Incentive problems in bank insider borrowing

Although bank insider abuses have been one of the most frequently cited causes of recent bank problems, the existing literature is surprisingly sparse in this area. The purpose of this article is to examine one element of insider abuse—the case of bank insider borrowing. In the context of the theory of financial intermediation, we propose a hypothesis that excessive insider borrowing creates substantial incentive problems and leads the bank to inferior performance. Our empirical analysis provides results consistent with this hypothesis. The policy implication of this article is that the regulatory agencies and especially the FDIC should carefully monitor banks with excessive insider borrowing to prevent an arbitrage against the insurance fund.     

Reporting choices in the shadow of bank runs

This paper investigates banks’ reporting choices in the context of bank runs. A fundamental-based run imposes market discipline on insolvent banks, but a panic-based run closes banks that could have survived with better coordination among creditors. We augment a bank-run model with the bank’s reporting choices. We show that banks with intermediate fundamentals have stronger incentive to misreport than those in the two tails. Moreover, reporting discretion reduces panic-based runs, but excessive discretion also reduces fundamental-based runs. The optimal amount of reporting discretion increases in the bank’s vulnerability to panic-based runs. Finally, a given bank’s opportunistic use of reporting discretion exerts a negative externality on other banks. Our paper answers the call by Armstrong et al. (2016) and Bushman (2016) to understand better the effects of banks’ special features on their reporting choices.     

How does deposit insurance affect bank risk? Evidence from the recent crisis

Deposit insurance is widely offered in a number of countries as part of a financial system safety net to promote stability. An unintended consequence of deposit insurance is the reduction in the incentive of depositors to monitor banks which lead to excessive risk-taking. We examine the relation between deposit insurance and bank risk and systemic fragility in the years leading up to and during the recent financial crisis. We find that generous financial safety nets increase bank risk and systemic fragility in the years leading up to the global financial crisis. However, during the crisis, bank risk is lower and systemic stability is greater in countries with deposit insurance coverage. Our findings suggest that the “moral hazard effect” of deposit insurance dominates in good times while the “stabilization effect” of deposit insurance dominates in turbulent times. The overall effect of deposit insurance over the full sample we study remains negative since the destabilizing effect during normal times is greater in magnitude compared to the stabilizing effect during global turbulence. In addition, we find that good bank supervision can alleviate the unintended consequences of deposit insurance on bank systemic risk during good times, suggesting that fostering the appropriate incentive framework is very important for ensuring systemic stability.     

How to get banks to take less risk and disclose bad news

There is wide agreement that before the recent financial crisis, financial institutions took excessive risk in their investment strategies. At the same time, regulators complained that banks did not reveal the extent of their difficulties in a timely fashion thus reducing the effectiveness of government intervention to prevent or mitigate the deleterious effects of the financial crisis. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how regulators can best use certain tools at their disposal to motivate banks to take less risk and to provide adverse information to regulators early. We argue that two tools, namely (i) allowing bank payouts to equity holders even when banks report they are in trouble and (ii) constraining banks’ future investment strategy when they are in trouble can achieve both goals. We show that, in some cases, it is optimal to use both of these tools in combination. That is, in such cases it is optimal to allow equity payouts when banks report they are in trouble, even though such payouts increase the incentive for banks to take excessive risk and even though these payments are financed by taxpayers. We also show that the more socially costly is constraining the bank’s portfolio selection or the more complex are the bank’s assets, the more likely it is that allowing larger payouts and fewer constraints is optimal. Finally we discuss how changes in bank capital requirements interact with inducing disclosure and preventing excessive risk taking.     

International diversification and risk of multinational banks: Evidence from the pre-crisis period

The recent financial crisis has clearly shown that the relationship between bank internationalization and risk is complex. Multinational banks can benefit from portfolio diversification, reducing their overall riskiness, but this effect can be offset by incentives going in the opposite direction, leading them to take on excessive risks. Since both effects are grounded on solid theoretical arguments, the answer of what is the actual relationship between bank internationalization and risk is left to the empirical analysis. In this paper, we study such relationship in the period leading to the financial crisis of 2007–2008. For a sample of 384 listed banks from 56 countries, we calculate two measures of risk for the period from 2001 to 2007 – the expected default frequency (EDF), a market-based and forward-looking indicator, and the Z-score, a balance-sheet-based and backward-looking measure – and relate them to the degree of banks’ internationalization. We find robust evidence that international diversification increases bank risk.     

Should banks own equity stakes in their borrowers? A contractual solution to hold-up problems

This paper develops a model to answer the question whether a bank should hold a share of the equity of a borrowing firm. The model shows that a small equity stake held by the bank can have a significant and positive impact on the lending relationship. The benefit of bank equity participation arises from the reduced ability of the bank to extract rents from the firm in multiple rounds of financing. This, in turn, improves the firm’s incentive to make investments in profitable projects that require future outside finance. The benefit is likely to be significant for small to medium size firms, growth firms, and firms with ongoing capital needs. The paper addresses, from a corporate finance perspective, the current debate about whether banks should be allowed to own equity stakes in corporations – and how large these equity stakes should be.     

The macroeconomic impact of bank capital requirements in emerging economies: Past evidence to assess the future

We test for emerging economies the hypothesis – previously verified for G-10 countries only – that the enforcement of bank capital asset requirements (CARs) curtails the supply of credit. The econometric analysis on individual bank data suggests three main results. First, CAR enforcement significantly trimmed credit supply, particularly at less-well capitalized banks. Second, the negative impact has been larger for countries enforcing CARs in the aftermath of a currency/financial crisis. Third, the adverse impact of CARs has been somewhat smaller for foreign-owned banks, suggesting that opening up to foreign investors may have partly shielded the domestic banking sector from negative shocks. Overall, CAR enforcement – inducing banks to reduce their lending – may have had both beneficial and detrimental effects. On one hand, it may have reduced ill-advised lending – possibly induced by banks' exploitation of the public safety net – and this is desirable. On the other hand, CAR enforcement may have induced an aggregate credit slowdown or contraction in the examined emerging countries, thus exacerbating liquidity constraints and negatively affecting real activity. This paper is relevant to the ongoing debate on the impact of the revision of bank CARs, as contemplated by the new Basel proposal. Our results suggest that in several emerging economies the revision of bank CARs could well induce a credit supply retrenchment, which should not be underestimated.     

Bank Ownership and Lending: Does Bank Ownership Matter?

Using the Central and Eastern European (CEE) bank-level data covering 2004–12, this article examines the differences in foreign-owned banks’ loan growth and its determinants in comparison with privately-owned domestic banks. The results indicate the greatest differences in the context of bank capital and liquidity. Bank capital remains an important loan growth determinant only for domestic private banks during the non-crisis periods and bank liquidity is of greater importance to domestic private banks during the crisis periods. This highlights local regulatory authorities’ limited ability to harness loan growth and excessive risk-taking during the non-crisis periods and points at the benefits of multinational banking groups’ internal capital markets during the crisis periods.     

Risk-shifting and the regulation of bank CEOs’ compensation

This paper analyzes the effects of two regulatory mechanisms, namely a regulation of the structure of bank CEOs incentive pay and sanctions for the CEOs of failed banks, on bank risk shifting. We extend a standard model of CEO compensation by incorporating leverage and an investment decision. To the extent that bank depositors and creditors are even partially protected by public guarantees, we show that it is in the interests of bank shareholders to choose more risky investments than would be socially optimal, and therefore to design a CEO contract with excessive risk taking incentives. Thus, we argue that current corporate governance arrangements in the banking sector are not efficient. In this setting, we show that putting in place one of the aforementioned mechanisms could yield the socially optimal outcome at no cost. We also identify some limitations and potential perverse effects of these mechanisms.     

The effect of ownership on the prudential behavior of banks – The case of China

Although the relationship between bank ownership and performance is the current focus of much research, this paper investigates the relationship between ownership and the prudential behavior of banks. Using Chinese data, I show that lending by state-owned banks has been less prudent than lending by joint-equity banks, but has improved over time. This is consistent with the hypothesis that accountability to shareholders and depositors gives joint-equity banks a better incentive than state-owned banks to engage in prudent lending, and with the hypothesis that the reform of the banking system has improved the incentive for state-owned banks to behave more prudently in their lending.     

Wholesale funding and bank stability: The impact of economic policy uncertainty

The primary aim of this paper is to examine the conditioning effects of economic policy uncertainty on the relationship between wholesale funding and bank stability. Based on a sample of 1829 commercial banks in 27 countries over the period 2005–2020, we provide evidence of a nonlinear relationship between wholesale funding and bank stability. Specifically, a small share of nondeposit funding to total deposit and short-term funding (below 22.3%) offers some risk reduction, but a substantial mixing of nondeposit and deposit funding increases bank fragility. Moreover, the adverse effects of excessive wholesale funding on bank stability are strengthened during periods of high policy uncertainty. Nevertheless, banks in advanced countries, large banks, and high-quality banks with better asset quality are less affected by the detrimental impact of excessive wholesale funding on bank stability when during periods of increased policy uncertainty.     

公司治理、资本监管与银行风险承担

选取2007-2017年中国25家上市银行数据,采用面板回归模型对公司治理与资本监管对银行风险承担的影响进行实证分析。研究表明：股权集中度与银行风险承担之间呈正U型关系,较低的股权集中度会降低银行风险资产配置权重,股权集中度的提升会加大银行风险承担。董事会规模会促进银行风险承担,董事会规模过大将平滑单个董事表决权,导致董事会控制效率下降而引发银行经营决策频繁变动,由此加大银行风险承担。资本监管会抑制银行风险承担,资本监管的趋严促使银行减持风险资产进行资本补充;资本监管对股份制银行、国有大型银行与城农商银行风险承担的影响力度依次递减。货币供给增速的放缓将降低银行存款吸收能力,由此加大银行流动性风险,货币供给对银行信贷存在制约效应;经济增速的下调将降低企业盈利能力,由此加大银行风险承担,银行存在顺周期放贷倾向。     

Sequential payments and optimal pricing in payment systems

This paper studies the intraday payment behaviour between heterogeneous banks as well as optimal intraday pricing schemes. The paper shows the social optimality of payment sequencing, which allows a bank to delay payments until the bank receives payments from the counterparty. The payment sequencing allows a bank with high liquidity cost to ‘recycle’ payment inflow from another bank with lower liqudity cost, reducing the aggregate cost of funding of banks to settle all payments. But we also see that the banks have an incentive to delay payments more than the payment sequencing requires. This underscores the importance of social planner’s role reducing settlement delay, while leaving socially efficient payment sequencing. In this context, we compare two different pricing schemes, a standard throughput guideline and a time-varying intraday tariff, to discuss the optimal incentive mechanisms in payment systems for the ‘socially efficient sequential settlement’.     

中国上市银行薪酬激励与银行绩效

本文以14家股份制商业银行为样本,从公司治理视角分析上市银行CEO报酬及银行内的报酬差异与银行经营绩效间的关系。研究结果表明,中国上市银行员工薪酬激励与银行绩效有显著的正相关关系;缩小银行高管薪酬和员工薪酬差异对银行绩效有显著的正相关影响;股权激励对上市银行绩效的影响并不显著;银行高管内部薪酬差异却存在锦标赛竞争机制,即银行高管间适当的薪酬差异可以提升银行绩效。因此,改变目前中国上市银行报酬—绩效契约是今后的金融业改革中需要解决的重要问题。     

Bank Risk and Deposit Insurance

Arguing that a relatively high cost of deposit insurance indicatesthat a bank takes excessive risks, this article estimates thecost of deposit insurance for a large sample of banks in 14economies to assess the relationship between the risk-takingbehavior of banks and their corporate governance structure.The results suggest that banks with concentrated ownership tendto take the greatest risks, and those with dispersed ownershipengage in a relatively low level of risk taking. Moreover, asa proxy for bank risk, the cost of deposit insurance has somepower in predicting bank distress.     

What types of banks profit most from fees charged? A cross-country examination of bank-specific and country-level determinants

The perception that banks are exploiting customers through their fee-charging practices in a bid to maximize profits, has fuelled widespread public interest in identifying the banks that profit most heavily from fees. Using hierarchical cross-country regression analyses, this paper seeks to answer the question – what types of banks profit most from fees charged? It also highlights the country level factors that influence banks’ ability to profit from fees charged. The factors at the country level distinguish between those that relate specifically to the financial services industry and broader macroeconomic indicators. The paper also identifies three channels through which national culture impacts banks’ ability to make high profits from fees. This paper uses the most comprehensive set of explanatory variables in studies of this nature. It has also extended the spatial scope of previous studies on bank fees by including data on banks from 46 developed and developing countries. In light of swelling public pressure on governments to do ‘something’ about bank fees, ill-advised measures are highlighted.     

Financial crisis and bank executive incentive compensation

We study the executive compensation structure in 14 of the largest U.S. financial institutions during 2000–2008. We focus on the CEO's purchases and sales of their bank's stock, their salary and bonus, and the capital losses these CEOs incur due to the dramatic share price declines in 2008. We consider three measures of risk-taking by these banks. Our results are mostly consistent with and supportive of the findings of Bebchuk, Cohen and Spamann (2010), that is, managerial incentives matter — incentives generated by executive compensation programs are correlated with excessive risk-taking by banks. Also, our results are generally not supportive of the conclusions of Fahlenbrach and Stulz (2011) that the poor performance of banks during the crisis was the result of unforeseen risk. We recommend that bank executive incentive compensation should only consist of restricted stock and restricted stock options — restricted in the sense that the executive cannot sell the shares or exercise the options for two to four years after their last day in office. The above incentive compensation proposal logically leads to a complementary proposal regarding a bank's capital structure, namely, banks should be financed with considerably more equity than they are being financed currently.     

中国银行流动性过剩的成因辨析:一个新的视角

本文将银行的流动性资产分为自愿性(预防性)流动资产和非自愿性流动资产两部分.通过建立银行预防性流动资产需求模型,运用向量误差修正模型(VEC)和方差分解方法实证分析我国银行流动性过剩的原因.实证结果表明:银行间同业拆借利率、汇率波动率、存款波动率和银行存款增加是银行流动性过剩的主要原因,银行的自愿性流动资产过剩和非自愿性流动性过剩并存,银行大量的流动性资产部分是为了规避融资成本、汇率风险和存款波动等风险而持有的.     

Credit market equilibrium with bank monitoring and moral hazard

We characterize a credit market equilibrium in which banks coexistwith capital markets and firms obtain funding from both sources.An incentive problem exists between the firm's insiders andoutside providers of capital. Banks can provide not only creditbut also monitoring services. We show that when banks cannotprecommit to a particular level of monitoring there is a uniquecredit market equilibrium with firms being financed with a combinationof bank credit and external capital. In this equilibrium, amarginal substitution of bank credit for capital market financingwould raise the firm's stock price.     

The Impact of Capital Requirements and Managerial Compensation on Bank Charter Value

This paper examines the joint impact of capital requirements and managerial incentive compensation on bank charter value and bank risk. Most of the previous literature in the area of banking and agency theory has focused on asymmetric information between either banks and regulators, (and therefore on the role of bank capital), or between bank shareholders and bank managers, (and therefore on the role of managerial ownership). In this paper we unify these issues and present empirical results from the regression of capital requirements jointly with measures of incentive compensation on Tobin's Q, our proxy for bank charter value, and on the standard deviation of total return, our proxy for bank risk. In a sample of 102 bank holding companies we find that capital levels are consistently a significant positive factor in determining bank charter value and a significant negative factor in determining risk. On the other hand, we find our six measures of incentive compensation to be generally insignificant relative to charter value but do provide some evidence consistent with a theory relating types of incentive compensation with risk.