Generally, many variables are captured in the depository institutions in U.
S, Japan and China. However, due to the nature of the economic structure and financial laws operating between the U.S and Japan/China, such depository systems are waged with both similarities and contrasts.
Ideally, the institutions in U.S, Japan and China are allied to various activities and functions such as regulating the banking institutions as well as the services offered by the clients, regulating the banking framework to accommodate the requirements of both domestic and also international banking requirements of the institutions which compounds also the affiliated organization and agencies to those operating in the depository system. There is very little difference in the institutions affairs between th U.S and Japan/China. They both regulate the banking and financial activities of the community banks, companies representing bank holdings, thrift institutions, credit unions and also trust companies. To both cases, the framework of the institutions is the benchmark allied to the provision of regulatory activities for the corporate and banking financial circumstances.
They define the structures in which the broad array of activities and trade relations by the financial institutions and their clients should operate in. (Taylor, Kraft, Julie, 2006)However, the statutory regulations between U.S and the Japan/China is basically different and ascribed to different legal codes and requirements captured in the financial legal frameworks of the respective states. For example, the regulatory framework in U.S is regulated by the codes developed by the Federal Reserve system which was enacted in the 1982.
In Japan/China, the same regulatory framework in the institutions is provided by the respective financial laws which are usually varied demanding different trade restriction for the institutions. However, to U.S and the Japan/China, the codes and regulations have been seldom coined to follow suit to international financial requirement by adhering to various accounting standards such as the International Accounting Standard Board’s regulation. The activity framework to this institutions is almost the same with only role activity been diverse from the states of the financial implications in the countries.
(Taylor, Kraft, Julie, 2006) ReferenceTaylor, M, Kraft, B & Julie, R (2006) Financial Institutions Fraud. American Criminal Law Review, Vol. 43