Search Results

Showing results 1 to 10 of approximately 10.

(refine search)
SORT BY: PREVIOUS / NEXT
Keywords:Dodd-Frank 

Journal Article
Banking trends: how Dodd–Frank affects small bank costs

Do stricter regulations enacted since the financial crisis pose a significant burden?
Economic Insights , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , Pages 14-18

Journal Article
Tailoring Bank Regulations

Policy Update article: Tailoring Bank Regulations
Econ Focus , Issue 3Q , Pages 26-26

Discussion Paper
Changing Risk-Return Profiles

Are stock returns predictable? This question is a perennially popular subject of debate. In this post, we highlight some results from our recent working paper, where we investigate the matter. Rather than focusing on a single object like the forecasted mean or median, we look at the entire distribution of stock returns and find that the realized volatility of stock returns, especially financial sector stock returns, has strong predictive content for the future distribution of stock returns. This is a robust feature of the data since all of our results are obtained with real-time analyses ...
Liberty Street Economics , Paper 20181004

Journal Article
Banking Policy Review: Did Dodd–Frank End 'Too Big to Fail'?

Postcrisis bank reform was intended to end market perceptions that if a big bank fails, the government will have no choice but to bail it out. Ryan Johnston examines the evidence from recent studies.
Economic Insights , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , Pages 16-20

Report
Resolving “Too Big to Fail”

Using a synthetic control research design, we find that ?living will? regulation increases a bank?s annual cost of capital by 22 basis points, or 10 percent of total funding costs. This effect is stronger in banks that were measured as systemically important before the regulation?s announcement. We interpret our findings as a reduction in ?too big to fail? subsidies. The size of this effect is large: a back-of-the-envelope calculation implies a subsidy reduction of $42 billion annually. The impact on equity costs drives the main effect. The impact on deposit costs is statistically ...
Staff Reports , Paper 859

Working Paper
The Impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on Small Business

There are concerns that the Dodd-Frank Act (DFA) has impeded small-business lending. By increasing the fixed regulatory compliance requirements needed to make business loans and operate a bank, the DFA disproportionately reduced the incentives for all banks to make very modest loans and reduced the viability of small banks, whose small-business share of commercial and industrial (C&I) loans is generally much higher than that of larger banks. Despite an economic recovery, the small-loan share of C&I loans at large banks and banks with $300 or more million in assets has fallen 9 percentage ...
Working Papers , Paper 1806

Report
Changing risk-return profiles

We show that realized volatility, especially the realized volatility of financial sector stock returns, has strong predictive content for the future distribution of market returns. This is a robust feature of the last century of U.S. data and, most importantly, can be exploited in real time. Current realized volatility has the most information content on the uncertainty of future returns, whereas it has only limited content about the location of the future return distribution. When volatility is low, the predicted distribution of returns is less dispersed and probabilistic forecasts are ...
Staff Reports , Paper 850

Journal Article
Banking Trends How Foreign Banks Changed after Dodd–Frank

The Great Recession and the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 both affected how foreign banks operate in the U.S
Banking Trends , Issue 4 , Pages 1-6

Journal Article
How Dodd–Frank affects small bank costs

Do stricter regulations enacted since the financial crisis pose a significant burden?
Banking Trends , Issue Q1 , Pages 1-6

Discussion Paper
Did the Dodd-Frank Act End ‘Too Big to Fail’?

One goal of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 was to end ?too big to fail.? Toward that goal, the Act required systemically important financial institutions to submit detailed plans for an orderly resolution (?living wills?) and authorized the FDIC to create an alternative resolution procedure. In response, the FDIC has developed a ?single point of entry? (SPOE) strategy, under which healthy parent companies bear the losses of their failing subsidiaries. Since SPOE makes the parent company responsible for subsidiaries? losses, we would expect that parents have become riskier, relative to their ...
Liberty Street Economics , Paper 20180305

FILTER BY year

FILTER BY Series

Banking Trends 2 items

Economic Insights 2 items

Liberty Street Economics 2 items

Staff Reports 2 items

Econ Focus 1 items

Working Papers 1 items

show more (1)

FILTER BY Content Type

FILTER BY Jel Classification

G1 2 items

G21 2 items

C22 1 items

E40 1 items

E50 1 items

G17 1 items

show more (3)

FILTER BY Keywords

PREVIOUS / NEXT