Big banks are increasingly willing to challenge the regulatory oversight of the federal government, particularly in Washington D.C. This shift in strategy reflects a growing confidence among financial institutions, which are now more assertive in their dealings with regulatory bodies. The move is seen as a response to the perceived overreach of regulatory agencies, which have been imposing stricter rules and penalties on banks.

One key area where this change is evident is in the handling of regulatory fines. Historically, banks have often settled disputes with regulators without contesting the fines. However, recent cases have seen banks taking a more aggressive stance, challenging the fines and arguing that they are excessive. This approach is seen as a way to push back against what banks perceive as unfair and disproportionate penalties.

Another significant development is the increased scrutiny of regulatory actions. Banks are now more likely to question the motives and methods of regulatory agencies, particularly in cases where they believe the actions are arbitrary or unjust. This shift in attitude is driven by a desire to protect their interests and ensure that regulatory actions are fair and reasonable.

The change in strategy is also influenced by the broader political environment. The current administration has been more lenient in its approach to banking regulations, which has emboldened banks to be more assertive in their dealings with regulators. This new stance is likely to have significant implications for the regulatory landscape, as banks seek to maintain their profitability and growth while navigating the complex regulatory environment.

Overall, the willingness of big banks to confront their regulatory overseers reflects a shift in their approach to regulatory compliance, driven by a desire to protect their interests and ensure fair treatment.