Regulatory Requirements Quotes

The protocol things, the officialdom, are part of my work. But it doesn't take more than 20 percent of my time. The majority of my time I spend on issues that I care about.

How can any company know if its processes, products, people are safe? Only if everyone is watching and telling the truth. The first part can be assumed; the second cannot.

I was, as president and chairman of the board, required by law to verify the veracity of the financial figures, the assets under management, the number of outstanding shares, et cetera.

Intel has a very complete process that I go through any time I want to sell that ensures I have no insider information.

I've signed many documents as president and CEO as required by law. I signed every single document that we were required to file - every single one of them.

I have made it a policy not to draft documents that will be reviewed by a public body.

They say I am a regulator and I think it is just an effort not to comply with the decree. I do not do anything except what the decree requires me to do.

Banks can’t put their money in the bank. They have to lend it out.

That's a problem. I mean, like any sort of growing startup organization, we are sort of overwhelmed by our growth. And that means we're getting enormous quantity of whistleblower disclosures of a very high caliber, but don't have enough people to actually process and vet this information.

Do I regret taking the company public? Yes and no. Yes, because it put us under enormous pressure for a young company to go public at that point in its history, something you never could have done in the old days.

There was a time when the FCC tried to require a certain amount of television and media to be educational, a certain amount to be newsworthy and a certain amount of it to be public access.

Setting regulatory certainty is very important for bitcoin. I'm opposed to the regulations, but the bitcoin businesses need to know the rules of the game in order to move ahead.

In my view, it is unreasonable for EPA to exclude considerations of costs in determining whether it is 'appropriate' to impose significant new regulations on electric utilities.

Loss-absorbing capacity among banks is substantially higher as a result of both regulatory requirements and stress testing exercises.

The big producer is going to figure out how to deal with whatever the rules are, but the little guy who is running a few hundred units or maybe feeding 1,500 cattle a year, how will they ever comply with these requirements?

I always assign auditors to strictly supervise the businesses.

We're one of the most highly regulated industries, and we have to pay attention to what government is doing.

Regulations force people to do better.

The sum of all the current regulations presents ever increasing hurdles.

Always beware an unsigned architectural design.

The RFA requires federal agencies to assess the economic impact of their regulations on small firms, and if significant, consider less burdensome alternatives. Federal agencies sometimes fail to comply at all, or simply 'check the box,' fulfilling the letter of the law, while missing the purpose of the law entirely.

I've spent enough time in the business community to know there are certain regulators who are very constructive in their approach - those who enforce the laws and who actually want to help you comply - and there are others who have a prosecutorial attitude.

There is no such thing as free regulation.

I'm a former insurance regulator. What companies really want and need is some clarity about what the rules are.

From my point of view, the American financial system - including banks and investment banks - is far safer because of capital and liquidity requirements. Despite all the turbulence so far this year, I don't think anyone's questioning our system. And that, obviously, is a good thing.