Search results

The purpose of this paper is to assist the numerous regulators around the globe who are currently considering ways to impose domestic systemic importance-based capital requirements on banks.

The article discusses in some detail a number of issues from the viewpoint of regulatory practice, mentioning relevant literature where available. Comments partly reflect the experience that the Czech National Bank gathered over the past two years while preparing its own regime of domestic systemic importance-based capital requirements on banks.

The authors stress, among other points, one weakness of the (otherwise well-designed) method suggested by the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS) for assessment of banks’ systemic importance: the method is “relative” in that it does not reflect the absolute importance of the banking sector for the economy. The paper also explains that in some cases, use of individual-level rather than consolidated-level data may be preferable, in contrast to what the BCBS guidance suggests. Further, implications of the buffers over a longer term are pointed out.

As far as the authors are aware, this article is the first to comprehensively discuss the main issues surrounding both key steps (systemic importance assessment and determination of buffer level) in the process of introducing buffers based on domestic systemic importance. A number of questions related to these two steps are raised which regulators may appreciate to be reminded of, even if some of the questions are such that it is not possible to give a generally applicable answer to them.

This paper aims to highlight some of the more important changes in US prudential regulation and their implications for the operation of large foreign banking organizations (FBOs) in the USA.

This paper begins with a summary of the regulatory status of FBOs prior to the crisis. It then discusses developments during the US financial crisis of 2007-2009 that motivated stricter US prudential regulation. The third part discusses some major post-crisis changes in prudential regulation. Finally, the paper considers two areas where important changes in US rules could not be applied in a straightforward manner to FBOs: non-bank financial subsidiaries and branches and agencies.

Most of the regulatory changes will enhance US financial stability, albeit in some cases at the cost of weakening FBOs consolidated risk management. However, a few of the regulatory changes have given foreign branches and agencies a significant competitive advantage in US money markets.

The paper provides an integrated analysis of both the why and the what of changes in US regulation with some discussion of the economic consequences.

Systemic risk has been a cause of concern for the bank regulatory authorities worldwide since the global financial crisis. This study aims to identify systemically important banks (SIBs) in India by using SRISK to measure the expected capital shortfall of banks in a systemic event. The sample size comprises a balanced data set of 31 listed Indian commercial banks from 2006 to 2019.

In this study, the authors have used SRISK to identify banks that have a maximum contribution to the systemic risk of the Indian banking sector. Leverage, size and long-run marginal expected shortfall (LRMES) are used to compute SRISK. Forward-looking LRMES is computed using the GJR-GARCH-dynamic conditional correlation methodology for early prediction of a bank’s contribution to systemic risk.

This study finds that public sector banks are more vulnerable to macroeconomic shocks owing to their capital inadequacy vis-à-vis the private sector banks. This study also emphasizes that size should not be used as a standalone factor to assess the systemic importance of a bank.

Systemic risk has attracted a lot of research interest; however, it is largely limited to the developed nations. This paper fills an important research gap in banking literature about the identification of SIBs in an emerging economy, India. As SRISK uses both balance sheet and market-based information, it can be used to complement the existing methodology used by the Reserve Bank of India to identify SIBs.

This study empirically demonstrates a contradiction between pillar 3 of Basel norms III and the designation of Systemically Important Banks (SIBs), also known as Too Big to Fail (TBTF). The objective of this study is threefold, which has been approached in a phased manner. The first is to determine the systemic importance of the banks under study; second, to examine if market discipline exists at different levels of systemic importance of banks and lastly, to examine if the strength of market discipline varies at different levels of systemic importance.

This study is based on all the public and private sector banks operating in the Indian banking sector. The Gaussian Mixture Model algorithm has been utilized to classify banks into distinct levels of systemic importance. Thereafter, market discipline has been observed by analyzing depositors' sentiments toward banks' risk (CAMEL indicators). The analysis has been performed by employing the system Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) to estimate models with different dependent variables.

The findings affirm the existence of market discipline across all levels of systemic importance. However, the strength of market discipline varies with the systemic importance of the banks, with weak market discipline being a negative externality of the SIBs designation.

By employing the Gaussian Mixture Model algorithm to develop a framework for categorizing banks on the basis of their systemic importance, this study is the first to go beyond the conventional method as outlined by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

This study aims to empirically explore e-banking service quality and its impact on the e-banking loyalty through a mediating impact of e-banking satisfaction. The account holders of three domestic systemically important banks of Pakistan were surveyed during COVID-19 to examine the electronic services provided by these banks.

The data was collected through an adapted questionnaire by using emails and messaging applications. The database of a local marketing company in Pakistan was used, and 976 responses were included in the analysis. The structured equation modeling was used to test the propositions of study.

The findings delineate that reliability and website design proved to increase e-banking loyalty, particularly during COVID-19. The link between e-banking privacy and security and e-banking loyalty was proved as fully mediated by e-banking satisfaction; however, indirect effect of the reliability and website design with e-banking loyalty was partially mediated.

In strategic planning of e-banking mechanisms and the associated consumer behavior, the results of this study can be helpful for policymakers. In case of similar epidemics and natural calamities, consumers may depict similar behavior as shown during the lockdown and social distancing during COVID-19; hence, the study can help regulatory bodies in preparing their safety roadmap.

The mediating effect of e-banking satisfaction between privacy & Security and e-banking loyalty implies that customer give importance to secure e-banking platforms. There can be a variation in their loyalty because of privacy concerns. The application of cognitive–motivational–relational (CMR) theory in a relationship between e-banking service quality and e-banking loyalty with a mediating role of satisfaction is an emotional response to capture the behavioral changes during COVID-19. It enables researchers to understand the CMR theory concerning COVID-19 and e-banking perspective.

The learning outcomes of this study are to gain an understanding of the banking regulations and their impact on banking performance, to understand the intermediation role of banks by channelizing depositors’ savings and providing loans to borrowers, to explain an impact of a recent regulatory change in the Indian banking that directly impacts their financial performance, to critically evaluate the different financial ratios to analyze the performance of a bank and to build a DuPont analysis framework for banks.

The case serves as a primer on banking regulations in India and provides insights into banking performance. Banking regulations play an important role in maintaining financial stability, specifically in emerging economies like India. The protagonist of the case is Salil Kumar who presented his internship project to the review committee of Stock Investment Company on April 16, 2021. However, he had to rework and present his final project within seven days on the basis of the feedback received from the committee. Kumar faced the dilemma of bringing together a comparative study across two banks, namely, Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India (ICICI Bank) and State Bank of India (SBI) and building a DuPont framework covering the different aspects of banking performance. The case exemplifies the intricate regulatory landscape in India within which banks operate and highlights the recent alterations introduced by the Reserve Bank of India. For instance, the framework for dealing with domestic systemically important banks (D-SIBs) was introduced in 2014 and subsequently adopted in August 2015. The D-SIB framework provides inherent guarantee to large banks such as ICICI Bank and SBI. This ensures government backup in the event of any failure, thereby securing financial stability. The case study is suitable for banking and financial accounting courses taught in postgraduate management programs. Once the case is studied, the students are expected to understand the basics of banking, regulations, impact of regulations on banking performance and financial measures.

The case provides valuable insights into the intricate dynamics of the banking industry, offering a critical perspective for analysis. A well-structured teaching note would serve as a valuable tool for instructors, allowing them to facilitate engaging classroom discussions and effectively guide students toward achieving the desired teaching objectives.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

The increased capital requirements and the implementation of new liquidity standards under Basel III sparked various concerns among researchers, academics and other stakeholders. The question is whether Basel III regulation is ideal, that is, adequate to deal with a crisis, such as the 2007–2009 global financial crisis? The purpose of this paper is threefold: First, perform a stress testing exercise on the US banking sector, while examining liquidity and solvency risk indicators jointly under the Basel III regulatory framework. Second, allow the study to cover the post-crisis period, while referring to key Basel III regulatory requirements. And third, focus on the resilience of domestic systemically important banks (D-SIBs), which are supposed to support the US financial system in times of stress and therefore whose failure causes the entire financial system to fail.

The authors used a sample of the 24 largest US banks observed over the period Q1-2015 to Q1-2021 and a scenario-based vector autoregressive conditional forecasting approach.

The authors found that the model successfully produces accurate forecasts and simulates the responses of the solvency and liquidity indicators to different real and historical macroeconomic shocks. The authors also found that the US banking sector is resilient and can withstand both historical and hypothetical macroeconomic shocks because of its compliance with the Basel III capital and liquidity regulations, which consist of encouraging banks to hold high-quality liquid assets and stable funding resources and to strengthen their capital, which absorbs the losses incurred in a crisis.

The authors developed a framework for testing the resilience of the US banking sector under macroeconomic shocks, while examining liquidity and solvency risk indicators jointly under Basel III regulatory framework, a point not yet well studied elsewhere, and most studies on this subject are based on precrisis data. The authors also focused on the resilience of D-SIBs, whose failure causes the failure of the entire financial system, which previous studies have failed to examine.

Financial systemic risk is often assessed by the interconnectedness of financial institutes (FI) in terms of cross-ownership, overlapping investment portfolios, interbank credit exposures, etc. Less is known about the interconnectedness between FIs through the lens of consumer credits. Using detailed consumer credit data in Canada, this chapter constructs a novel banking network to measure FIs’ interconnectedness in the consumer credit markets. Results show that FIs on average are more connected to each other over the sample period, with the interconnectedness measure increases by 19% from 2013 Q4 to 2019 Q4. FIs with more diversified portfolios are more connected in the network. Among various types of FIs, secondary FIs have the notable increase in interconnectedness. Domestic Systemically Important Banks and secondary FIs offering a broad range of loan products are more connected to large FIs, while those specialized in single loan types are more connected to their industry peers. FI connectedness is also significantly related to their participation in the mortgage markets.

This paper aims to examine the relationship between regulation, market discipline and banking distress.

To address the empirical question put forward above, a multivariate logit model is applied to an international sample of 586 banks from 21 European countries in the period between 2000 and 2012. To give robustness to the results, different variables have been used to test the role played by market discipline and regulation as well as an alternative methodology known as duration/survival analysis.

It can be found that market discipline is a good indicator in signalling banking distress, that is, market discipline has penalized more banks with a higher likelihood of being in distress. Nonetheless, as broadly acknowledged, market discipline was not sufficient per se to avoid banking distress in Europe. With regard to regulation, this paper evidences that the adoption of other regulatory measures beyond the simple transposition of changes occurred in the EU Directives such as borrower-based measures and limits on pre-emptive exposures’ concentration, have contributed toward reducing the probability of distress of EU banks, showing that the introduction of this kind of measures was necessary and relevant. In addition, in this paper, it can be found that the NPL ratio, size, capital (including the well-known regulatory capital ratio, as well as the novel leverage ratio which discards the risk weights present in the former one) and liquidity are good indicators of banking distress which lead us to conclude that the new regulatory framework known as Basel III is on the right path to mitigate the probability that a new banking crisis similar to the last one takes place again.

The first limitation regards the period of time chosen, that is, from 2000 to 2012, empirically neglecting, to some extent the important regulatory changes occurred after the aforementioned period. Nonetheless, as mentioned in the Data and Methodology section, the period ends in 2012 because it is difficult to flag a reasonable number of banks’ bailouts afterwards, to properly run the type of model used in this paper. The second limitation is the fact that the possible changes in the risk management and risk assessment by institutions and in the behaviour of investors, acknowledge as weak and inappropriate before the on-set of the global financial crisis, albeit very relevant, are not in the scope of this paper.

Despite the welcomed changes performed by regulators so far, some aspects are not complete yet and new areas deserve more empirical work and attention by the regulators and supervisors. Some of them stem directly from the results obtained from this paper such as the enhancement and a close monitoring of the current Pillar 3 framework the increase of the adoption of more targeted tools, in a more preemptive way, to counter the build-up of risks and the implementation of the leverage ratio.

In the aftermath of the financial crisis, the identification of leading indicators signalling emerging risks to the banking system has become a major priority to central banks and supervisory authorities. As a consequence, several studies have formulated the aim of analysing predictive characteristics of a set of macroeconomic variables, such as GDP Growth, Credit-to-GDP, Inflation, M2-to-GDP, among others. Other studies take a different perspective and complement the analysis with bank-specific risk indicators. Nonetheless the aforementioned studies do not consider the relationship between regulation and market discipline and banking distress. This is the gap the authors wanted to fill, and this assessment is the main contribution of this paper.