WASHINGTON, DC-When the Dodd-Frank Act passed last year only the broad-bush outlines of the legislation were clear. Left to be determined were a myriad of rules that would actually implement the legislation. Based on comments by panelists and attendees at this week’s CRE Finance Council, held in Washington, DC, rule-making under Dodd-Frank will be painful for regulators and the regulated alike. “You couldn’t pay me enough to be a regulator right now,” said one participant. “Inevitably, there will be groups that are unhappy with the end result, and in some cases the legislation calls for conflicting regulation.”

This person’s sympathy for regulators, though, was in the minority. For the most part, panelists expressed dread and disgust with the upcoming process. “This legislation was intended to address a serious problem,” said another panelist, “but I think the law of unintended consequences may make the situation even worse.”

Many pointed to the ongoing efforts to update Regulation AB as an example. When the SEC first wrote the rules it created conditions to access the public securitization markets. Those, however, quickly drove investors to the private market. “Now it looks as though the SEC is planning to issue rules for the private market as well,” a panelist said. While the SEC is inviting industry comment--which the CRE Finance Council has obliged--even crafting suggested regulations is fraught, another panelist said. “You want to ask [the regulators] what does this or that mean. But in the end you wind up keeping silent because you may not like the answer and then it could be codified into the rules.”

The ire with regulators was not limited to the US. Panelists also called out negotiators in the Basel Accords, noting that many of their changes will have to be redone unless regulators want to see markets come to a halt. “A lot of the attention with Basel focused on capital standards but the liquidity standards they are developing have been largely under the radar,” a panelist said. “The problem is that liquidity standards aren’t intuitive to capital-minded folks and some of the requirements they are enacting could develop into significant macro issues on a global scale.”