This paper studies the quantitative impact of microprudential bank regulations on bank lending and value metrics of efficiency and welfare in a dynamic model of banks that are financed by debt and equity, undertake maturity transformation, are exposed to credit and liquidity risks, and face financing frictions. We show that (1) there exists an inverted U-shaped relationship between bank lending, welfare, and capital requirements, (2) liquidity requirements unambiguously reduce lending, efficiency, and welfare, and (3) resolution policies contingent on observed capital, such as prompt corrective action, dominate in efficiency and welfare terms (noncontingent) capital and liquidity requirements.

This paper studies the quantitative impact of microprudential bank regulations on bank lending and value metrics of efficiency and welfare in a dynamic model of banks that are financed by debt and equity, undertake maturity transformation, are exposed to credit and liquidity risks, and face financing frictions. We show that (1) there exists an inverted U-shaped relationship between bank lending, welfare, and capital requirements, (2) liquidity requirements unambiguously reduce lending, efficiency, and welfare, and (3) resolution policies contingent on observed capital, such as prompt corrective action, dominate in efficiency and welfare terms (noncontingent) capital and liquidity requirements.

The paper studies the effectiveness of bank resolutions using a comprehensive database on banks headquartered in 18 European countries over the period 2000–19. By means of difference-in-differences methodology, we find that impaired asset segregations – otherwise known as bad banks – have been more effective than state-funded recapitalisations of distressed banks. While recapitalised banks seem to have used the injected funds mainly to clean up their balance sheets by reducing problem loans and cutting down on lending, banks that segregated assets increased progressively their lending after the creation of the bad bank. For both types of banking crisis interventions, we find a significant ex-post reduction in the cost of bank funding and shift towards deposit funding.