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.
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.
