Why Do Banks Fail And What To Do About It

A leading finance expert explains how and why big banks fail—and what can be done to prevent it Dealer banks—that is, large banks that deal in securities and derivatives, such as J. P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs—are of a size and complexity that sharply distinguish them from typical commercial banks. When they fail, as we saw in the global financial crisis, they pose significant risks to our financial system and the world economy. How Big Banks Fail and What to Do about It examines how these banks collapse and how we can prevent the need to bail them out. In sharp, clinical detail, Darrell Duffie walks readers step-by-step through the mechanics of large-bank failures. He identifies where the cracks first appear when a dealer bank is weakened by severe trading losses, and demonstrates how the bank's relationships with its customers and business partners abruptly change when its solvency is threatened. As others seek to reduce their exposure to the dealer bank, the bank is forced to signal its strength by using up its slim stock of remaining liquid capital. Duffie shows how the key mechanisms in a dealer bank's collapse—such as Lehman Brothers' failure in 2008—derive from special institutional frameworks and regulations that influence the flight of short-term secured creditors, hedge-fund clients, derivatives counterparties, and most devastatingly, the loss of clearing and settlement services. How Big Banks Fail and What to Do about It reveals why today's regulatory and institutional frameworks for mitigating large-bank failures don't address the special risks to our financial system that are posed by dealer banks, and outlines the improvements in regulations and market institutions that are needed to address these systemic risks.

With the recent credit crisis there is a renewed interest in how banks operate and sometimes fail. This book offers an understandable explanation of the complex banking system and how to prevent unreasonable risk.

One of the major financial market events of the 1980s was the precipitous rise of depository institution failures including banks, savings and loan associations, and credit unions. Not since the 1930s has there been a similar period of turmoil in these industries. The events of the 1980s have inspired a renewed interest in the causes and cost of financial institution failure and several questions that had seldom been asked in the post-World War II economics literature have resurfaced Why do financial institutions fail? What are the costs of their failure? How do they differ from other firms and industries? What are the implications for financial market regulation? The Causes and Costs of Depository Institution Failures critically surveys and extends previous analyses of these questions. Audience: Scholars and researchers in the areas of money and banking, financial institutions, and financial markets, as well as regulators and policymakers.

Offering a historical analysis of management in banking from the Medici to present day, this book explores how banks can cause devastating financial crisis when they fail. Rather than labelling management as ‘good’ or ‘bad’, the author focuses on the concept of absent management, which can occur as a result of complexity. The complexity of banking, which intensified alongside the phenomenal growth of banks in the 20th and 21st centuries, resulted in banks that are mismanaged or, at times, even unmanaged. Drawing on business school case studies including Barings and Lehman Brothers, this book showcases how absent management in banking has caused crises, depressions and recessions, and how ultimately it will continue to do so.

The potential failure of a large bank presents vexing questions for policymakers. It poses significant risks to other financial institutions, to the financial system as a whole, and possibly to the economic and social order. Because of such fears, policymakers in many countries—developed and less developed, democratic and autocratic—respond by protecting bank creditors from all or some of the losses they otherwise would face. Failing banks are labeled "too big to fail" (or TBTF). This important new book examines the issues surrounding TBTF, explaining why it is a problem and discussing ways of dealing with it more effectively. Gary Stern and Ron Feldman, officers with the Federal Reserve, warn that not enough has been done to reduce creditors' expectations of TBTF protection. Many of the existing pledges and policies meant to convince creditors that they will bear market losses when large banks fail are not credible, resulting in significant net costs to the economy. The authors recommend that policymakers enact a series of reforms to reduce expectations of bailouts when large banks fail.

Ten states concentrated in the western, midwestern, and southeastern United States—all areas where the housing market had experienced strong growth in the prior decade—experienced 10 or more commercial bank or thrift (bank) failures between 2008 and 2011. The failures of the smaller banks (those with less than $1 billion in assets) in these states were largely driven by credit losses on commercial real estate (CRE) loans. The failed banks also had often pursued aggressive growth strategies using nontraditional, riskier funding sources and exhibited weak underwriting and credit administration practices. The rapid growth of CRE portfolios led to high concentrations that increased the banks' exposure to the sustained real estate and economic downturn that began in 2007. The Department of the Treasury and the Financial Stability Forum's Working Group on Loss Provisioning have observed that the current accounting model for estimating credit losses is based on historical loss rates, which were low in the prefinancial crisis years. The Financial Accounting Standards Board has issued a proposal for public comment for a loan loss provisioning model that is more forward-looking and focuses on expected losses, which would result in banks establishing earlier recognition of loan losses for the loans they underwrite and could incentivize prudent risk management practices. Moreover, it should help address the cycle of losses and failures that emerged in the recent crisis as banks were forced to increase loan loss allowances and raise capital when they were least able to do so. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) used shared loss agreements to help resolve failed banks at the least cost during the recent financial crisis. Under a shared loss agreement, FDIC absorbs a portion of the loss on specified assets of a failed bank that are purchased by an acquiring bank. The acquisitions of failed banks by healthy banks appears to have mitigated the potentially negative effects of bank failures on communities, although the focus of local lending and philanthropy may have shifted. First, while bank failures and failed bank acquisitions can have an impact on market concentration—an indicator of the extent to which banks in the market can exercise market power, such as raising prices or reducing availability of some products and services—GAO found only a limited number of metropolitan areas and rural counties were likely to have become significantly more concentrated. The lack of increases in concentration was because in many instances, the failed banks were acquired by out-of-market institutions. Second, GAO's econometric analysis of call report data from 2006 through 2011 found that failing small banks extended progressively less net credit as they approached failure, and that acquiring banks generally increased net credit after the acquisition. However, acquiring bank and existing peer bank officials GAO interviewed noted that in the wake of the bank failures, underwriting standards had tightened and thus credit was generally more available for small business owners who had good credit histories and strong financials than those that did not. Third, officials from regulators, banking associations, and banks GAO spoke with said that involvement in local philanthropy declined as small banks approached failure but generally increased after acquisition. Yet, these acquiring banks may not focus on the same philanthropic activities as did the failed banks. Finally, GAO econometrically analyzed the relationships among bank failures, income, unemployment, and real estate prices for all states and the District of Columbia (states) for the 1994 through 2011 period and found that bank failures in a state were more likely to affect its real estate sector than its labor market or broader economy.