Larry D. Wall

Sub-Debt Yield Spreads as Bank Risk Measures

Several recent studies have recommended greater reliance on subordinated debt as a tool to discipline bank risk taking. Some of these proposals recommend using sub-debt yield spreads as triggers for supervisory discipline under prompt corrective action (PCA). Currently such action is prompted by capital adequacy measures. This paper provides the first empirical analysis of the relative accuracy of various capital ratios and sub-debt spreads in predicting bank condition: measured as subsequent CAMEL or BOPEC ratings. The results suggest that some of the capital ratios, including the summary measure used to trigger PCA, have almost no predictive power. Sub-debt yield spreads performed slightly better than the best capital measure, the Tier-1 leverage ratio, albeit the difference is not significant. The performance of sub-debt yields satisfies an important pre-requisite for using sub-debt as a PCA trigger. However, the prediction errors are relatively high and further work to refine the measures would be desirable.

Subordinated Debt and Bank Capital Reform

In recent years there has been a growing realization that there are significant problems with the current bank risk-based capital guidelines. As financial firms have become more sophisticated and complex they have effectively arbitraged the existing capital requirements. They have become so good at avoiding the intent of capital regulation that the regulations have essentially ceased being a safety and soundness issue for supervisors and have become more a compliance issue. There is also a growing realization that bank regulation must more effectively incorporate market discipline to encourage prudent risk management. One means recommended to accomplish this is to increase the role of subordinated debt in the bank capital requirement. Arguments have been made that this could lead to improvements in both market and supervisory discipline. Although a number of such proposals have been made, there appears to be significant misunderstanding of how bank capital requirements would be modified and what might be accomplished by the modification. On the one extreme, some discussions of sub-debt seem to imply that merely requiring banks to issue debt would solve all safety and soundness related concerns. At the other extreme, are a series of questions that raise doubts as to whether any change in the role of sub-debt could contribute toward safety and soundness goals. ; The goal of this article is to provide a comprehensive review and evaluation of the purpose and potential of subordinated debt proposals, and to present a regulatory reform proposal that incorporates what we believe are the most desirable characteristics of subordinated debt. The article is intended as a reference piece from which readers new to the topic may find a thorough review of the issues, and others can draw on specific aspects of the debate. Coverage includes: (1) a discussion of the characteristics of sub-debt that make it attractive for imposing market and supervisory discipline on banks; (2) explanation of how current regulatory arrangements do not allow these features to be fully utilized; (3) discussion of the role of debt markets, equity markets and supervision in disciplining firm behavior, and how the use of sub-debt avoids many of the problems associated with alternative regulatory proposals; (4) a review of the evidence on the extent of market pricing and disciplining of risk imposed by holders of bank liabilities; (5) a review of some of the existing sub-debt proposals emphasizing their differences and the reasoning for those differences; (6) a new regulatory reform proposal which increases the role of sub-debt and (7) a discussion of some of the standard questions raised about sub-debt proposals and, when appropriate, explanation of how our proposal addresses these concerns.

Determinants of domestic and cross-border bank acquisitions in the European Union.

This paper analyzes the determinants of bank acquisitions both within and across countries in the EU-25 over the period 1997-2004. The findings of this paper are broadly in line with those of the academic literature on the subject, which are mainly based on the US experience. Our results suggest poorly managed EU-25 banks (high cost to income) are more likely to be acquired by other EU-25 banks, in the same country. Nevertheless, this underperformance of target banks does hold for cross border bank acquisitions only if compared to the median of the market. Larger banks are more likely to be acquired by other banks in the same country. The probability of being acquired by another bank in the same market is larger for banks that are quoted in the stock market, which is consistent with the disciplinary character of listing in the stock markets. Finally, banks operating in more concentrated markets are less likely to be acquired by other banks operating within the same country but are more likely to be acquired by banks in other EU-25 countries.

Bank Capital Ratios Across Countries: Why Do They Vary?

This paper extends the literature on bank capital structure by modeling capital structure as a function of important public policy and bank regulatory characteristics of the home country, as well as of bank specific variables, country macro-economic conditions and country level financial characteristics. The model is estimated with annual data for an unbalanced panel of the 78 largest private banks in the world headquartered in 12 industrial countries over the period between 1992 and 2005. The results indicate that bank capital ratios are significantly affected in the hypothesized directions by most of the bank-specific variables. Several of the country characteristic and policy variables are also significant with the predicted sign: banks maintain higher capital ratios in home countries in which the bank sector is relatively smaller and in countries that practice prompt corrective actions more actively, have more stringent capital requirements, and have more effective corporate governance structures.

The effect of capital adequacy guidelines on large bank holding companies

Abstract The United States federal bank regulators imposed numerical capital guidelines in 1981. If these guidelines are binding on bank holding companies, then theoretical evidence suggests that banking organizations may be increasing asset risk. This study tests empirically the hypothesis that the guidelines are binding. Two models of changes in bank holding company equity capital to assets ratios are developed and tested using maximum likehood estimation: a regulatory model and a market model. The results indicate that most large bank holding companies are influenced by regulatory forces.

An analysis of the systemic risks posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and an evaluation of the policy options for reducing those risks

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are government-sponsored enterprises that are central players in U.S. secondary mortgage markets. Over the past decade, these institutions have amassed enormous mortgage- and non-mortgage-oriented investment portfolios that pose significant interest-rate risks to the companies and a systemic risk to the financial system. This paper describes the nature of these risks and systemic concerns and then evaluates several policy options for reducing the institutions’ investment portfolios. We conclude that limits on portfolio size (assets or liabilities) would be the most desirable approach to mitigating the systemic risk posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Resolving large financial intermediaries: banks versus housing enterprises

This paper examines the policy issues with respect to resolving the possible failure of housing enterprises Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The authors compare and contrast these issues with those raised in the context of large bank failures and also identify important differences in the extant supervisory authorities. Based on these discussions, they offer a number of policy suggestions designed to minimize the cost of resolution and protect taxpayers from loss should a large bank or housing enterprise fail.

Capital changes at large affiliated banks

The federal bank regulators imposed numerical capital guidelines in December 1981. If these guidelines are binding, then banking organizations may respond to the costs of regulation in various ways. If the regulations are not binding, then further reliance may be placed on market discipline. This study develops two models of changes in the equity capital to assets ratio of large banks affiliated with bank holding companies—a regulatory model in which capital regulations are a binding influence and a market model in which financial markets influence capital ratios. The two models are examined empirically through a disequilibrium framework and maximum likelihood estimation techniques. The results suggest that most banks are predominantly influenced by regulatory forces.

The Use of Accruals to Manage Reported Earnings: Theory and Evidence

This paper develops a model in which firm managers maximize their own compensation by using accruals to manage reported earnings. The results of the model suggest that the form of the managerial compensation function and managerial time preferences may have an important influence on the relationship between accruals and latent earnings. Among the possible relationships suggested by the model are strategies we call Smooth Income, Occasional Big Bath, Live for Today, and Maximize Variability, each of which suggests a different reporting strategy pursued by managers. Most empirical tests of accruals are inconsistent with this and other theoretical models because they include a single earnings variable in a linear regression analysis. Instead, we document the reporting of accruals by two firms, Sunbeam and Citicorp, that is consistent with the “Live for Today” and “Occasional Big Bath” strategies.

On Investing in the Equity of Small Firms

This comment provides a brief discussion of the roles of different investors in small business firms. It then evaluates the contribution made in papers by in this issue by Robinson and Cottrell on informal investors in Alberta, Canada, and by Pintado, Pérez de Lema, and Van Auken on venture capital investment in Spain.