Suchergebnisse

International audience ; Using a simple two-country model where national or supranational regulators can set capital requirements as either risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we examine which of these arrangements is best. Our results demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set at a supranational level particularly when cross-country spillovers are large and national regulators su¤er from substantial degrees of regulatory capture. We further highlight the im-portance of llowing for supervisory "remoteness" in this context, and show that national regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover e¤ects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small.

International audience ; Using a simple two-region model where local or central regulators set capital requirements as risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set centrally when cross-region spillovers are arge and local regulators suffer from substantial regulatory capture. We show that local regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover effects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small, and that capital regulation at central rather than local levels is more benefcial the larger the impact of systemic risk and the more asymmetric is regulatory capture at the local level.

International audience ; Using a simple two-country model where national or supranational regulators can set capital requirements as either risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we examine which of these arrangements is best. Our results demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set at a supranational level particularly when crosscountry spillovers are large and national regulators suffer from substantial degrees of regulatory capture. We further highlight the importance of allowing for supervisory "remoteness" in this context, and show that national regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover effects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small.

International audience ; Using a simple two-country model where national or supranational regulators can set capital requirements as either risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we examine which of these arrangements is best. Our results demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set at a supranational level particularly when cross-country spillovers are large and national regulators su¤er from substantial degrees of regulatory capture. We further highlight the im-portance of llowing for supervisory "remoteness" in this context, and show that national regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover e¤ects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small.

International audience ; Using a simple two-region model where local or central regulators set capital requirements as risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set centrally when cross-region spillovers are arge and local regulators suffer from substantial regulatory capture. We show that local regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover effects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small, and that capital regulation at central rather than local levels is more benefcial the larger the impact of systemic risk and the more asymmetric is regulatory capture at the local level.

International audience ; Using a simple two-country model where national or supranational regulators can set capital requirements as either risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we examine which of these arrangements is best. Our results demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set at a supranational level particularly when crosscountry spillovers are large and national regulators suffer from substantial degrees of regulatory capture. We further highlight the importance of allowing for supervisory "remoteness" in this context, and show that national regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover effects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small.

International audience ; Using a simple two-country model where national or supranational regulators can set capital requirements as either risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we examine which of these arrangements is best. Our results demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set at a supranational level particularly when cross-country spillovers are large and national regulators su¤er from substantial degrees of regulatory capture. We further highlight the im-portance of llowing for supervisory "remoteness" in this context, and show that national regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover e¤ects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small.

International audience ; Using a simple two-region model where local or central regulators set capital requirements as risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set centrally when cross-region spillovers are arge and local regulators suffer from substantial regulatory capture. We show that local regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover effects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small, and that capital regulation at central rather than local levels is more benefcial the larger the impact of systemic risk and the more asymmetric is regulatory capture at the local level.

International audience ; Using a simple two-country model where national or supranational regulators can set capital requirements as either risk sensitive capital or leverage ratios, we examine which of these arrangements is best. Our results demonstrate the importance of capital requirements being set at a supranational level particularly when crosscountry spillovers are large and national regulators suffer from substantial degrees of regulatory capture. We further highlight the importance of allowing for supervisory "remoteness" in this context, and show that national regulators may want to surrender regulatory power only when spillover effects are large but the degree of supervisory capture is relatively small.