I argue creditors, plausibly considering the link between bank lobbying and government bailouts, reflect the financial-safety-net aspect of bank lobbying. My structural estimation based on U.S. data suggests bank lobbying is negatively associated with the occurrence of a run-like equilibrium when a bank is subject to multiple equilibria. The estimated effect on bank risk and value is economically significant in the postcrisis U.S. banking sector. This result is consistent with the reduced-form evidence in this paper and has passed multiple robustness checks. Counterfactual simulations suggest the lobbying effect as a financial safety net would vary depending on policy responses to financial crisis.

Using a data set of public procurement auctions and registered shareholders of all bidding firms in Singapore, we study the effects of ownership networks on prices and efficiency in product markets. We find participating bidders with common owners or common owners’ owners are more likely to submit identical bids, and the identical bids are associated with higher contract prices. Our structural estimates suggest removing ownership network effects improves a procurer’s cost efficiency. Our findings are robust to falsification tests, bid rounding concerns, placebo tests using other common stakeholder relationships, and weighting based on a machine-learning prediction of the auction format.

Should banks be transparent during a bail-in? Banks suffering losses may bail-in creditors to optimally allocate resources between early and late withdrawers. However, if losses are private information, then bail-ins may signal asset quality. In the absence of signaling, banks can sell assets at a pooled price, effectively insuring creditors against asset risks. However, when bail-ins signal quality, banks may delay bail-ins and sell assets at higher prices than otherwise, but this incentive can trigger inefficient bank runs. To prevent such runs, banks should choose to be either fully transparent or entirely opaque, ensuring asset quality is not private information.

This study provides direct evidence of the association between debt–equity conflict and investment efficiency in financially distressed firms. Leveraging a unique institutional setting in Japan, we examine the impact of lender-affiliated directors on the managerial decisions of their borrowers. Although banker-directors do not influence firms at low risks of default, their presence leads to more conservative financial decisions in distressed firms, thereby mitigating shareholder exploitation. They also reduce information frictions to prevent overinvestment and underinvestment. However, despite within-firm efficiency gains, potential spillover effects on other stakeholders raise questions about the broader welfare implications of this debt–equity conflict mitigation.

Due to the government-driven mergers of large banks, many competing firms in Japan ended up borrowing from a common lender. Using firm-level data, we find that the capital investments of competing firms that share a common lender decrease by 15% of the mean. When a common lender can exercise its voice through its former employees serving as firms’ executive directors, investments fall significantly further. Competing firms that share a common lender increase markups and profitability ratios, suggesting that the lender induces strategic coordination among its borrowers to reduce their competitive pressures. Firms use saved resources from weaker competition for cash cushions.