Scandal in the Portuguese banking sector – how a banking specific earnings management model predicted the fall of a family business group

IF 5.5 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Green Finance Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.3934/gf.2022018
Tânia Menezes Montenegro, Filomena Antunes Brás
{"title":"Scandal in the Portuguese banking sector – how a banking specific earnings management model predicted the fall of a family business group","authors":"Tânia Menezes Montenegro, Filomena Antunes Brás","doi":"10.3934/gf.2022018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examined the external ability of the loan loss provision (LLP) model to detect extreme cases of earnings management (EM). According to the literature, the LLP model is the most useful in examining EM in banking institutions. We used it herein to explore the time-series behaviour of a fraudulent business group in the Portuguese banking sector between 1992 and 2013 − the Banco Espírito Santo Group (GBES). We conclude that GBES did not make discretionary use of LLP (i.e., DLLP) in the fraud period (2008 to 2013) when compared with the pre-fraud years (1992 to 2007). However, the level of LLP was significantly higher in the latter period; this was consistent with the procyclical nature of GBES's LLP. The results of a difference-in-difference approach did not reveal any significant differences between GBES's DLLP and non-fraudulent banks in the fraud period. Interestingly, the full bank sample (including GBES) provided evidence of the procyclical nature of LLP. Additional tests did not support the hypothesis of income smoothing via LLP, either amongst the bank sample as a whole or by GBES. The proven facts of the fraud indicated a significant undervaluation of loans and financial instruments and an underestimation of LLP. Thus, we expected to find negative DLLP in the fraud period and significantly different DLLP between the pre-fraud period and the fraud period itself. The DLLP of GBES should also have been significantly different from non-fraudulent banks in the fraud period. The LLP model proved ineffective in detecting GBES fraud and assessing the decisions of the bank's leader and his team, while the use of DLLP was effective. The evidence collected in our study will be of benefit to scholars and banking regulators.","PeriodicalId":41466,"journal":{"name":"Green Finance","volume":"97 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Green Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/gf.2022018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examined the external ability of the loan loss provision (LLP) model to detect extreme cases of earnings management (EM). According to the literature, the LLP model is the most useful in examining EM in banking institutions. We used it herein to explore the time-series behaviour of a fraudulent business group in the Portuguese banking sector between 1992 and 2013 − the Banco Espírito Santo Group (GBES). We conclude that GBES did not make discretionary use of LLP (i.e., DLLP) in the fraud period (2008 to 2013) when compared with the pre-fraud years (1992 to 2007). However, the level of LLP was significantly higher in the latter period; this was consistent with the procyclical nature of GBES's LLP. The results of a difference-in-difference approach did not reveal any significant differences between GBES's DLLP and non-fraudulent banks in the fraud period. Interestingly, the full bank sample (including GBES) provided evidence of the procyclical nature of LLP. Additional tests did not support the hypothesis of income smoothing via LLP, either amongst the bank sample as a whole or by GBES. The proven facts of the fraud indicated a significant undervaluation of loans and financial instruments and an underestimation of LLP. Thus, we expected to find negative DLLP in the fraud period and significantly different DLLP between the pre-fraud period and the fraud period itself. The DLLP of GBES should also have been significantly different from non-fraudulent banks in the fraud period. The LLP model proved ineffective in detecting GBES fraud and assessing the decisions of the bank's leader and his team, while the use of DLLP was effective. The evidence collected in our study will be of benefit to scholars and banking regulators.
葡萄牙银行业的丑闻——一个银行业特定的盈余管理模型如何预测了一家家族企业集团的倒闭
我们检验了贷款损失准备(LLP)模型检测盈余管理(EM)极端案例的外部能力。根据文献,LLP模型在检查银行机构的新兴市场方面最有用。我们在此使用它来探索1992年至2013年间葡萄牙银行业欺诈商业集团- Banco Espírito Santo group (GBES)的时间序列行为。我们得出结论,与欺诈前年份(1992年至2007年)相比,GBES在欺诈期间(2008年至2013年)没有酌情使用LLP(即DLLP)。而LLP水平在后期显著升高;这与GBES LLP的顺周期性质是一致的。差异中的差异方法的结果并没有揭示GBES的DLLP和非欺诈银行在欺诈期间的任何显著差异。有趣的是,整个银行样本(包括GBES)提供了LLP的顺周期性质的证据。额外的测试不支持通过LLP实现收入平滑的假设,无论是在整个银行样本中还是在GBES中。经证实的欺诈事实表明,贷款和金融工具的价值被严重低估,LLP的价值被低估。因此,我们期望在欺诈期间发现负的DLLP,并且在欺诈前期和欺诈期间之间发现显著不同的DLLP。GBES的DLLP在欺诈期间也应该与非欺诈银行有显著差异。LLP模型在检测GBES欺诈和评估银行领导及其团队的决策方面被证明是无效的,而DLLP的使用是有效的。本研究收集的证据将对学者和银行监管机构有益。
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
Green Finance
Green Finance Multiple-
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
3.50%
发文量
14
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Green Finance is an international, interdisciplinary Open Access journal dedicated to green finance, environmental, and sustainability research and practice. It offers a platform for publishing original contributions and technical reviews on green finance and related topics, following a rigorous peer-review process. Accepted article types include original research, reviews, editorials, letters, and conference reports.
×
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