Liquidity saving mechanisms
AbstractWe study the incentives of participants in a real-time gross settlement with and without the addition of a liquidity saving mechanism. Participants in our model face a liquidity shock and different cost of delaying payments. They trade-off the cost of delaying a payment with the cost of borrowing liquidity from the central bank. The heterogeneity of participants in our model gives rise to a rich set of strategic interactions. The main contribution of our paper is to show that the design of a liquidity saving mechanism has important implications for welfare. In particular, we find that adding one type of liquidity saving mechanism can either increase or decrease welfare depending on parameters.
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 Society for Economic Dynamics in its series 2007 Meeting Papers with number 165.
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Society for Economic Dynamics Christian Zimmermann Economic Research Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PO Box 442 St. Louis MO 63166-0442 USA
Web page: http://www.EconomicDynamics.org/society.htm
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
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.:
- Jamie McAndrews & Antoine Martin, 2007.
"Liquidity saving mechanisms,"
2007 Meeting Papers
165, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Charles M. Kahn & William Roberds, 2000.
"The CLS Bank: a solution to the risks of international payments settlement?,"
2000-15, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
- Kahn, Charles M. & Roberds, William, 2001. "The CLS bank: a solution to the risks of international payments settlement?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 191-226, June.
- Angelini, Paolo, 2000. "Erratum [Are Banks Risk Averse? Intraday Timing of Operations in the Interbank Market]," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(3), pages 442, August.
- Matthew Willison, 2005. "Real-Time Gross Settlement and hybrid payment systems: a comparison," Bank of England working papers 252, Bank of England.
- Bech, Morten L. & Garratt, Rod, 2003.
"The intraday liquidity management game,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 198-219, April.
- Bech, Morten L. & Garratt, Rod, 2001. "The Intraday Liquidity Management Game," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt0m6035wg, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
- Kurt Johnson & James J. McAndrews & Kimmo Soramaki, 2004. "Economizing on liquidity with deferred settlement mechanisms," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, issue Dec, pages 51-72.
- Angelini, Paolo, 1998. "An analysis of competitive externalities in gross settlement systems," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-18, January.
- Angelini, Paolo, 2000. "Are Banks Risk Averse? Intraday Timing of Operations in the Interbank Market," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(1), pages 54-73, February.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christian Zimmermann).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.