Abstract
Narrow banking has surfaced frequently as a proposed framework for dealing with financial instability and inefficiency. Recent proposals include reforms intended to improve the implementation of monetary policy, and to deal with perceived problems related to stablecoins. A model is constructed in which banks must deal with three frictions: limited commitment, moral hazard with respect to risky assets, and potential misrepresentation of safe assets. Surprisingly, deposit insurance does not engender inefficiency, and government-imposed capital requirements and leverage requirements serve to reduce welfare. The viability of narrow banking depends on inefficient regulation in conventional banking, and narrow banking is never welfare-improving.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
