高利贷管制:正当性、后果及波兰经验教训

IF 0.2 Q4 ECONOMICS
R. Kowalski, G. Wałęga
{"title":"高利贷管制:正当性、后果及波兰经验教训","authors":"R. Kowalski, G. Wałęga","doi":"10.33119/gn/149195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we analyse a recent debate on justification of usury regulations and their implications. To investigate the impact of liberal, competition-enhancing policy on usurious practices, we present a case study of the Polish payday loan market after 2008. We also examine the efficacy of usury regulations in Poland. Our study finds that consumer welfare, social welfare, and the risk of exploitation of borrowers are the main arguments for introducing interest caps. We demonstrate that, in pursuit of greater profits, loan companies use additional non-inter-est fees and commissions as well as bundling, and thereby reduce the transparency of loan agreements. We show that rising competition on the payday loan market is not sufficient to reduce the cost of loans, especially when the efficacy of regulatory control is deficient and unsatisfactory. Therefore, the size of to the of their welfare ; an empirical relationship between a present and an increased they themselves is correlative in Thus, the results of their study do not confirm the theoretical findings which assume the causal character of this relationship.","PeriodicalId":40977,"journal":{"name":"Gospodarka Narodowa-The Polish Journal of Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulation of Usury: Justification, Consequences, and Some Lessons from Polish Experience\",\"authors\":\"R. Kowalski, G. Wałęga\",\"doi\":\"10.33119/gn/149195\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper we analyse a recent debate on justification of usury regulations and their implications. To investigate the impact of liberal, competition-enhancing policy on usurious practices, we present a case study of the Polish payday loan market after 2008. We also examine the efficacy of usury regulations in Poland. Our study finds that consumer welfare, social welfare, and the risk of exploitation of borrowers are the main arguments for introducing interest caps. We demonstrate that, in pursuit of greater profits, loan companies use additional non-inter-est fees and commissions as well as bundling, and thereby reduce the transparency of loan agreements. We show that rising competition on the payday loan market is not sufficient to reduce the cost of loans, especially when the efficacy of regulatory control is deficient and unsatisfactory. Therefore, the size of to the of their welfare ; an empirical relationship between a present and an increased they themselves is correlative in Thus, the results of their study do not confirm the theoretical findings which assume the causal character of this relationship.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gospodarka Narodowa-The Polish Journal of Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gospodarka Narodowa-The Polish Journal of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33119/gn/149195\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gospodarka Narodowa-The Polish Journal of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33119/gn/149195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我们分析了最近关于高利贷监管的正当性及其影响的辩论。为了研究自由的、促进竞争的政策对高利贷行为的影响,我们提出了2008年后波兰发薪日贷款市场的案例研究。我们还研究了波兰高利贷监管的有效性。我们的研究发现,消费者福利、社会福利和借款人被剥削的风险是引入利率上限的主要论据。我们证明,为了追求更大的利润,贷款公司使用额外的非利息费用和佣金以及捆绑,从而降低了贷款协议的透明度。我们表明,发薪日贷款市场上日益激烈的竞争不足以降低贷款成本,特别是在监管控制效率不足和令人不满意的情况下。因此,大小决定了他们的福利;因此,他们的研究结果并不能证实假定这种关系具有因果关系的理论发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulation of Usury: Justification, Consequences, and Some Lessons from Polish Experience
In this paper we analyse a recent debate on justification of usury regulations and their implications. To investigate the impact of liberal, competition-enhancing policy on usurious practices, we present a case study of the Polish payday loan market after 2008. We also examine the efficacy of usury regulations in Poland. Our study finds that consumer welfare, social welfare, and the risk of exploitation of borrowers are the main arguments for introducing interest caps. We demonstrate that, in pursuit of greater profits, loan companies use additional non-inter-est fees and commissions as well as bundling, and thereby reduce the transparency of loan agreements. We show that rising competition on the payday loan market is not sufficient to reduce the cost of loans, especially when the efficacy of regulatory control is deficient and unsatisfactory. Therefore, the size of to the of their welfare ; an empirical relationship between a present and an increased they themselves is correlative in Thus, the results of their study do not confirm the theoretical findings which assume the causal character of this relationship.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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