Unexpected increases in interest rates during the early 1980s and decreases in asset quality in the late 1980s caused massive losses throughout the savings and loan industry. Insolvency was common, if not the rule. But because of bureaucratic forbearance, funding constraints, and federal deposit insurance, hundreds of insolvent thrifts continued to operate. This is because regulatory agencies were unwilling or unable to close thrift institutions immediately upon insolvency. Instead, they progressively reduced the thrift capital requirement and later refrained from enforcing that requirement in the hope that the industry would recover. Coupled with deposit insurance and the expanded investment and lending powers granted to the industry in the early 1980s, this regulatory forbearance gave thrift managers the opportunity to pursue strategies to turn around their firms, to regain profitability and to restore adequate capital levels.
Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Publisher Info
Article provided by Financial Management Association in its journal Financial Management.
Contact details of provider: Postal: University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave. COBA #3331 Tampa, FL 33620 Phone: 813-974-2084 Fax: 813-974-3318 Web page: http://www.fma.org/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Courtney Connors).
Related research
Keywords:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)