WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 || 3 | 4 |   ...   | 5 |

«Elena Loutskina University of Virginia, Darden School of Business & Philip E. Strahan Boston College, Wharton Financial Institutions Center & NBER ...»

-- [ Page 2 ] --
Deregulation integrates the banking system Into the 1970s, most lending occurred through insured depository institutions, and technological, legal and regulatory barriers prevented integration across geographical and product markets. Over time, these barriers have eroded. The process began during the 1970s, when only 12 states allowed unrestricted statewide branching and another 16 prohibited branching entirely. Between 1970 and 1994, 38 states eased their restrictions on in-state branching. States also prohibited ownership of their banks by out-of-state bank holding companies. These barriers to integration began to fall when Maine passed a 1978 law allowing entry by out-of-state BHCs if, in return, banks from Maine were allowed to enter those states.

Other states followed suit, and state deregulation of intra-state banking was nearly complete by 1992 (Jayaratne and Strahan, 1996; Jayaratne and Strahan, 1998).

The transition to full interstate banking and branching was fostered by passage of the Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (IBBEA), which effectively permitted bank holding companies to enter other states without permission and allowed banks to operate branches across state lines (Rice and Strahan, 2010). With these legal changes, banks now

–  –  –

across geographical markets through banks’ internal capital markets (Houston, James and Marcus, 1997).

Despite the passage of IBBEA, states continue to exercise authority under this law to restrict or limit interstate branch entry. While IBBEA opened the door to nationwide branching, it allowed states to influence the manner in which it was implemented. States that opposed entry by out-of-state banks could use provisions of IBBEA to erect barriers to some forms of out-ofstate entry, to raise the cost of entry, and to distort the means of entry. From the time of enactment in 1994 until the branching default "trigger date" of June 1, 1997, IBBEA allowed states to employ various means to erect these barriers. States could set regulations on interstate branching with regard to four important provisions: (1) the minimum age of the target institution, (2) whether or not to permit de novo interstate branching, (3) whether or not to permit acquisition of individual branches rather than whole banks, and (4) how tightly to control the percentage of deposits in insured depository institutions controlled by any single bank or bank holding company. Following Rice and Strahan (2010), we use these four state powers to build a simple index of interstate branching restrictions across states. The index equals zero for states that are most open to out-of-state entry. We add one to the index when a state adds any of the four barriers just described. Specifically, we add one to the index: if a state imposes a minimum age on target institutions of interstate acquirers of 3 or more years; if a state does not permit de novo interstate branching; if a state does not permit the acquisition of individual branches by an outof-state bank; and if a state imposes a deposit cap less that 30%. So, the index ranges from zero to four. We use this index below as a policy instrument to help explain variation in our key measure of financial integration.

–  –  –

The move toward integration in mortgage lending occurred in concert with branching deregulation, initially spurred by the activities of the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs)

- The Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). By the 1990s, both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had become heavy buyers of mortgages from all types of lenders, with the aim of holding some of those loans and securitizing the rest. Together they have played the dominant role in fostering the development of the mortgage secondary market. As shown by Frame and White (2005), the GSEs combined market share has grown rapidly since the early 1980s. In 1990 about 25% of the $2.9 trillion in outstanding mortgages were either purchased and held or purchased and securitized by the two major GSEs. By 2003, this market share had increased to 47%.3 This market share fell after 2004 in the wake of the accounting scandals and the growth of subprime mortgages by private lenders, and then increased significantly since 2006 in response to the credit crisis. GSE access to implicit government support allows them to borrow at rates below those available to private banks, and to offer credit guarantees on better terms than competitors without such implicit support.4 As shown in Loutskina and Strahan (2010), the GSEs enhance mortgage liquidity, reduce the cost of borrowing, and increase mortgage acceptance rates conditional on borrower credit

                                                            

3 GNMA provides a very important source of mortgage finance to low-income borrowers, holding or securitizing about 10% of all mortgages outstanding.

4 Passmore, Sherlund and Burgess (2005) argue that most (but not all) of the benefits of GSE subsidies accrue to their shareholders rather than mortgage borrowers. To take advantage their low borrowing costs, during the 1990s the GSEs increasingly opted to hold, rather than securitize, many of the mortgages that they buy. Policymakers became concerned about the resulting expansion of interest rate risk at the GSEs (Greenspan, 2004), although the 2008 crisis resulted more from the credit guarantees offered by the agencies than from exposure to their retained mortgage portfolio.





–  –  –

GSEs buy mortgages, they bear both credit and interest rate risk. When GSEs securitize mortgages, they either buy them and issue mortgage-backed securities (MBS), or they just sell credit protection to the original lender. In the first case, the originating bank retains no stake in the mortgage. In the second case, the bank continues to fund the mortgage and bear the interest rate risk, but obtains the option to sell the mortgage off as an MBS (because of the credit protection). In all cases, the GSEs enhance liquidity and thus foster integration of credit markets.

The GSEs operate under a special charter, however, that limits the size of mortgages that they may purchase or securitize. These limitations were designed to ensure that the GSEs meet the legislative goal of promoting access to mortgage credit for low and moderate-income households. The GSEs may only purchase non-jumbo mortgages, defined in 2006 as those below $417,000 for loans secured by single-family homes. The loan limit increases each year by the percentage change in the national average of single-family housing prices during the prior year, based on a survey of major lenders by the Federal Housing Finance Board. The limit is 50% higher in Alaska and Hawaii. Because the loan limit changes mechanically and only as a function of national housing prices, local housing supply or demand conditions have no effect on the jumbo loan cutoff. We exploit this fact in developing our instrument for housing price growth below.

Starting in the early 1980s, securitization moved beyond the GSEs, as private investment banks began to purchase and securitize jumbo loans, providing similar services for large mortgages that Fannie and Freddie provide for non-jumbos, although without the government subsidy. This fact can be seen by the jump in the average mortgage interest rate around the jumbo loan cutoff. In fact, this rate differential increased sharply during the financial crisis as

–  –  –

their investments.

Both the moves to allow geographical expansion of banks within and across states, as well as the expansion of GSEs and private securitization have benefited both lenders and borrowers. Diversification opportunities have been enhanced, credit can flow more easily toward high-return investments, and opening up of markets has increased competition and lowered the price of credit (Demsetz and Strahan, 1997; Stiroh and Strahan, 2003). As we show next, however, financial integration has led to greater volatility, both in the housing sector (and, by extension, for the value of collateral more generally) and also in the economy as a whole.

III. FINANCIAL INTEGRATION AND HOUSE-PRICE VOLATILITY

In this section we test how financial integration affects the volatility of housing prices within local markets, and how the synchronicity (or interrelatedness) of housing price changes between markets varies with pair-wise measures of financial integration. In our first set of models, we build a panel dataset based on house-price volatility and financial integration at the level of the Central Business Statistical Area (CBSA) over the 1994 to 2006 period (unit of analysis = CBSA-year). In the second set of models, we build a richer panel by creating all CBSA-year pairs, again over the 1994 to 2006 period (unit of analysis = CBSA-pair-year). We test whether the correlation or similarity of housing prices shocks between pairs of markets changes as the two markets become more financially integrated with each other.

To start, we measure the volatility of the housing prices using the absolute deviation of housing price growth in a CBSA-year from the conditional mean, after removing time and CBSA

fixed effects. Specifically, we estimate the following regression:

–  –  –

Data for housing price growth rates are constructed from the Federal Housing Finance Association’s (FHFA) CBSA-level house price index. The residual growth-shocki,t captures how much housing prices growth differs in each CBSA and year compared to average housing price growth in this year across all geographies. The absolute value of this residual reflects housing price fluctuations specific to a given geography: Voli,t=|growth-shocki,t |.

The CBSA-year regressions test how integration affects housing-price volatility, as

follows:

–  –  –

where Integrationi,t equals our measures of the extent to which financial activity in a CBSA-year is connected to financial activity in other CBSAs (defined below).

The pair-wise regressions have the following structure:

Interrelatednessi,j,t = αt + γi,j + β2Integrationi,j,t + Other Controls + εi,j,t (3a)

where Interrelatednessi,j,t equals the negative of the absolute value of the difference in housingprice growth shocks between two CBSAs in a given year:

–  –  –

So, an increase in Interrelatednessi,j,t measures a decline in the difference in growth shocks between two CBSAs. In Equation (3a), Integrationi,j,t measures the pair-wise connectedness of two CBSA markets in a given year (defined below).

–  –  –

integrated lenders condition their credit decisions more on prices and less on other dimensions of credit risk (e.g. specialized knowledge about the local economy), or because capital flows more easily toward high-demand markets and away from low-demand markets. Both channels imply β1 0 in Equation (2). By looking at integration’s effects on pair-wise markets, we can isolate the capital flows channel. Imagine two CBSA markets – ‘A’ and ‘B’ – that are well integrated.

A shock to prices in ‘A’ (and thus to credit demand there) will draw financial resources away from ‘B’, thus accommodating the credit demand and raising prices in A and lowering them in B.

This second capital flight channel thus suggests that financial integration ought to make houseprice changes become less correlated as integration between two markets increases, so β2 0 in equation (3a).5 Measuring Financial Integration by CBSA-year Our measure of financial integration is built from the distribution and ownership of bank branches and deposits across local markets. The measure is based on information on total deposits, location and ownership of all bank branches from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) Summary of Deposits, available online annually from 1994 forward.6 We construct the In-CBSA ratio, equal to the fraction of all deposits in a CBSA that are owned by a holding company which also owns deposits in one or more other CBSAs.7

                                                            

5 House price variation driven by local credit supply shocks will tend to attenuate this effect.

6 See http://www2.fdic.gov/sod/.

7 We define a banking company as the highest entity within a bank holding company for banks owned by holding companies, or for the bank itself for stand-alone banks.

–  –  –

which in turn may reflect risk management or diversification motivations of potential entrants.



Pages:     | 1 || 3 | 4 |   ...   | 5 |


Similar works:

«Financial services sector report Opportunities for Standards in Investment and Asset Management A joint study from BSI and Long Finance – 2014 Prepared by Z/Yen Group for BSI Opportunities for Standards in Investment and Asset Management About the Publishers BSI (British Standards Institution) is the business standards company that equips businesses with the necessary solutions to turn standards of best practice into habits of excellence. Formed in 1901, BSI was the world’s first National...»

«LAKSHMI IYER 437 Flanner Hall, Email: liyer@nd.edu University of Notre Dame. Phone: +1-574-631-8954 Notre Dame, IN 46556. http://www3.nd.edu/~liyer/ Positions Associate Professor, Department of Economics, University of Notre Dame, July 2016-. Past Positions Associate Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School, 2010-2016. Visiting Researcher, Boston University Institute for Economic Development, 2015-16. Faculty Affiliate, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard...»

«Thames catchment abstraction licensing strategy May 2014 A licensing strategy to manage water resources sustainably We are the Environment Agency. It’s our job to look after your environment and make it a better place – for you, and for future generations. Your environment is the air you breathe, the water you drink and the ground you walk on. Working with business, Government and society as a whole, we are making your environment cleaner and healthier. The Environment Agency. Out there,...»

«Repo Haircuts and Economic Capital Wujiang Lou1 st 1 Draft CNY, February 8, 2016; Revision 3/21/2016 Abstract This article presents a model of haircuts and economic capital for repos. We propose a credit approach to solve haircuts such that the exposure to market risk meets a prescribed credit rating scale measured by expected loss. Specifically for securities financing business, a credit risk capital approach is also adopted where the borrower dependent haircut is set to a level such that the...»

«MINUTES OF THE 396TH BOARD MEETING OF THE NEW JERSEY HOUSING AND MORTGAGE FINANCE AGENCY MEMBERS: *Charles Richman, Deputy Commissioner, DCA (representing Richard E. Constable, III, Commissioner, DCA) **Susan Fischer, Assistant Attorney General (representing John Hoffman, Acting Attorney General) ***Robert Shaughnessy, Assistant Deputy Director, Department of Property Management and Construction (representing Andrew Sidamon-Eristoff, State Treasurer) ****Thomas Hunt, Deputy Assistant Director,...»

«What civil society after civil war? A study of civil society organizations' affect on peace consolidation in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Tajikistan Sabine Freizer Ph.D. thesis final submission 15 October 2004 Social Policy Department London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London UMI Number: U615252 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not...»

«Adriel A. Hilton, Ph.D. www.adrielhilton.com Business Address Western Carolina University Killian 209G Cullowhee, North Carolina 28723 (828) 227-2115 (office) aahilton@wcu.edu (e-mail) EDUCATION Doctor of Philosophy Higher Education (Administration) Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD School of Education and Urban Studies Department of Advanced Studies, Leadership and Policy Dissertation Title: The Perceptions of Administrators Concerning the One Florida Initiative Master of Applied Social...»

«RECOMMENDATION PAPER “SMEs & Access to Finance” Thematic Pole 2 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Chapter 1 SME’s and finance in the EU: the state of the art 1.1 The approach 1.2 Perceptions about the future 1.3 Summary of the state of the art Chapter 2 Focus area: Finance and social entrepreneurship 2.1 SMEs, Social Enterprises and Finance 2.2 Social Enterprises and new financial instruments 2.3 The future 2.3.1 Vision 2.3.2 Actions 2.3 SMEs and Social Enterprises: common challenges and...»

«The Implication of Economic Partnership Agreement for Africa, Caribbean and Pacific groups: A General Equilibrium Analysis Alemnesh Angelo Adamu Master’s thesis · 30 hec · Advanced level European Erasmus Mundus Masters Program: Agricultural, Food and Environmental Policy Analysis (AFEPA) Degree thesis No 826 · ISSN 1401-4084 Uppsala 2013 The Implication of Economic Partnership Agreement for Africa, Caribbean and Pacific Groups – General Equilibrium Analysis Alemnesh Angelo Adamu...»

«Crisis, Slump, Superstition and Recovery Thinking and acting beyond vulgar Keynesianism Tamara Lothian* Columbia University – Center for Law and Economic Studies Roberto Mangabeira Unger* Harvard University March 1, 2011 * © Tamara Lothian and Roberto Mangabeira Unger 2011 CRISIS, SLUMP, SUPERSTITION, AND RECOVERY Thinking and acting beyond vulgar Keynesianism ABSTRACT The intellectual and practical response to the worldwide financial and economic crisis of 2007-2009 as well as to the...»

«Minimum Wage: Maximum Impact Alan Manning April 2012 © Resolution Foundation 2012 E: info@resolutionfoundation.org T: 020 3372 2960 F: 020 3372 2999 About the Author Professor Alan Manning is Head of the Economics Department at the London School of Economics where he has taught since 1989. He is one of the UK’s leading labour market economists and has published widely on the impacts of the minimum wage, monopsony, immigration and technological change on wages and employment. Contents...»

«SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL ACTIONS REGENTS AGENDA July 2013 ANN ARBOR CAMPUS 1. Recommendations for approval of new appointments and promotions for regular associate and full professor ranks, with tenure. (1) Ayanian, John Z., M.D., professor of internal medicine, with tenure, Medical School, professor of health management and policy, without tenure, School of Public Health, and professor of public policy, without tenure, Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, effective September 1, 2013. (2)...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.