Why Do Banks Practice Regulatory Arbitrage? Evidence from Usage of Trust Preferred Securities
Nicole M. Boyson
Northeastern University - D’Amore-McKim School of Business
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne; Swiss Finance Institute
Rene M. Stulz
Ohio State University (OSU) - Department of Finance; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
March 8, 2014
Fisher College of Business Working Paper No. 2014-03-01
Charles A. Dice Center Working Paper No. 2014-01
Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper No. 14-21
We propose a theory of regulatory arbitrage by banks and test it using trust preferred securities (TPS) issuance. From 1996 to 2007, U.S. banks in the aggregate increased their regulatory capital through issuance of TPS while their net issuance of common stock was negative due to repurchases. We assume that, in the absence of capital requirements, a bank has an optimal capital structure that depends on its business model. Capital requirements can impose constraints on bank decisions. If a bank’s optimal capital structure also meets regulatory capital requirements with a sufficient buffer, the bank is unconstrained by these requirements. We expect that unconstrained banks will not issue TPS, that constrained banks will issue TPS and engage in other forms of regulatory arbitrage, and that banks with TPS will be riskier than other banks with the same amount of regulatory capital, and therefore, more adversely affected by the credit crisis. Our empirical evidence supports these predictions.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 50
JEL Classification: G01, G21working papers series
Date posted: March 13, 2014 ; Last revised: April 4, 2014
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.484 seconds