Bank business models and the separation issue:
The main hallmarks of the global financial crisis were too-big-to-fail institutions taking on too much risk with other people's money while gains were privatised and losses socialised. It is shown that banks need little capital in calm periods, but in a crisis they need too much - there is no r...
Gespeichert in:
1. Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Weitere Verfasser: | , |
Format: | Elektronisch Buchkapitel |
Sprache: | English |
Veröffentlicht: |
Paris
OECD Publishing
2014
|
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | DE-384 DE-473 DE-824 DE-29 DE-739 DE-355 DE-20 DE-1028 DE-1049 DE-521 DE-861 DE-898 DE-92 DE-91 DE-573 DE-19 Volltext |
Zusammenfassung: | The main hallmarks of the global financial crisis were too-big-to-fail institutions taking on too much risk with other people's money while gains were privatised and losses socialised. It is shown that banks need little capital in calm periods, but in a crisis they need too much - there is no reasonable ex-ante capital rule for large systemically important financial institutions that will make them safe. The bank regulators paradox is that large complex and interconnected banks need very little capital in the good times, but they can never have enough in an extreme crisis. Separation is required to deal with this problem, which derives mainly from counterparty risk. The study suggests banks should be considered for separation into a ring-fenced non-operating holding company (NOHC) structure with ring-fencing when they pass a key allowable threshold for the gross market value (GMV) of derivatives, a case which is reinforced if the bank has high wholesale funding and low levels of liquid trading assets. The pricing of derivatives and repos would become more commensurate with the risks if the NOHC proposal were to be pursued as a unifying strategy for the different national approaches. Most of the objections to this structure are summarised and rebutted. Other national proposals for separation in Switzerland, the Volcker rule, the Vickers rule, and the Liikanen proposal are argued to be inferior to the ring-fenced NOHC proposal, on the grounds that empirical evidence about what matters for a safe business model is not taken properly into account. JEL classification: G01, G15, G18, G20, G21, G24, G28 Keywords: Financial crisis, derivatives, bank business models, distance-to-default, structural bank separation, banking reform, GSIFI banks |
Beschreibung: | 1 Online-Ressource (23 Seiten) 21 x 28cm |
DOI: | 10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |
Internformat
MARC
LEADER | 00000nma a2200000zc 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | BV047939419 | ||
003 | DE-604 | ||
007 | cr|uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 220413s2014 |||| o||u| ||||||eng d | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |2 doi | |
035 | |a (ZDB-13-SOC)061274038 | ||
035 | |a (OCoLC)961399898 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV047939419 | ||
040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e aacr | ||
041 | 0 | |a eng | |
049 | |a DE-384 |a DE-91 |a DE-473 |a DE-824 |a DE-29 |a DE-739 |a DE-355 |a DE-20 |a DE-1028 |a DE-1049 |a DE-188 |a DE-521 |a DE-861 |a DE-898 |a DE-92 |a DE-573 |a DE-19 | ||
100 | 1 | |a Blundell-Wignall, Adrian |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Bank business models and the separation issue |c Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson and Caroline Roulet |
264 | 1 | |a Paris |b OECD Publishing |c 2014 | |
300 | |a 1 Online-Ressource (23 Seiten) |c 21 x 28cm | ||
336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a The main hallmarks of the global financial crisis were too-big-to-fail institutions taking on too much risk with other people's money while gains were privatised and losses socialised. It is shown that banks need little capital in calm periods, but in a crisis they need too much - there is no reasonable ex-ante capital rule for large systemically important financial institutions that will make them safe. The bank regulators paradox is that large complex and interconnected banks need very little capital in the good times, but they can never have enough in an extreme crisis. Separation is required to deal with this problem, which derives mainly from counterparty risk. The study suggests banks should be considered for separation into a ring-fenced non-operating holding company (NOHC) structure with ring-fencing when they pass a key allowable threshold for the gross market value (GMV) of derivatives, a case which is reinforced if the bank has high wholesale funding and low levels of liquid trading assets. The pricing of derivatives and repos would become more commensurate with the risks if the NOHC proposal were to be pursued as a unifying strategy for the different national approaches. Most of the objections to this structure are summarised and rebutted. Other national proposals for separation in Switzerland, the Volcker rule, the Vickers rule, and the Liikanen proposal are argued to be inferior to the ring-fenced NOHC proposal, on the grounds that empirical evidence about what matters for a safe business model is not taken properly into account. JEL classification: G01, G15, G18, G20, G21, G24, G28 Keywords: Financial crisis, derivatives, bank business models, distance-to-default, structural bank separation, banking reform, GSIFI banks | ||
650 | 4 | |a Finance and Investment | |
700 | 1 | |a Atkinson, Paul |4 ctb | |
700 | 1 | |a Roulet, Caroline |4 ctb | |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |x Verlag |z URL des Erstveröffentlichers |3 Volltext |
912 | |a ebook | ||
943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033320913 | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-384 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-473 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-824 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-29 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-739 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-355 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-20 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-1028 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-1049 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-521 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-861 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-898 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-92 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-91 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-573 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
966 | e | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |l DE-19 |p ZDB-13-SOC |x Verlag |3 Volltext |
Datensatz im Suchindex
_version_ | 1815091529528639488 |
---|---|
adam_text | |
adam_txt | |
any_adam_object | |
any_adam_object_boolean | |
author | Blundell-Wignall, Adrian |
author2 | Atkinson, Paul Roulet, Caroline |
author2_role | ctb ctb |
author2_variant | p a pa c r cr |
author_facet | Blundell-Wignall, Adrian Atkinson, Paul Roulet, Caroline |
author_role | aut |
author_sort | Blundell-Wignall, Adrian |
author_variant | a b w abw |
building | Verbundindex |
bvnumber | BV047939419 |
collection | ebook |
ctrlnum | (ZDB-13-SOC)061274038 (OCoLC)961399898 (DE-599)BVBBV047939419 |
discipline | Wirtschaftswissenschaften |
discipline_str_mv | Wirtschaftswissenschaften |
doi_str_mv | 10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |
format | Electronic Book Chapter |
fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>00000nma a2200000zc 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV047939419</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr|uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220413s2014 |||| o||u| ||||||eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-13-SOC)061274038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)961399898</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV047939419</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">aacr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-384</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-91</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-473</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-824</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-29</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-739</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-355</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-20</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-1028</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-1049</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-188</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-521</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-861</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-898</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-92</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-573</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Blundell-Wignall, Adrian</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bank business models and the separation issue</subfield><subfield code="c">Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson and Caroline Roulet</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Paris</subfield><subfield code="b">OECD Publishing</subfield><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 Online-Ressource (23 Seiten)</subfield><subfield code="c">21 x 28cm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The main hallmarks of the global financial crisis were too-big-to-fail institutions taking on too much risk with other people's money while gains were privatised and losses socialised. It is shown that banks need little capital in calm periods, but in a crisis they need too much - there is no reasonable ex-ante capital rule for large systemically important financial institutions that will make them safe. The bank regulators paradox is that large complex and interconnected banks need very little capital in the good times, but they can never have enough in an extreme crisis. Separation is required to deal with this problem, which derives mainly from counterparty risk. The study suggests banks should be considered for separation into a ring-fenced non-operating holding company (NOHC) structure with ring-fencing when they pass a key allowable threshold for the gross market value (GMV) of derivatives, a case which is reinforced if the bank has high wholesale funding and low levels of liquid trading assets. The pricing of derivatives and repos would become more commensurate with the risks if the NOHC proposal were to be pursued as a unifying strategy for the different national approaches. Most of the objections to this structure are summarised and rebutted. Other national proposals for separation in Switzerland, the Volcker rule, the Vickers rule, and the Liikanen proposal are argued to be inferior to the ring-fenced NOHC proposal, on the grounds that empirical evidence about what matters for a safe business model is not taken properly into account. JEL classification: G01, G15, G18, G20, G21, G24, G28 Keywords: Financial crisis, derivatives, bank business models, distance-to-default, structural bank separation, banking reform, GSIFI banks</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Finance and Investment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Atkinson, Paul</subfield><subfield code="4">ctb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Roulet, Caroline</subfield><subfield code="4">ctb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">URL des Erstveröffentlichers</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ebook</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033320913</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-384</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-473</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-824</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-29</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-739</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-355</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-20</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-1028</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-1049</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-521</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-861</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-898</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-92</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-91</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-573</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j</subfield><subfield code="l">DE-19</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
id | DE-604.BV047939419 |
illustrated | Not Illustrated |
index_date | 2024-07-03T19:35:10Z |
indexdate | 2024-11-07T19:02:53Z |
institution | BVB |
language | English |
oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033320913 |
oclc_num | 961399898 |
open_access_boolean | |
owner | DE-384 DE-91 DE-BY-TUM DE-473 DE-BY-UBG DE-824 DE-29 DE-739 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-20 DE-1028 DE-1049 DE-188 DE-521 DE-861 DE-898 DE-BY-UBR DE-92 DE-573 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
owner_facet | DE-384 DE-91 DE-BY-TUM DE-473 DE-BY-UBG DE-824 DE-29 DE-739 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-20 DE-1028 DE-1049 DE-188 DE-521 DE-861 DE-898 DE-BY-UBR DE-92 DE-573 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
physical | 1 Online-Ressource (23 Seiten) 21 x 28cm |
psigel | ebook ZDB-13-SOC |
publishDate | 2014 |
publishDateSearch | 2014 |
publishDateSort | 2014 |
publisher | OECD Publishing |
record_format | marc |
spelling | Blundell-Wignall, Adrian Verfasser aut Bank business models and the separation issue Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson and Caroline Roulet Paris OECD Publishing 2014 1 Online-Ressource (23 Seiten) 21 x 28cm txt rdacontent c rdamedia cr rdacarrier The main hallmarks of the global financial crisis were too-big-to-fail institutions taking on too much risk with other people's money while gains were privatised and losses socialised. It is shown that banks need little capital in calm periods, but in a crisis they need too much - there is no reasonable ex-ante capital rule for large systemically important financial institutions that will make them safe. The bank regulators paradox is that large complex and interconnected banks need very little capital in the good times, but they can never have enough in an extreme crisis. Separation is required to deal with this problem, which derives mainly from counterparty risk. The study suggests banks should be considered for separation into a ring-fenced non-operating holding company (NOHC) structure with ring-fencing when they pass a key allowable threshold for the gross market value (GMV) of derivatives, a case which is reinforced if the bank has high wholesale funding and low levels of liquid trading assets. The pricing of derivatives and repos would become more commensurate with the risks if the NOHC proposal were to be pursued as a unifying strategy for the different national approaches. Most of the objections to this structure are summarised and rebutted. Other national proposals for separation in Switzerland, the Volcker rule, the Vickers rule, and the Liikanen proposal are argued to be inferior to the ring-fenced NOHC proposal, on the grounds that empirical evidence about what matters for a safe business model is not taken properly into account. JEL classification: G01, G15, G18, G20, G21, G24, G28 Keywords: Financial crisis, derivatives, bank business models, distance-to-default, structural bank separation, banking reform, GSIFI banks Finance and Investment Atkinson, Paul ctb Roulet, Caroline ctb https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j Verlag URL des Erstveröffentlichers Volltext |
spellingShingle | Blundell-Wignall, Adrian Bank business models and the separation issue Finance and Investment |
title | Bank business models and the separation issue |
title_auth | Bank business models and the separation issue |
title_exact_search | Bank business models and the separation issue |
title_exact_search_txtP | Bank business models and the separation issue |
title_full | Bank business models and the separation issue Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson and Caroline Roulet |
title_fullStr | Bank business models and the separation issue Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson and Caroline Roulet |
title_full_unstemmed | Bank business models and the separation issue Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson and Caroline Roulet |
title_short | Bank business models and the separation issue |
title_sort | bank business models and the separation issue |
topic | Finance and Investment |
topic_facet | Finance and Investment |
url | https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5jzb2rhk9b6j |
work_keys_str_mv | AT blundellwignalladrian bankbusinessmodelsandtheseparationissue AT atkinsonpaul bankbusinessmodelsandtheseparationissue AT rouletcaroline bankbusinessmodelsandtheseparationissue |