BIS published a working paper that investigates the implications of regulatory stress tests for entrepreneurship in the United States. The paper shows that stress tests have had potentially unintended side effects on entrepreneurship and innovation at young firms in the United States. The findings suggest that post-crisis financial regulation has led to a reallocation of credit away from risky borrowers. The paper highlights a possible trade-off between financial stability and growth, but does not take a stance on the efficiency or long-run implications of the implemented policy.
To quantify the overall impact of stress tests, regulators have turned to evaluating the effects of stress tests on financing and the real economy. This paper contributes to the literature that highlights some negative consequences of stress tests on credit supply to small businesses and presents new evidence on the real effects of financial regulation. Regulatory stress tests for the largest banks might have an unintended side effect by curtailing credit to young businesses, which are especially dependent on external financing. These effects should be taken into account when evaluating the overall consequences of financial regulation or higher capital requirements, especially in light of the current debate on declining dynamism and the post-crisis productivity slowdown. The contraction in lending has the potential to stymie entrepreneurship and innovation. The idea that stress tests dampen economic dynamism could help to explain the persistent decline in entrepreneurship since the crisis.
The banks that have undergone stress tests have sharply reduced home equity loans to small businesses, which is an important source of financing for entrepreneurs. The resulting contraction in loan supply has affected the real economy. By exploiting geographical variation in county exposure to stress-tested banks, the paper shows that counties with a higher exposure have experienced a relative decline in employment at young firms during the recovery, especially in industries that rely more on home equity financing. Additional findings suggest that counties with a higher exposure to stress-tested banks have seen a decline in patent applications by young firms as well as a fall in labor productivity. The fall in labor productivity reflects the disproportionate contribution of young firms to innovation and growth. While the results do not imply that stress tests have reduced overall welfare, they do highlight a possible trade-off between financial stability and economic dynamism.
Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, Stress Testing, Small Business Lending, Loan-Level Data, Credit Risk, Post-Crisis Reforms, BIS
Previous ArticleEIOPA Publishes Q&A on Regulations in November 2019
FCA and PRA in the UK, FED in the US, and the authorities in Singapore have fined Goldman Sachs for risk management failures in connection with the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
BCBS announced that OSFI and the Bank of Canada hosted the 21st International Conference of Banking Supervisors (ICBS) virtually on October 19-22, 2020.
FCA proposed guidance on how firms should continue to seek to help customers who hold insurance and premium finance products and may be in financial difficulty because of COVID-19, after October 31, 2020.
EBA issued an opinion on prudential treatment of the legacy instruments as the grandfathering period nears an end on December 31, 2021.
ESRB published the fifth issue of the EU Non-bank Financial Intermediation Risk Monitor 2020 (NBFI Monitor).
HM Treasury announced that the new Financial Services Bill has been introduced in the Parliament.
APRA announced that it has increased the minimum liquidity requirement of Bendigo and Adelaide Bank for failing to comply with the prudential standard on liquidity.
PRA published the consultation paper CP17/20 to propose changes to certain rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
US Agencies adopted a final rule that applies to advanced approaches banking organizations and aims to reduce interconnectedness in the financial system as well as to reduce contagion risks associated with the failure of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB).
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) adopted a final rule that implements the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for certain large banking organizations.