メインコンテンツに移動

Don’t count on buffers

One possible mitigator of the pro-cyclical impact of risk-sensitive capital requirements would be counter-cyclical changes in capital buffers. Empirical evidence on this issue is scarce and a new regulatory capital regime could well induce a behavioural change. Nevertheless, David Rowe argues that relying on counter-cyclical capital buffers to neutralise the impact of pro-cyclical capital requirements is risky at best

analysi-rowe-gif

Most of the discussion surrounding the pro-cyclical implications of risk-sensitive regulatory capital rules has focused on required capital. Naturally, however, few institutions hold just the bare minimum capital required by regulators. To do so would subject them to undesirable regulatory and market sanctions should an unexpected shock push their capital below the minimum. This raises the

コンテンツを印刷またはコピーできるのは、有料の購読契約を結んでいるユーザー、または法人購読契約の一員であるユーザーのみです。

これらのオプションやその他の購読特典を利用するには、info@risk.net にお問い合わせいただくか、こちらの購読オプションをご覧ください: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

現在、このコンテンツをコピーすることはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

無料メンバーシップの内容をお知りになりたいですか?ここをクリック

パスワードを表示
パスワードを非表示にする

Most read articles loading...

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

ログイン
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here