Skip to content

Content Library

Back to Articles

Article August 23, 2025

Why Legal Discipline Must Anchor the New Risk Era

Why Legal Discipline Must Anchor the New Risk Era

Simon Rasin, Director, Senior Managing Counsel, Head of Legal for Corporate Treasury, Risk and Stress Testing, BNY MellonLinkedIn profile for Simon Rasin

The SVB collapse exposed deep flaws in risk governance, deposit stability assumptions, and regulatory preparedness. As scrutiny rises, institutions are reevaluating how risk is embedded in decision-making and whether the system can meet the demands of a r

display-middle-ads-here
According to the Head of Legal at a leading New York bank, the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in early 2023 did more than trigger tremors in liquidity markets – it shattered the belief that technical compliance alone could prevent disaster.

While the resolution process spared most depositors, the aftermath has transformed how regulators, institutions, and legal counsel approach asset-liability management, liquidity planning, and the culture of risk. 

In the months since, oversight has intensified. Supervisors are tightening expectations on liquidity stress testing, prepositioned collateral, and contingency funding plans through aggressive reviews and sharper scrutiny.

“The Federal Reserve’s discount window, once a theoretical exercise, has become a litmus test for operational readiness,” the legal chief told CeFPro’s recent Treasury & ALM conference. 

Legal teams now play a more central role, not just ensuring documentation is watertight but aligning governance with escalating supervisory demands.

The SVB episode, they argue, exposed an uncomfortable truth: many banks had the right tools but lacked the governance discipline to enforce them. 

Liquidity coverage ratios mean little if leadership cannot activate them under pressure. In-house legal and risk teams must ensure frameworks are both executable and integrated into enterprise decision-making. 

That requires embedding stress-tested assumptions into boardroom discussions and confronting the reality that even insured deposits can vanish in hours.

Perhaps the most significant shift is the blurring of lines between regulation and supervision. 

“It’s no longer about waiting for new rules – supervisory pressure itself is driving change,” this executive explained. 

Institutions are overhauling liquidity playbooks not because of mandates, but because no board wants to be caught flat-footed in the next crisis.

Legal and risk functions must interpret this supervisory tone and translate it into clear internal expectations and actionable strategies.

Sign Up to Our Newsletter

Sign up

Connect Plus

Unlock more with Connect Plus membership

This content is available to Connect Plus members.