Banking and currency crisis and systemic risk: lessons from recent events

Banking and currency crises have done severe economic damage in many countries in recent years. This article examines the causes and characteristics of these crises and the public policies intended to prevent them or mitigate their adverse consequences.Financial crises ; Bank failures ; Money ; Public policy

A proposal for efficiently resolving out-of-the-money swap positions at large insolvent banks

Recent evidence suggests that bank regulators appear to be able to resolve insolvent large banks efficiently without either protecting uninsured deposits through invoking "too-big-to-fail" or causing serious harm to other banks or financial markets. But resolving swap positions at insolvent banks, particularly a bank's out-of-the-money positions, has received less attention. The FDIC can now either repudiate these contracts and treat the in-the-money counterparties as at-risk general creditors or transfer the contracts to a solvent bank. Both options have major drawbacks. Terminating contracts abruptly may result in large-fire sale losses and ignite defaults in other swap contracts. Transferring the contracts both is costly to the FDIC and protects the counterparties, who would otherwise be at-risk and monitor their banks. This paper proposes a third option that keeps the benefits of both options but eliminates the undesirable costs. It permits the contracts to be transferred, thus avoiding the potential for fire-sale losses and adverse spillover, but keeps the insolvent bank's in-the-money counterparties at-risk, thus maintaining discipline on banks by large and sophisticated creditors.Deposit insurance ; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ; Swaps (Finance)

Deposit insurance reform in the FDIC Improvement Act: the experience to date

In 1991, the U.S. adopted fundamental deposit insurance reform in the FDIC Improvement Act. This article reveals why such reform was necessary in light of the severe banking crisis of the 1980s and analyzes its success to date.Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991

FDICIA after five years: a review and evaluation

At yearend 1991, Congress enacted fundamental deposit insurance reform for banks and thrifts in the FDIC Improvement Act (FDICIA). This reform followed the failure of more than 2,000 depository institutions in the 1980s. Many of these failed because of the incentive incompatibility of the structure of federal government-provided deposit insurance, which encouraged moral hazard behavior by banks and poor agent behavior by regulators. Insurance was put on a more incentive compatible basis by providing for a graduated series of sanctions that mimic market discipline and first may and then must be applied by the regulators on floundering the banks. This article reviews these changes and evaluates the early results.Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991

U.S. corporate and bank insolvency regimes: an economic comparison and evaluation

In the U.S., the insolvency resolution of most corporations is governed by the federal bankruptcy code and is administered by special bankruptcy courts. Most large corporate bankruptcies are resolved under Chapter 11 reorganization proceedings. However, commercial bank insolvencies are governed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and are administered by the FDIC. These two resolution processes--corporate bankruptcy and bank receiverships--differ in a number of significant ways, including the type of proceeding (judicial versus administrative); the rights of managers, stockholders and creditors in the proceedings; the explicit and implicit goals of the resolution; the prioritization of creditors--claims; the costs of administration; and the timeliness of creditor payments. These differences derive from perceptions that "banks are special." This paper elucidates these differences, explores the effectiveness of the procedural differences in achieving the stated goals, and considers the potential economic consequences of the different structures.Bank failures ; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Derivatives and systemic risk: netting, collateral, and closeout

In the U.S., as in most countries with well-developed securities markets, derivative securities enjoy special protections under insolvency resolution laws. Most creditors are “stayed” from enforcing their rights while a firm is in bankruptcy. However, many derivatives contracts are exempt from these stays. Furthermore, derivatives enjoy netting and close-out, or termination, privileges which are not always available to most other creditors. The primary argument used to motivate passage of legislation granting these extraordinary protections is that derivatives markets are a major source of systemic risk in financial markets and that netting and close- out reduce this risk. ; To date, these assertions have not been subjected to rigorous economic scrutiny. This paper critically reexamines this hypothesis. These relationships are more complex than often perceived. We conclude that it is not clear whether netting, collateral, and/or close-out lead to reduced systemic risk, once the impact of these protections on the size and structure of the derivatives market has been taken into account.Derivative securities ; Financial markets