行業，我們還在救助非銀行產業。那些持有大量銀行債務，且在金融衍生品交易中作為銀行對手方的機構同樣受益于我們的救助。如果我們沒有對銀行進行救助，上述非銀行機構可能會損失慘重。

????Hark. Do you hear it? That sound of ringing bells coming from the nation's capital as we enter the holiday season? Is it Salvation Army Santas taking to the street corners? Church campaniles playing "Carol of the Bells?" Or maybe angels getting their wings a la the Christmas classic It's a Wonderful Life?

????Nope. It's the ka-ching of K Street lobbyists ringing up the billable hours as they pile into the newest industry battle against financial reform. I am speaking of nascent efforts to regulate the multi-trillion dollar asset management industry. This war promises to be even bigger than the one megabanks have waged against the Volcker rule's proposed ban on speculative trading.

????The shot heard 'round the beltway was a seemingly innocuous report by a government research group called, appropriately, the Office of Financial Research or "OFR." The OFR was created by the Dodd-Frank financial reform law to -- among other things -- conduct and sponsor research related to "financial stability." That seems reasonable after the 2008 financial crisis nearly brought down the world economy.

????The OFR was asked by its parent agency, a group of major financial regulatory heads called the Financial Stability Oversight Council or "FSOC," to look at potential risks associated with asset managers. These entities -- which include mutual funds, private equity and hedge funds, as well as the asset management divisions of insurance companies and banks -- collectively control about $53 trillion of assets. Ten firms each individually control over $1 trillion in assets with the largest, by far, being BlackRock (BLK), which manages $4.1 trillion.

????While acknowledging the lack of complete data to conduct the analysis, the OFR report had, I thought, some useful observations about things asset managers do that are frighteningly similar to the kinds of things that banks did in the lead-up to the financial crisis. You know, things like excessive leverage (yes, a number of them do use significant leverage to enhance returns), taking big risks to reach for yield, mismatching assets and liabilities, and putting assets in separate accounts that are not transparent to regulators or their public investors.

????Was the report perfect? No. Is anything? But its primary purpose, as I understand it, was simply to help FSOC look outside of the regulated banking system to learn more about the business and activities of asset managers so it could determine if there were any risks that might threaten markets and the economy. That is what the FSOC and OFR are supposed to do.

????People love to beat up on the big banks (and I do my fair share), but believe it or not, they were not the root of all evil in 2008. Asset managers and insurance companies also created significant problems. As you will recall, taxpayers had to risk trillions in government support to bailout both the American Insurance Group, a.k.a. AIG (AIG), as well as the money market/mutual fund industry. What's more, it is important to understand that when we bailed out the banks, we also bailed out these nonbank institutions, as some were heavily invested in bank debt or were standing on the other side of bank derivatives trades. Without the bank bailouts, these nonbanks could have taken big losses.