More congressional scrutiny is being directed at the San Francisco Federal Reserve bank and its role in supervising Silicon Valley Bank.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. told First Citizens BancShares it was claiming a $500 million profit linked to rights it had received in the company's stock, which soared after the acquisition of the failed Silicon Valley Bank was sealed.

The rules President Joe Biden calls for include minimizing the financial burden that replenishing the Deposit Insurance Fund would impose on community banks.

Jelena McWilliams, who chaired the agency during the Trump administration, said removing the cap on insured deposits would impact the banking sector in three key ways.

The use of the Federal Reserve's emergency lending facilities was largely unchanged this week, indicating to some that the recent liquidity crisis isn't getting any worse.

A federal appeals court ruled in favor of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, setting up a court split ahead of a highly anticipated Supreme Court hearing in October. The Fifth Circuit previously ruled that the agency's funding mechanism violates the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.

The incentive structures for both banks and large, sophisticated depositors have changed because of federal regulators' decision to guarantee the uninsured deposits of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

The high-stakes acquisitions of 2008 and subsequent legal liabilities have sapped enthusiasm from many prospective buyers for Silicon Valley and Signature Banks. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. may end up having to sell assets piece by piece.

The system of 11 regional banks issued a combined $137 billion of bonds and discount notes on Tuesday and Wednesday, after selling $112 billion on Monday, the largest single day of issuance in its 90-year history.

After the failure of two banks between $100 billion and $250 billion of assets, many are asking regulators to change their oversight practices for these banks. The Fed has a wide berth to make a wide array of changes.

During his second day of congressional testimony this week, the Federal Reserve chair faced several questions about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's embattled funding mechanism.

For some political strategists, rising economic populism in the Republican party could mean that more financial services firms could face more political risk.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Martin Gruenberg said that the rise of hybrid and remote work, alongside rising interest rates, could be creating lingering risk in the maturity of some bank loans.

A New York Fed study finds that the Community Reinvestment Act does nothing to extend credit to lower-income areas, but it's unclear whether regulators' current reform effort could change that.

The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco confirmed Thursday night that Silvergate Bank has "fully repaid" the $4.3 billion it was lent in advances late last year. The bank had said in a regulatory filing that repaying the advances "could result in ... the bank being less than well-capitalized."

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is warning that excessive fees can chip away at the cash sent to the most vulnerable consumers who opt to receive Social Security and other public benefits via prepaid cards.

Banks reported record growth in net interest margins in 2022, but net income still fell, and the industry "continues to face significant downside risks" from inflation and other factors, Martin Gruenberg says.

The closely watched case — which goes to the heart of how the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau operates — could have a huge impact on consumers, the agency and the many industries it oversees and those it seeks to regulate.

Auto title lender TitleMax was ordered by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to pay a $10 million fine and $5 million in restitution for overcharging servicemembers and altering their personal information to avoid detection.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has asked the high court to overrule a lower-court decision that threatens its funding structure. The justices didn't accept the case on Tuesday, but experts say it could still make the cut in the coming week.