Search results

To raise the quality of regulatory capital, Basel III capital rules recognize unrealized gains and losses on all available-for-sale (AFS) securities in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (CET1). However, by examining the correlations between U.S. GDP growth rate, interest rates and regulatory capital ratios computed using Basel III regulatory capital definition for six U.S. global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) since 2007, this chapter finds that Basel III regulatory capital will enhance the pro-cyclicality of Basel III leverage ratio and Tier 1 capital ratio and their sensitivity to long-term interest rates. Therefore, Basel III capital standards may have significant implications for bank supervision and bank capital risk management in the near future. As banks will hold more high-quality liquid assets (HQLAs) as required by Basel III Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR), the weight of unrealized gains and losses arising from fair value accounting will increase in Basel III Tier 1 capital base, the consequent increase of pro-cyclicality in a bank’s regulatory capital ratios may distort the true picture of bank capital adequacy. If an expected loss approach (EL) is used as the provisioning model, such capital risk may be increased further. Moreover, as U.S. monetary policy has started tapering quantitative easing, long-term interest rates will increase inevitably. This may increase the negative impact of unrealized gains and losses on AFS securities on bank capital. As a result, it may be difficult for banks to maintain appropriate capital ratios to meet regulatory requirements and support business activities.

This research aims to examine the effect of Tier-1 capital, risk management, and profitability on performance of Indonesia commercial banks.

The research population consisted of all commercial banks listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange periods of 2010 to 2014 with a total of 42 companies. The statistical analysis for testing the hypothesis using structural equation modeling (SEM) covariance based using WarpPLS.

Research result shows that Tier-1 capital has a positive effect on capital on risk management; risk management has a positive effect on performance, but risk management does not have an effect to profitability; profitability has a positive effect on performance; and Tier-1 capital has a negative effect on profitability. On the other hand, profitability has a negative effect on Tier-1 capital and performance has a positive effect on Tier-1 capital, whereas Tier-1 capital does not have an effect on performance.

The originality of this research can be seen from the causal relationship between the effects of Tier-1 capital, risk management and profitability on performance of commercial banks in the context of stock performance among Indonesia commercial banks. In addition, previous research findings remain inconsistent between one another. By conducting this research, it is expected that more consistent research findings than the previous ones can be generated. Sluggish global economic conditions which result in declined bank performance are an interesting topic to investigate.

This paper aims to examine the effects of Tier-1 capital toward risk management and profitability on the performance of Indonesian Commercial Banks.

The research population consisted of all commercial banks listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The data were in the form of financial statements of commercial banks for the periods of 2012 to 2016 with a total of 42 companies (bank). From a total of 42 commercial banks listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange, not all of them met the criteria. Commercial banks that meet these criteria are as many as 28 banks are sampled research.

Tier-1 capital has a positive direct effect on risk management, Tier-1 capital has a positive indirect effect on profitability with risk management as a mediation variable, risk management has a positive direct effect on profitability, Tier-1 capital has a positive indirect effect on performance with risk management and profitability as mediation variables, risk management has a positive indirect effect on performance with as mediation variable and profitability has a positive impact on performance.

The originality of this research can be seen from the causal relationship between the effects of Tier-1 capital, risk management and profitability on the performance of commercial banks in the context of stock performance among Indonesia commercial banks. Also, the analysis tools using multiple fixed effect panel data models in this research as a novelty in this research. In addition, previous research findings remain inconsistent with one another. By conducting this research, it is expected that more consistent research findings than the previous ones can be generated. Sluggish global economic conditions, which result in declined bank performance are an interesting topic to investigate. The paper uses an original sample, 28 Indonesian banks in 2012-2016. Also, it links Tier 1 capital with risk management and performance in a novel theoretical framework.

The authors examine whether Chinese banks use loan loss provisions (LLPs) for capital management, income smoothing and signaling purposes, and assess the effect of the recent regulatory changes following the implementation of Chinese Basel III on such behavior.

The authors use a unique set of hand-collected data on bank capital combined with financial data downloaded from the China Stock Market and Accounting Research (CSMAR) database. Multivariate regression models are used to test our hypotheses.

The authors find that while there is no evidence to suggest capital management practice before the Chinese Basel III, the implementation of the new regulations induced listed banks to manage tier-1 capital via LLPs. The authors also find strong support that Chinese banks engage in income smoothing via LLPs management, and there is no change in such tendency following the issuance of Chinese Basel III. Lastly, the authors do not find support for the signaling behavior by Chinese banks using LLPs.

The authors’ evidence suggests that elevated tier-1 capital and provisioning requirements may induce capital management by banks, which indicates a potential unintended effect brought forth by the new Basel regulations.

To the best of authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to examine Chinese banks' behavior relating to LLPs in terms of capital management, income smoothing and signaling. In particular, the authors use a sample containing a large number of Chinese commercial banks – previously a major data issue in other studies.

The choice between different financing sources is governed by a number of finance theories, particularly, trade-off theory and pecking order theory. However, the special characteristics of Islamic finance, which forces the exclusion of conventional bonds, leave Islamic banks with limited number of alternatives. Tier 1 sukuk are distinguished type of sukuk that combines the features of conventional bonds and stocks. This paper aims to answer the following question: Does the issuance of Tier 1 sukuk positively affect Islamic banks’ profitability or is their impact concentrated on enhancing Islamic banks’ capital adequacy ratios?

The data set used in this study consists of all United Arab Emirates (UAE) Islamic banks that issued Tier 1 sukuk over the period 2010–2020. Pooled and fixed effects panel regressions of Tier 1 sukuk and other control variables on three proxies of Islamic banks’ profitability were run. The selection of fixed-effect model is based on Hausman test, redundant fixed effects and likelihood ratio test.

This study reveals novel findings. Tier 1 sukuk increases both earnings per share (EPS) and capital adequacy ratios. That is, this study finds that there is a positive significant impact of Tier 1 sukuk on EPS, which indicates that issuing more Tier 1 sukuk will generate more return to shareholders in terms of higher EPS because of the lower cost of Tier 1 sukuk compared to equity. However, this study finds that there is an insignificant impact of Tier on sukuk on both return on assets and return on equity. Hence, it is concluded that Tier 1 sukuk does not increase the risk appetite of UAE Islamic banks.

Tier 1 sukuk is a niche instrument that has been recently used by Islamic banks. Hence, there are a limited number of Islamic banks that have issued this type of sukuk and consequently limited number of observations. Therefore, with the increased use of this instrument, a larger set of data will be available for examination. In addition, future research could examine the relationship between issuing Tier 1 sukuk and profitability in other countries where such sukuk have loss absorption feature. The impact of other types of sukuk, such as liability sukuk, on Islamic banks’ profitability could also be an interesting field of study.

This study recommends Islamic banks to issue more Tier 1 sukuk to enhance their profitability indicators while meeting Basel III accord. This study also recommends investors to purchase the stocks of Islamic banks that issue Tier 1 sukuk because they are able to offer them higher EPS. The authors advise the UAE regulators to allow Islamic banks to issue Tier 1 sukuk with loss absorption feature to enable Islamic banks engage in more risky activities that usually provide larger profits. This study also suggests that the Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB) reclassifies Tier 1 sukuk, with loss absorption feature, within the highest quality of capital, common equity Tier 1, to encourage Islamic banks to issue this type of sukuk, especially Basel III accord and IFSB 15 require higher ratios of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets.

This research contributes to the existing literature in two ways. First, it adds to the existing literature on the impact of sukuk on Islamic banks profitability. That is, contrary to prior studies that merely investigate the impact of issuing ordinary sukuk on profitability, this study explores a distinguished type of sukuk, that is Tier 1 sukuk, that has been surprisingly ignored so far. Second, this study shows that it is not only capital adequacy ratios that have improved as a result of issuing Tier 1 sukuk but also Tier 1 sukuk reduce the cost of capital of UAE Islamic banks which has been reflected in a higher profitability proxied by EPS. Hence, these sukuk serve a dual function for Islamic banks by improving both capital adequacy and profitability ratios.

This chapter examines the impact of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on bank profitability, using a sample of US banks from 2001 to 2016. We find a robust negative relationship between the aggregate level of policy uncertainty and bank profitability. The channel analysis shows that policy uncertainty can significantly reduce loan growth and increase the nonperforming loan ratio. More importantly, we find critical evidence that bank capital can improve the impact of policy uncertainty on the bank's economic performance and operation. Overall, this chapter has an important policy implication: policymakers can reduce the adverse effect of policy uncertainty on the banking industry through measures to stabilize bank capital adequacy.

This paper aims to provide a comparative study of the Islamic versus conventional banking sector risk by using market data generated from the sample of publicly listed Islamic and conventional banks in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region.

The authors introduce a market-based measure of bank stress and test this indicator against the Tier 1 Capital Ratio using Granger causality tests.

The authors find that the market-based measure is a leading indicator of banking stress when compared to the accounting-based Tier 1 ratio and thus is relevant to the Basel regulation’s Pillar 3.

This paper only looks at Islamic vs conventional banks in the Gulf region, and the authors would like to extend this analysis to a broader range of financial institutions, especially in the European and North American markets.

Developing a measure that signals bank stress ahead of typically used measures can help regulators, bank management and investors identify oncoming problems and issues before these become too big to manage.

The results from this analysis provides insight into the offsetting impact from two drivers (beta and book-to-market ratio) of the cost of equity capital for the conventional vs Islamic banking sectors.

This study aims to understand how quickly Japanese banks readjust their capital ratios (leverage, regulatory capital, tier-I capital and common equity) following an economic shock.

This study uses a two-step system GMM framework to test the study's hypotheses using the annual data of Japanese commercial and cooperative banks ranging from 2005 to 2020.

The findings show that banks adjust their leverage ratio faster than regulatory capital, tier-I capital and common equity ratios. In addition to that, the results reveal that the speed of capital adjustment is higher for commercial banks than for cooperative banks, suggesting higher economic costs and implications for commercial banks. Furthermore, it is worth noting that well-capitalised (under-capitalised) banks tend to prioritise the adjustments to common equity (leverage) before considering the adjustments to leverage (common equity). According to the results, high-liquid (low-liquid) banks alter their regulatory capital and tier-I capital ratios (leverage) more quickly (more slowly) than low-liquid (high-liquid) banks.

The findings suggest that when formulating and implementing new banking regulations, particularly in assessing and adjusting specific capital requirements under Pillar II of Basel III, management (including bankers, regulators and policymakers) should consider the heterogeneity observed in the rate of capital adjustment across various bank characteristics. Additionally, bank managers should also consider the speed of adjustment when determining optimal half-life and target capital structures.

To the author's knowledge, this study represents a pioneering investigation into the rate of adjustment of capital ratios (leverage, regulatory, tier-I and common equity) within Japan's banking sector. The study employs a comprehensive dataset encompassing both commercial and cooperative banks to facilitate this analysis. A notable contribution to the existing body of literature, this study offers a detailed analysis and emphasises the varying degrees of adjustment in capital ratios. The study also highlights the heterogeneous nature of the adjustment rate in these ratios by categorising the data into well-capitalised, under-capitalised, highly liquid and low-liquid banks.

In September 2009, G20 representatives called for introducing a minimum leverage ratio as an instrument of financial regulation. It is supposed to assure a certain degree of core capital for banks, independent of the controversial procedures used to assess risk. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper discusses the interaction and tensions between the leverage ratio and risk-based capital requirements, using financial data of the Swiss systemically important bank United Bank of Switzerland.

It can be shown that the leverage ratio potentially undermines risk weighting such that banks feel encouraged to take greater risks.

The paper proposes an alternative instrument that is conceived as a base risk weight and functions as a backstop. It ensures a minimum core capital ratio, based on unweighted total exposure by ensuring a minimum ratio of risk-weighted to total assets for all banks. The proposed measure is easy to compute like the leverage ratio, and also like the latter, it is independent of risk weighting. Yet, its primary advantage is that it does not supersede risk-based capital adequacy targets, but rather supplements them.