We examine whether U.S. banks subject to the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) reduce lending (an unintended consequence) and/or become more resilient to liquidity shocks, as intended by regulators. We find that LCR banks tighten lending standards, and reduce liquidity creation that occurs mainly through lower lending relative to non-LCR banks. However, covered banks also contribute less to fire-sale externalities relative to exempt banks. For LCR banks, we estimate that the total after-tax benefits of reduced fire-sale risk (net of the costs associated with foregone lending) exceed $50 billion from 2013Q2 to 2017, mostly accruing to the largest LCR banks. Non-LCR regulations enacted during our sample period cannot fully account for these findings. For the banking sector as a whole, lending migrates to smaller, non-LCR banks so that lending shares increase but fire-sale risk does not decrease. Our results highlight the trade-off between liquidity creation and resiliency arising from liquidity regulations that underlie the debate on whether the LCR should be extended following the banking crisis of March 2023

This paper studies whether and how environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure regulations imposed on banks generate transmission effects along the lending channel. I use a setting of U.S. firms borrowing from non‐U.S. banks and exploit the staggered adoption of ESG disclosure regulations in banks’ home countries. I find that exposed borrowers of affected banks improve their environmental and social (E&S) performance following the disclosure mandate. Consistent with banks enhancing both their engagement and selection activities, affected banks impose more environmental action covenants in loan contracts, and they are more likely to terminate a borrower with bad E&S records following the regulation. Further evidence shows that the transmission effects are stronger when a disclosure regulation is well‐enforced (as indicated by a greater increase in banks’ disclosure) and among borrowers with greater switching costs. Collectively, the findings document the role of lending relationships in transmitting the real effect of ESG disclosure regulations from banks to borrowing firms

Prudential bank regulation complicates monetary policy because it has cyclical effects on the growth of bank credit, which can be a channel through which monetary policy is transmitted to the economy. Employing a panel of 36 advanced and developing countries for the period 1973–2015, we find that changes in regulation have been procyclical with respect to credit surges and counter-cyclical with respect to credit stops. As a result, monetary policy risks being too loose over the credit cycle. The economic effects of prudential regulation on credit have been meaningful given the large-scale bank liberalizations undertaken by many countries. The result is robust to dealing with a wide range of sensitivity tests and endogeneity concerns. In designing regulations, policymakers need to consider transmission mechanisms through which they might affect the real economy and undermine the goals of monetary policy

Postcrisis bank regulations raised market-making costs for bank-affiliated dealers. We show that this can, somewhat surprisingly, improve overall investor welfare and reduce average transaction costs despite the increased cost of immediacy. Bank dealers in OTC markets optimize between two parallel trading mechanisms: market making and matchmaking. Bank regulations that increase market-making costs change the market structure by intensifying competitive pressure from nonbank dealers and incentivizing bank dealers to shift their business activities toward matchmaking. Thus, postcrisis bank regulations have the (unintended) benefit of replacing costly bank balance sheets with a more efficient form of financial intermediation

The regulation that caps executives’ variable compensation, as part of the Capital Requirements Directive IV of 2013, likely affected executive turnover, compensation design, and risk-taking in EU banking. The current study identifies significantly higher average turnover rates but also finds that they are driven by CEOs at poorly performing banks. Banks indemnified their executives by off-setting the bonus cap with higher fixed compensation. Although our evidence is only suggestive, we do not find any reduction in risk-taking at the bank level, one purported aim of the regulation

We investigate how provisioning models interact with bank regulation to affect banks' risk‐taking behavior. We study an accuracy versus timeliness trade‐off between an incurred loss model (IL) and an expected loss model (EL) such as current expected credit loss model or International Financial Reporting Standards 9. Relative to IL, even though EL improves efficiency by prompting earlier corrective action in bad times, it induces banks to originate either safer or riskier loans. Trading off ex post benefits versus ex ante real effects, we show that more timely information under EL enhances efficiency either when banks are insufficiently capitalized or when regulatory intervention is likely to be effective. Conversely, when banks are moderately capitalized and regulatory intervention is sufficiently costly, switching to EL impairs efficiency. From a policy perspective, our analysis highlights the roles that regulatory capital and the effectiveness of regulatory intervention play in determining the economic consequences of provisioning models. EL spurs credit supply and improves financial stability in economies where intervening in banks' operations is relatively frictionless and/or regulators can tailor regulatory capital to incorporate information about credit losses

We examine the economic consequences of a rule designed to improve consumers' understanding of mortgage information. The 2015 TILA‐RESPA Integrated Disclosures rule (TRID) simplifies the mortgage disclosures provided to consumers. As a consequence, TRID‐affected mortgages become a less attractive investment opportunity to banks. Our main results document that mortgage applications affected by TRID are less likely to be approved following the rule's effective date. We find evidence consistent with both a decrease in consumers' information processing costs and an increase in banks' secondary market frictions, providing insight into the potential channels through which this reduction in mortgage credit operates. We also find that banks partially compensate for reduced mortgage lending by increasing small business lending, and that fintechs absorb mortgage demand in areas with reduced mortgage lending by banks. Our study documents real actions that firms take in response to disclosure transparency regulation and contributes to the literature on the economic consequences of such regulation

This paper assesses the value of multiple requirements in bank regulation using a novel empirical rule-based methodology. Exploiting two datasets, we apply simple threshold-based rules to assess how different capital and liquidity ratios individually and in combination might have identified banks that failed in the global financial crisis and European sovereign debt crisis. Our results support the case for a small portfolio of different regulatory metrics, calibrated holistically. A portfolio of a leverage ratio, a risk-weighted capital ratio and a liquidity ratio such as the NSFR correctly identifies a high proportion of failing banks with fewer false alarms than any of these metrics individually – and at less stringent calibrations. The relative usefulness of individual metrics also varies across different crises and regulatory regimes, highlighting how a portfolio approach may be more robust. Further, we show that market-based capitalisation measures and loan-to-deposit ratios can provide complementary value in monitoring banks

We examine how banks’ cross-border lending reacts to changes in the intensity of liquidity regulation using a new dataset on the UK’s Individual Liquidity Guidance. An increase in requirements reduces banks’ cross-border lending growth to banks and non-banks. But banks’ business models determine how they adjust: banks with higher deposit shares, such as those with UK retail operations, protect lending more; banks also preserve lending to countries they do most business, cutting elsewhere; foreign subsidiaries from countries not eligible to issue High Quality Liquid Assets (HQLA) show the strongest reduction in lending; in contrast, subsidiaries from HQLA-issuing countries cut intragroup lending

The literature demonstrates numerous consequences of bank geographic deregulation, but neglects bank capital structure – critical to performance, resilience, and prudential regulation/supervision. We supply first-time evidence on geographic deregulation effects on bank capital. We also distinguish and test two novel mechanisms through which geographic deregulation may affect bank behavior. The competitive defense and competitive offense mechanisms differentiate deregulation effects in increasing external competitive pressures on banks versus expanding banks’ capacity to compete externally. We find statistically and economically significant evidence of geographic deregulation effects on two bank capital management tools – target capital ratios and speeds of adjustment to these targets – yielding higher targets and faster adjustment. Findings are robust to addressing identification concerns using dynamic panel methodology, a gravity-deregulation approach, and time-varying bank-specific instruments. The data also support both the competitive defense and competitive offense mechanisms, suggesting future research and policy applications of these mechanisms to banking and more generally