对最近危机的监管反应:对巴塞尔市场风险框架和沃尔克规则的评估

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments Pub Date : 2015-04-06 DOI:10.1111/fmii.12025
Gordon J. Alexander, Alexandre M. Baptista, Shu Yan
{"title":"对最近危机的监管反应:对巴塞尔市场风险框架和沃尔克规则的评估","authors":"Gordon J. Alexander,&nbsp;Alexandre M. Baptista,&nbsp;Shu Yan","doi":"10.1111/fmii.12025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Banks around the world suffered huge trading losses in the recent crisis. In response, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (<span>2011a</span>) provides a revised framework to determine the minimum capital requirements for their trading portfolios. Moreover, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (<span>2010</span>) imposes certain restrictions on the composition of the trading portfolios of U.S. banks through the ‘Volcker Rule.’ Our paper assesses the effectiveness of the Basel framework and the Volcker Rule in preventing banks from taking substantive tail risk in their trading portfolios without capital requirement penalties. We find that the Basel framework is ineffective in preventing banks from doing so, but that the Volcker Rule is beneficial in that it partially mitigates this ineffectiveness. We also suggest two alternatives to the Basel framework and discuss the impact of the Volcker Rule if either one of them is adopted.</p>","PeriodicalId":39670,"journal":{"name":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","volume":"24 2-3","pages":"87-125"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/fmii.12025","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Regulatory Responses to the Recent Crisis: An Assessment of the Basel Market Risk Framework and the Volcker Rule\",\"authors\":\"Gordon J. Alexander,&nbsp;Alexandre M. Baptista,&nbsp;Shu Yan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/fmii.12025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Banks around the world suffered huge trading losses in the recent crisis. In response, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (<span>2011a</span>) provides a revised framework to determine the minimum capital requirements for their trading portfolios. Moreover, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (<span>2010</span>) imposes certain restrictions on the composition of the trading portfolios of U.S. banks through the ‘Volcker Rule.’ Our paper assesses the effectiveness of the Basel framework and the Volcker Rule in preventing banks from taking substantive tail risk in their trading portfolios without capital requirement penalties. We find that the Basel framework is ineffective in preventing banks from doing so, but that the Volcker Rule is beneficial in that it partially mitigates this ineffectiveness. We also suggest two alternatives to the Basel framework and discuss the impact of the Volcker Rule if either one of them is adopted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments\",\"volume\":\"24 2-3\",\"pages\":\"87-125\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/fmii.12025\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fmii.12025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Economics, Econometrics and Finance\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fmii.12025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

世界各地的银行在最近的危机中遭受了巨大的交易损失。作为回应,巴塞尔银行监管委员会(2011)提供了一个修订框架,以确定其交易组合的最低资本要求。此外,多德-弗兰克华尔街改革和消费者保护法案(2010)通过“沃尔克规则”对美国银行的交易组合构成进行了一定的限制。我们的论文评估了巴塞尔框架和沃尔克规则在防止银行在没有资本要求处罚的情况下在其交易组合中承担实质性尾部风险方面的有效性。我们发现,巴塞尔框架在阻止银行这样做方面是无效的,但沃尔克规则是有益的,因为它在一定程度上减轻了这种无效性。我们还提出了巴塞尔框架的两种替代方案,并讨论了如果采用其中任何一种,沃尔克规则的影响。
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
On Regulatory Responses to the Recent Crisis: An Assessment of the Basel Market Risk Framework and the Volcker Rule

Banks around the world suffered huge trading losses in the recent crisis. In response, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (2011a) provides a revised framework to determine the minimum capital requirements for their trading portfolios. Moreover, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) imposes certain restrictions on the composition of the trading portfolios of U.S. banks through the ‘Volcker Rule.’ Our paper assesses the effectiveness of the Basel framework and the Volcker Rule in preventing banks from taking substantive tail risk in their trading portfolios without capital requirement penalties. We find that the Basel framework is ineffective in preventing banks from doing so, but that the Volcker Rule is beneficial in that it partially mitigates this ineffectiveness. We also suggest two alternatives to the Basel framework and discuss the impact of the Volcker Rule if either one of them is adopted.

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
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments bridges the gap between the academic and professional finance communities. With contributions from leading academics, as well as practitioners from organizations such as the SEC and the Federal Reserve, the journal is equally relevant to both groups. Each issue is devoted to a single topic, which is examined in depth, and a special fifth issue is published annually highlighting the most significant developments in money and banking, derivative securities, corporate finance, and fixed-income securities.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Do banks adjust their capital when they face liquidity shortages? Evidence from U.S. commercial banks Piercing through the haze: Did PPP increase versus decrease bank efficiency? Issue Information
×
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