We study the impact of stricter and more harmonized banking regulation along the income distribution using household survey data for 25 EU countries. Exploiting country-level heterogeneity in the implementation of European Banking Union directives allows us to control for confounders and identify effects. Our results show that these regulatory reforms aimed at increasing financial system resilience affect households heterogeneously and result in a widening of the income distribution. These results are dependent on a country’s ex-ante regulatory stringency, and more pronounced in countries with stronger bank dependence. Furthermore, we find that more stringent regulation reduces income growth for low-income households primarily due to exits from employment, whereas affluent households tend to experience increased growth rates for employee and self-employed income.

We study how deposit competition affects a bank's decision to securitize mortgages. Exploiting the state-specific removal of deposit market caps across the U.S. as a source of competition, we find a 7.1 percentage point increase in the probability that banks securitize mortgage loans. This result is driven by an 11 basis point increase in deposit costs and corresponding reductions in banks' deposit holdings. Our results are strongest among banks that rely more on deposit funding. These findings highlight a hitherto undocumented and unintended regulatory cause that motivates banks to adopt the originate-to-distribute model.

We examine how banks manage carbon transition risk by selling loans given to polluting borrowers to less regulated shadow banks in securitization markets. Exploiting the election of Donald Trump as an exogenous shock that reduces carbon transition risk, we find that banks engage in regulatory arbitrage and use brown loan securitization to manage their exposure to carbon transition risk. Banks are more likely to securitize brown loans when carbon transition risk is high but keep these loans on their balance sheets when the risk is reduced. In addition, securitization enables banks to offer lower interest rates to polluting borrowers but does not affect the supply of green loans. Our findings are more pronounced among banks with low levels of capitalization, domestic banks, and banks that do not display green lending preferences. We discuss how securitization can weaken the effectiveness of bank climate policies.

We study real estate lending responses to tighter macroprudential policy (MPP) in the form of lower required loan-to-value (LTV) ratios. Contract details of 2.4 million mortgage loans originated between 2008 and 2020 reveal significantly fewer new loan issuances in response to contractionary MPP, commensurate with an average reduction in aggregate lending of 21 percent. Loan-level analyses reveal, however, that banks comply with lower LTVs by systematically more benevolent valuations of residential real estate pledged as collateral instead of reducing loan size. Exploiting earthquakes as plausible exogenous shocks to property values corroborates these risk-shifting patterns by banks in the form of inflated property valuations after LTV shocks.

This paper analyzes the impact of reduced tax incentives for equity financing on banks' regulatory capital ratios under the Basel III regime. We are particularly interested in a recent interest rate cut in the Italian corporate equity allowance, which reduces the relative tax advantage of equity financing. The results show that banks respond to this increased tax disparity by significantly reducing their regulatory capital while at the same time reducing their risk-taking. The decline in capital is more pronounced for small banks and outweighs the initial capital gains from the introduction of this tax instrument. Our results challenge the use of equity allowances, in that financial stability gains persist only as long as costly tax subsidies remain intact and diminish as the size of the subsidy is reduced.

Seit 1990 wurden im Rahmen der „Gemeinschaftsaufgabe Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ (GRW) rund 68 Milliarden Euro an Unternehmen in strukturschwachen Regionen in Ost- und Westdeutschland vergeben. Dieser Beitrag verdeutlicht die Rolle der Banken dabei und zeigt erhebliche räumliche Unterschiede bei den Subventionen.