3 Issuing costs of state guaranteed bonds - Financial Risk and ...
3 Issuing costs of state guaranteed bonds - Financial Risk and ...
3 Issuing costs of state guaranteed bonds - Financial Risk and ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
4 Impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>state</strong> <strong>guaranteed</strong> <strong>bonds</strong> on bank lending, funding <strong>and</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>itability performance<br />
Table 18: Difference in pr<strong>of</strong>it performance between banks having issued <strong>guaranteed</strong> <strong>bonds</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
banks having issued eligible <strong>bonds</strong> without guarantee<br />
Balance<br />
sheet item<br />
Pre-issue<br />
year<br />
Net interest income / total<br />
liabilities + equity (% change)<br />
Operating income / total liabilities<br />
+ equity (% change)<br />
Source: London Economics<br />
Posts- issue<br />
year<br />
Number<br />
<strong>of</strong><br />
banks<br />
Banks having issued<br />
<strong>guaranteed</strong> <strong>bonds</strong><br />
Mean <strong>of</strong><br />
% change<br />
St<strong>and</strong>ard<br />
deviation<br />
<strong>of</strong> %<br />
change<br />
Banks having issued eligible<br />
<strong>bonds</strong> without guarantee<br />
Number<br />
<strong>of</strong> banks<br />
Mean <strong>of</strong><br />
% change<br />
St<strong>and</strong>ard<br />
deviation<br />
<strong>of</strong> %<br />
change<br />
2007 2009 1 -30.9% - 63 12.5% 30.5<br />
2007 2010 6 -3.6% 34.4 58 12.4% 30.1<br />
2008 2009 6 2.3% 29.8 65 10.6% 25.1<br />
2008 2010 26 -11.2% 25.2 58 9.8% 26.0<br />
2009 2010 2 -6.5% 4.9 59 0.8% 19.1<br />
2007 2009 1 -11.6 - 62 1.9% 25.5<br />
2007 2010 6 -1.4 22.1 58 9.8% 26.0<br />
2008 2009 5 5.0% 17.6 57 12.7% 27.6<br />
2008 2010 24 -1.4% 30.7 51 13.6% 26.9<br />
2009 2010 2 -1.1% 4.5 58 -0.9% 17.3<br />
4.4 Econometric analysis <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> the issue <strong>of</strong> <strong>guaranteed</strong> <strong>bonds</strong><br />
on banks’ performance<br />
4.4.1 Empirical research strategy<br />
The empirical research strategy adopted for the assessment <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>state</strong> <strong>guaranteed</strong><br />
<strong>bonds</strong> on bank outcomes is the counterfactual approach whereby the performance <strong>of</strong> a relevant<br />
control group <strong>of</strong> banks that did not participate in <strong>state</strong> guarantee schemes or receive ad hoc<br />
guarantees ('non-participating' banks) is compared to the performance <strong>of</strong> banks that did not<br />
participate in <strong>state</strong> guarantee schemes or received ad hoc guarantees ('participating' banks).<br />
The bank sample used in the analysis consists <strong>of</strong> participating <strong>and</strong> non-participating banks that<br />
issued <strong>bonds</strong> that were, or would have been eligible to be, <strong>state</strong> <strong>guaranteed</strong>. That is, bank selection<br />
is based on the issuers behind the SG <strong>and</strong> non-SG <strong>bonds</strong> considered in Section 2.<br />
The average impact <strong>of</strong> a <strong>state</strong> guarantee on bank outcomes is estimated by taking the differencein-differences<br />
<strong>of</strong> bank outcomes <strong>of</strong> participating <strong>and</strong> non-participating banks, controlling for other<br />
determinants <strong>of</strong> bank outcomes that are observed <strong>and</strong> can be measured.<br />
Estimating the difference-in-differences involves several steps. Below, we provide an illustration<br />
based on 2 banks only, a participating bank <strong>and</strong> a non-participating bank.<br />
93