### Document: Different Models of Banking Regulation

Banking regulation is vital in maintaining financial stability, safeguarding the interests of depositors, and ensuring the overall health of a nation's economy. Different countries have diverse approaches to how they monitor and regulate their banking sectors. This document explores two models of banking sector regulation—the United States model involving multiple agencies including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Reserve System, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC); and a contrasting single-agency model exemplified by the Financial Services Commission (FSC), as seen in some jurisdictions like South Korea and Jamaica.

#### United States Banking Regulation: A Multi-Agency Approach

##### 1. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)
The OCC is an independent bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Established by the National Currency Act of 1863, its primary role is to charter, regulate, and supervise all national banks and federal savings associations as well as federal branches and agencies of foreign banks in the United States. The OCC's pivotal responsibilities include reviewing bank applications for new charters, branches, capital, or other changes; and taking supervisory actions against banks not in compliance with laws and regulations.

##### 2. Federal Reserve System (The Fed)
Founded in 1913, the Federal Reserve serves as the central bank of the United States. The Fed's broad mandate includes regulating and supervising banks to ensure sound banking practices and overall financial stability. It oversees both member and non-member banks and possesses emergency lending capabilities to safeguard against financial crises. Its functions are critical in setting national monetary policy, regulating the banking industry, providing services to other banks, the U.S. government, and managing the country's money supply.

##### 3. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)
The FDIC, created in 1933 in response to thousands of bank failures during the Great Depression, insures deposits at banks and thrifts. It covers the depositor’s accounts at insured banks up to a ceiling per account ownership category. Beyond insurance, the FDIC also monitors and examines financial institutions for safety, soundness, and consumer protection; makes large and complex financial institution resolutions; and manages receiverships.

#### Example of Single-Agency Model: The Financial Services Commission

##### 1. The Financial Services Commission (FSC)
In countries like South Korea and Jamaica, the FSC functions as the integrated supervisor for the financial services sector, including banking, securities, and insurance markets. Established to promote the soundness of financial systems and supervise financial institutions, the South Korean FSC, for example, oversees financial policies, financial services companies and their operations, and ensures compliance with laws and regulations.

The FSC combines regulatory and supervisory authority previously divided among separate government entities, thereby streamlining the process and ensuring a unified oversight structure. Its responsibilities include policy formulation, supervision of financial organizations, examination of procedures, consumer protection, and handling administrative sanctions for irregularities and violations.

### Summary
While the U.S. uses a multi-agency approach for banking regulation, involving the OCC, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC each playing specialized roles in a broader system of financial regulation, other countries may employ a centralized approach where a single entity like the FSC manages all major regulatory responsibilities. Each model has its distinct advantages. The multi-agency approach allows for checks and balances across different facets of financial regulation, minimizing systemic risks; whereas the single-agency model promises efficiency and potentially clearer accountability. Both systems aim to foster stability, compliance, and confidence in the banking sector, yet they reflect different historical, economic, and structural choices tailored to national needs.