An Empirical Investigation into the Effect of Explicit Deposit Insurance and Design on the Liability Structure of Banks

Open access

Abstract

This paper provides an insight into the behaviour of the liability side of bank balance sheet in response to explicit deposit insurance. It is an empirical investigation into the choice of a rational bank maximizing its bank value in terms of deposit and non-deposit liabilities after the implementation of explicit deposit insurance. The paper tests how banks' liabilities are affected because of the safety net and its design. Banks lower their leverage ratio as a response to the explicit deposit insurance. The paper finds evidence of depositor shifting funds between the types of deposits in the bank as a result of the explicit deposit insurance. It provides evidence of the importance of setting the right coverage in order to prevent the adverse effects that deposit insurance induces. It studies how the safety net design features affect the bank liability structure. The study finds that besides the explicit deposit insurance, the bank liability structure is affected by factors like tax expense, bank size, overheads, and dividend payout.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Assa H. & Okhrati R. (2018). Designing Sound Deposit Insurances. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 327 226-242.

  • 2. Bradley C. M. & Shibut L. (2006). The Liability Structure of FDIC Insured Institutions: Changes and Implications. FDIC Banking Review. 18 1.

  • 3. Buser S. A. Chen A. H. & Kane E. J. (1981). Federal deposit insurance regulatory policy and optimal bank capital. The Journal of Finance 36(1) 51-60.

  • 4. Chernykh L. & Cole R. A. (2011). Does Deposit Insurance Improve Financial Intermediation? Evidence from the Russian experiment. Journal of Banking & Finance 35(2) 388-402.

  • 5. Cull R. Senbet L. W. & Sorge M. (2002). The Effect of Deposit Insurance on Financial Depth: A Cross-Country Analysis. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 42(4) 673-694.

  • 6. Demirgüç-Kunt A. & Detragiache E. (2002). Does Deposit Insurance increase Banking System Stability? An Empirical Investigation. Journal of monetary economics 49(7) 1373-1406.

  • 7. Demirgüç-Kunt A. & Kane E. J. (2002). Deposit Insurance around the Globe: Where does it work?. Journal of Economic Perspectives 16(2) 175-195.

  • 8. Demirgüç-Kunt A. & Huizinga H. (2004). Market discipline and deposit insurance. Journal of Monetary Economics 51(2) 375-399.

  • 9. Demirgüç-Kunt A. (2013). Re-examining the role of the state in the financial sector. Journal of Financial Stability 4(9) 731-732.

  • 10. Diamond D. W. & Dybvig P. H. (1983). Bank runs deposit insurance and liquidity. Journal of Political Economy 91(3) 401-419.

  • 11. Fueda I. & Konishi M. (2007). Depositors’ response to deposit insurance reforms: evidence from Japan 1990–2005. Journal of Financial Services Research 31(2-3) 101-122.

  • 12. Goldstein I. & Pauzner A. (2005). Demand–deposit contracts and the probability of bank runs. The Journal of Finance 60(3) 1293-1327.

  • 13. Gonzalez F. (2005). Bank regulation and risk-taking incentives: An international comparison of bank risk. Journal of Banking & Finance 29(5) 1153-1184.

  • 14. Gropp R. & Heider F. (2010). The determinants of bank capital structure. Review of Finance 14(4) 587-622.

  • 15. Igbinosa S. Sunday O. & Babatunde A. (2017). Empirical Assessment on Financial Regulations and Banking Sector Performance. Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice 6(3) 143-155.

  • 16. Ioannidou V. & De Dreu J. (2019). The Impact of Explicit Deposit Insurance on Market Discipline. Panel Data Econometrics (pp. 839-864). Academic Press.

  • 17. Keiko M.? & Masahiro H.? (2004). End of the Convoy system and the surge of Market Discipline: Evidence from Japanese small Financial Institutions (No. 105). Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).

  • 18. Kim I. & Han Y. (2014). Deposit insurance banks’ moral hazard and regulation: Evidence from the ASEAN countries and Korea. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 50(6) 56-71.

  • 19. Leland H. E. (1994). Corporate debt value bond covenants and optimal capital structure. The Journal of Finance 49(4) 1213-1252.

  • 20. Martinez Peria M. S. & Schmukler S. L. (2001). Do Depositors Punish Banks for Bad Behavior? Market discipline Deposit Insurance and Banking Crises. The Journal of Finance 56(3) 1029-1051.

  • 21. Merton R. C. (1977). An analytic derivation of the cost of deposit insurance and loan guarantees an application of modern option pricing theory. Journal of Banking & Finance 1(1) 3-11.

  • 22. Murata K. & Hori M. (2004) End Of The Convoy System And The Surge Of Market Discipline: Evidence From Japanese Small Financial Institutions Esri Discussion Paper No. 105 Tokyo Economic And Social Research Institute

  • 23. Nys E. Tarazi A. & Trinugroho I. (2015). Political connections Bank Deposits and Formal Deposit Insurance. Journal of Financial Stability 19 83-104.

  • 24. Park S. (1995). Market discipline by depositors: Evidence from reduced-form equations. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 35 497-514

  • 25. Qian N. Zhang K. & Zheng C. (2017). How Do Regulatory Ability and Banking Market Structure Affect Explicit Deposit Insurance Scheme Adoption and Banks’ Risk Taking?. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3060943

  • 26. Sundaresan S. & Wang Z. (2014). Bank Liability Structure. Columbia Business School Research Paper No. 14-41

  • 27. Tsuru K. (2003). Depositors’ selection of banks and the deposit insurance system in Japan: Empirical evidence and its policy implications. Research Institute of Economy Trade and Industry (RIETI) Discussion Paper Series (03-E) 024.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.83

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.23
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.902

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 46 46 46
PDF Downloads 43 43 43