Ratio controls need reconsideration

Charles Goodhart

Journal of Financial Stability, 2013, vol. 9, issue 3, 445-450

Abstract: Bank equity capital can play several roles; for example as a buffer against (unexpected) loss, as protection for other creditors in bankruptcy, and as ‘skin in the game’. There was never sufficient discussion of which role(s) the BCBS capital adequacy requirements (CARs) were meant to play, and whether they did so satisfactorily. In practice they did not. I discuss what principles should lie behind CARs if we could design these from scratch. I argue that there should be a minimum intervention point triggering official action to depose management and shareholders, and then move to resolution, with an increasingly penal ladder of sanctions as equity capital falls towards this point. A similar approach should also be applied to liquidity requirements.

Keywords: Bank equity; Capital adequacy requirements; Ladder of sanctions; Bank liquidity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: G18 G28 G33 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (14)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1572308913000089
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:finsta:v:9:y:2013:i:3:p:445-450

DOI: 10.1016/j.jfs.2013.02.001

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Financial Stability is currently edited by I. Hasan, W. C. Hunter and G. G. Kaufman

More articles in Journal of Financial Stability from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().