Talk:Bank for International Settlements/Archive 1

structure of the article
I just added a new subtitle ("goals and structure"), because until now we had a very long introduction, and a table of contents almost at the end of the article. --Michaël 11:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

M3 indicator?
Can I ask someone to explain this term. I am researching macroeconomics for personal interest and have to rely on the internal links to define some terms. There is no article, link nor description for this term. 206.24.48.1 03:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Irrelevant and unsourced sections
I've removed the following sections: Dollar hegemony, Debt load, and Export vs. domestic, as they are unsourced and are tenuously connected to the BIS. - Crosbiesmith 12:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

GRB
GRB does not seem to a fraud in terms of cheating people out of money. As far as I can tell, GRB does not ask for money. I tried to register an account with GRB. The GRB site said it emailed a PIN. But I never got an email. The script to resend a PIN was broken. It gave a ColdFusion error.

GRB is a pie-in-the-sky proposal for an alternate banking system. Even if GRB were a fraud, this article would not be the place to warn people about it.

I removed the section on GRB.

TT   13:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Nazi Gold controversy
I have not deleted this section. But I nominate it as a candidate. The section cites a reference. Which is good. But the section does not have much to do with the Bank for International Settlements. Which is bad.

TT   13:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I've removed the section on that basis. This article's about the BIS, that sentence isn't.  --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 12:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Role in WWII
I recently watched the documentary cited on this page, and I think that a stronger statement should be made about the role of the BIS in moving Nazi funds and collaborating with the Nazis. There seems to be little doubt that this happened, and it would seem like bias to dismiss these claims as mere accusations, when there are solid records indicating that members and heads of the BIS and world banks like the Bank of England (as part of the BIS) aided or did not take action to prevent the transfer of gold from conquered nations to the reichsbank. Any thoughts? Markleci 01:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Article added. Interesting read! --LC 01:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thats why i am here - the WWII controversy

This is the worst page I have ever seen. Political, lacking of basic information about the topic, haphazard, incorrect information. If I turned this in in high school, I wouldn't have got a good grade. I see no hope for this page, unless someone apolitical and knowledgeable starts completely over. This page is a disgrace to wikipedia. 2-1-2007

I'm in the process of collecting material for a new article on Allen Dulles which does justice to the historical record. Like this one, which reads like an advertisement for the bank, the Dulles article is a whitewash.

"I amend my comment somewhat after having read the Criticism section of the article. While it calls me a 'Conspiracy Theorist', which ought not be a pejorative in my opinion, it does mention the principal accusation of the place of BIS in plundering of the gold of conquered nations.ProudPrimate 01:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)"

"An early foe of Hitler...." it says, lifting whole paragraphs from a CIA website page. He was part of a massive collaboration and support with Fritz Thyssen, Brown Bros. Harriman, and Prescott Sheldon Bush. But I want to be sure the foundations are all in place first. I just bittorrented a version of the documentary mentioned above — with an American voice narrating, (who doesn't mention TimeWatch in the opening passage, perhaps to avoid crediting them). But the rest is identical, and I agree, the damning evidence against all of these too, too clever men is massive.

I'm particularly interested in Hjalmar Schacht, whose creation the BIS was, and his close connection with Dulles. Hitler is quoted in after-dinner repartee as saying "He is a man of quite astonishing ability and is unsurpassed in the art of getting the better of the other party. But it was just his consummate skill in swindling other people which made him indispensable at the time." (quoted in the video, and in a review of Hitler's Banker: Hjalmar Horace Greeley Schacht).

ProudPrimate 01:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree that this article is severely lacking in terms of the banks activities during the war, specifically there is no mention of the allegations of collaboration between the bank and the axis powers. I am therefore adding an npov tag to the page. --Deadly&forall;ssassin 17:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

comments
This is not true. National-states are quite free (and do) set their own banking policies. (For example, China has reserve rate and banking regulations that are quite a bit looser than BIS suggestions.)


 * The reserve rates required of nation-states, land-owners, and corporations by national central banks are effectively determined by BIS policy. One of the most questionable assumptions of which are that all nation-states in the system, democratic or not, enjoy a "zero reserve" status under the BIS regime.


 * Another such BIS rule is that a drastically lower reserve rate is required of land-owners than of private corporations, and of these than the citizenry - a clearly "rigged" playing field favoring incumbent regimes and landlords which has led in recent years to suggestions that the BIS should be reformed to use credit rating agencies to determine the creditworthiness of these instead.

China recently joined the WTO and will likely be forced to tighten up. Also, as a still-nominally-Communist country, they have ideological problems with the current BIS reserve rate system. These are factors driving the "suggestions that the BIS should be reformed". Basically, the BIS system was set up to win the Cold War. It's probably the keystone of people's objections to the global banking regimes.


 * No they don't have ideological problems with it. There are a number of practical and logistical reasons that Chinese banks don't use BIS standards.


 * um, do you have any experience with Asian culture? if someone has an ideological problem with something, they invent " a number of practical and logistical reasons " to delay, i.e. ignore.  IT's not like communism has gone away - the Chinese government knows exactly who wrote the original BIS guidelines and why.  They're a holdover from the Cold War and everyone knows it.24


 * The practical problem with BIS standards is that the four Chinese state owned banks would likely collapse if they used BIS standards. However, unlike Japan, China is fixing its banking system.

But that misses my main point which is that BIS standards are guidelines which national central banks can and do ignore.
 * ok, fine, so they aren't as powerful as IMF or WTO rules.24
 * Which means that your statement that BIS effectively sets reserve rates is wrong.


 * depends on what you mean by "effectively" and "wrong". I don't know about you, but I cannot call up the managers of four Chinese state banks who are lifetime Communist Party members and tell them to shift over to consider capitalist military-industrial nations and private landowners to have drastically preferred credit, and make them do it, even though they "would likely collapse"... I'll stand by my statement, and instead say that they're about equally powerful as IMF or WTO which also say they don't "rule" their client nations.


 * Neither can the BIS. Chinese banks don't lend to foreign nations (they can't since the renminbi is not convertible) nor do they lend to landowners since no one in China owns land (they have land use certificates which provide most of benefits of tenure but generally can't be collateralized).  The managers of Chinese state banks tend to be Harvard business school graduates rather than Communist Party members.  BIS is nowhere near as powerful as WTO or IMF.


 * we still have this problem with the hack the way the last author left it:

I just happened across this article while studying credit policy for my masters program in economics, and I have to say it's one of the worst I've seen on wikipedia to date. For example, the topic of "Natural Capital" refers to landowners, something the BIS has no policy on or any interest in. Land owners are not required to hold capital under the policy. The only point of relevancy I can think of is that the Basel II makes it hard for banks to lend to landowners on high Loan to Valuation ratios. I don't know what you *think* the BIS does, but my understanding is that they process international payments, serve as a forum for monetary policy and are the platform for discussing and implementing Basel II. I know there's a tendancy amongst the left to lump this organisation in with other international organisations (WTO, World Bank and the IMF being the ones I see mentioned here), but they're not all the same. If you have a beef about property rights, the World Bank or IMF seems a more logical target.

At the very least, please describe what they actually DO, not what your personal beefs are with the global financial system. And even better, provide citations for your criticisms.

140.168.69.166 07:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC) (Jason)
 * Easier said than done. It's pretty time consuming to sort the wheat out from the chaff.  Any efforts you might make will be most welcome.  As a small token of my own good intentions, I have completely deleted the section on natural capital. It doesn't provide references, or explain the connection to the BIS. - Crosbiesmith 09:15, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

This article is of extremely low quality. Instead of explaining what the BIS does, who its members are, when it was established etc., it rushes into criticism already in the second half-sentence. Then the second paragraph starts with "this plan", without ever having mentioned any plan. It is utterly unintelligible.
 * well, it certainly is crap at this point, since all mention of the problem and the plan to reform reserves was removed. The most prominent critic of the standing BIS scheme is Joseph Stiglitz, ex of the world bank, who believes a very comprehensive global land reform scheme would be the way to fix the BIS and World Bank both. 24

24, would it be possible for you to write an article which cleanly separates description from criticism? AxelBoldt
 * not in the present political climate here, no. The BIS is such a heavily criticized institution with its own internal reform plans so self-critical that any mention of the Bank and its current policy must read like polemic to the uninformed.  I think the description as I wrote it is fair, and reflects global opinion of the flaws in the BIS.  It does not of course, and can never, reflect US perceptions that the BIS is fair play.  Feel free to look up Stiglitz and Crockett (many of the criticisms of the BIS are Crockett's own).  If we can settle down on how to debate economics topics and whether the classical bigots are going to be allowed to rule the roost, I'll know how to write it.24

That's a heavily biased and agenda-pushing article. In other words, not encyclopedia material. If Larry were here, he'd just remove most of it to the talk page, as he did to one of mine back-when (and for good reason, I see). Cheers, Koyaanis Qatsi, Monday, April 8, 2002
 * it's nice that you believe that. When did you last talk to Crockett?  The article is indeed biased towards his published point of view, and describes  his problems and agenda, as it should, since he is the source cited, and that is the current plan of the Bank's own management.  What is the issue here?

If this is Crockett's opinion, not your own, say so. That is part of the issue. If it is your opinion, not Crockett's, it does not belong in an encyclopedia. That is the rest of the issue. Koyaanis Qatsi, Monday, April 8, 2002
 * the article as I left it described the problem of moving off a landownership and military fiat preference system (leading to the "risk free rate" for all dictatorships backed by "the West" no matter how truly uncreditworthy they are, and also leading to the global debt mess, but that's hardly only my view) and adopting credit ratings as the problem of "hardwiring the credit culture", Crockett's own exact words. 24


 * And, I doubt Larry understands this topic well enough to comprehend the variosu arguments around land reform, military fiat, global banking and etc. So if me moved it to talk it would be for a perception, not for an analysis of bias.24

I moved this from the main page, since it lacks a neutral description of the bank. Biased propaganda has no place in Wikipedia, especially if it is as incomprehensible as the following.
 * it was the uninformed edit that made it incomprehensible. The criticism of the bank comes from other world bank figures, and it's own management.  The program of reform mentioned is the bank's own.  Shows what happens when people who don't understand the material, and just don't like what they read, hack it up rather than understand it.  Anyway, there are more important articles to waste my credibility on, and in general this crowd can't tell a Governing ontological distinction from a Governing operational distinction, so rather than be suicide-bombed for doing this right and offending some neoclassical fool's "truth", I'm going to leave it alone.  Thanks for cleaning up the mess.24

The article as I left it is extremely poor, since it doesn't explain what the bank's mission is nor what it actually does. But the following paragraphs make matters only worse. AxelBoldt


 *  - because of its interlocking role with the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in supporting development under a strategy of capitalism, its role is debated politically, especially in money supply theory. 


 * In addition to this plan to "hardwire the credit culture", and address specific concerns with Offshore Financial Centres (OFCs), Highly Leveraged Institutions (HLIs), Large and Complex Financial Institutions (LCFIs), and deposit insurance, the Bank under General Manager Andrew Crockett seeks to implement a standard "well-designed financial safety net, supported by strong prudential regulation and supervision, effective laws that are enforced, and sound accounting and disclosure regimes," for capitalism.


 * Doubts about this program, its effectiveness, and desirability, especially in light of serious failures of money-laundering law enforcement, major breaches of prudence and supervision in the United States, have to some minor critique of the BIS in the anti-globalization movement. However, as few in this movement recognize its absolutely central role, this has been muted in comparison with that focused on IMF,  WTO and World Bank policies.

On http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:BankIntZahlungsausgleich.jpg, there is a GNU-FDL-licensed picture of the BIS headquarters in Basel, Switzerland you may use for the article. I made this photograph. Regards, David Croll/de:Benutzer:Keimzelle
 * David, Thanks! I actually found the picture before I found your note.  It's a good clear picture and it really helps the page.  Viele dank!  Crosbiesmith 23:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

- The author knows nothing about monetary policy, nothing about banking regulation, nothing about central banks, nothing about the history of the BIS, nothing about economics. This article should be taken off of Wikipedia. Bhcpunga 18:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Global value
I've reverted the whole edit made by User:142.177.92.181, as it introduces a raft of undefined terms, unattributed opinion, and irrelevant references. The 'Montreal Declaration of the World Municipal Leaders' doesn't have any direct connection to this article. If a participant made a specific criticism of the BIS that might be worth quoting. I don't belive the idea that the BIS should consider the 'human value of mothers' as as a store of 'objective global value' has been discussed anywhere else -  Crosbiesmith 20:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

99.39.186.37 (talk) 22:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC) NYT June 29, 2010 B5 Global Group Warns Banks of the West Still at Risk Some banks "still appear on life support" --countries were unlikely to be able to resist upward pressure by means of capital controls ---continue to engage in high-risk practices rules to be finished in Nov but years before initialized--Many banks still face 'day of reckoning' due to removal of government support and will need to write down losses or refinance I agree with the author about regs of BIS who later in this discussion says the bank is above the law; appears it is such a cash cow it just changes owners.

Please note the word "reserve" in banking is used in at least three different meanings.

1) Reserve policy should refer to holding highly liquid assets against a run. In a Gold Standard Era bank, this would have been gold, perhaps bank notes held on the premises, and maybe correspondent bank deposits (think of the Suffolk Bank system, see Arthur J. Rolnick, Bruce D. Smith, and Warren E. Weber, Lessons from a Laissez-Faire Payments System: The Suffolk Banking System (1825-58) Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, May/June 1998 Vol. 80, No. 3, pp. 105-116 http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/article/3112.) In the U.S. today, reserves are vault cash plus deposits in the relevant Reserve Bank (see Stephen G. Cecchetti, & Kermit L.  Schoenholtz, Money, Banking and Financial Markets, 3rd Edition (McGraw-Hill, New York: 2011) p. G-10.)  By the way, there are now, and have been since its inception, twelve Reserve Banks in the Federal Reserve System not nine regions. Each country sets its own reserve requirements. If the BIS proposed a new standard, the Federal Reserve would have to implement it in its regulations or Congress would have to legislate it before it would become effect in the United States (Stephen G. Cecchetti, & Kermit L. Schoenholtz, Money, Banking and Financial Markets, 3rd Edition (McGraw-Hill, New York: 2011), p. 361.) Vault cash and deposits with the Federal Reserve Banks (overwhelmingly the most important quantitatively) appear as assets on bank balance sheets. Member bank reserves appear as a liability on central bank balance sheets. In the U.S. (and this seems the general practice elsewhere), reserve requirements are set as a percent of deposits (bank liabilities) not of loans (bank assets.)  I should warn that my fellow economists are often confused about the concept of reserves and until the recent financial crisis seemed woefully ignorant of the distinction between capital and reserves. My purely personal belief is that economists' lack of understanding of accounting and finance has led to much bad policy.

2) Loan loss reserves are offsets to loans held on bank balance sheets against defaults that might be incurred on those loans. Increases in loan loss reserves decrease bank net income and therefore equity (and thus capital), while decreases increase net income and therefore equity (and thus capital.)  See Peter S. Rose & Sylvia C. Hudgins Bank Management & Financial Service,8th Edition (McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York: 2010.) pp 135-7, 148.

3) Central bank holdings of gold and foreign currencies are called foreign exchange reserves. They use them to facilitate international transactions and intervene in foreign exchange markets.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MalcolmSr. (talk • contribs) 20:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Conspiracy theories
I think there should be some mention at least of the conspiracy theories about this entity. Anyone know how to cite a conspiracy theory? 76.117.247.55 (talk) 01:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. many articles need this section like "Criticism" We could use: BIS: http://www.thedailybell.com/1327/BIS-Trading-With-the-Enemy-The-Whole-Story.html http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/big_brother_basel.php http://www.bilderberg.org/bis.htm The Bank for International Settlements: Evolution and Evaluation [Hardcover] James C. Baker (Author) Muez1981 (talk) 22:28, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

A Bank above and beyond the Law
A Bank Above the Law

Quotes from the "Agreement between the Swiss Federal Council and the Bank for International Settlements to determine the Bank’s legal status in Switzerland" (1987)


 * "The buildings or parts of buildings and surrounding land which, whoever may be the owner thereof, are used for the purposes of the Bank shall be inviolable. No agent of the Swiss public authorities may enter therein without the express consent of the Bank."


 * "The archives of the Bank and, in general, all documents and any data media belonging to the Bank or in its possession, shall be inviolable at all times and in all places."


 * "The Bank shall exercise supervision of and police power over its premises."


 * "The Bank shall enjoy immunity from jurisdiction, save: ..."


 * "The Bank shall enjoy, in respect of its property and assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, immunity from any measure of execution (including seizure, attachment, freeze or any other measure of execution, enforcement or sequestration, and in particular of attachment within the meaning of Swiss law), except: ..."


 * "All deposits entrusted to the Bank, all claims against the Bank and the shares issued by the Bank shall, without the express prior agreement of the Bank, wherever located and by whomsoever held, be immune from any measure of execution (including seizure, attachment, freeze or any other measure of execution, enforcement or sequestration, and in particular of attachment within the meaning of Swiss law)."


 * "The Bank, its assets, income and other property shall be exempt from direct Federal, cantonal and communal taxes."


 * "The treatment by customs authorities of articles intended for the Bank shall be governed by the Ordinance of 13th November 1985 concerning the preferential customs treatment of international organisations, of States in their relations with such organisations and of the special missions of foreign States."


 * "The Bank may receive, hold, convert and transfer all funds, gold, currency, cash and other transferable securities, and dispose freely thereof, and generally carry out without any restriction all the operations permitted by its Statutes, both within Switzerland and in its relations with foreign countries."


 * "The pension fund of the Bank, which is administered under the auspices of the Bank for its official purposes, shall enjoy, irrespective of whether or not the fund has separate legal personality, the same exemptions, privileges and immunities as those enjoyed by the Bank itself with regard to its movable property."


 * The members of the Board of Directors of the Bank, together with the representatives of those central banks which are members of the Bank, shall enjoy while carrying out their duties in Switzerland and throughout their journey to or from the place where a meeting is held, the following privileges and immunities: (a) immunity from arrest or imprisonment and immunity from seizure of their personal baggage, save in flagrant cases of criminal offence; (b) inviolability of all papers and documents; (c) immunity from jurisdiction, even after their mission has been accomplished, for acts carried out in the discharge of their duties, including words spoken and writings; ..."

Hm.. in essence a Bank that is above the law.. in fact any law.. kind of an express and explicit invitation to fraud and criminal activities.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.215.34.78 (talk) 04:06, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sources: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalbanking04.htm

(see also the footnotes and references at the end of that page).

The complete text is published in: 'Compendium of Swiss Laws' [Recueil systématique/Systematische Sammlung]: 0.192.122.971.3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.215.43.102 (talk) 01:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This kind of immunity for intergovernmental organizations is needed for the same reason that diplomatic immunity is needed for ambassadors and embassies. From the point of view of other governments, the host government is "above the law" within its territory. Governments regularly change their laws or ignore them in order to violate the natural rights of their citizens. If representatives of other governments were not exempt from such treatment, then they could not reliably perform the services which their governments require of them. For example, see the Iran hostage crisis during which the American diplomats were unable to discharge their duties due to interference by the Iranian government and its stooges. Intergovernmental organizations are generally governed by boards whose members represent a variety of governments. These boards ensure that the actions of the organization are consistent with standards of behavior which are broadly regarded as proper by the community of nations. JRSpriggs (talk) 14:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Without a source, that would be but your own original research. All editors of whatever outlook should only be citing sources on this topic. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Here's one article, any thoughts on that? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

BIS member list and Map errors
The article has a map showing BIS members, but it fails to list the current ones. I will try to put a list up, but someone will probably need to modify it to make the article appear better aesthetically. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizziiusa (talk • contribs) 12:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The world map does not indicate these listed members: Columbia, Luxembourg, Peru. Elfelix (talk) 20:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I request a change to the History section
In my view, the history section is unbalanced as it focuses almost exclusively on the Second World War. I therefore suggest to provide a sober, very high-level and factual overview of the entire BIS history. This is not only what the average reader would expect to find under this heading, it also reduces the exaggerated focus on the WWII episode (for which, nonetheless, I have kept to a large extent the original critical tone). It is also a good way of referencing the key academic literature on the BIS – which is currently entirely ignored by the Wikipedia entry. Since I work for the BIS I should not make the changes myself, but I would appreciate if a Wikipedia editor could review my version and update the entry for me.

'History The BIS was established in 1930 by an intergovernmental agreement between Germany, Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, the United States and Switzerland. It opened its doors in Basel, Switzerland on 17 May 1930.

The BIS was originally intended to facilitate reparations imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles after World War I, and to act as the trustee for the German Government International Loan (Young Loan) that was floated in 1930. The need to establish a dedicated institution for this purpose was suggested in 1929 by the Young Committee, and was agreed to in August of that year at a conference at The Hague. A charter for the bank was drafted at the International Bankers Conference at Baden-Baden in November, and its charter was adopted at a second Hague Conference on January 20, 1930. According to the charter, shares in the bank could be held by individuals and non-governmental entities. However, the rights of voting and representation at the Bank’s General Meeting were to be exercised exclusively by the central banks of the countries in which the shares had been initially subscribed. The BIS was constituted as having corporate existence in Switzerland on the basis of an agreement with Switzerland acting as headquarters state for the bank. It also enjoyed certain immunities in the contracting states (Brussels Protocol 1936).

The BIS’s original task of facilitating World War I reparation payments quickly became obsolete. Reparation payments were first suspended (Hoover moratorium, June 1931) and then abolished altogether (Lausanne Agreement, July 1932). Instead, the BIS focused on its second statutory task, i.e. fostering the cooperation between its member central banks. It acted as a meeting forum for central banks and provided banking facilities to them. For instance, in the late 1930s, the BIS was instrumental in helping continental European central banks shipping out part of their gold reserves to London and New York. At the same time, the BIS fell under the spell of the appeasement illusion. The most notorious incident in this context was the transfer of 23 tons of gold held by the BIS in London on behalf of the Czechoslovakian national bank to the German Reichsbank after Nazi Germany had invaded Czechoslovakia in March 1939.

At the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, the BIS Board of Directors – on which the main European central banks were represented – decided that the Bank should remain open, but that, for the duration of hostilities, no meetings of the Board of Directors were to take place and that the Bank should maintain a neutral stance in the conduct of its business. However, as the war dragged on evidence mounted that the BIS conducted operations that were helpful to the Germans. Also, throughout the war, the BIS accepted gold from the German Reichsbank in payment for prewar obligations linked to the Young Plan. This in spite of repeated Allied warnings not to accept gold or other assets from Nazi Germany. It later transpired that much of this gold had been looted (and subsequently remelted) by the Germans from the central banks in occupied territories. Some of this remelted gold included gold rings and other items from labor and prison camp victims. Operations conducted by the BIS were viewed with increasing suspicion from London and Washington. The fact that top level German industrialists and advisors sat on the BIS board seemed to provide ample evidence of how the BIS might be used by Hitler throughout the war, with the help of American, British and French banks. Between 1933 and 1945 the BIS board of directors included Walther Funk, a prominent Nazi official, and Emil Puhl, as well as Hermann Schmitz, the director of IG Farben and Baron von Schroeder, the owner of the J.H. Stein Bank.

The 1944 Bretton Woods Conference recommended the "liquidation of the Bank for International Settlements at the earliest possible moment". This resulted in the BIS being the subject of a disagreement between the U.S. and British delegations. The liquidation of the bank was supported by other European delegates, as well as the United States (including Harry Dexter White and Henry Morgenthau, Secretary of the Treasury), but opposed by John Maynard Keynes, head of the British delegation.

Fearing that the BIS would be dissolved, Keynes went to Morgenthau hoping to prevent the dissolution, or have it postponed, but the next day the dissolution of the BIS was approved. However, the liquidation of the bank was never actually undertaken. In April 1945, the new U.S. president Harry S. Truman and the British government suspended the dissolution, and the decision to liquidate the BIS was officially reversed in 1948.

After the Second World War, the BIS retained an outspoken European focus. It acted as Agent for the European Payments Union (EPU, 1950-58), an intra-European clearing arrangement designed to help the European countries in restoring currency convertibility and free, multilateral trade. During the 1960s – the heyday of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system – the BIS once again became the locus for transatlantic monetary cooperation. It coordinated the central banks’ Gold Pool and a number of currency support operations (e.g. Sterling Group Arrangements of 1966 and 1968). The Group of Ten (G10), including the main European economies, Canada, Japan and the United States, became the most prominent grouping.

With the end of the Bretton Woods system (1971-73) and the transition to floating exchange rates, financial stability issues came to the fore. The collapse of internationally active banks, such as Bankhaus Herstatt (1974), highlighted the need for improved banking supervision at an international level. The G10 Governors created the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS), which remains active to this day. The BIS developed into a global meeting place for regulators and for developing international standards (Basel Concordat, Basel Capital Accord, Basel II and III). Through its member central banks, the BIS was actively involved in the resolution of the Latin American debt crisis (1982).

From 1964 until 1993, the BIS provided the secretariat for the Committee of Governors of the Central Banks of the Member States of the European Community (Committee of Governors). This Committee had been created by European Council decision to improve monetary cooperation among the EC central banks. Likewise, the BIS in 1988-89 hosted most of the meetings of the Delors Committee (Committee for the Study of Economic and Monetary Union), which produced a blueprint for monetary unification subsequently adopted in the Maastricht Treaty (1992). In 1993, when the Committee of Governors was replaced by the European Monetary Institute (EMI – the precursor of the ECB), it moved location from Basel to Frankfurt, cutting its ties with the BIS.

In the 1990s-2000s, the BIS successfully globalised, breaking out of its traditional European core. This was reflected in a gradual increase in its membership (from 33 shareholding central bank members in 1995 to 60 in 2013, which together represent roughly 95% of global GDP), and also in the much more global composition of the BIS Board of Directors. In 1998, the BIS opened a Representative Office for Asia and the Pacific in the Hong Kong SAR. A BIS Representative Office for the Americas was established in 2002 in Mexico DF.

The BIS was originally owned by both central banks and private individuals, since the United States, Belgium and France had decided to sell all or some of the shares allocated to their central banks to private investors. BIS shares traded on stock markets, which made the bank an unusual organization: an international organization (in the technical sense of public international law), yet allowed for private shareholders. Many central banks had similarly started as such private institutions; for example, the Bank of England was privately owned until 1946. In more recent years the BIS has bought back its once publicly traded shares. It is now wholly owned by BIS members (central banks) but still operates in the private market as a counterparty, asset manager and lender for central banks and international financial institutions. Profits from its transactions are used, among other things, to fund the bank's other international activities.

V Torrano (talk) 12:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Deleted History
Back in the early to mid 2000's I wrote a whole section on the history of the BIS, Norway's involvement and demand that the Bank be liquidated. You dishonest shills delete it and expect people to donate money to your right wing propaganda screed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.211.246.11 (talk) 06:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)