Search Results
Report
Less for You, More for Me: Credit Reallocation and Rationing Under Usury Limits
Many states have capped consumer loan interest rates to protect households from high-cost lenders. Using triple-difference and event study analysis, we investigate how these usury limits affect the availability and allocation of credit across households. Consistent with standard price theory, we find that credit to the riskiest borrowers contracts under usury limits without improving delinquencies. More surprisingly, credit to lower risk borrowers expands under usury limits. This reallocation suggests that usury limits have unintended effects that are not entirely explained by standard theory.
Discussion Paper
The Unintended Effects of Interest Rate Caps: Credit Rationing for Risky Borrowers
In imperial China, 3 percent was the maximum legal monthly loan rate; charging more was punishable by 40 to 100 blows with the “light cane.” (Rockoff 2003) Centuries later, many U.S. states are imposing the same cap (without corporal penalties) on alternative credit providers, such as payday, installment, and auto-title lenders, with the goal of lowering credit costs and delinquency for the high-risk borrowers that rely on these funding sources. A concern, however, is that lenders will simply refuse to lend to these borrowers at lower interest rates. Our recent Staff Report studies how ...
Discussion Paper
The Unintended Effects of Interest Rate Caps: Credit Reallocation to Safer Borrowers
Several states have recently capped consumer loan rates with the stated purpose of protecting borrowers. In a recent Staff Report, we study how these interventions have played out in three states. In our first post about that study, we showed that rate caps lead riskier borrowers to face rationing in the credit market. One question that naturally arises is what lenders do with the credit they used to provide to high-risk borrowers before the caps were imposed. Lenders that lend exclusively to high-risk borrowers (at rates above the cap) may decide to stop lending to high-risk borrowers in ...
Report
Who Pays the Price? Overdraft Fee Ceilings and the Unbanked
Would capping overdraft fees increase financial inclusion? Studying an event in which caps were relaxed, we find banks raised overdraft fees but also expanded overdraft coverage and deposit supply, leading more low-income households to open accounts. While inattentive depositors may not benefit from being banked, the rise in account ownership persists, suggesting newly banked households valued their account even after learning about its costs. We find no evidence that being banked weakens households’ broader credit health, including delinquency, indebtedness, and credit scores. We conclude ...