IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ijc/ijcjou/y2019q1a3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Basel's Capital Surcharges for Global Systemically Important Banks Too Small?

Author

Listed:
  • Wayne Passmore

    (Federal Reserve Board)

  • Alexander H. von Hafften

    (Federal Reserve Board)

Abstract

The Basel Committee promulgates bank regulatory standards, including capital surcharges for global systemically important banks (G-SIBs). Our analysis suggests that the Basel III capital surcharge framework underestimates the probability of bank failure, wrongly disregards short-term funding, and excludes too many banks; our baseline estimate suggests surcharges should increase 3.00 to 8.25 percentage points and that even higher surcharges should apply to G-SIBs that rely on short-term funding. Our findings, which do not account for Basel III beyond the capital surcharges, may differ from the findings of a comprehensive analysis of Basel III.

Suggested Citation

  • Wayne Passmore & Alexander H. von Hafften, 2019. "Are Basel's Capital Surcharges for Global Systemically Important Banks Too Small?," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 15(1), pages 107-156, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ijc:ijcjou:y:2019:q:1:a:3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ijcb.org/journal/ijcb19q1a3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ijcb.org/journal/ijcb19q1a3.htm
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tirupam Goel & Ulf Lewrick & Aakriti Mathur, 2021. "Does regulation only bite the less profitable? Evidence from the too-big-to-fail reforms," BIS Working Papers 922, Bank for International Settlements.
    2. Alexander Jiron & Wayne Passmore & Aurite Werman, 2021. "An empirical foundation for calibrating the G-SIB surcharge," BIS Working Papers 935, Bank for International Settlements.
    3. Favara, Giovanni & Ivanov, Ivan & Rezende, Marcelo, 2021. "GSIB surcharges and bank lending: Evidence from US corporate loan data," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(3), pages 1426-1443.
    4. Daniel Dimitrov & Sweder van Wijnbergen, 2023. "Macroprudential Regulation: A Risk Management Approach," Working Papers 765, DNB.
    5. Leo Haan & Jan Kakes, 0. "European banks after the global financial crisis: peak accumulated losses, twin crises and business models," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-15.
    6. Marwan Alzoubi & Ayman Abdalmajeed Alsmadi & Hamad kasasbeh, 2022. "Systemically Important Bank: A Bibliometric Analysis for the Period of 2002 to 2022," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    7. Degryse, Hans & Mariathasan, Mike & Tang, Hien T., 2023. "GSIB status and corporate lending," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    8. Busch, Pascal & Cappelletti, Giuseppe & Marincas, Vlad & Meller, Barbara & Wildmann, Nadya, 2021. "How useful is market information for the identification of G-SIBs?," Occasional Paper Series 260, European Central Bank.
    9. Michael Sigmund, 2022. "The capital buffer calibration for other systemically important institutions‐Is the country heterogeneity in the EU caused by regulatory capture?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(5), pages 533-563, November.
    10. Michael Sigmund, 2020. "The Capital Buffer Calibration for Other Systemically Important Institutions – Is the Country Heterogeneity in the EU caused by Regulatory Capture? (Michael Sigmund)," Working Papers 232, Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank).
    11. Leo Haan & Jan Kakes, 2020. "European banks after the global financial crisis: peak accumulated losses, twin crises and business models," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(3), pages 197-211, September.
    12. Luis Garcia & Ulf Lewrick & Taja Sečnik, 2021. "Is window dressing by banks systemically important?," BIS Working Papers 960, Bank for International Settlements.
    13. Tirupam Goel & Ulf Lewrick & Aakriti Mathur, 2019. "Playing it safe: global systemically important banks after the crisis," BIS Quarterly Review, Bank for International Settlements, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G01 - Financial Economics - - General - - - Financial Crises
    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ijc:ijcjou:y:2019:q:1:a:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bank for International Settlements (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ijcb.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.