Across the hallways of many state capitals, state banking and securities regulators also got by in 1995 with budgets that were far lower than the fees that the regulated industries paid into state coffers. Precise data on the state fees and assessments paid by banks isn't available, according to CSBS, because much state banking and securities regulation is combined in one agency and the departments don't report the individual sources of revenue. But it appears that the fees paid in the securities area for many departments help keep banking-related fees down. Johns estimates that the fees and assessments collected from state-regulated banks is about the same as the department budgets. But this is only part of the picture in trying to draw comparisons between the costs of regulation on the insurance and banking industries.
Insurance is exclusively state-regulated, while banks are also supervised by four federal agencies.
The FDIC and the Fed are funded largely by income from investments. Any effort to measure the cost of regulation for the two industries has to take into account the fact that banks, like most corporations, pay state and federal tax on net income while insurers pay state tax on gross premiums written. Insurance industry experts themselves are split on whether the current system makes sense. Mutual Insurance Cos. The industry is putting far more into state government through premium taxes and other revenues than it is getting back in well-funded departments.