Since the onset of the recent financial crisis, discussions have been taking place around a set of proposals with a view to reducing the probability that ’it could happen again’. Along with new rules related to bank capital and liquidity buffers, the hyper-speculative exposure of some financial players has stimulated a debate on the recommendations that commercial banks and depositors should be ring-fenced. Theoretical assumptions and pros and cons of these proposals are compared, to conclude that a mixed regulatory model based on prudential and structural rules could fail the purpose to make the financial system both safe and efficient.

Breaking up the bank: alternative proposals to separate banking activities

GABBI, GIAMPAOLO;SIRONI, ANDREA
2014

Abstract

Since the onset of the recent financial crisis, discussions have been taking place around a set of proposals with a view to reducing the probability that ’it could happen again’. Along with new rules related to bank capital and liquidity buffers, the hyper-speculative exposure of some financial players has stimulated a debate on the recommendations that commercial banks and depositors should be ring-fenced. Theoretical assumptions and pros and cons of these proposals are compared, to conclude that a mixed regulatory model based on prudential and structural rules could fail the purpose to make the financial system both safe and efficient.
Gabbi, Giampaolo; Sironi, Andrea
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11565/3975585
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact