Impact of Higher Capital Buffers on Banks’ Lending and Risk-Taking: Evidence from the Euro Area Experiments

Giuseppe Cappelletti, Aurea Ponte Marques, Paolo Varraso, Žymantas Budrys, Jonas Peeters
{"title":"Impact of Higher Capital Buffers on Banks’ Lending and Risk-Taking: Evidence from the Euro Area Experiments","authors":"Giuseppe Cappelletti, Aurea Ponte Marques, Paolo Varraso, Žymantas Budrys, Jonas Peeters","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3412762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We study the impact of higher bank capital buffers, namely of the Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) buffer, on banks' lending and risk-taking behaviour. The O-SII buffer is a macroprudential policy aiming to increase banks' resilience. However, higher capital requirements associated with the policy may likely constrain lending. While this may be a desired effect of the policy, it could, at least in the short-term, pose costs for economic activity. Moreover, by changing the relative attractiveness of different asset classes, a higher capital requirement could also lead to risk-shifting and therefore promote the build-up (or deleverage) of banks' risk-taking. Since the end of 2015, national authorities, under the EBA framework, started to identify banks as O-SII and impose additional capital buffers. The identification of the O-SII is mainly based on a cutoff rule, ie. banks whose score is above a certain threshold are automatically designated as systemically important. This feature allows studying the effects of higher capital requirements by comparing banks whose score was close to the threshold. Relying on confidential granular supervisory data, between 2014 and 2017, we find that banks identified as O-SII reduced, in the short-term, their credit supply to households and financial sectors and shifted their lending to less risky counterparts within the non-financial corporations. In the medium-term, the impact on credit supply is defused and banks shift their lending to less risky counterparts within the financial and household sectors. Our findings suggest that the discontinuous policy change had limited effects on the overall supply of credit although we find evidence of a reduction in the credit supply at the inception of the macroprudential policy. This result supports the hypothesis that the implementation of the O-SII's framework could have a positive disciplining effect by reducing banks' risk-taking while having only a reduced adverse impact JEL Classification: E44, E51, E58, G21, G28","PeriodicalId":138725,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Markets & Investment (Topic)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Markets & Investment (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3412762","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

We study the impact of higher bank capital buffers, namely of the Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) buffer, on banks' lending and risk-taking behaviour. The O-SII buffer is a macroprudential policy aiming to increase banks' resilience. However, higher capital requirements associated with the policy may likely constrain lending. While this may be a desired effect of the policy, it could, at least in the short-term, pose costs for economic activity. Moreover, by changing the relative attractiveness of different asset classes, a higher capital requirement could also lead to risk-shifting and therefore promote the build-up (or deleverage) of banks' risk-taking. Since the end of 2015, national authorities, under the EBA framework, started to identify banks as O-SII and impose additional capital buffers. The identification of the O-SII is mainly based on a cutoff rule, ie. banks whose score is above a certain threshold are automatically designated as systemically important. This feature allows studying the effects of higher capital requirements by comparing banks whose score was close to the threshold. Relying on confidential granular supervisory data, between 2014 and 2017, we find that banks identified as O-SII reduced, in the short-term, their credit supply to households and financial sectors and shifted their lending to less risky counterparts within the non-financial corporations. In the medium-term, the impact on credit supply is defused and banks shift their lending to less risky counterparts within the financial and household sectors. Our findings suggest that the discontinuous policy change had limited effects on the overall supply of credit although we find evidence of a reduction in the credit supply at the inception of the macroprudential policy. This result supports the hypothesis that the implementation of the O-SII's framework could have a positive disciplining effect by reducing banks' risk-taking while having only a reduced adverse impact JEL Classification: E44, E51, E58, G21, G28
更高的资本缓冲对银行借贷和风险承担的影响:来自欧元区实验的证据
我们研究了更高的银行资本缓冲,即其他系统重要性机构(O-SII)缓冲对银行贷款和冒险行为的影响。O-SII缓冲是一项宏观审慎政策,旨在提高银行的抗风险能力。然而,与该政策相关的更高资本要求可能会限制贷款。虽然这可能是该政策的预期效果,但至少在短期内,它可能会给经济活动带来成本。此外,通过改变不同资产类别的相对吸引力,更高的资本要求也可能导致风险转移,从而促进银行承担风险的积累(或去杠杆化)。自2015年底以来,在EBA框架下,各国当局开始将银行确定为O-SII,并施加额外的资本缓冲。O-SII的识别主要基于一个截止规则,即:分数超过一定阈值的银行将自动被指定为具有系统重要性的银行。通过比较得分接近临界值的银行,这一功能可以研究提高资本金要求的影响。根据保密的细粒度监管数据,在2014年至2017年期间,我们发现被认定为O-SII的银行在短期内减少了对家庭和金融部门的信贷供应,并将贷款转移到非金融企业内部风险较低的同行。在中期,对信贷供应的影响被消除,银行将贷款转向金融和家庭部门风险较低的同行。我们的研究结果表明,不连续的政策变化对总体信贷供应的影响有限,尽管我们发现宏观审慎政策开始时信贷供应减少的证据。这一结果支持了一种假设,即O-SII框架的实施可以通过减少银行的风险承担而产生积极的约束效应,同时只会减少不利影响。JEL分类:E44, E51, E58, G21, G28
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信