We use an event study approach to estimate the burden of the financial regulations associated with Systemically Important Financial Institution (SIFI) designation. On March 30, 2016, the US District Court determined that MetLife’s SIFI designation was arbitrary and capricious because the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) failed to weigh the economic cost of the financial regulation on MetLife against the benefits of increased financial stability. We find significant positive abnormal returns for MetLife and AIG on the date of the ruling. We estimate that the lifting of the SIFI designation created $1.4 billion in corporate wealth for MetLife, suggesting that MetLife would be 3.4% more profitable as a non-SIFI. These gains fall short of the $8 billion stipulated by MetLife in its complaint. We also find significant abnormal returns to SIFI institutions on the day following the US Presidential election.

中文翻译：

---

系统重要性的价值：大都会人寿*

我们使用事件研究方法来估计与具有系统重要性的金融机构（SIFI）指定相关的金融法规的负担。2016年3月30日，美国地区法院裁定MetLife的SIFI称谓是任意的和反复无常的，因为金融稳定监督委员会（FSOC）未能权衡MetLife的金融法规的经济成本与增加的金融稳定性所带来的好处。在裁定之日，我们发现MetLife和AIG出现了明显的正异常收益。我们估计，取消SIFI名称将为MetLife创造14亿美元的公司财富，这表明，作为非SIFI，MetLife的利润将增加3.4％。这些收益低于大都会人寿在其申诉中规定的80亿美元。