We examine the effect of air quality regulation on productivity in some of the most heavily regulated manufacturing plants in the United States, the oil refineries of the Los Angeles (South Coast) Air Basin. We use direct measures of local air pollution regulation to estimate their effects on abatement investment. Refineries not subject to these regulations are used as a comparison group. We study a period of sharply increased regulation between 1979 and 1992. Initial compliance with each regulation cost $3 million per plant and a further $5 million to comply with increased stringency. We construct measures of total factor productivity using Census of Manufacturers output and materials data that report physical quantities of inputs and outputs for the entire population of refineries. Despite high costs associated with the local regulations, productivity in the Los Angeles Air Basin refineries rose sharply between 1987 and 1992, which was a period of decreased refinery productivity in other regions. We conclude that abatement cost measures may grossly overstate the economic cost of environmental regulation as abatement can increase productivity

The principal–agent problem between the regulator, regulated banks, and taxpayers is critical to the viability of the financial system’s safety net. There exists the danger that the regulator will collude with regulated banks to pursue their benefits at the expense of taxpayers, thereby reducing effectiveness of financial supervision. This paper proposes that the human relationship prevailing between the regulatory authorities and private banks referred to as “amakudari” is a form of collusion between the regulator and banks that endangers the safety net mechanism in Japan. Statistical analysis of data on regional banks shows that those banks accepting post-retirement officials from the Ministry of Finance have reduced capital adequacy levels and increased non-performing loans. Thus, the statistical result supports the hypothesis proposed in this paper

This paper examines the extent to which accounting systems separately identify all the costs of environmental regulation. We estimate the relation between the “visible” costs of regulatory compliance (costs that firms' accounting systems correctly classify as “environmental”) and “hidden” environmental costs embedded in other accounts. We use plant-level data from 55 steel mills to estimate hidden costs, and we follow up with structured interviews of corporate-level managers and plant-level accountants. Empirical results show that a $1 increase in the visible cost of environmental regulation is associated with an increase in total cost (at the margin) of 10–11, of which 9–10 are hidden in other accounts. The findings suggest that inappropriate identification and accumulation of the costs of environmental compliance are likely to distort costs in firms subject to environmental regulation

This paper studies moral hazard in banking due to delegated monitoring in an environment of aggregate risk and examines its implications for credit market equilibrium and regulation, in a model where banks are price competitors for loans and deposits. It provides a rationale for an incentive-based lending capacity positively linked to the bank's capital and profit margin, for an oligopolistic market structure wherever banks have market power, and for capital requirements. Social-welfare-maximizing capital requirements are lowered in recessions, are higher the more fragmented the banking sector, and are increased when anti-competitive measures are removed. In equilibrium banks earn excessive profits and credit may be rationed. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: D82, G28, L13

Until the middle of the 1970's, regulations constrained banks' ability to enter new markets. Over the subsequent 25 years, states gradually lifted these restrictions. This paper tests whether rents fostered by regulation were shared with labor, and whether firms were discriminating by sharing these rents disproportionately with male workers. We find that average compensation and average wages for banking employees fell after states deregulated. Male wages fell by about 12 percent after deregulation, whereas women's wages fell by only 3 percent, suggesting that rents were shared mainly with men. Women's share of employment in managerial positions also increased following deregulation

In 1992–1993, the SEC required enhanced disclosure on executive compensation and Congress enacted tax legislation limiting the deductibility of non-performance related compensation over one million dollars, i.e. Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). We examine the effects of these regulatory changes and report small and large sample evidence that many million-dollar firms have reduced salaries in response to 162(m) and that salary growth rates have declined post-1993 for the firms most likely to be affected by the regulations. We further document that bonus and total compensation payouts are increasingly sensitive to stock returns after 1993, especially for firms with million-dollar pay packages. We also document that, once we control for other factors affecting CEO incentives, the sensitivity of the CEO's wealth to changes in shareholder wealth has increased from 1993 to 1996 for firms with CEOs near or above the million dollar compensation level. Overall, our results suggest that some firms have reduced salaries in response to 162(m). More importantly, the pay for performance sensitivity, measured using total annual compensation and firm-related CEO wealth, has increased for firms likely to be affected by 162(m

This paper develops a framework for analyzing tradeoffs between policies for cleaning banks' balance sheets of bad debt when asymmetric information exists between banks and regulators regarding the amount of bad debt. The framework consists of a two-tier hierarchy composed of a regulator, banks, and firms. Hidden information and moral hazard are present at each tier of the hierarchy. The analysis identifies two types of effects of the regulator's policy choice: a direct effect on a bank's willingness to reveal its bad loans versus hiding them via loan rollovers, and an indirect effect on firm behavior as a function of the bank's response. The framework is applied to analyze tradeoffs between three policies: a laissez-faire policy, transfer of debt to an asset management company, and cancellation of debt inherited from a previous regime. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: G21; G28; G30; P34

Who should enforce laws or contracts: judges or regulators? Many Coasians, though not Coase himself, advocate judicial enforcement. We show that the incentives facing judges and regulators crucially shape this choice. We then compare the regulation of financial markets in Poland and the Czech Republic in the 1990s. In Poland, strict enforcement of the securities law by a highly motivated regulator was associated with a rapidly developing stock market. In the Czech Republic, hands-off regulation was associated with a moribund stock market

We use event-time methodology to study legal insider trading associated with mergers circa 1900. For mergers with “prospective” disclosures similar to today's, we find substantial value gains at announcement, implying participation by “out-side” shareholders despite the absence of insider constraints. Furthermore, preannouncement stock-price runups, relative to total value gain, are no more than those observed for modern mergers. Insider regulation apparently has produced little benefit for outsiders, with the inside information-pricing function and related gains shifting to external “information specialists.” Other results suggest market penalties for nondisclosure; i.e., insider trading is less successful in a restricted information environment

During the Progressive Era at the beginning of the 20 th century, the United States replaced litigation by regulation as the principal mechanism of social control of business. To explain why this happened, we present a model of choice of law enforcement strategy between litigation and regulation based on the idea that justice can be subverted with sufficient expenditure of resources. The model suggests that courts are more vulnerable to subversion than regulators, especially in an environment of significant inequality of wealth and political power. The switch to regulation can then be seen as an efficient response to the subversion of justice by robber barons during the Gilded Age. The model makes sense of the progressive reform agenda, and of the successes and failures of alternative law enforcement strategies in different countries