We investigate how differential exposures by German banks to the US real-estate market affect domestic lending in Germany when home prices started to decline in the USA. We find that banks with an exposure to the US real-estate sector and to conduits shift their domestic lending to industry–region combinations with lower insolvency ratios following a decrease in US home prices. These banks also contract their lending to German firms more than banks that do not have such exposure. We mainly document that possible losses abroad shift bank lending at home where the size of the effect depends on the type and the degree of exposure the bank has.

While the positive growth effects of financial integration are extensively documented, little is known of its impact on small and young firms. This paper aims to fill this void relying on a panel of 60,000 firm-year observations on listed and unlisted companies in Eastern European economies to assess the differential impact of foreign bank lending on firm growth and financing. Foreign lending stimulates growth in firm sales, assets, and use of financial debt even though the effect is dampened for small firms. More strikingly, young firms benefit most from foreign bank presence, while businesses connected to domestic banks or to the government suffer. Overall, our findings suggest that foreign banks can help to mitigate connected-lending problems and to improve capital allocation.

We study local loan conditions when banks close branches. In places where branch closures do not take place, firms that purposely switch banks receive a sixty-three basis points (bps) discount. However, after the closure of nearby branches of their credit-granting banks, firms that locally and hurriedly transfer to other banks receive no such discount. Yet, the loan default rate for the latter (more expensive) transfer loans is on average a full percentage point lower than that for the former (cheaper) switching loans. This suggests that transfer firms are of “better” quality than switching firms. In sum, even if local markets remain competitive, when banks close branches, firms lose.

We investigate how bank organization shapes banking competition. We show that a bank's geographical lending reach and loan pricing strategy is determined by its own and its rivals’ organizational structure. We estimate the impact of organization on the geographical reach and loan pricing of a large bank. We find that the reach of the bank is smaller when rival banks are large and hierarchically organized, have superior communication technology, have a narrower span of organization, and are closer to a decision unit with lending authority. Rival banks’ size and the number of layers to a decision unit soften spatial pricing.

This paper provides evidence on the strategic lending decisions made by banks facing a negative funding shock. Using bank–firm level credit data, we show that banks reallocate credit within their loan portfolio in at least three different ways. First, banks reallocate to sectors where they have a high market share. Second, they also reallocate to sectors in which they are more specialized. Third, they reallocate credit toward low-risk firms. These reallocation effects are economically large. A standard deviation increase in sector market share, sector specialization, or firm soundness reduces the transmission of the funding shock to credit supply by 22%, 8%, and 10%, respectively.

Does market power of banks affect firm performance? To answer this question we examine 25,236 syndicated loan facilities granted between 2000 and 2010 by 296 banks to 9,029 US non-financial firms. Accounting for both observed and unobserved bank and firm heterogeneity, we find that firms that were recently poorly performing obtain loans from banks with more market power. However, in the year after loan origination market power positively affects firm performance, but only if it is not too high. Our estimates thus suggest that bank market power can facilitate access to credit by poorly performing firms, yet at the same time also boosts the performance of the firms that obtain credit.

We study the risk-taking channel of monetary policy in Bolivia, a dollarized country where monetary changes are transmitted exogenously from the USA. We find that a lower policy rate spurs the granting of riskier loans, to borrowers with worse credit histories, lower ex-ante internal ratings, and weaker ex-post performance (acutely so when the rate subsequently increases). Effects are stronger for small firms borrowing from multiple banks. To uniquely identify risk-taking, we assess collateral coverage, expected returns, and risk premia of the newly granted riskier loans, finding that their returns and premia are actually lower, especially at banks suffering from agency problems.

We show that lenders charge higher interest rates for mortgages on properties exposed to a greater risk of sea level rise (SLR). This SLR premium is not evident in short-term loans and is not related to borrowers’ short-term realized default or creditworthiness. Further, the SLR premium is smaller when the consequences of climate change are less salient and in areas with more climate change deniers. Overall, our results suggest that mortgage lenders view the risk of SLR as a long-term risk and that attention and beliefs are potential barriers through which SLR risk is priced in residential mortgage markets.

We present a model of credit market competition to derive key hypotheses about how information sharing between banks influences the spatial clustering of their branches. We then test these hypotheses using data on 56,555 branches owned by 614 banks across 19 countries. We find that information sharing incentivizes banks to establish branches in localities that are new to them but that are already served by other banks. The resultant branch clustering is associated with reduced spatial credit rationing, as information sharing enables firms to access credit from more distant banks. These findings underscore how information sharing makes it more important for banks to move closer to each other rather than closer to their borrowers.