The Optimal Capital Structure of Banks: Balancing Deposit Insurance, Capital Requirements and Tax-Advantaged Debt

The capital structure and regulation of financial intermediaries is an important topic for practitioners, regulators and academic researchers. In general, theory predicts that firms choose their capital structures by balancing the benefits of debt (e.g., tax and agency benefits) against its costs (e.g., bankruptcy costs). However, when traditional corporate finance models have been applied to insured financial institutions, the results have generally predicted corner solutions (all equity or all debt) to the capital structure problem. This paper studies the impact and interaction of deposit insurance, capital requirements and tax benefits on a bankÇs choice of optimal capital structure. Using a contingent claims model to value the firm and its associated claims, we find that there exists an interior optimal capital ratio in the presence of deposit insurance, taxes and a minimum fixed capital standard. Banks voluntarily choose to maintain capital in excess of the minimum required in order to balance the risks of insolvency (especially the loss of future tax benefits) against the benefits of additional debt. Because we derive a closed- form solution, our model provides useful insights on several current policy debates including revisions to the regulatory framework for GSEs, tax policy in general and the tax exemption for credit unions.

Debate over Fair Value Accounting: Should we allow Politics to take an active role in setting accounting standards or should we trust that the SEC knows best?

In light of the recent economic downfall, there has been significant media coverage on the topic of fair value accounting. There are many critics of the accounting rule, who place blame on it for the destruction of billions of dollars in capital between financial institutions. Other commentators, however, see the rule as necessary and applaud its ability to bring the turmoil in the economy into the spotlight promptly so that it could be addressed effectively. This paper will begin by conducting a study of fair-value accounting from its inception in previous standards and then follow it through to Statement No. 157. I will then discuss the SEC’s most recent study of FAS157 and their decision as a result of the study.

The International Financial Reporting Standards and Their Implementation into the US Accounting System

This paper examines the differences between the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The areas closely examined are the differences inrevenue recognition and reporting of intangibles. By investigating the differences in the two sets of standards I put into context the changes that would be necessary for domestic companies adopting the IFRS. The differences between these two standards are important because the implementation of IFRS into the U.S. is a current issue for domestic companies. It is important to note how the new standards will affect different companies in different ways. Depending on the size and industry, some companies will have a harder time transitioning to the new standards. However, once these companies make the transition to IFRS they will have better recognition and reporting of revenues and intangibles.