Conflicts of Interest in Japanese Insolvencies: The Problem of Bank Rescues
Economists and legal scholars routinely posit an implicit contract between Japanese firms and their principal lender (called their "main bank"). Under this arrangement, the bank implicitly agrees to rescue the firm (through financial and managerial help) when times turn bad. Out of court, it rescues the firm from insolvency. Not only does it save the investments specific to the troubled firm, it lowers the use of costly bankruptcy proceedings and cuts the costs of those bankruptcy procedures it does occasionally invoke. Given the creditor-shareholder conflicts of interest that arise as firms approach insolvency, such arrangements would seem unstable. Yet according to a long sociological tradition, conflicts of interest are inherently less problematic in Japan than in the West. According to the emerging economic and legal tradition, Japanese economic actors do face those conflicts, but keep them in check through reputational concerns, close-knit ties, and government supervision. Using two datasets of troubled firms from the 1970s and 1980s, we ask whether Japanese main banks in fact rescue distressed borrowers. We find no evidence that they do: large Japanese firms fail; when large firms approach insolvency main banks do not increase the share of the firm's debt they bear; stronger ties between distressed firms and their main bank do not facilitate loans; and troubled firms do not try to preserve their main bank relationship. Instead, the claim that Japanese banks implicitly agree to rescue firms is sheer myth. Conflicts of interest do indeed matter in Japan -- and they matter enough to prevent precisely the incentive-incompatible rescue deals that scholars in the field so routinely posit.
|Date of creation:||Sep 2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.cirje.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/index.html
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Takeo Hoshi & Anil Kashyap & David Scharfstein, 1989.
"Corporate structure, liquidity, and investment: evidence from Japanese industrial groups,"
Finance and Economics Discussion Series
82, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Hoshi, Takeo & Kashyap, Anil & Scharfstein, David, 1991. "Corporate Structure, Liquidity, and Investment: Evidence from Japanese Industrial Groups," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 106(1), pages 33-60, February.
- Hoshi, Takeo & Kashyap, Anil & Scharfstein, David, 1990.
"The role of banks in reducing the costs of financial distress in Japan,"
Journal of Financial Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 67-88, September.
- Takeo Hoshi & Anil Kashyap & David Scharfstein, 1990. "The Role of Banks in Reducing the Costs of Financial Distress in Japan," NBER Working Papers 3435, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Dore, Ronald, 2000. "Stock Market Capitalism: Welfare Capitalism: Japan and Germany versus the Anglo-Saxons," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199240616.
- Morck, Randall & Nakamura, Masao & Shivdasani, Anil, 2000. "Banks, Ownership Structure, and Firm Value in Japan," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(4), pages 539-67, October.
- Sheard Paul, 1994. "Reciprocal Delegated Monitoring in the Japanese Main Bank System," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 1-21, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tky:fseres:2003cf240. 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: (CIRJE administrative office)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.