Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaper › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaper › Journal article › Research › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Can strong capital regulation prevent risk-taking from deposit insurance?
AU - Bartholdy, Jan
AU - Justesen, Lene Gilje
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Can strong capital regulation prevent risk-taking from deposit insurance? Denmark offers a unique setting providing solid identification for testing risk incentives from deposit insurance under strong capital regulation. The Danish system is a universal system without strong risk exposure regulation. Commercial banks and savings banks have different ownership structures but are subject to the same set of regulations, but savings banks have no incentive to increase risk after the implementation of a deposit insurance scheme. We show that commercial banks did not increase their risk at the introduction of deposit insurance compared to savings banks. We attribute this to strong capital requirements and a firm closure policy. The results also hold for large commercial banks, indicating that the systemic risk did not increase either. Finally, there is no evidence that commercial banks increase their risk by allowing their customers to increase their leverage (risk) compared with customers in savings banks.
AB - Can strong capital regulation prevent risk-taking from deposit insurance? Denmark offers a unique setting providing solid identification for testing risk incentives from deposit insurance under strong capital regulation. The Danish system is a universal system without strong risk exposure regulation. Commercial banks and savings banks have different ownership structures but are subject to the same set of regulations, but savings banks have no incentive to increase risk after the implementation of a deposit insurance scheme. We show that commercial banks did not increase their risk at the introduction of deposit insurance compared to savings banks. We attribute this to strong capital requirements and a firm closure policy. The results also hold for large commercial banks, indicating that the systemic risk did not increase either. Finally, there is no evidence that commercial banks increase their risk by allowing their customers to increase their leverage (risk) compared with customers in savings banks.
KW - Deposit insurance
KW - difference-in-difference
KW - moral hazard
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097929999&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/1351847X.2020.1860107
DO - 10.1080/1351847X.2020.1860107
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85097929999
VL - 27
SP - 1164
EP - 1185
JO - European Journal of Finance
JF - European Journal of Finance
SN - 1351-847X
IS - 12
ER -