Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2021, Vol. 489 Issue (3): 18-37    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
资产透明度、监管套利与银行系统性风险
陈国进, 蒋晓宇, 刘彦臻, 赵向琴
厦门大学王亚南经济研究院/厦门大学经济学院,福建厦门 361005;
中国人民银行金融研究所,北京 100033
Asset Transparency, Regulatory Arbitrage, and Bank Systemic Risk
CHEN Guojin, JIANG Xiaoyu, LIU Yanzhen, ZHAO Xiangqin
Wang Yanan Economic Research Institute/School of Economics, Xiamen University;
Research Institute, The People's Bank of China
下载:  PDF (964KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 资产不透明的金融机构过度依赖批发性融资进行监管套利不利于系统性风险的防控。在此背景下,本文首先在经典银行道德风险模型的基础上引入关联性,从资产透明度和监管套利的视角分析银行系统性风险累积的内在机理。而后利用2007-2018年中国上市银行微观数据,构建资产透明度指标和系统性风险指标(SRISKMES),对理论推论进行实证检验。主要结论有:(1)资产不透明、监管套利会提高银行的系统性风险。(2)监管套利弱化了资产透明度和资本监管机制对银行系统性风险承担的约束作用,资产透明度与资本监管机制在约束系统性风险承担中的协调作用不明显。(3)以大银行为主的债权银行受监管套利的影响相较于受资产透明度的影响更明显。在此基础上,我们对完善金融风险防范体系以及监管机制提出了若干建议。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
陈国进
蒋晓宇
刘彦臻
赵向琴
关键词:  透明度  监管套利  系统性风险    
Summary:  Regulatory arbitrage and opacity of bank assets were important causes of the 2007-2008 global financial crisis. The full disclosure of information reduces the probability of bank bankruptcy and systemic risk. Banks with greater asset transparency are better able to convey solvency information to the outside world, which makes it easier to attract external refinancing. Conversely, the solvency uncertainty caused by asset opacity may lead to banking crises. Macro-prudential regulation, such as bank capital adequacy ratio regulation, has focused on regulating business on balance sheets. In this context, banks are motivated to move business outside their balance sheets to avoid financial regulation and profit from regulatory arbitrage. There are currently few theoretical or empirical studies on the effects of asset transparency and regulatory arbitrage on banks' systemic risk.
This paper addresses the differences between interbank wholesale financing and retail deposits in depositor market supervision. It further addresses the use of wholesale financing (represented by interbank certificates of deposit) for regulatory arbitrage. Unlike traditional assets and liabilities such as deposits and loans, wholesale financing avoids both investor and depositor supervision and regulatory restrictions. This reduces bank asset transparency and makes banks take greater risks,and excessive connectedness.
This paper first introduces the classical bank moral hazard model in relation to the concepts of bank asset transparency and regulatory arbitrage (represented by correlated risk). We further analyze the effects of asset transparency and regulatory arbitrage on banks' systemic risk from the perspective of theoretical modeling. We also undertake empirical analysis of these effects based on our theoretical model. Drawing on the Wind and Bankfocus databases, we use the rolling window, SRISK and MES methods to measure the asset transparency and systemic risk of China's commercial banks. We fully control for bank level characteristics and macroeconomic factors that may affect systemic risk.
We find that regulatory arbitrage and low asset transparency lead to higher systemic risk. In the case of regulatory arbitrage, the correlation of bank risks and the risk externality of “rarely standing or falling alone” reduce the incentive for bank supervision. This results in collective failure and higher systemic risk. Banks no longer rely entirely on the deposit market for refinancing when interbank regulatory arbitrage occurs. The constraint of transparency on bank risk is weakened and the problem of moral hazard is further aggravated. As a lack of asset transparency weakens banks' financing ability in the deposit market, banks become more active in interbank regulatory arbitrage. Banks may opt for more opaque and risky investments. The homogeneity of assets and risk contagion from interbank certificates of deposit make the banking system more vulnerable. Regulatory arbitrage also weakens the effect of capital regulation on banks' systemic risk.
This paper's contributions are as follows. First, we study systemic risk at the bank level. This paper relaxes the independence setting and introduces asset transparency in the case of heterogeneous portfolios (allowing correlation). We also study the influence of asset transparency on banks' systemic risk. This paper therefore enriches research on the relationship between DELR and bank accounting choice and individual/systemic risk. It also details the mechanism of regulatory arbitrage and its coordination with capital regulation. Second, we study the asymmetric responses of systemically important banks to deposit market supervision using correlation and the setting of creditor and debtor banks. This is another way to support research on the distortion of retail deposit markets by “too big to fail” banks. Third, we add to the retail deposit market literature from the perspective of the wholesale funding market and banks' systemic risk. We also fill the gap in research related tobank asset transpavency and wholesale funding such as shadow banking and Internet finance.
Keywords:  Transparency    Regulatory Arbitrage    Systemic Risk
JEL分类号:  C23   E61   G21  
基金资助: * 本文获得国家社科基金重大项目(20&ZD055)和国家自然科学基金 (71971180, 71771193, 71988101)的资助。感谢第十届《金融研究》论坛评论人提出的宝贵建议,感谢匿名审稿人的宝贵意见,文责自负。
通讯作者:  赵向琴,经济学博士,教授,厦门大学经济学院,E-mail:xqzhao@xmu.edu.cn.   
作者简介:  陈国进,经济学博士,教授,厦门大学王亚南经济研究院,厦门大学经济学院,E-mail:gjchen@xmu.edu.cn.
蒋晓宇,金融学博士,厦门大学经济学院,中国人民银行金融研究所,E-mail:jiangxy@pbc.gov.cn.
刘彦臻,金融学博士研究生,厦门大学王亚南经济研究院,E-mail:liuyanzhen8888@163.com.
引用本文:    
陈国进, 蒋晓宇, 刘彦臻, 赵向琴. 资产透明度、监管套利与银行系统性风险[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 489(3): 18-37.
CHEN Guojin, JIANG Xiaoyu, LIU Yanzhen, ZHAO Xiangqin. Asset Transparency, Regulatory Arbitrage, and Bank Systemic Risk. Journal of Financial Research, 2021, 489(3): 18-37.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2021/V489/I3/18
[1] 陈国进、蒋晓宇和赵向琴,2020,《货币政策、宏观审慎监管与银行系统性风险承担》,《系统工程理论与实践》第6期,1419~1438。
[2] 陈湘鹏、周皓和金涛等,2019,《微观层面系统性金融风险指标的比较与适用性分析——基于中国金融系统的研究》,《金融研究》第5期,第17~36页。
[3] 邓向荣、张嘉明,2018,《货币政策、银行风险承担与银行流动性创造》,《世界经济》第4期,第28~52页。
[4] 郭晔、赵静,2017,《存款竞争、影子银行与银行系统风险——基于中国上市银行微观数据的实证研究》,《金融研究》第6期,第81~94页。
[5] 纪洋、边文龙和黄益平,2018,《隐性存保、显性存保与金融危机:国际经验与中国实践》,《经济研究》第8期,第20~35页。
[6] 梁琪、李政和郝项超,2013,《我国系统重要性金融机构的识别与监管——基于系统性风险指数 SRISK 方法的分析》,《金融研究》第9期,第56~70页。
[7] 刘莉亚、黄叶苨和周边,2019,《监管套利、信息透明度与银行的影子》,《经济学(季刊)》第3期,第1035~1060页。
[8] 邱晗、黄益平和纪洋,2018,《金融科技对传统银行行为的影响——基于互联网理财的视角》,《金融研究》第11期,第17~30页。
[9] 汪莉,2017,《隐性存保、“顺周期”杠杆与银行风险承担》,《经济研究》第10期,第69~83页。
[10] 王永钦、陈映辉和杜巨澜,2016,《软预算约束与中国地方政府债务违约风险:来自金融市场的证据》,《经济研究》第11期,第96~109页。
[11] Acharya, V. V., and S. G. Ryan, 2016, “Banks' Financial Reporting and Financial System Stability”, Journal of Accounting Research, 54(2): 277~340.
[12] Acharya, V. V., L. Pedersen, T. Philippon, and M. Richardson, 2017, “Measuring Systemic Risk”, Review of Financial Studies, 30(1): 2~47.
[13] Allen, F., E. Carletti, and R. Marquez, 2011, “Credit Market Competition and Capital Regulation”, Review of Financial Studies, 24(4): 983~1018.
[14] Benoit, Slvain, J. Colliard, C. Hurlin, and C. Pérignon, 2017, “Where the Risks Lie: A Survey on Systemic Risk”,, Review of Finance, 21(1): 109~52.
[15] Brownlees, C., and R. F. Engle, 2017, “SRISK: A Conditional Capital Shortfall Measure of Systemic Risk”, Review of Financial Studies, 30(1): 48~79.
[16] Brunnermeier, M. K., 2009, “Deciphering the Liquidity and Credit Crunch 2007-2008”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(1): 77~100.
[17] Brunnermeier M, S Rother, I Schnabel, 2020, “Asset Price Bubbles and Systemic Risk”. The Review of Financial Studies, 33(9): 4272~4317.
[18] Buchak, G, G. Matvos, T. Piskorski, et al., 2018, “Fintech, Regulatory Arbitrage, and the Rise of Shadow Banks”, Journal of Financial Economics, 130(3): 453~483.
[19] Bushman, R. M., and C. D. Williams, 2015, “Delayed Expected Loss Recognition and the Risk Profile of Banks”, Journal of Accounting Research, 53(3): 511~553.
[20] Cerutti, E., S. Claessens, and L. Laeven, 2017, “The Use and Effectiveness of Macroprudential Policies: New Evidence”, Journal of Financial Stability, 28(2): 203~224.
[21] Chen, Q., I. Goldstein, Z. Huang, et al., 2019, “Bank Transparency and Deposit Flows”, SSRN Working Paper, NO. 3212873.
[22] Cordella, T., G. Dell'Ariccia, and R. Marquez, 2018, “Government Guarantees, Transparency, and Bank Risk-taking”, IMF Economic Review.
[23] Dang, T. V., G. Gorton, B. Holmström, et al., 2017, “Banks as Secret Keepers”, American Economic Review, 107(4):1005~29.
[24] Dell’Ariccia, G., and L. Ratnovski, 2019, “Bailouts and Systemic Insurance”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 105(8):166~177.
[25] Dell’Ariccia, G., L. Laeven, and R. Marquez, 2014, “Real Interest Rates, Leverage, and Bank Risk-taking”, Journal of Economic Theory, 149(149): 65~99.
[26] Demyanyk, Y., and E. Loutskina, 2016, “Mortgage Companies and Regulatory Arbitrage”, Journal of Financial Economics, 122(2): 328~351.
[27] Egan, M., A. Hortaçsu, and G. Matvos, 2017, “Deposit Competition and Financial Fragility: Evidence From the US Banking Sector”, American Economic Review, 107(1): 169~216.
[28] Goldstein, I., and Y. Leitner, 2018, “Stress Tests and Information Disclosure”, Journal of Economic Theory, 177(9): 34~69.
[29] Granja, J., 2018, “Disclosure Regulation in the Commercial Banking Industry: Lessons from the National Banking Era”, Journal of Accounting Research, 56(1): 173~216.
[30] Hachem, K., and M. Z. Song, 2017, “Liquidity Rules and Credit Booms”, NBER Working Paper.
[31] Houston, J. F., C. Lin, and Y. Ma, 2012, “Regulatory Arbitrage and International Bank Flows”, Journal of Finance, 67(5): 1845~1895.
[32] Iyer, R., M. Puri, and N. Ryan, 2016, “A Tale of Two Runs: Depositor Responses to Bank Solvency Risk”, Journal of Finance, 71(6): 2687~2726.
[33] Iyer, R., T. L. Jensen, N. Johannesen, et al., 2019, “The Distortive Effects of Too Big To Fail: Evidence from the Danish Market for Retail Deposits”, Review of Financial Studies, 32(12): 4653~4695.
[34] Jiang, L. L., R. Levine, and C. Lin, 2016, “Competition and Bank Opacity”, Review of Financial Studies, 29(7): 1911~1942.
[35] Karolyi, G. A., and A. G. Taboada, 2015, “Regulatory Arbitrage and Cross‐border Bank Acquisitions”, Journal of Finance, 70(6): 2395~2450.
[36] Lambert, C., F. Noth, and U. Schüwer, 2017, “How Do Insured Deposits Affect Bank Risk? Evidence from the 2008 Emergency Economic Stabilization Act”, Journal of Financial Intermediation, 29: 81~102.
[37] Mistrulli, P. E., 2011, “Assessing Financial Contagion in the Interbank Market: Maximum Entropy versus Observed Interbank Lending Patterns”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 35(5): 1114~1127.
[38] Perignon, C., D. Thesmar, and G. Vuillemey, 2017, “Wholesale Funding Dry-Ups”, Journal of Finance, 73 (2): 575~617.
[39] Ratnovski, L., 2013, “Liquidity and Transparency in Bank Risk Management”, Journal of Financial Intermediation, 22(3): 422~439.
[1] 史燕平, 杨汀, 庞家任. 去产能政策与融资租赁[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 490(4): 73-91.
[2] 徐国祥, 吴婷, 王莹. 基于共同冲击和异质风险叠加传导的风险传染研究——来自中国上市银行网络的传染模拟[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 490(4): 38-54.
[3] 甄红线, 王三法. 企业精准扶贫行为影响企业风险吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 487(1): 131-149.
[4] 曾爱民, 魏志华, 张纯, 左婉平. 企业社会责任:“真心”抑或“幌子”?——基于高管内幕交易视角的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 483(9): 154-171.
[5] 张智富, 郭云喜, 张朝洋. 宏观审慎政策协调能否抑制国际性银行危机传染?——基于跨境金融关联视角的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 481(7): 21-37.
[6] 王辉, 梁俊豪. 基于动态因子Copula模型的我国银行系统性风险度量[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 485(11): 58-75.
[7] 常莹莹, 曾泉. 环境信息透明度与企业信用评级——基于债券评级市场的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 467(5): 132-151.
[8] 李政, 梁琪, 方意. 中国金融部门间系统性风险溢出的监测预警研究——基于下行和上行ΔCoES指标的实现与优化[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 464(2): 40-58.
[9] 方意, 王晏如, 黄丽灵, 和文佳. 宏观审慎与货币政策双支柱框架研究——基于系统性风险视角[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 474(12): 106-124.
[10] 朱莹, 王健. 市场约束能够降低地方债风险溢价吗?——来自城投债市场的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 456(6): 56-72.
[11] 何青, 钱宗鑫, 刘伟. 中国系统性金融风险的度量——基于实体经济的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 454(4): 53-70.
[12] 黄卓, 邱晗, 沈艳, 童晨. 测量中国的金融不确定性——基于大数据的方法[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 461(11): 30-46.
[13] 李志辉, 李源, 李政. 中国银行业系统性风险监测研究——基于SCCA技术的实现与优化[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 429(3): 92-106.
[14] 苟文均, 袁鹰, 漆鑫. 债务杠杆与系统性风险传染机制—基于CCA模型的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 429(3): 74-91.
[15] 刘圣尧, 李怡宗, 杨云红. 中国股市的崩盘系统性风险与投资者行为偏好[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 428(2): 55-70.
[1] 王曦, 朱立挺, 王凯立. 我国货币政策是否关注资产价格?——基于马尔科夫区制转换BEKK多元GARCH模型[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 1 -17 .
[2] 刘勇政, 李岩. 中国的高速铁路建设与城市经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 18 -33 .
[3] 况伟大, 王琪琳. 房价波动、房贷规模与银行资本充足率[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 34 -48 .
[4] 祝树金, 赵玉龙. 资源错配与企业的出口行为——基于中国工业企业数据的经验研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 49 -64 .
[5] 陈德球, 陈运森, 董志勇. 政策不确定性、市场竞争与资本配置[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 65 -80 .
[6] 牟敦果, 王沛英. 中国能源价格内生性研究及货币政策选择分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 81 -95 .
[7] 高铭, 江嘉骏, 陈佳, 刘玉珍. 谁说女子不如儿郎?——P2P投资行为与过度自信[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 96 -111 .
[8] 吕若思, 刘青, 黄灿, 胡海燕, 卢进勇. 外资在华并购是否改善目标企业经营绩效?——基于企业层面的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 112 -127 .
[9] 姜军, 申丹琳, 江轩宇, 伊志宏. 债权人保护与企业创新[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 128 -142 .
[10] 刘莎莎, 孔高文. 信息搜寻、个人投资者交易与股价联动异象——基于股票送转的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 143 -157 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1