Skip to main content
Log in

Bank shareholder wealth effects of California's proposition 103

  • Published:
Journal of Financial Services Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Proposition 103, approved by California voters on November 8, 1988, allows California state-chartered banks to become vendors of life, health, and property-liability insurance products. It is hypothesized that such a regulatory realignment should have resulted in a wealth increase for California state-chartered banks. An examination of the market response among these banks indicates a statistically significant positive stock price response on the dates of passage of Proposition 103 and a subsequent Supreme Court ruling upholding its constitutionality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brown, Stephen J., and Warner, Jerold B. “Using Daily Stock Returns: The Case of Event Studies,”Journal of Financial Economics 14 (March 1985), 3–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desai, Anad S., and Stover, Roger D. “Bank Holding Company Acquisitions, Stockholder Returns and Regulatory Uncertainty,”Journal of Financial Research 8 (1985), 145–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodd, Peter, and Warner, Jerold B. “On Corporate Governance,”Journal of Financial Economics 11 (1983) 401–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenbeis, Robert A., Harris, Robert S., and Lakonishok, Josef. “Benefits of Bank Diversifications: The Evidence from Shareholder Returns,”Journal of Finance 39 (1984), 881–892.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fields, Joseph A., Ghosh, Chimnoy, Kidwell, David, and Klein, Linda. “Wealth Effects of Regulatory Reform: The Reaction to California's Proposition 103”Journal of Financial Economics 27 (December 1990).

  • Fraser, Donald R., and Kolari, James W. “The 1982 Depository Institutions Act and Security Returns in the Savings and Loan Industry,”Journal of Financial Research 13 (1990), 339–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, Glenn V., Jr., “Problems and Solutions in Conducting Event Studies,”Journal of Risk and Insurance 57 (June 1990), 282–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, Christopher, M., and Wier, Peggy. “Returns to Acquirers and Competition in the Acquisition Market: The Case of Banking,”Journal of Political Economy 95 (April 1987), 355–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M.C., and Meckling, W.H. “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure,”Journal of Financial Economics 3 (October 1976), 306–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeley, M., “The Stock Price Effects of Bank Holding Company Securities Issuance,”Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Winter 1989), 3–20.

  • Keen, Howard, Jr., “The Impact of a Dividend Cut Announcement on Bank Share Prices,”Journal of Bank Research 13 (Winter 1983), 274–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Insup and Schweitzer, Robert, “Shareholder Wealth Effects of Interstate Banking: The Case of Delaware's Financial Center Development Act,”Journal of Financial Services Research 2 (1989), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madura, Jeff White, Ann Marie, and McDaniel, William R “Reaction of British Bank Share Prices to Citicorp's Announced $3 Billion Increase in Loan-Loss Reserves,”Journal of Banking and Finance 15 (1991), 151–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayers, David, and Smith, Clifford W. “On the Corporate Demand for Insurance.,”Journal of Business 55 (1982), 281–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, John D., and Keown, Arthur J. “One-Bank Holding Company Formation and the 1970 Bank Holding Company Act Amendment,”Journal of Banking and Finance 11 (1987), 213–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, Sam, “Towards a More General Theory of Regulation,”Journal of Law and Economics 19 (1976), 211–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramesh, Chandra, and Balachandran, Bala V. “A Synthesis of Alternative Testing Procedures for Event Studies,”Contemporary Accounting Research 6 (1990), 611–640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelor, Roger M., and Cross, Mark L. “Insurance Firm Market Response to California Proposition 103 and the Effects of Firm Size,”Journal of Risk and Insurance 57 (1990) 682–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Clifford W., and Warner, Jerold B. “On Financial Contracting: An Analysis of Bond Covenants,”Journal of Financial Economics 5 (June, 1979), 117–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szewczyk, Samuel H., and Varma, Raj. “The Effect of Proposition 103 on Insurers: Evidence from the Capital Market,”Journal of Risk and Insurance 57 (1990), 671–681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, Larry D., and Peterson, Pamela D. “Valuation Effects of New Capital Issues by Large Bank Holding Companies,”Journal of Financial Services Research 5 (1991), 77–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whalen, G. “Bank Holding Company Voluntary Nonbanking Asset Divestitures,” Economic Commentary (Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland), June 15, 1986.

  • Zellner, Arnold, “An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias,”Journal of the American Statistical Association 5 (1962), 348–368.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shelor, R.M., Cross, M.L. Bank shareholder wealth effects of California's proposition 103. J Finan Serv Res 8, 45–55 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01052938

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01052938

Keywords

Navigation