2017年税法对银行安全和资本化的潜在影响

M. Roe, M. Troege
{"title":"2017年税法对银行安全和资本化的潜在影响","authors":"M. Roe, M. Troege","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3268891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much has been written and discussed in banking circles about recent rollbacks in prudential regulation, with some seeing the rollbacks as unsafe and others seeing them as allowing stronger financial action. Undiscussed is that the basic taxation of the corporation in the United States—and banks are taxed like ordinary corporations—has a profound impact on the level of debt and equity throughout the economy and in the banking system in particular, and that recent changes to the tax code could affect bank safety, stability, and capitalization levels. \n \nWe analyze here how and why the 2017 tax act will incentivize banks to be better capitalized, albeit modestly so. For those worried about regulatory rollbacks that decrease bank safety, this tax incentive—which has been unremarked upon and not analyzed in the academic literature, as far as we can tell—offsets some recent regulatory rollbacks. And, more important analytically and potentially for policy, we show that this tax change, if properly expanded, would have a major beneficial safety impact on banks. Properly reformed, the taxation of banks (1) can substantially improve bank safety, at a level that may well rival the improvements from post-crisis regulation and (2) can be done in a revenue-neutral way.","PeriodicalId":10698,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The 2017 Tax Act’s Potential Impact on Bank Safety and Capitalization\",\"authors\":\"M. Roe, M. Troege\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3268891\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Much has been written and discussed in banking circles about recent rollbacks in prudential regulation, with some seeing the rollbacks as unsafe and others seeing them as allowing stronger financial action. Undiscussed is that the basic taxation of the corporation in the United States—and banks are taxed like ordinary corporations—has a profound impact on the level of debt and equity throughout the economy and in the banking system in particular, and that recent changes to the tax code could affect bank safety, stability, and capitalization levels. \\n \\nWe analyze here how and why the 2017 tax act will incentivize banks to be better capitalized, albeit modestly so. For those worried about regulatory rollbacks that decrease bank safety, this tax incentive—which has been unremarked upon and not analyzed in the academic literature, as far as we can tell—offsets some recent regulatory rollbacks. And, more important analytically and potentially for policy, we show that this tax change, if properly expanded, would have a major beneficial safety impact on banks. Properly reformed, the taxation of banks (1) can substantially improve bank safety, at a level that may well rival the improvements from post-crisis regulation and (2) can be done in a revenue-neutral way.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3268891\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3268891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

银行界已经写了很多关于最近审慎监管倒退的文章和讨论,一些人认为这种倒退是不安全的,另一些人则认为它们允许更强有力的金融行动。未被讨论的是,美国公司的基本税收——银行像普通公司一样被征税——对整个经济,特别是银行系统的债务和股本水平有着深远的影响,最近对税法的修改可能会影响银行的安全、稳定和资本化水平。我们在此分析2017年的税收法案如何以及为什么会激励银行提高资本充足率,尽管这种激励力度不大。对于那些担心监管回退会降低银行安全性的人来说,这种税收激励——据我们所知,在学术文献中没有被注意到,也没有被分析过——抵消了最近一些监管回退。而且,更重要的分析和潜在的政策是,我们表明,这种税收变化,如果适当扩大,将对银行的安全产生重大有益影响。经过适当改革,对银行征税(1)可以大大提高银行的安全性,其水平完全可以与危机后监管带来的改善相媲美;(2)可以以一种收入中性的方式实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The 2017 Tax Act’s Potential Impact on Bank Safety and Capitalization
Much has been written and discussed in banking circles about recent rollbacks in prudential regulation, with some seeing the rollbacks as unsafe and others seeing them as allowing stronger financial action. Undiscussed is that the basic taxation of the corporation in the United States—and banks are taxed like ordinary corporations—has a profound impact on the level of debt and equity throughout the economy and in the banking system in particular, and that recent changes to the tax code could affect bank safety, stability, and capitalization levels. We analyze here how and why the 2017 tax act will incentivize banks to be better capitalized, albeit modestly so. For those worried about regulatory rollbacks that decrease bank safety, this tax incentive—which has been unremarked upon and not analyzed in the academic literature, as far as we can tell—offsets some recent regulatory rollbacks. And, more important analytically and potentially for policy, we show that this tax change, if properly expanded, would have a major beneficial safety impact on banks. Properly reformed, the taxation of banks (1) can substantially improve bank safety, at a level that may well rival the improvements from post-crisis regulation and (2) can be done in a revenue-neutral way.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Real Consequences of Macroprudential FX Regulations Will the EU Taxonomy Regulation Foster a Sustainable Corporate Governance? Hedge Fund Management and Pricing Structure around the World Open Access, Interoperability, and the DTCC's Unexpected Path to Monopoly Indirect Investor Protection: The Investment Ecosystem and Its Legal Underpinnings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1