IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umagsb/2017031.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Liability Games

Author

Listed:
  • Csoka, Péter
  • Herings, P. Jean-Jacques

    (Microeconomics & Public Economics, RS: GSBE ETBC)

Abstract

A firm has liabilities towards a group of creditors. We analyze the question of how to distribute the asset value of the firm among the creditors and the firm itself. Compared to standard bankruptcy games as studied in the game theory literature, we introduce the firm as an explicit player and define a new class of transferable utility games called liability games. Liability games are superadditive, constant sum, partially convex, and partially concave. The core of a liability game is empty if and only if the firm is insolvent and has multiple positive liabilities. We analyze the nucleolus of the game and show that allocating the asset value of the firm using the nucleolus satisfies efficiency, non-negativity, and liabilities boundedness. We prove that at the nucleolus, the firm gets a strictly higher amount than its stand-alone value if and only if the firm is insolvent and has multiple positive liabilities. The firm is using the threat to pay others to get debt forgiveness and is able to keep a positive amount of its assets. We provide conditions under which the nucleolus coincides with a generalized truncated proportional rule, assigning a non-negative payment to the firm and distributing the remainder in proportion to the liabilities, truncated by the asset value of the firm.

Suggested Citation

  • Csoka, Péter & Herings, P. Jean-Jacques, 2017. "Liability Games," Research Memorandum 031, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:umagsb:2017031
    DOI: 10.26481/umagsb.2017031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/17671965/RM17031.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26481/umagsb.2017031?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Benjamin & Mark L. J. Wright, 2009. "Recovery before redemption: A theory of delays in sovereign debt renegotiations," CAMA Working Papers 2009-15, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    2. Kornai, J, 1979. "Resource-Constrained versus Demand-Constrained Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(4), pages 801-819, July.
    3. Satyajit Chatterjee & Burcu Eyigungor, 2015. "A Seniority Arrangement for Sovereign Debt," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(12), pages 3740-3765, December.
    4. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    5. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1969. "The nucleolus of a characteristic function game," LIDAM Reprints CORE 44, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Federico Sturzenegger & Jeromin Zettelmeyer, 2007. "Debt Defaults and Lessons from a Decade of Crises," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262195534, December.
    7. William Thomson, 2013. "Game-Theoretic Analysis Of Bankruptcy And Taxation Problems: Recent Advances," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-14.
    8. Anderson, Ronald W & Sundaresan, Suresh, 1996. "Design and Valuation of Debt Contracts," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 9(1), pages 37-68.
    9. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    10. Serkan Arslanalp & Peter Blair Henry, 2005. "Is Debt Relief Efficient?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(2), pages 1017-1051, April.
    11. Larry Eisenberg & Thomas H. Noe, 2001. "Systemic Risk in Financial Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 236-249, February.
    12. Bezalel Peleg, 1965. "An inductive method for constructing mimmal balanced collections of finite sets," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 155-162, June.
    13. W. Max Corden, 1988. "Debt Relief and Adjustment Incentives," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 35(4), pages 628-643, December.
    14. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    15. O'Neill, Barry, 1982. "A problem of rights arbitration from the Talmud," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 345-371, June.
    16. M. Maschler & B. Peleg & L. S. Shapley, 1979. "Geometric Properties of the Kernel, Nucleolus, and Related Solution Concepts," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 303-338, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Csóka, Péter, 2018. "Az adósságelengedés modellezése kooperatív játékelmélettel [Modelling debt relief using cooperative game theory]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 768-779.
    2. Martijn W. Ketelaars & Peter Borm, 2024. "On the unification of centralized and decentralized clearing mechanisms in financial networks," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 99(3), pages 205-231, June.
    3. Martijn Ketelaars & Peter Borm & Marieke Quant, 2020. "Decentralization and mutual liability rules," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 92(3), pages 577-599, December.
    4. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & Jordi Teixidó-Figueras & Cori Vilella, 2016. "The global carbon budget: a conflicting claims problem," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 693-703, June.
    5. Cano-Berlanga, Sebastián & Giménez-Gómez, José-Manuel & Vilella, Cori, 2017. "Enjoying cooperative games: The R package GameTheory," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 305(C), pages 381-393.
    6. Trudeau, Christian, 2018. "From the bankruptcy problem and its Concede-and-Divide solution to the assignment problem and its Fair Division solution," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 225-238.
    7. Péter Csóka & P. Jean-Jacques Herings, 2018. "Decentralized Clearing in Financial Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4681-4699, October.
    8. Quant, Marieke & Borm, Peter & Hendrickx, Ruud & Zwikker, Peter, 2006. "Compromise solutions based on bankruptcy," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 247-256, May.
    9. Fatemeh Babaei & Hamidreza Navidi & Stefano Moretti, 2022. "A bankruptcy approach to solve the fixed cost allocation problem in transport systems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 332-358, July.
    10. Louis de Mesnard, 2015. "The three wives problem and Shapley value," Post-Print hal-01091714, HAL.
    11. Stovall, John E., 2014. "Collective rationality and monotone path division rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-24.
    12. B. Dietzenbacher & A. Estévez-Fernández & P. Borm & R. Hendrickx, 2021. "Proportionality, equality, and duality in bankruptcy problems with nontransferable utility," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 301(1), pages 65-80, June.
    13. Bas Dietzenbacher & Peter Borm & Arantza Estévez-Fernández, 2020. "NTU-bankruptcy problems: consistency and the relative adjustment principle," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 24(1), pages 101-122, June.
    14. Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu & Weijun He, 2016. "Allocating Water under Bankruptcy Scenario," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(11), pages 3949-3964, September.
    15. Schouten, Jop, 2022. "Cooperation, allocation and strategy in interactive decision-making," Other publications TiSEM d5d41448-8033-4f6b-8ec0-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Alexander Karpov & Semyon Yurkov, 2012. "Generalized bankruptcy problem," HSE Working papers WP BRP 08/FE/2012, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    17. Péter Csóka & P. Jean-Jacques Herings, 2021. "An Axiomatization of the Proportional Rule in Financial Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2799-2812, May.
    18. Long, Yan & Sethuraman, Jay & Xue, Jingyi, 2021. "Equal-quantile rules in resource allocation with uncertain needs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    19. Mirjam Groote Schaarsberg & Hans Reijnierse & Peter Borm, 2018. "On solving mutual liability problems," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 87(3), pages 383-409, June.
    20. Tamas Solymosi & Balazs Sziklai, 2015. "Universal Characterization Sets for the Nucleolus in Balanced Games," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1512, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:unm:umagsb:2017031. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Andrea Willems or Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meteonl.html .

    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.