Abstract
The debate over the existence and extent of funding cost differentials between large and small banks is central to regulatory reforms related to perceptions of “too big to fail” government support. After providing a simple taxonomy of five basic approaches into which the wide-ranging empirical literature on this topic can be categorized, I analyze key challenges that all of the approaches face, namely, the interpretation of funding costs differences between large and small banks, the choice of the relevant time period, the choice of the sample, and the significant differences in the funding structures of large and small banks. After analyzing further more specific challenges for three of the approaches, I describe the most promising methods for measuring funding cost differentials and present a “natural experiment” concerning the elimination of complete FDIC coverage of transactions deposits at the end of 2012, which suggests that depositors did not perceived a significant difference in risk between large and small banks during this period.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
