Truth-telling and the Role of Limited Liability in Costly State Verification Loan Contracts
AbstractRecent literature has considered the form of loan contract between two or more risk neutral parties where the revelation principle is inappropriate due to the lack of commitment to an auditing policy by the lender. The privately informed debtor has a stochastic return; once he knows the state realisation, auditing and cheating are determined as Nash equilibria. The literature assumes that this leads to randomised cheating and auditing. In this paper we verify that the contract may involve this randomisation; but that it may also involve truthtelling with random auditing and one or more investors in line with Persons (1996); or a single state independent repayment with no auditing. We define conditions on the state observation cost and the distribution of returns which determine which of these three forms of contract is optimal. We find that under unlimited liability when the loan size is fixed the two investor truthtelling contract dominates all the other forms; and that this is also true when the loan size is optimally chosen. On the other hand under limited liability if the cost of observation is large relative to the lowest state revenue, the random auditing contract or a constrained two investor truthtelling contract may be optimal. The limited liability condition in the constrained truthtelling contracts forces the level of finance to be higher than under unlimited liability.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Royal Economic Society in its series Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2003 with number 188.
Date of creation: 04 Jun 2003
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Office of the Secretary-General, School of Economics and Finance, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife, KY16 9AL, UK
Phone: +44 1334 462479
Web page: http://www.res.org.uk/society/annualconf.asp
More information through EDIRC
loan contracts; costly state verification; commitment; limited liability;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
- G0 - Financial Economics - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Annamaria Menichini, 2000. "Third parties as an incentive to comply," CSEF Working Papers 41, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy, revised 01 Jan 2006.
- Gollier, Christian & Alary, David, 2004.
"Debt Contract, Strategic Default, and Optimal Penalties with Judgement Errors,"
Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine
123456789/6457, Paris Dauphine University.
- David Alary & Christian Gollier, 2004. "Debt Contract, Strategic Default, and Optimal Penalties with Judgement Errors," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 5(2), pages 357-372, November.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.