资本充足率监管与商业银行经营目标的路径选择

满足资本充足率监管要求和实现盈利是商业银行需要完成的两个基本经营目标。本文建立了单期模型，从理论角度分析了商业银行是如何通过调整资本金水平、存贷款总量以及风险偏好等不同的路径选择来实现上述双重经营目标。文章对我国商业银行近年来的经营行为进行实证分析表明，依靠股东注资、上市融资和发行次级债的方式已成为有效补充商业银行资本金以达到资本充足率监管要求的中长期主要路径．而调整存贷款总量和贷款组合的风险偏好是调节商业银行资本充足率水平的短期工具。在此基础上，指出国有商业银行完成上述双重基本指标是一项涉及政府、监管机构和商业银行三位一体的系统工程，     

资本充足率监管与商业银行经营目标的路径选择

满足资本充足率监管要求和实现盈利是商业银行需要完成的两个基本经营目标。本文建立了单期模型,从理论角度分析了商业银行是如何通过调整资本金水平、存贷款总量以及风险偏好等不同的路径选择来实现上述双重经营目标。文章对我国商业银行近年来的经营行为进行实证分析表明,依靠股东注资、上市融资和发行次级债的方式已成为有效补充商业银行资本金以达到资本充足率监管要求的中长期主要路径,而调整存贷款总量和贷款组合的风险偏好是调节商业银行资本充足率水平的短期工具。在此基础上,指出国有商业银行完成上述双重基本指标是一项涉及政府、监管机构和商业银行三位一体的系统工程。     

Are regulatory capital adequacy ratios good indicators of bank failure? Evidence from US banks

Motivated by massive bank failures during the financial crisis, this paper examines whether capital adequacy ratios required by regulators are associated with bank failure. It investigates whether the association is affected by the bank's proximity to the minimum required capital ratios. If results show a significant association between regulatory capital and failure of banks falling below the minimum capital ratios, then the ratios are set at an adequate level. Examining a sample of 560 US bank holding companies for the period 2003–2009, results reveal that the association between the core (Tier 1) capital ratio and bank failure becomes significant only if the bank holding company has a Tier 1 capital ratio of less than 6%. This is the level below which US bank regulators do not regard banks as being well capitalized. During the financial crisis period of 2007–2009, there is a significant association only when the criterion is set at or above 8%. Market-based probability of default is more significantly associated with failure relative to Tier 1 capital ratio. The findings of this paper are relevant to regulatory policy discussions and Basel III deliberations on capital adequacy at times of financial turmoil.     

银行资本监管与商业银行风险——对中国13家商业银行的实证研究

通过构建模型对2000～2005年我国商业银行风险与资本充足率变化进行实证检验,结果表明,我国实施银行资本监管能够促使已达到最低监管要求的银行提高资本充足率和降低银行风险,但对于达不到监管要求的银行,实施银行资本监管并不能促使其提高资本充足率和降低风险水平.实施银行资本监管不是我国商业银行风险降低的原因,资本监管在市场化程度较高的银行中会失效.市场及投资者并不因为银行资本充足率变化而对上市银行的收益或价值的评价产生变化.改革我国商业银行产权制度、建立显性的存款保险制度、加强市场约束是我国商业银行降低风险、提高资本监管有效性的基础.     

国有商业银行资本充足监管有效性及其前提条件

资本充足问题一直是各国商业银行外部监管和内部控制共同关心的问题.<巴塞尔协议>出台以来,我国国有商业银行内部激励缺乏,而外部监管又流于形式,资本充足率持续下降.本文从国有悖论、监管宽容和实证推算三个方面重点对国有商业银行资本充足监管的有效性进行分析,认为当前对国有商业银行资本充足监管是无效或低效的.但在我国已经加入WTO的宏观背景下,对国有商业银行进行资本充足监管又是必要和必须的,而前提是对不良贷款进行二次剥离和彻底改制,以建立起现代商业银行制度,从而为国有商业银行资本充足有效监管奠定制度基础.     

Liquidity creation,regulatory capital,and bank profitability

We examine the interrelationships among liquidity creation, regulatory capital, and bank profitability of US banks. We find that regulatory capital and liquidity creation affect each other positively after controlling for bank profitability. However, this relationship is largely driven by small banks and primarily during non-crisis periods. It is also sensitive to the level of banks' regulatory capital and how it is measured. Furthermore, we find that banks which create more liquidity and exhibit higher illiquidity risk have lower profitability. Finally, the relationship between regulatory capital and bank performance is not linear and depends on the level of capitalization. Regulatory capital is negatively related to bank profitability for higher capitalized banks but positively related to profitability for lower capitalized banks. Therefore, a change in regulatory capital has differential impacts on bank performance. Our findings have various implications for policymakers and bank regulators.     

银行资本监管与商业银行风险——对中国13家商业银行的实证研究

通过构建模型对2000～2005年我国商业银行风险与资本充足率变化进行实证检验，结果表明，我国实施银行资本监管能够促使已达到最低监管要求的银行提高资本充足率和降低银行风险，但对于达不到监管要求的银行，实施银行资本监管并不能促使其提高资本充足率和降低风险水平。实施银行资本监管不是我国商业银行风险降低的原因，资本监管在市场化程度较高的银行中会失效。市场及投资者并不因为银行资本充足率变化而对上市银行的收益或价值的评价产生变化。改革我国商业银行产权制度、建立显性的存款保险制度、加强市场约束是我国商业银行降低风险、提高资本监管有效性的基础。     

The role of regulatory capital in international bank mergers and acquisitions

When investigating the role of regulatory capital in bank mergers and acquisitions (M&As) we finds that US targets are better capitalized than their acquirers and non-acquired peers and that US banks maintain higher capital levels than European banks. Thus, US banks strategically raise their capital levels to avoid regulatory scrutiny. Furthermore, more value is created for targets with high excess capital and in M&As involving targets with considerably higher excess-capital ratios than their acquirers. Thus, the excess regulatory capital hypothesis is supported. Finally, market prices reflect the influence that capital has on the probability of the merger's regulatory approval.     

Capital requirements and bank behaviour: Empirical evidence for Switzerland

In recent years, regulators have increased their focus on the capital adequacy of banking institutions to enhance the stability of the financial system. The purpose of the present paper is to shed some light on whether and how Swiss Banks react to constraints placed by the regulator on their capital. Building on previous work by Shrieves and Dahl (cf. Shrieves, R.E., Dahl, D., 1992. The relationship between risk and capital in commercial banks. Journal of Banking and Finance 16, 439–457), we use a simultaneous equations model to analyse adjustments in capital and risk at Swiss banks, when those approach the minimum regulatory capital level. Our results indicate that regulatory pressure induce banks to increase their capital, but does not affect the level of risk.     

Basel II vs. Prompt Corrective Action: Which Is Best for Public Policy?

This paper evaluates Basel II as a tool for achieving public policy objectives relative to structured early intervention and resolution (SEIR) and prompt corrective action (PCA) in the U.S. It concludes that Basel II compares poorly in terms of maintaining a safe and sound banking system. Rather, Basel II resembles a "best practices" guide for banks in managing their credit risk. However, it may do damage through encouraging some large banks in the U.S. to successfully pressure their regulators to lower the capital trigger ratio for "adequately‐capitalized" status in order to benefit from any lower regulatory capital requirement that Basel II may give them.     

Loan loss accounting and procyclical bank lending: The role of direct regulatory actions

I provide evidence that loan loss accounting affects procyclical lending through its impact on regulatory actions. Regulators are more likely to place banks with inadequate loan loss allowances under enforcement actions that restrict lending, leading these banks to lend less during downturns. Further, I find that banks with lower regulatory ratings lend less when they have more timely provisions, consistent with research theorizing that timely provisions increase transparency and inhibit regulatory forbearance. This regulatory action mechanism expands on prior research that has focused on the effect of loan loss recognition on regulatory capital adequacy during economic downturns.     

中国商业银行资本监管有效性实证研究

为了检验资本充足性管制对中国商业银行的资本充足率和风险水平的影响,本文在国外学者研究的基础上,构建了一个联立方程模型。根据这个模型,采用两阶段最小二乘法进行实证分析,分析结果表明:不管是资本充足情况较好的银行,还是资本充足情况较差的银行在资本充足性管制的压力下都提高了资本充足率;资本充足性管制促进了商业银行风险的降低。不过,由于多数银行已超过资本充足性管制中的最低标准,该标准产生的管制效应正在减弱。     

中国系统重要性银行附加资本计提机制研究——基于Copula-CoVaR模型

在 CoVaR 风险度量框架的基础上建立系统重要性银行附加资本计提机制,旨在将风险溢出与资本计提挂钩。运用 Copula-CoVaR 模型测算商业银行对银行体系的风险溢出效应,考虑到额外的资本对溢出风险吸收作用,在控制每一家银行对银行系统的风险溢出一致的基础上确定银行的资本充足水平,进而确定对应的系统重要性银行附加资本的计提比例。     

The Basel Committee proposals for a new capital accord: implications for Italian banks

Following a few general considerations on the recently proposed revision of the Basel Agreement on capital adequacy, this paper focuses on the first pillar of the Basel Committee proposals, the handling of capital requirements for credit risk in the banking book. The Basel Committee envisages an approach alternatively based on external ratings or on internal rating systems for the determination of the minimum capital requirement related to bank loan portfolios. This approach supports a system of capital requirements that is more sensitive to credit risk. On the basis of specific assumptions, these requirements provide a measure of the value at risk (VaR) produced by models used by major international banks. We first address the impact of the standardised and (internal ratings-based) IRB foundation approach using general data on Italian banks loans' portfolios default rates. We then simulate the impact of the proposed new rules on the corporate loan portfolios of Italian banks, using the unique data set of mortality rates recently published by the Bank of Italy. Three main conclusions emerge from the analysis: (i) the standardised approach implicitly penalizes Italian banks in their interbank funding as their rating is generally below AA/Aa, (ii) the average default rate experienced by Italian banks is higher than the one implied in the benchmark risk weight (BRW) proposed by the Basel Committee for the IRB foundation approach, thereby potentially leading to an increase in the regulatory risk weights, and (iii) the risk-weight is based on an average asset correlation that is significantly higher than the one historically recorded within the Italian banks' corporate borrowers. These findings support the need for a significant revision of the basic inputs and assumptions of the Basel proposals. Finally, in relation to the conditions that allow the capital market to effectively discipline banks, we comment on the proposals advanced in relation to the third pillar of the new capital adequacy scheme.     

Bank Taxes,Leverage, and Risk

We use staggered changes in the taxation of banks by U.S. states to show how banks adjust their capital structure in response to taxes. A one percentage point increase in the income tax rate leads to a decrease in the ratio of equity to total assets of 15 basis points. The effect is symmetric for tax increases and decreases but heterogeneous in that small and strongly capitalized banks react more. In response to taxes, banks also adjust their assets consistent with regulatory arbitrage activities intended to keep down regulatory risk measures, thereby keeping regulatory ratios at acceptable levels despite increasing leverage. Finally, higher taxes may decrease banks’ ability to survive crises.     

A PRACTICAL APPROACH TO CAPITAL STRUCTURE FOR BANKS

Like U.S. companies in many industries. American's bank's attention to capital structure is reflected in their high level of stock repurchases in recent years. But, if banks are responding to some of the same economic forces that are driving industrial firms to shed excess capital, there are some important differences between banks and industrials that complicate the process of establishing appropriate capital levels for banks. The most important difference comes from regulation. Since the implementation by FDICIA of risk based capital guidelines in the early 1990s, the capital ratios of U.S. banks have increased substantially. In fact, most U.S. banks today carry considerably more capital than is required by the regulators. This tendency to exceed regulatory capital levels is especially pronounced for smaller institutions, which can in turn be explained by the riskier profile of smaller banks: While such banks have the highest proportion of the lowest-risk assets (such as cash, mortgages, and marketable securities), they also have a much greater degree of concentration (and co-variance) among their riskier assets.
This article recommends using a quantitative economic approach (such as a RAROC model) to generate a lower bound on the amount of necessary capital. This estimate can then be translated into a target capital structure by taking account of a variety of practical, qualitative considerations, including banks' preference to maintain capital levels that provide a comfortable margin above bank regulators' "well capitalized" levels. Although such considerations will vary in importance from one bank to another, they will generally include management's risk tolerance, regulatory constraints, market pressures (as reflected in peer group capital levels), the bank's prospects and investment plans, and, for larger banks, rating agency requirements.     

CAPITAL ADEQUACY AND THE VALUATION OF LARGE COMMERCIAL BANKING ORGANIZATIONS

Bankers argue that regulatory agencies require excessive capital adequacy. As a consequence, banks cannot achieve optimal capital structure. This study investigates the capital adequacy issue for bank holding companies over the 1974—1983 period, one of the most turbulent periods in recent banking history. During this time, capital is never excessive from the stockholders' viewpoint, and financial markets, on average, perceive capital levels as inadequate. Assuming the public wants no lower capital levels than shareholders, recent regulatory action to require higher capital ratios is a Pareto superior decision.     

Bank Capital and Lending Relationships

This paper investigates the mechanisms behind the matching of banks and firms in the loan market and the implications of this matching for lending relationships, bank capital, and credit provision. I find that bank‐dependent firms borrow from well‐capitalized banks, while firms with access to the bond market borrow from banks with less capital. This matching of bank‐dependent firms with stable banks smooths cyclicality in aggregate credit provision and mitigates the effects of bank shocks on the real economy.     

我国中小银行风险控制能力的主成分分析——基于公司治理视角

文章以我国上市的11家中小银行为样本,根据其2013年半年度报告,基于公司治理视角,选取八个具有代表性的指标,利用SPSSl9．0对我国中小银行风险控制能力进行主成分分析。实证结果表明,基于选定的指标和数据,为提高风险控制能力,加强和完善我国中小银行公司治理各种机制的重要性依次递减为：外部治理中的资本充足率监管机制和信息披露机制、内部治理中的股东治理机制和董事会治理机制、内部治理中的股权制衡机制。由此提出加大外部监管力度,强化中小银行资本充足率监管机制;优化股权结构,完善中小银行董事会治理机制;重视引进并且稳定境外战略投资者等建议。     

Structural effects of asset-backed securitization

This paper analyses the potential changes in the operational structure of deposit-taking financial institutions that securitize assets. Findings indicate that banks can create an asset securitization pipeline structure that enables them to increase their return on capital. In other words, through securitization banks can expand their loan provision business without increasing their liabilities or their capital levels. Using a contingent claims model, four factors that impact on the bank's decision to securitize are highlighted and analysed: (i) the level of deposit insurance; (ii) capital adequacy requirements; (iii) insolvency risk; and, (iv) the risk of credit enhancements. Furthermore, we identify key accounting and regulatory challenges that emerge for banks from the process of asset backed securitization.