1932

Abstract

During the 2007–2009 financial crisis, many parties criticized aspects of accounting requirements for banks as undermining financial stability. These criticisms generally reflect the view that these requirements primarily affect stability through their effects on banks’ regulatory capital adequacy. I criti-cally evaluate whether this idea can be sustained on logical and evidential grounds. I explain how accounting requirements typically have quite small effects on banks’ regulatory capital adequacy. I discuss the plausibility of the alternative view that accounting requirements primarily affect stability by improving banks’ understanding of their risks and their transparency to markets and regulators. Because securitization is the setting in which banks’ regulatory capital adequacy is most likely to be significantly affected by accounting requirements, I describe empirical research on significant changes in securitization accounting effective in 2010. I explain how even in this setting regulatory capital adequacy incompletely explains how accounting requirements for banks affect stability.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-110716-032340
2017-11-01
2024-06-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/financial/9/1/annurev-financial-110716-032340.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-110716-032340&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Acharya V, Ryan S. 2016. Banks’ financial reporting and financial system stability. J. Account. Res. 54:277–340 [Google Scholar]
  2. Acharya V, Schnabl P, Suarez G. 2013. Securitization without risk transfer. J. Financ. Econ. 107:515–36 [Google Scholar]
  3. Admati A, Hellwig M. 2013. The Bankers’ New Clothes: What's Wrong with Banking and What To Do about It Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  4. Am. Account. Assoc. Financ. Account. Stand. Comm. 2007. Response to FASB exposure draft, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, Including an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115.”. Account. Horiz 21:2189–200 [Google Scholar]
  5. Badertscher B, Burks J, Easton P. 2012. A convenient scapegoat: fair value accounting by commercial banks during the financial crisis. Account. Rev. 87:59–90 [Google Scholar]
  6. Badertscher B, Burks J, Easton P. 2014. The market pricing of other-than-temporary impairments. Account. Rev. 89:811–38 [Google Scholar]
  7. Barth M, Hodder L, Stubben S. 2008. Fair value accounting for liabilities and own credit risk. Account. Rev. 83:3629–64 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bassett W, King T. 2008. Profits and balance sheet developments at U.S. commercial banks in 2007. Fed. Res. Bull 94:A1–39 [Google Scholar]
  9. Beatty A, Liao S. 2011. Do delays in expected loss recognition affect banks’ willingness to lend?. J. Account. Econ. 52:1–20 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bech M, Rice T. 2009. Profits and balance sheet developments at U.S. commercial banks in 2008. Fed. Res. Bull 95:A57–97 [Google Scholar]
  11. Berger A, Udell G. 2002. Small business credit availability and relationship lending: the importance of bank ownership structure. Econ. J. 112:477F32–53 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bhat G, Ryan S, Vyas D. 2017. The implications of credit risk modeling for banks’ loan loss provisions and loan origination procyclicality Work. Pap. New York Univ. New York: [Google Scholar]
  13. Board Gov. Fed. Reserve Syst. 2017. Charge-off and delinquency rates on loans and leases at commercial banks Stat. Release, US Fed. Reserve May 17. https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/ [Google Scholar]
  14. Bonsall S, Bozanic Z, Dou Y, Richardson G, Vyas D. 2017. Have FAS 166 and FAS 167 improved the financial reporting for securitizations? Work. Pap. Ohio State Univ. Columbus: [Google Scholar]
  15. Bushman R, Williams C. 2012. Accounting discretion, loan loss provisioning, and discipline of banks’ risk-taking. J. Account. Econ. 54:1–18 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bushman R, Williams C. 2015. Delayed expected loss recognition and the risk profile of banks. J. Account. Res. 53:511–53 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dou Y. 2017. The spillover effects of consolidating securitization entities on small business lending Work. Pap. New York Univ. New York: [Google Scholar]
  18. Dou Y, Ryan S, Xie B. 2017. The real effects of FAS 166/167 on banks’ mortgage approval and sale decisions Work. Pap. Penn. State Univ University Park: [Google Scholar]
  19. Dugan J. 2009. Loan loss provisioning and pro-cyclicality Remarks before the Inst. Int. Bank., Mar. 2 New York: [Google Scholar]
  20. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 1975. Accounting for contingencies Statement Financ. Account. Stand. 5 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  21. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 1993. Accounting for certain investments in debt and equity securities Statement Financ. Account. Stand. 115 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  22. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 1999. Preliminary views on major issues related to reporting financial instruments and certain related assets and liabilities at fair value Dec. Statement FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  23. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2000. Accounting for transfers and servicing of financial assets and extinguishments of liabilities: a replacement of FASB statement no. 125 Financ. Account. Stand. 140 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  24. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2003. Consolidation of variable interest entities (revised December 2003)—an interpretation of ARB no. 51 FASB Interpret. 46(R) FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  25. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2006. Fair value measurements Statement Financ. Account. Stand. 157 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  26. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2007. The fair value option for financial assets and financial liabilities—including an amendment of FASB statement no. 115 Statement Financ. Account. Stand. 159 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  27. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2008. Determining the fair value of a financial asset when the market for that asset is not active FASB Staff Position FAS 157-3 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  28. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2009a. Accounting for transfers of financial assets—an amendment of FASB statement no. 140 Statement Financ. Account. Stand. 166 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  29. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2009b. Amendments to FASB interpretation no. 46(R) Statement Financ. Account. Stand. 167 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  30. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2009c. Determining fair value when the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability have significantly decreased and identifying transactions that are not orderly FASB Staff Position FAS 157-4 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  31. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2009d. Recognition and presentation of other-than-temporary impairments FASB Staff Position FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  32. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2016a. Financial instruments—credit losses (Topic 326): measurement of credit losses on financial instruments Account. Stand. Update 2016-13 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  33. FASB (Financ. Account. Stand. Board). 2016b. Financial instruments—overall (Subtopic 825-10) Account. Stand. Update 2016-01 FASB Norwalk, CT: [Google Scholar]
  34. Int. Monet. Fund. 2008. Containing systemic risks and restoring financial soundness Glob. Financ. Stab. Rep., Apr., World Econ. Financ. Surv. Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  35. Johnson S. 2008a. How far can fair value go. CFO.com May 6 [Google Scholar]
  36. Johnson S. 2008b. The fair-value blame game. CFO.com Mar. 19 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lee S, Rose J. 2010. Profits and balance sheet developments at U.S. commercial banks in 2009. Fed. Res. Bull 96:A1–37 [Google Scholar]
  38. Reed J. 2008. How assets held off of the balance sheet contributed to the securitization of risky assets Chairm. Open. Statement, US Senate Comm. Bank. Hous. Urban Aff., Sept. 18 Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  39. Rummell N. 2008. Fair-value rules get more blame for crunch. Financial Week Mar. 24. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ryan S. 2007. Financial Instruments and Institutions: Accounting and Disclosure Rules Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ryan S. 2011. Financial reporting for financial instruments. Found. Trends Account. 6:187–354 [Google Scholar]
  42. Standard & Poor's. 2008. RatingsDirect, corporate ratings criteria 2008. S&P Global Ratings Apr. 15. https://www.standardandpoors.com/en_US/web/guest/ratings/ratings-criteria/-/articles/criteria/requests-for-comment/filter/all [Google Scholar]
  43. The Economist. 2008. All's fair. The Economist Sept. 18. http://www.economist.com/node/12274096 [Google Scholar]
  44. Tian X, Zhang H. 2016. Impact of FAS 166/167 on credit card securitization Work. Pap. Ohio State Univ. Columbus: [Google Scholar]
  45. Udell G. 1989. Loan quality, commercial loan review and loan officer contracting. J. Bank. Finance 13:3367–82 [Google Scholar]
  46. Xie B. 2016. Does fair value accounting exacerbate the pro-cyclicality of bank lending?. J. Account. Res. 54:235–74 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-110716-032340
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error