Advertisement

The Shadow Banking System and the Need for Supervision

  • Valerio Lemma
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Banking and Financial Institutions book series (SBFI)

Abstract

In this chapter I will move from the link between the deregulation of the banking industry and the freedom to perform market-based financing, in order to understand the need for checks and balances in the shadow banking system.

Keywords

Monetary Policy Credit Institution Supervisory Authority Euro Zone Regulatory Arbitrage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    see Capriglione (1997) “Presentazione,” in Capriglione (ed.) La disciplina degli intermediari e dei mercati finanziari, (Padova) p. XIV.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See Draghi (1997) “Commento sub art. 46 d. lgs. 415 del 1996,” in Capriglione (ed.) La disciplina degli intermediari e dei mercati finanziari, (Padova) p. 384 ff., where the author shows the guidelines of the reform process aimed by directive 93/22/EC and the new roles of the financial markets as private enterprises able to self-regulate their activities, within a competitive system.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    See Valentino (1996) “Decreto Eurosim: focus sul big bang del mercato finanziario italiano,” Le Società, n. 9, p. 1006 ff.Google Scholar
  4. 11.
    See Gorton (2009) “Slapped in the Face by the Invisible Hand: Banking and the Panic of 2007,” SSRN Working Paper, no. 1401882, p. 1, where the author admits that “many private decisions were made, over a long time, which created the shadow banking system.”Google Scholar
  5. 12.
    See Cioffi (2010) “Persistence and Perversity: The Global Financial Crisis, the Failure of Reform, and the Legitimacy Crisis of Finance Capitalism,” Western Political Science Association 2010 Annual Meeting Paper, for a wider analysis of this topic from a political science perspective.Google Scholar
  6. 14.
    See Hobsbawm (1995) Age of Extremes. The Short Twentieth Century, cit.Google Scholar
  7. Capriglione (2010) “Un secolo di regolazione,” in Capriglione (ed.) L’ordinamento finanziario italiano, cit., p. 53 ss.Google Scholar
  8. 15.
    See Demirgüç, Kunt, and Huizinga (1999) “Market Discipline and Financial Safety Net Design,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2183, where the authors outline that “the safety net that policymakers design must provide the right mix of market and regulatory discipline—enough to protect depositors without unduly undermining market discipline on banks.”Google Scholar
  9. 16.
    For the juridical fundaments of such a decision see Oppo (1990) “Commento sub art. 41 Cost,” Capriglione and Mezzacapo (eds) Codice commentato della banca, (Milano) I, p. 3 ff.Google Scholar
  10. Merusi (1980) “Commento sub art. 47 Cost.,” Branca (ed.), Commentario alla Costituzione (Bologna-Roma), III.Google Scholar
  11. 17.
    See Posner (2007) Economic Analysis of Law, (New York) p. 419 ff. and p. 465 ff., for a closer look at the market for corporate securities, in IRS double dimension: risk and expected return.Google Scholar
  12. 19.
    This reflects the ideas of Montedoro and Supino (2014) “Il difficile dialogo fra economia e diritto in una prospettiva istituzionalistica,” Rivista Trimestrale di Diritto dell’Economia, p. 135 ff.Google Scholar
  13. 20.
    See Lemma (2013) Etica e professionalità bancaria, cit., p. 134 andGoogle Scholar
  14. in line with the foregoing, see Solomon (2000) “Historicism, Communitarianism and commerce: An Aristotelean Approach to Business Ethics,” Contemporary Economic Ethics and Business Ethics (Berlin) p. 119Google Scholar
  15. Black (2001) “The Legal and Institutional Preconditions for Strong Securities Markets,” UCLA Law Review, p. 781 ff.Google Scholar
  16. Koslowski (2001) Principles of Ethical Economy (Dordrecht-Boston-London), p. 13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Latouche (2003) Giustizia senza limiti. La sfida dell’etica in un’economia mondializzata (Torino) p. 254 ss.Google Scholar
  18. Stirner (2006) The Ego and its Own (Cambridge) p. 141 ff.Google Scholar
  19. Wilmarth (2009) “The Dark Side of Universal Banking: Financial Conglomerates and the Origins of the Subprime Financial Crisis,” Connecticut Law Review, vol. 41, no. 4.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    See Morera and Rangone (2013) “Sistema regolatorio e crisi economica,” Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, fasc. Vol. 2, p. 383 ff., for a focus on the Italian regulation and crisis.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    See Renne (2014) “Options Embedded in ECB Targeted Refinancing Operations,” Banque de France Working Paper, no. 518, for a first analysis of the implementation of new refinancing operations aimed at supporting bank lending to the non-financial private sector (announced in June 2014). It is important to recall this paper because it focuses on the options embedded in these targeted longer-term refinancing operations. In particular, it shows how quantitative results point to substantial gains—for participating banks—attached to the satisfaction of lending conditions defined by the scheme.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    See Mésonnier and Monks (2014) “Did the EBA Capital Exercise Cause a Credit Crunch in the Euro Area?,” Banque de France Working Paper, no. 491.Google Scholar
  23. 26.
    See Enriques and Zetzsche (2014) “Quack Corporate Governance, Round III? Bank Board Regulation Under the New European Capital Requirement Directive,” Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper, no. 67/2014, where the Authors argue that European policymakers and supervisors should avoid using a heavy hand, respectively when issuing rules implementing CRD IV provisions on bank boards and when enforcing them.Google Scholar
  24. 27.
    See Masera (2014) “CRR/CRD IV: The Trees and the Forest,” SSRN Working Paper, no. 2418215, where the author reviews the new CRR/CRD IV capital regulatory framework and highlights the weaknesses that continue to characterise the new capital regulatory framework.Google Scholar
  25. 28.
    See Turner (2012) “Shadow Banking and Financial Instability,” The Harvard Law School Forum, April 16, 2012 where it is highlighted that “because of these … features, entirely free banking systems—such as existed in the USA before the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913—were inherently unstable”.Google Scholar
  26. 30.
    See Capriglione and Troisi (2014) L’ordinamento finanziario dell’UE dopo la crisi, cit., p. X.Google Scholar
  27. 31.
    See Ferrarini and Chiarella (2013) “Common Banking Supervision in the Eurozone: Strengths and Weaknesses,” ECGI—Law Working Paper, no. 223/2013, where the authors highlight that certain the weaknesses of the ESFS could be tempered by an extension of the Banking Union to a sufficient number of non-euro countries under the regime of close cooperation.Google Scholar
  28. See also Ferran (2014) “European Banking Union and the EU Single Financial Market: More Differentiated Integration, or Disintegration?,” University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper, no. 29/2014, for the early indication that some non-euro member states do want to join EBU notwithstanding certain lingering differences between their position and that of euro area member states provide an encouraging sign as to the value of those efforts.Google Scholar
  29. 32.
    See Eurogroup (2014) Work Programme for the Eurogroup for the Second Half of 2014, Brussels, June 19, 2014, p. 2, for the policy priorities of this institutions, which shall pay close attention to financial stability in the euro area as well as to the euro area aspects in establishing and operationalizing the Banking Union. It is clear, then, that Eurogroup will follow closely the comprehensive assessment and the stress tests, discuss its implications and certain aspects of the functioning of the SRM and SRF.Google Scholar
  30. 33.
    See EC, The Juncker Commission: A Strong and Experienced Team Standing for Change, Brussels, IP/14/984,September 10, 2014.Google Scholar
  31. 36.
    Cfr. European Commission, Programme of the Conference “Towards a Better Regulation of the Shadow Banking System”, April 27, 2012.Google Scholar
  32. 38.
    See Hill (2014) Capital Markets Union — Finance Serving the Economy, Brussels, November 6, 2014.Google Scholar
  33. 39.
    See Enria (2009) “The Development of Financial Regulation and Supervision in Europe,” in Mayes, Pringle, and Taylor (eds), Towards a New Framework for Financial Stability (London), p. 59 ff.Google Scholar
  34. 40.
    See Pellegrini (2012) “Conclusioni,” in Pellegrini (ed.), Elementi di diritto pubblico dell’economia, (Padova) p. 569.Google Scholar
  35. 42.
    See Calabresi (1985) Ideals, Beliefs, Attitudes, and the Law, (Syracuse), p. 84, where the author cites his (1982) “The New Economic Analysis of Law,” Proceedings of the British Academy.Google Scholar
  36. 43.
    See Ferran and Alexander (2010) “Can Soft Law Bodies be Effective? Soft Systemic Risk Oversight Bodies and the Special Case of the European Systemic Risk Board,” University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper, no. 36/2011, where the authors outline that “strengthening and reinforcing are words that feature prominently in many policy statements relating to these institutional developments but many of these bodies, including the FSB and the ESRB, are designed to operate without legally-binding powers.”Google Scholar
  37. 44.
    See Draghi (2013) “Foreword,” in ESRB, Annual Report 2013, cit., p. 5.Google Scholar
  38. 45.
    See Pellegrini (2012) “L’Architettura di vertice dell’ordinamento finanziario europeo: funzioni e limiti della supervisione,” Rivista Trimestrale di Diritto dell’ Economia, p. 52 ff., where the author clarifies the distinction between macro-prudential supervision, assigned to the ESRB, and a micro-prudential supervision, delegated to the ESFS, a network of national authorities which cooperate with three new European authorities (EBA, ESMA, EIOPA).Google Scholar
  39. 46.
    See Troiano (2010) “L’architettura di vertice dell’ordinamento finanziario europeo,” in Pellegrini (ed.), Elementi di diritto pubblico dell’economia, cit., p. 542.Google Scholar
  40. 47.
    For further clarification, see Casolari (2012) “The Principle of Loyal Co-operation: A ‘Master Key’ for EU External Representation?,” in Blockmans and Wessel (eds) Principles and Practices of EU External Representation, (The Hague), p. 11 ff.Google Scholar
  41. 49.
    See Enria, Angelini, Neri, Quagliariello, and Panetta (2010) “Pro-Cyclicality of Capital Regulation: s it a Problem? How to Fix it?”, Bancad’Italia Occasional Paper, no. 74, where the authors use a macroeconomic euro area model with a bank sector to study the pro-cyclical effect of the capital regulation, and reach the conclusion that “a permanent increase in the capital requirement would have negative consequences on welfare” (p. 38).Google Scholar
  42. this approach has been confirmed by FSB (2014), Global Shadow Banking Monitoring Report, cit., presenting the data from 25 jurisdictions and the euro area as a whole, covering about 80 per cent of global GDP and 90 per cent of global financial system assets.Google Scholar
  43. 51.
    See Schoenmaker (2012) “Banking Supervision and Resolution: The European Dimension,” Law and Financial Markets Review, Vol. 6, 2012, p. 52 ff., where the author highlights that “National authorities aim for the least-cost solution for domestic taxpayers. This results in an undersupply of the public good of global financial stability.”CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 53.
    See Vento and La Ganga (2009) “Bank Liquidity Risk Management and Supervision: which Lessons from Recent Market Turmoil?,” Journal of Money, Investment and Banking, Issue 10, p. 78 ff.Google Scholar
  45. 55.
    See Pellegrini (2003) Banca Centrale Nazionale e Unione Monetaria Europea, (Bari), p 235 ff.Google Scholar
  46. 59.
    See Schoenmaker (2014) “The New European Banking Union Landscape,” Duisenberg School of Finance Policy Brief, no. 35, where the author explains how the advance to Banking Union may creating a truly integrated EUM internal market.Google Scholar
  47. 60.
    See Hellwig (2014) “Yes Virginia, There is a European Banking Union! But it May Not Make Your Wishes Come True,” Max Planck Institute Collective Goods Preprint, no. 2014/12 for a critical review of the prospects for European Banking Union as they appear in the summer of 2014.Google Scholar
  48. 61.
    See Henry et al. (2013) “A Macro Stress Testing Framework for Assessing Systemic Risks in the Banking Sector,” ECB Occasional Paper, no. 152., where it is explained why the use of macro stress tests to assess bank solvency has developed rapidly over the past few years.Google Scholar
  49. 64.
    This is in line with the goal of Draghi (2014) Monetary Policy in a Prolonged Period of Low Inflation, Sintra, May 26, 2014, where he clarified that “an intermediate situation is one where credit supply constraints interfere with the transmission of monetary policy and impair the effects of our intended monetary stance. This would require targeted measures to help alleviate credit constraints.”Google Scholar
  50. 65.
    See, on thispoint, Capriglione and Semeraro (2012) Crisi finanziaria e dei debiti sovrani. L’Unione Europea tra rischi ed opportunità (Torino) p. 100 ff., where the analysis is recalled of Belke (2012) “Three years LTROs—A first assessment of Non-Standard Policy,” Note of the Directorate General for Internal Policies—Policy Department: Economic and Scientific Policy, April.Google Scholar
  51. 67.
    See FSB, Recommendations to Strengthen Oversight and Regulation of Shadow Banking, October 27, 2011, p. 16 ff.Google Scholar
  52. 68.
    See Zetzsche (2012) The Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive — European Regulation of Alternative Investment Funds (Alphen and den Rijn), p. 21 ff., where the author highlight that “when the financial crisis came upon Europe … the light touch regulation, pro-market attitude for which the hedge funds group and the private equity group stood ran counter to the political interests of subjecting managers of AIFs to more stringent regulatory oversight.”Google Scholar
  53. For an interesting point of view, see also Buttigieg (2013) “Negotiating and Implementing the AIFMD: The Malta Experience,” The Accountant, Spring 2014, p. 34 ff.Google Scholar
  54. With regard to UCITs, see European Commission, Greater Protection for Retail Investors: Commission Welcomes European Parliament Adoption of Strengthened European Rules on UCITS, Brussels, April 15, 2014.Google Scholar
  55. 74.
    See, on this point, Cassese (2009) Il diritto globale, (Torino) p. 17 ff.Google Scholar
  56. 75.
    See Lemma (2006) “‘Soft law’ e regolazione finanziaria,” Nuova giuris prudenza civil ecommentata, f. 11, p. 600 ff.Google Scholar
  57. see also Gersen and Posner (2008) Soft Law, U. of Chicago, Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper, no. 213, where the authors clarify that soft law consist of “rules” issued by bodies that do not comply with procedural formalities necessary to give the same an “hard legal status,” but nonetheless these rules may influence the behavior of other law-making bodies and of the public.Google Scholar
  58. 76.
    See Claessens, Pozsar, Ratnovski, and Singh (2012) Shadow Banking: Economics and Policy, in IMF Staff Discussion Note.Google Scholar
  59. 77.
    See Ghosh, Gonzalez del Mazo, and Ötker-robe (2012) “Chasing the Shadows: How Significant is Shadow Banking in Emerging Markets?”, The World Bank Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network—Economic Premise, where the authors specify that in select Central Eastern European countries, shadow banking grew rapidly until 2007, and then lost some of its share following the global financial crisis.Google Scholar
  60. 81.
    See also Sharma (2014) “Shadow Banking, Chinese Style,” Economic Affairs, Vol. 34, Issue 3, p. 340 ff., where he tries to measure and understand the growth of shadow banks in China, by investigating how Chinese Government can best utilise the services of shadow banks without create systemic risks for the global financial system.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 85.
    See Errico et al. (2014) “Mapping the Shadow Banking System Through a Global Flow of Funds Analysis,” IMF Working Paper—Statistics Department, p. 37, even if it is still to be completed the data collection, in order to proceed, successively, to the verification of their reliability, as well as to identify the nodes interconnected of financial flows mentioned above (with respect to “each sector in each location”).Google Scholar
  62. 87.
    See IMF (2014) Global Financial Stability Report. Risk Taking, Liquidity, and Shadow Banking: Curbing Excess While Promoting Growth, cit., p. 74, where the Fund identifies the key drivers of the growth patterns of the shadow banking system and quotes the results of Jackson (2013) “Shadow Banking and New Lending Channels—Past and Future,” 50 Years of Money and Finance: Lessons and Challenges, Vienna: The European Money and Finance Forum; Caballero (2010) “The ‘Other’ Imbalance and the Financial Crisis,” NBER Working Paper, no. 15636; Goda and Lysandrou-Stewart (2013) “The Contribution of U.S. Bond Demand to the U.S. Bond Yield Conundrum of 2004 to 2007: An Empirical Investigation,” Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Vol. 27, pp. 113–136; Goda and Lysandrou (2014) “The Contribution of Wealth Concentration to the Subprime Crisis: A Quantitative Estimation.,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 301–327; and Lysandrou (2012) “The Primacy of Hedge Funds in the Subprime Crisis,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Vol. 34, Issue 2, pp. 225–253.Google Scholar
  63. 89.
    See Marchesi and Sabani (2013) “Does it Take Two to Tango? Improving Cooperation between the IMF and the World Bank: Theory and Empirical Evidence,” Centro Studi Luca d’Agliano Development Studies Working Paper, no. 357, for an empirical analysis that shows that a Bank–Fund simultaneous intervention is beneficial to growth and that such beneficial effect is increasing with the willingness to coordinate of the two organizations. According to these Authors, this evidence would be in favor of a (more) centralized governance.Google Scholar
  64. 90.
    See Fitoussi and Laurent (2008) La nuova ecologia politica (Milano) p. 9, where the authors describe the economic self-regulation as the failure of an illusion.Google Scholar
  65. 94.
    See Dallas (2011) “Short-Termism, the Financial Crisis, and Corporate Governance,” Journal of Corporation Law, Vol. 37, p. 264 ff., for an exploration of the reasons why financial and non-financial firms engage in short-termism with particular attention given to the financial crisis of 2007–2009.Google Scholar
  66. 95.
    See Posner (2007) Economic Analysis of Law, cit., p. 469, where the author explains the link between diversification, leverage, and debt-equity ratio and p. 473 on the challenge of “behavioral finance,” which—as aforementioned—does not find any protection in the shadow banking system.Google Scholar
  67. 96.
    This is consistent with the approach of Shavell (2004) Foundations of Economic Analysis of Law (Cambridge), p. 473 ff., and, in particular, pp. 474–490, where there are the differences between the “certain enforcement” and the “enforcement with a probability.”Google Scholar
  68. 100.
    See FSB (2014) Structural Banking Reforms: Cross-border Consistencies and Global Financial Stability Implications, for a quantitative assessment of potential cross-border financial stability implications related to national structural banking reforms that have recently been implemented or proposed.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Valerio Lemma 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valerio Lemma
    • 1
  1. 1.Marconi University of RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations