Abstract
Cross-border banking needs cross-border recapitalisation mechanisms. Each mechanism, however, suffers from the financial trilemma, which is that cross-border banking, national financial autonomy and financial stability are incompatible. In this paper, we study the efficiency of different burden-sharing agreements for the recapitalisation of the 30 largest banks in Europe. We consider bank bailouts for these banks in a simulation framework with stochastic country-specific bailout benefits. Among the burden sharing rules, we find that the majority and qualified-majority voting rules come close to the efficiency of a bailout mechanism with a supranational authority. Even a unanimous voting rule works better than home-country bailouts, which are very inefficient. If we assume additional systemic risk benefits, the efficiency of burden sharing rules comes close to the supranational solution.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 334-349 |
| Journal | Journal of Banking and Finance |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue number | November |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2014 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver