|
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
Payday Holiday: How Households Fare After Payday Credit BansDonald P. MorganFederal Reserve Bank of New York Michael Strainaffiliation not provided to SSRN February 1, 2008 FRB of New York Staff Report No. 309 Abstract: Payday loans are widely condemned as a “predatory debt trap.” We test that claim by researching how households in Georgia and North Carolina have fared since those states banned payday loans in May 2004 and December 2005. Compared with households in states where payday lending is permitted, households in Georgia have bounced more checks, complained more to the Federal Trade Commission about lenders and debt collectors, and filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection at a higher rate. North Carolina households have fared about the same. This negative correlation—reduced payday credit supply, increased credit problems—contradicts the debt trap critique of payday lending, but is consistent with the hypothesis that payday credit is preferable to substitutes such as the bounced-check “protection” sold by credit unions and banks or loans from pawnshops.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 49 Keywords: payday credit, consumer welfare, bounced-check protection, informal bankruptcy JEL Classification: G21, G28, I38 working papers seriesDate posted: November 26, 2007 ; Last revised: July 13, 2011Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.360 seconds
