Are "bounced check loans" really loans? Theory, evidence and policy

Marc Anthony Fusaro

The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 2010, vol. 50, issue 4, 492-500

Abstract: This research addresses the controversial bank policy of paying - rather than bouncing - overdrawn checks, debits or ATM withdrawals. We argue that it should fall under lending regulations only if consumers use the program to get intentional loans. In contrast, if the program primarily applies to checking account activity then it should fall under checking account regulations. A model of precautionary balance holding and checking account customer data are used to estimate the likelihood of overdrafting. Predicted overdrafts are compared to actual overdrafts to conclude that 79% are explained by the model and thus thought to be mistakes due to the stochastic nature of household expenditures.

Keywords: Bounced; check; Overdraft; Precautionary; money; demand; Checking; account; Bank; regulation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1062-9769(10)00044-X
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:quaeco:v:50:y:2010:i:4:p:492-500

Access Statistics for this article

The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance is currently edited by R. J. Arnould and J. E. Finnerty

More articles in The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().