JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS最新文献

This paper investigates the effects of economic uncertainty and economic policy uncertainty on banks’ loan loss provision in Brazil, and it seeks to identify which uncertainties have the greatest impact on loan loss provisions. Regarding uncertainties, it is possible to proxy economic uncertainty and economic policy uncertainty through disagreements among professional forecasters and through news-based proxies. Thus, as a novelty, disagreements among professional forecasters are used to proxy both economic and economic policy uncertainties, and for checking robustness, news-based proxies are employed. The disagreements in expectations are divided into two groups: the first focuses on uncertainties related to economic policy instruments (i.e., monetary policy interest rate and primary surplus), and the second on uncertainties related to economic outcomes (i.e., inflation, exchange rate, GDP growth, and public debt). Regarding the news-based proxies of economic policy uncertainty and economic uncertainty, two indicators were employed: the first is the Economic Policy Uncertainty index, and the second is the index of economic uncertainty unrelated to economic policy that we calculate. Based on dynamic panel data analysis for 125 Brazilian banks, the findings suggest uncertainties in economic outcomes have greater influence on banking provisions than uncertainties in economic policy. The study validates the results using news-based indexes and a subsample representing the post-global financial crisis period.

This paper examines the relationship between blockholder coalitions and the probability of completing a cross-border merger and acquisition. Using different power indices based on Shapley-Shubik values for cooperative games for a sample of acquirers' firms from Latin America, our findings indicate an inverted-U-shaped relationship between the voting power of the largest blockholder and the likelihood of completing a cross-border deal. This relationship is strengthened by the number of active blockholders and the participation of institutional investors within coalitions among the top four blockholders, particularly pension fund administrators. Consequently, we observe that colluding blockholders in acquirer firms are more inclined to pursue risky cross-border acquisitions, but only when they possess relatively low levels of voting rights. Additionally, the study highlights a positive moderating effect of cross-border deals with coalition agreements on the long-term value performance of acquiring firms, suggesting that coalition agreements promote overseas acquisitions that enhance value.

We suggest that the intertemporal risk-return tradeoff is not necessarily positive but rather state dependent. We further explore the state dependent risk-return relation by examining how the positive risk-return relation is distorted in response to various market conditions, including extreme price changes, differing levels of investor sentiment, the introduction of stock options, and throughout business cycles. The tendency for uninformed investors to be optimistic (pessimistic) in response to good (bad) market news cause overpricing (underpricing), and the resulting trade activity of arbitrageurs that distorts the positive risk-return tradeoff, is documented consistently across these environments. We find that the attenuation (reinforcement) of the positive risk-return relation under investors’ optimistic (pessimistic) expectations is stronger in high (low) sentiment periods, in the presence of extreme returns, in the period after stock options became available, and during expansionary periods. We argue that the asymmetric intertemporal risk-return relation is a consequence of rational arbitrageurs’ trading to exploit mispricing through the selling of overpriced stocks conditional on good news and buying underpriced stocks conditional on bad news.

Acquisitions are complex strategic decisions and there is not a consensus about the outcomes of them. The complexity and the implications increase with international acquisitions (IA). We examine international acquisitions from a different perspective to see how they affect competitiveness of acquires using a sample of international acquisitions by U.S. firms applying a control sample methodology. Competitiveness outcomes of IAs vary based on the dimension used. They result with lower financial performance, profitability and productivity whereas have a positive effect on market power and innovation of acquirers. Negative performance is consistent with the general belief about agency theory, but our findings also provide support for the resource-based view of enhanced competitiveness. Regarding the success factors, we show that capabilities of acquirers matter more than their resources in explaining post-acquisition competitiveness of acquirers. Acquirers with greater acquisition experience benefit a lot more from IAs compared to firms without acquisition experience. We also show that relatedness of acquirer and target is crucial for creating synergies and efficiencies in terms of enhanced productivity.

Using microdata for Japan for 2007 and 2012, we examine whether and how financial constraints discourage individuals from starting a business. As proxies for financial constraints, we use prefectural variations in the share of firms relying on physical collateral and personal guarantees. We find that individuals are less likely to become nascent entrepreneurs if they live in a prefecture with a higher share of firms relying on personal guarantees. The negative effect of personal guarantees on becoming a nascent entrepreneur is insignificant when using a subsample for 2012, suggesting that administrative and legislative changes since the 2000s have made personal guarantees less costly for potential entrepreneurs over time. In contrast, we do not find a negative link between physical collateral and business startups. Our findings suggest that the low level of entrepreneurship in Japan is not due to financial constraints. If anything, it is due to a lack of risk-taking by potential entrepreneurs rather than a lack of collateralizable assets.

This paper proposes a new model to estimate the countercyclical bank solvency capital buffer established in Basel III. The model lies in a flexible semi-nonparametric approach to capture the probability distribution of the capital adequacy ratio, but also a stochastic Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process that incorporates components of the cyclical behavior. We measure the risk of breaching the minimum capital threshold that separates the countercyclical capital buffer from other capital components and analyze its relationship with macroeconomic variables such as interest rates, credit levels, and credit-to-GDP gaps. Furthermore, a vector autoregressive model is estimated to test the existence of the bank-capital channel and the risk-taking channel. The application to Germany and the Netherlands shows that countercyclical buffers are more accurate when skewness and kurtosis are considered and the probability of breaching the regulatory threshold is sensitive to macroeconomic signals. Overall, our model seems to be a useful tool for monitoring prudential policy and as a guide to establish countercyclical capital buffers.

This paper examines extrapolative patterns of analysts’ expectations in the cross-section of firms. Using analysts’ target prices, I estimate the degree of extrapolative weighting capturing the relative weight analysts place on recent versus distant realized returns when forming their price expectation. I show considerable levels of extrapolation in the overall sample and on firm level. Results suggest considerable cross-sectional variation of extrapolation with valuation difficulty having a positive impact on the degree of extrapolative weighting. Furthermore, I construct a time-series of the degree of extrapolative weighting and argue that its time-series variation is also explained by valuation difficulty.

Previous research has documented significant, and often persistent, disparities in credit and payments market participation and outcomes across many socioeconomic and demographic categories. Continuing study of the mechanisms and consequences of such inequality is vital for understanding its sources, persistence, and potential remedies. This Special Issue on Inequality in Consumer Credit and Payments helps to deepen the academic and policy discourse through a multifaceted approach that combines both empirical and theoretical analysis, offering new insights into the structural challenges at play and the potential policy responses that might mitigate them.

Banks impose a variety of account fees, and credit card issuers impose a variety of fees related to card usage. Using detailed data from a 2021 representative diary survey of US consumers, we investigate whether lower-income consumers and Black consumers are more likely to pay bank account or credit card fees, and how payment behavior varies depending on paying such fees. We find that the probability of paying several types of bank account and credit card fees is correlated with consumers’ demographic and income attributes. The percentage of Black consumers who pay overdraft or low-balance fees on their bank accounts or pay late fees or cash-advance fees on their credit cards is higher than the percentage of White consumers who pay those fees. We find that some fees on bank accounts and credit cards are regressive: lower-income consumers are significantly more likely to pay overdraft, bounced check, or late fees. While Black consumers were significantly more likely to pay any bank account fee, the race effect was smaller when controlling for income in the regressions.

Promoting bank account ownership is important because having a bank account is the foundation for households’ financial well-being. Unbanked households differ in their likelihood of opening a bank account, and understanding the factors associated with these differences can help policymakers and industry stakeholders to tailor financial inclusion strategies. This study examines which factors are associated with unbanked households that are more (or less) likely to open a bank account. We use data from the FDIC National Surveys of Unbanked and Underbanked Households and assess the likelihoods of opening a bank account for different groups of unbanked households divided based on their prior banking status and interest in having a bank account. Unbanked households that previously had a bank account and are interested in having a bank account are more likely to open an account. These households tend to be unemployed, more educated, and native born, to have access to digital technologies, to use alternative financial services, and to be unbanked because of unfavorable bank account features. In contrast, households that never had a bank account and are uninterested in a bank account are less likely to open an account. These households tend to be not in the labor force, less educated, of a racial minority, and foreign born, to lack access to digital technologies, and to rely heavily on cash. Moreover, they tend to distrust banks. Advancing financial inclusion for this group will require strategies to increase their trust in the financial services industry.