BIS Assesses Impact of Basel III Reforms Using Macroeconomic Models
BIS published a working paper that assesses the impact of Basel III reforms from a macroeconomic perspective. The paper presents the results of simulation exercises to compare some of the models surveyed and in use by regulators. The aim of the paper is to support efforts to build models that can be used to estimate and evaluate the impact of post-2010 reforms. The exercise reveals that whenever the costs and benefits of regulation are introduced in the model, the effects of Basel III are positive on GDP. Additionally, all models exhibit a decrease in volatility when moving from Basel II to Basel III, but the impact is not very sizable.
The first part of the paper reviews the different channels of transmission of financial shocks (including regulatory changes) highlighted in the literature in the past 15 years. While a very large number of new models have been made available since the Committee's assessment of the long-term economic impact of stronger capital and liquidity requirements, standard models still concentrate mostly on capital requirements and more rarely on liquidity. Alternative models consider other policies (unconventional monetary policies) as well as new, highly relevant challenges like interactions with the shadow banking system. However, the latter models are not yet sufficiently operational to allow an empirical assessment of the impact of the regulatory changes. The second part of the report provides a simulation of regulatory scenarios replicating the implementation of Basel III reforms, using "off-the-shelf" macro-finance models. These simulations provide novel estimates of the impact of Basel III.
The models are used to provide a first assessment of the resilience of the post-Basel III banking system to very large shocks replicating the current COVID-19 environment. While significant advances have been made for the modeling of solvency requirements, the assessment of liquidity requirements is still an area for research, as most models still concentrate on the costs of liquidity. Taking stock of the literature review and the recent advances in modeling, the next stage could be to build a quantitative model that explicitly considers the most important costs and benefits of capital and liquidity regulations. These costs and benefits have already been identified (such as reduced crisis probability and crisis severity against higher spreads and lower output in normal times). Both capital and liquidity regulations should be incorporated into the model. The best (and the most time-efficient) strategy going forward can be to take a workhorse model with the most important ingredients included among the papers reviewed here and incorporate some key features if necessary.
Related Links
Keywords: International, Banking, Basel, Macroeconomic Impact, Regulatory Capital, Liquidity Requirements, Credit Risk, Liquidity Risk, Macroeconomic Model, BIS
Featured Experts
María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer
Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Nick Jessop
Scenario modeling expert; risk management specialist; quantitative financial modeler
Related Articles
BIS and Central Banks Experiment with GenAI to Assess Climate Risks
A recent report from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub details Project Gaia, a collaboration between the BIS Innovation Hub Eurosystem Center and certain central banks in Europe
Nearly 25% G-SIBs Commit to Adopting TNFD Nature-Related Disclosures
Nature-related risks are increasing in severity and frequency, affecting businesses, capital providers, financial systems, and economies.
Singapore to Mandate Climate Disclosures from FY2025
Singapore recently took a significant step toward turning climate ambition into action, with the introduction of mandatory climate-related disclosures for listed and large non-listed companies
SEC Finalizes Climate-Related Disclosures Rule
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized the long-awaited rule that mandates climate-related disclosures for domestic and foreign publicly listed companies in the U.S.
EBA Proposes Standards Related to Standardized Credit Risk Approach
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has been taking significant steps toward implementing the Basel III framework and strengthening the regulatory framework for credit institutions in the EU
US Regulators Release Stress Test Scenarios for Banks
The U.S. regulators recently released baseline and severely adverse scenarios, along with other details, for stress testing the banks in 2024. The relevant U.S. banking regulators are the Federal Reserve Bank (FED), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).
Asian Governments Aim for Interoperability in AI Governance Frameworks
The regulatory landscape for artificial intelligence (AI), including the generative kind, is evolving rapidly, with governments and regulators aiming to address the challenges and opportunities presented by this transformative technology.
EBA Proposes Operational Risk Standards Under Final Basel III Package
The European Union (EU) has been working on the final elements of Basel III standards, with endorsement of the Banking Package and the publication of the European Banking Authority (EBA) roadmap on Basel III implementation in December 2023.
EFRAG Proposes XBRL Taxonomy and Standard for Listed SMEs Under ESRS
The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), which plays a crucial role in shaping corporate reporting standards in European Union (EU), is seeking comments, until May 21, 2024, on the Exposure Draft ESRS for listed SMEs.
ECB to Expand Climate Change Work in 2024-2025
Banking regulators worldwide are increasingly focusing on addressing, monitoring, and supervising the institutions' exposure to climate and environmental risks.
