The systemic risk and negative social impacts from bank-issued wealth management products (WMPs) are well studied by scholars and practitioners in China. Using hand-collected bank data, we find that WMPs help reduce banks’ cost of funds, which is then passed on to their borrowers as lower borrowing cost. This finding shows an upside of this controversial but increasingly popular bank product. We propose four mechanisms through which WMPs can lower banks’ cost of funds: structural change in deposits, cross-subsidization, liquidity effect, and related-party transactions. We find supporting evidence for those mechanisms, and their effects vary across state-owned, joint-stock, and city commercial banks. Those variations are consistent with the unique characteristics of each bank group. We further explore the competition for capital between state-owned and non-state-owned banks. The results suggest that state-owned banks offer significantly higher interest rates for deposits as non-state-owned banks expand in the same region. WMP issuance is likely a differentiation strategy in response to the competition for deposits.

Using the full sample of U.S. banks and hand-collected data on enforcement actions over 2000–2014, we analyze the role of these interventions in promoting several aspects of accounting quality. We find that enforcement actions issued for both risk-related and accounting-related reasons lead to significant improvements in accounting quality. This improvement is consistently found for earnings smoothing, big-bath accounting, timely recognition of future loan losses, the association of loan loss provisions with future loan charge offs, loss avoidance, and cash flow predictability and earnings persistence. Most of the effects are somewhat more potent in the crisis period and survive in several sensitivity tests. Our findings highlight the imperative role of regulatory interventions in promoting bank accounting quality.