To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

Banks’ Internal Capital Markets and Deposit Rates

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 2017 52(5), 1797-1826 open access
It is commonly believed that deposit rates are determined primarily by supply: Depositors require higher deposit rates from risky banks, thereby creating market discipline. An alternative perspective is that market discipline is limited (e.g., due to deposit insurance and/or enhanced capital regulation) and that internal demand for funding by banks determines rates. Using branch-level deposit rate data, we find little evidence for market discipline as rates are similar across bank capitalization levels. In contrast, banks’ loan growth has a causal effect on deposit rates; for example, branches’ deposit rates are correlated with loan growth in other states in which their bank has some presence, suggesting internal capital markets help reallocate the bank’s funding.

Systematic mistakes in the mortgage market and lack of financial sophistication

Journal of Financial Economics 2017 123(1), 42-58
Institutions often offer a menu of contracts to consumers in an attempt to create a separating equilibrium that reveals borrower types and provides better pricing. We test the effectiveness of a specific set of contracts in the mortgage market: mortgage points. Points allow borrowers to exchange an upfront amount for a decrease in the mortgage rate. We document that, on average, points takers lose about $700. Also, points takers are less financially savvy (less educated, older), and they make mistakes on other dimensions (e.g., inefficiently refinancing their mortgages). Overall, our results show that borrowers overestimate how long they will stay with the mortgage.

Policy Intervention in Debt Renegotiation: Evidence from the Home Affordable Modification Program

Journal of Political Economy 2017 125(3), 654-712
We evaluate the effects of the 2009 Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) that provided intermediaries with sizable financial incentives to renegotiate mortgages. HAMP increased intensity of renegotiations and prevented a substantial number of foreclosures but reached just one-third of its targeted indebted households. This shortfall was in large part due to low renegotiation intensity of a few large intermediaries and was driven by intermediary-specific factors. Exploiting regional variation in the intensity of program implementation by intermediaries suggests that the program was associated with a lower rate of foreclosures, consumer debt delinquencies, house price declines, and an increase in durable spending.