Systemic Risk and Managerial Incentives in the Dodd-Frank Orderly Liquidation Authority

Joshua Mitts
{"title":"Systemic Risk and Managerial Incentives in the Dodd-Frank Orderly Liquidation Authority","authors":"Joshua Mitts","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2220208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Neither the FDIC’s recently announced resolution policy for failed financial institutions nor academic studies on systemic risk address the micro-level managerial incentives resulting from the Dodd-Frank Orderly Liquidation Authority’s incapacity to respond to simultaneous balance-sheet insolvency rather than temporary illiquidity. By holding correlated asset portfolios and serving as counterparties to similarly situated financial institutions, managers can strategically increase the likelihood of a government bailout rather than receivership under the OLA. Three case studies — Lehman Brothers, AIG, and large European banks’ response to the 2011 bail-in proposals — demonstrate the implications of the OLA’s shortcomings and the inadequacy of the FDIC’s approach. In light of these strategic incentives, the FDIC should modify its intervention policy to respond effectively to illiquidity-driven systemic risk and prudential regulators should work to reduce the likelihood of correlated balance-sheet insolvency.","PeriodicalId":431402,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Securities Law: U.S. (Topic)","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Securities Law: U.S. (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2220208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Neither the FDIC’s recently announced resolution policy for failed financial institutions nor academic studies on systemic risk address the micro-level managerial incentives resulting from the Dodd-Frank Orderly Liquidation Authority’s incapacity to respond to simultaneous balance-sheet insolvency rather than temporary illiquidity. By holding correlated asset portfolios and serving as counterparties to similarly situated financial institutions, managers can strategically increase the likelihood of a government bailout rather than receivership under the OLA. Three case studies — Lehman Brothers, AIG, and large European banks’ response to the 2011 bail-in proposals — demonstrate the implications of the OLA’s shortcomings and the inadequacy of the FDIC’s approach. In light of these strategic incentives, the FDIC should modify its intervention policy to respond effectively to illiquidity-driven systemic risk and prudential regulators should work to reduce the likelihood of correlated balance-sheet insolvency.
多德-弗兰克有序清算授权中的系统风险和管理激励
美国联邦存款保险公司(FDIC)最近宣布的针对破产金融机构的处置政策,以及系统性风险的学术研究,都没有解决多德-弗兰克有序清算局(Dodd-Frank Orderly Liquidation Authority)无力应对同时出现的资产负债表资不抵债(而非暂时性流动性不足)所导致的微观层面管理激励问题。通过持有相关资产组合并作为类似金融机构的对手方,管理人员可以在战略上增加政府救助而不是根据《破产法》接受接管的可能性。三个案例研究——雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)、美国国际集团(AIG)和欧洲大型银行对2011年纾困提议的回应——表明了《法律援助法》的缺陷和FDIC方法的不足之处。鉴于这些战略激励,FDIC应修改其干预政策,以有效应对由非流动性驱动的系统性风险,审慎的监管机构应努力降低相关资产负债表资不抵债的可能性。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信