Search results

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.

This study aims to examine the effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on banks’ capital, value and risk by investigating its impact on capital inflows and asset quality. The authors aim to investigate the value-protective characteristics of socially responsible performance.

This study uses a two-stage least squares approach with instrumental variables, with bank and year fixed effects to address concerns regarding endogeneity, specifically reverse causality and unobservable factors.

The results confirm a positive association of CSR with capital adequacy, including higher quality Tier 1 Capital. The authors find strong evidence that banks with higher CSR scores are associated with greater bank value and lower risk. The extended analyses find that the improvement in capital is from annual growth in capital and lower risky assets.

The research advances the field by providing new empirical evidence of a positive association between CSR and capital, including high-quality Tier 1 Capital. This study complements the prior research by simultaneously examining the dynamic links between CSR and capital, bank risk and bank value. The findings are consistent with the view that there is a dynamic link in which CSR affects the operations of banks.

This paper aims to improve the debate linking the business models of banks to their riskiness by checking if diversification exerts different impacts on the probability of bank distress depending on the level of capital buffers.

The paper focuses on a sample of listed bank holding companies observed between 2007:Q3 and 2022:Q4. The authors use three subindexes of bank diversification. The authors estimate a dynamic model specification using a system generalized method of moments with robust standard errors and consistent estimators under heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation within a panel. Sensitivity and robustness checks are performed.

Asset and income diversification increase the probability of distress in low-capitalized banks during normal periods (excluding periods of crises and high uncertainty). Concerning crisis periods, a marginal increase in asset diversification during the global financial crisis (GFC) and the COVID-19 pandemic crisis induces a more important increase in the probability of failure of well-capitalized banks relative to low-capitalized ones. Contrary to the results obtained for the GFC period, well-capitalized banks were found to pursue more careful funding diversification in reaction to the sudden increase of uncertainty during the Russia–Ukraine war.

Prudential supervision should concentrate on well-capitalized banks to encompass unexpected excessive risk-taking during crisis periods. Regulatory requirements should constrain fragile banks to avoid pursuing assets and income diversification strategies that increase earnings volatility.

The main originality of this paper is to consider the interaction between three different dimensions of bank diversification and capital regulation during stable and unstable periods using the marginal effect analysis. Moreover, this paper uses, initially, the GFC as the reference crisis period to study the impact of capital buffers and diversification interactions on the probability of bank distress. Then, the authors extend the observation period until 2022:Q4 to include two additional major events, namely, the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war.

While previous literature has emphasized the causal relationship from liquidity to capital, the impact of interbank network characteristics on this relationship remains unclear. By applying the interbank network simulation, this paper aims to examine whether the causal relationship between capital and liquidity is influenced by bank positions in the interbank network.

Using the sample of 506 commercial banks established in 28 European countries from 2001 to 2013, the author adopts the generalized method of moments simultaneous equations approach to investigate whether interbank network characteristics influence the causal relationship between bank capital and liquidity.

Drawing on a sample of commercial banks from 28 European countries, this study suggests that the interconnectedness of banks within interbank loan and deposit networks shapes their decisions to establish higher or lower regulatory capital ratios in the face of increased illiquidity. These findings support the implementation of minimum liquidity ratios alongside capital ratios, as advocated by the Basel Committee on Banking Regulation and Supervision. In addition, the paper underscores the importance of regulatory authorities considering the network characteristics of banks in their oversight and decision-making processes.

This paper makes a valuable contribution to the current body of research by examining the influence of interbank network characteristics on the relationship between a bank’s capital and liquidity. The findings provide insights that add to the ongoing discourse on regulatory frameworks and emphasize the necessity of customized approaches that consider the varied interbank network positions of banks.

This study aims to explore the relationship between risk governance characteristics (chief risk officer [CRO], chief financial officer [CFO] and senior directors [SENIOR]) and regulatory adjustments (RAs) in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development public commercial banks.

Using principal component analysis (PCA) and regression models, the research analyzes a representative data set of these banks.

A significant negative correlation between risk governance characteristics and RAs is found. Sensitivity analysis on the regulatory Tier 1 capital ratio and the total capital ratio indicates mixed outcomes, suggesting a complex relationship that warrants further exploration.

The study’s limited sample size calls for further research to confirm findings and explore risk governance’s impact on banks’ capital structures.

Enhanced risk governance could reduce RAs, influencing banking policy.

The study advocates for improved banking regulatory practices, potentially increasing sector stability and public trust.

This study contributes to understanding risk governance’s role in regulatory compliance, offering insights for policymaking in banking.

This public-sourced case describes the latest restructuring efforts by Deutsche Bank (DB) and gives a short history of prior restructuring efforts from the decade before. In July 2019, Christian Sewing, the new CEO of DB, announced a series of measures that included, among others, the elimination of global equity trading, the layoff of 18,000 employees, the creation of a “bad bank” to transfer noncore assets, and the suspension of dividends until 2022. The case describes key decisions a bank CEO makes when a bank needs to change course to return to profitability and growth. The case offers an opportunity to debate these key decisions, as well as discuss some of the prior ones during earlier restructuring efforts, and put the students in the CEO's shoes: What would you do and why? The case also describes key banking performance metrics (e.g., ROE, ROA) and other critical variables such as those reflecting capital health (Tier 1 ratio), as well as gives an overview of the bank business model and factors impacting bank profitability and value.

This paper investigates the significant increase in S corporation banks converting to C corporations following the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and the shift in motivations behind these conversions.

The paper uses bank-level panel data from Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Call Reports to analyze the determinants of S bank conversions after the TCJA, comparing post-TCJA conversion trends with pre-TCJA trends utilizing an ordinary least squares (OLS) and logistics model.

The study finds that post-TCJA conversions are primarily driven by financially stable banks seeking improved tax conditions and relaxed shareholder restrictions as C corporations. This contrasts with pre-TCJA conversions, which were predominantly driven by financially distressed S corporation banks seeking new equity capital to maintain solvency.

The findings necessitate a comprehensive reconsideration of the Subchapter S status' sustained relevance for smaller institutions, especially in light of the comparative benefits now offered by the C corporation status post-TCJA. The results underscore the importance of ongoing academic investigation to deepen the understanding of the evolving fiscal landscape's effects on community banks, thereby contributing to the knowledge of the resilience and health of the US economy.

This research nudges policymakers and regulators to contemplate the ongoing relevance and advantages of the S corporation status. Given the substantial benefits conferred by the C corporation status in the post-TCJA environment, this study suggests that retaining the S corporation status may not offer the same appeal for smaller community banks as it once did.

This paper contributes to the broader understanding of the impact of tax policy on businesses' organizational choices, particularly in the banking industry and emphasizes the need for a comprehensive review of the S corporation status to assess its ongoing applicability in fostering small and community-focused financial institutions in light of the evolved corporate tax landscape.

This current study draws a comparison between the performance indicators of public sector banks (PSBs) and private sector banks (or non-PSBs) in India. The study controls for the impact of COVID-19.

The study uses strongly balanced panel data for seven years of 12 PSBs and 10 non-PSBs from the Nifty PSU Bank Index and Nifty Private Bank Index. The study applies panel data methodology to arrive at the results.

The study demonstrates that the behavior of indicators of performance and returns volatility for PSBs and non-PSBs differs substantially. While factors like capital adequacy ratio (CAR), cost management (COST), liquidity (LIQ), inflation and economic growth exhibit a similar impact on both categories of Indian banks, the effect of credit risk (RISK), market power (POWER) and COVID-19 on performance and returns stability is different for PSBs and non-PSBs.

There is a limited sample size of banks in India.

PSBs and non-PSBs need distinct treatments when calibrating performance indicators.

The performance and stability of banks are essential for society at large, the depositors and the investors.

The study provides vibrant implications for insight for banks to calibrate the variables that determine performance and stability, regulators and policymakers for effective governance of the banking ecosystem and effective utilization of public funds and capital. The findings are relevant for policymaking today, when the government is considering the privatization of a few PSBs.

The aim of this paper is to study the relationship between banks' ownership structure and their risk-taking behavior as well as the impact of banking regulation on banks' approach to taking risk, after the 2008 financial crisis.

The empirical analysis considers a sample of listed banks from European Union (EU) countries, over the period of 2011–2016 and uses the generalized least squared (GLS) random effect (RE) method, following Baltagi and Wu (1999) and Pathan (2009).

The authors find that the structure of the board of directors can influence bank risk behavior but not the ownership concentration. No significant relation was found between the influence of the regulatory environment and bank risk, i.e., stricter regulation has no effect on risk taking by banks.

The paper contributes to the literature in risk measures and banks' corporate governance. It also considers the impact of regulatory framework on banks' risk-taking behavior. The aim of this empirical analysis was to examine in greater detail these subjects and the dynamics between them after the significant structural changes in the macroeconomic environment and in the financial system, particularly with regards the regulatory and supervisory framework following the 2008 financial crisis, using data from European Union countries.