Tara Rice

Commercial Banking Structure, Regulation, and Performance: An International Comparison

This paper provides detailed information on banking structure, permissible banking activities, regulatory structure, deposit insurance schemes, and supervisory practices in each of the 15 European Union countries, as well as in Canada, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States. Comparisons across the countries show there is a wide range of banking structures and supervisory practices, and there is a roughly equal division between those countries that rely on the central bank as the chief banking supervisor and those that do not. In addition, although all of the countries currently have deposit insurance schemes, these schemes differ widely in many respects. Cross-country comparisons of the different aspects of banking do reveal one common characteristic, however. Almost all of the countries allow a wide range of banking activities, including underwriting, dealing, and brokering in both securities and insurance, and these activities can generally be conducted either directly in a bank or indirectly through a subsidiary of a bank, rather than through a holding company structure. The notable exceptions to this common tendency are the United States and Japan. An appendix presents an exploratory regression analysis illustrating a way in which empirical examinations of bank performance might be enriched by taking into account differences in permissible banking activities across countries.

Liquidity Risk and U.S. Bank Lending at Home and Abroad

While the balance sheet structure of U.S. banks influences how they respond to liquidity risks, the mechanisms for the effects on and consequences for lending vary widely across banks. We demonstrate fundamental differences across banks without foreign affiliates versus those with foreign affiliates. Among the nonglobal banks (those without a foreign affiliate), cross-sectional differences in response to liquidity risk depend on the banks’ shares of core deposit funding. By contrast, differences across global banks (those with foreign affiliates) are associated with ex ante liquidity management strategies as reflected in internal borrowing across the global organization. This intra-firm borrowing by banks serves as a shock absorber and affects lending patterns to domestic and foreign customers. The use of official-sector emergency liquidity facilities by global and nonglobal banks in response to market liquidity risks tends to reduce the importance of ex ante differences in balance sheets as drivers of cross-sectional differences in lending.