Banks using ‘discretion’ to report loan losses
Regulators tolerate less standardised reporting during industry weakness
Financial regulators are allowing banks to use their own discretion in reporting loan losses during periods of industry weakness to temporarily preserve financial stability, a new report has claimed.
A working paper from the Bank for International Settlements entitled Regulatory discretion and banks’ pursuit of “safety in similarity”, found that institutions: “may be permitted to exercise more discretion in their reporting of charge-offs when the banking system is weaker than when the problem is more isolated”.
“Such discretion has the desired effect of at least temporarily preserving financial stability and it may also encourage banks to cluster to gain ‘safety in similarity’. Whether more clustering adds to financial stability is an open question,” the report charges.
The study looked at the annual charge-offs and provisions for loan losses for the 30 largest US banks between 1979 and 2005, and worked off the hypothesis that: “bank regulators grant banks more discretion in reporting charge-offs when the system is weaker” while they are “likely to be less generous with the reporting discretion options that they confer…when the industry is stronger.”
Researchers also found that risk-taking behaviour among banks is largely determined by the behaviour of peer banks and that the ‘clustering’ observed in loss reporting extends into risk appetites.
“In addition we [found] that individual banks detectably change their risk-taking to make it more like that of other banks during periods when the banking industry is weaker,” the paper concludes.
The full report can be found on the Bank for International Settlements’ website: www.bis.org.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Fed pivots to material risk – but what is it, exactly?
Top US bank regulator will prioritise risks that matter most, but they could prove hard to pinpoint
Hopes rise for EU re-entry to UK swaps market
EC says discussions on draft decision softening derivatives trading obligation are ‘advanced’
BoE’s Ramsden defends UK’s ring-fencing regime
Deputy governor also says regulatory reform is coming to the UK gilt repo market
Credit spread risk: the cryptic peril on bank balance sheets
Some bankers fear EU regulatory push on CSRBB has done little to improve risk management
Credit spread risk approach differs among EU banks, survey finds
KPMG survey of more than 90 banks reveals disagreement on how to treat liabilities and loans
Bowman’s Fed may limp on by after cuts
New vice-chair seeks efficiency, but staff clear-out could hamper functions, say former regulators
Review of 2025: It’s the end of the world, and it feels fine
Markets proved resilient as Trump redefined US policies – but questions are piling up about 2026 and beyond
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions