Reciprocal Brokered Deposits, Bank Risk, and Recent Deposit Insurance Policy
This study provides new evidence regarding reciprocal brokered deposits (RBDs), regulatory responses, and bank risk, contributing to prior studies in four ways. First, using updated financial Call Report data and bank failure data through 2012, we reexamine the moral hazard hypothesis that banks using RBDs exhibit higher risk. Second, we uncover a previously overlooked positive association between RBDs and banks’ cost of failure. Third, we apply Granger causality tests; and finally, we test whether the FDIC’s recent revision of its pricing discourages the use of RBDs and weakens its association with bank risk.
|Date of creation:||Jul 2014|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +61 2 6125 4705
Fax: +61 2 6125 5448
Web page: http://cama.crawford.anu.edu.au
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:een:camaaa:2014-56. See general 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: (Cama Admin)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.