BIS published a working paper that examines whether the market for bail-in debt imposes discipline on banks by analyzing the pricing of senior unsecured bank bail-in bonds of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) and other large banks. Bail-in regulation is a centerpiece of the post-crisis overhaul of bank resolution. It requires major banks to maintain a sufficient amount of “bail-in debt” that can absorb losses during resolution. If resolution regimes are credible, investors in bail-in debt should have a strong incentive to monitor banks and price bail-in risk. The authors study the pricing of senior bail-in bonds to evaluate whether this is the case. The authors identify the bail-in risk premium by matching bonds with comparable senior bonds that are issued by the same banking group but are not subject to bail-in risk.
Bail-in regimes are a core component of the post-crisis overhaul of bank resolution. These regimes require banks to issue sufficient amounts of “bail-in” debt to ensure that a failing bank can be resolved in orderly way, without disrupting crucial financial services. The expectation that investors in bail-in debt would exert discipline on banks through their pricing decisions is another key element of these regimes. The authors shed light on the existence and strength of market discipline in senior bail-in bond markets. There are four main findings. First, the authors identify a bail-in risk premium (BIRP), the evidence that investors are pricing bail-in risk. Second, investors in riskier banks are compensated through a larger BIRP. Third, discrimination across banks becomes weak when market-wide credit conditions ease. Fourth, issuers exploit this weakening in investor monitoring by timing their bail-in bond issuance to favorable market conditions.
The estimates may be interpreted as a lower bound on the effect of issuer and market risk factors on the BIRP for two reasons. First, the study focuses on large banks that frequently tap bond markets and issue in large amounts. This allows for a global comparison across the systemically most important banks and provides for an accurate measure of the BIRP based on tightly matched bonds in liquid markets. Smaller banks, with less regular presence in primary bond markets, could face greater challenges in building up their stock of required bail-in eligible debt. Second, the results stem from the analysis of a comparatively calm period of observation (2016–18). This period was marked by relatively low volatility in bond markets, amid investors’ search for yield in a very low interest rate environment.
Examining how the bail-in bond market performs under stress remains a topic for future research. An extrapolation of the results to periods of stress suggests that riskier issuers could be exposed to material increases in the cost of bail-in debt. Although banks can time their issuance to some extent, prolonged periods of stress could force some banks to tap the market at exceptionally high cost. From a policy perspective, the observed pro-cyclicality in the BIRP reinforces the value of a conservatively calibrated bail-in regime alongside stringent supervision to ensure that, during good times, banks build up their resilience and keep their risk-taking in check.
Related Link: Working Paper
Keywords: International, Banking, Securities, Bail-in, G-SIBs, TLAC, Too Big to Fail, BIRP, Bail-in Regime, Bank Resolution, Research, BIS
Previous ArticleSNB Updates Form for Reporting Solvency Risk of Counterparties
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FED) adopted the final rule on Adjustable Interest Rate (LIBOR) Act.
The European Central Bank (ECB) published an updated list of supervised entities, a report on the supervision of less significant institutions (LSIs), a statement on macro-prudential policy.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published a circular on the prudential treatment of crypto-asset exposures, an update on the status of transition to new interest rate benchmarks.
The European Commission (EC) adopted the standards addressing supervisory reporting of risk concentrations and intra-group transactions, benchmarking of internal approaches, and authorization of credit institutions.
The China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) issued rules to manage the risk of off-balance sheet business of commercial banks and rules on corporate governance of financial institutions.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) made announcements to address sustainability issues in the financial sector.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published regulatory standards on identification of a group of connected clients (GCC) as well as updated the lists of identified financial conglomerates.
The General Board of the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), at its December meeting, issued an updated risk assessment via the quarterly risk dashboard and held discussions on key policy priorities to address the systemic risks in the European Union.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is seeking comments, until December 21, 2022, on the draft guidance for firms to support existing mortgage borrowers.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a report that assesses progress on the transition from the Interbank Offered Rates, or IBORs, to overnight risk-free rates as well as a report that assesses global trends in the non-bank financial intermediation (NBFI) sector.