Pro-Cyclicality of Provisions for Loan Losses

K. Lim
{"title":"Pro-Cyclicality of Provisions for Loan Losses","authors":"K. Lim","doi":"10.20525/ijfbs.v11i3.1823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The crux of bank accounting is how to measure and disclose ex ante credit risk, as loan yields and cost of funds are determined by managerial effectiveness and the financial market. This paper examines how the practice of setting up provisions for loan losses by bank managers had changed to preserve regulatory capitals around the 2008 financial crisis. This paper examines the empirical relationship between ex ante credit loss, which is proxied by loan losses provisions, and realized credit loss, which is measured by net charge-off. The empirical relations are examined before, during, and after the 2008 financial crisis to find the patterns of prediction errors of the incurred loss model. This paper obtains evidence that the empirical relation between non-performing assets and provisions for loan losses weakened at the time of a financial crisis. The relations of net charge-offs and allowance for loan losses on provisions for loan losses amplified during a financial crisis by accounting design. After the financial crisis is over, the empirical relation between non-performing assets and provisions for loan losses does not return back to the pre-crisis relation, but to a different, new post-crisis relation. This paper obtains evidence that financially stable banks in terms of the tier 1 capital ratio, return on assets, market-to-book ratio, or dividend payout ratio tend to adjust provisions for loan losses in a larger scale in response to a financial crisis than less stable banks.","PeriodicalId":181605,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies (2147-4486)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies (2147-4486)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20525/ijfbs.v11i3.1823","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The crux of bank accounting is how to measure and disclose ex ante credit risk, as loan yields and cost of funds are determined by managerial effectiveness and the financial market. This paper examines how the practice of setting up provisions for loan losses by bank managers had changed to preserve regulatory capitals around the 2008 financial crisis. This paper examines the empirical relationship between ex ante credit loss, which is proxied by loan losses provisions, and realized credit loss, which is measured by net charge-off. The empirical relations are examined before, during, and after the 2008 financial crisis to find the patterns of prediction errors of the incurred loss model. This paper obtains evidence that the empirical relation between non-performing assets and provisions for loan losses weakened at the time of a financial crisis. The relations of net charge-offs and allowance for loan losses on provisions for loan losses amplified during a financial crisis by accounting design. After the financial crisis is over, the empirical relation between non-performing assets and provisions for loan losses does not return back to the pre-crisis relation, but to a different, new post-crisis relation. This paper obtains evidence that financially stable banks in terms of the tier 1 capital ratio, return on assets, market-to-book ratio, or dividend payout ratio tend to adjust provisions for loan losses in a larger scale in response to a financial crisis than less stable banks.
贷款损失拨备的顺周期性
银行会计的关键是如何衡量和披露事前信用风险,因为贷款收益率和资金成本是由管理效率和金融市场决定的。本文考察了2008年金融危机前后,银行经理为保留监管资本而设立贷款损失准备金的做法发生了怎样的变化。本文考察了以贷款损失拨备为代表的事前信用损失与以净冲销衡量的已实现信用损失之间的实证关系。考察了2008年金融危机前、危机中、危机后的实证关系,找出了发生损失模型预测误差的规律。本文得到的证据表明,在金融危机时期,不良资产与贷款损失拨备之间的实证关系减弱。在金融危机期间,由于会计设计,贷款损失准备金的净冲销和贷款损失准备之间的关系被放大了。金融危机结束后,不良资产与贷款损失拨备之间的经验关系并没有回到危机前的关系,而是回到了一种不同的、新的危机后关系。本文得到的证据表明,在一级资本比率、资产收益率、市净率或股息支付率方面,财务稳定的银行在应对金融危机时,往往比不稳定的银行更大规模地调整贷款损失拨备。
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