Article Abstract:
Jones, King, Cummings, Harrington and Klein have evaluated the efforts of the National Insurance Commissioners Assn. and federal banking institutions in the regulating the industry and enforcing corrective measures. The authors, however, failed to develop a benchmark measure for risk which could have made their analysis stronger. Nevertheless, they concluded that book values and risk-based capital measures are not effective in evaluating risk.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
US risk-based procedures for undertaking capital investments is evaluated by comparing standards adopted by the stock market with those used by regulatory authorities. It is shown that market measures and those of risk-based capital standards fairly agree on the amount of capital in institutions and capital requirements but not on asset risk. Based on the results, a recommendation that banks undertake off-balance sheet activities can be given.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
The prompt corrective actions required by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Improvement Act of 1991 on banks demonstrating a big likelihood of going bankrupt are evaluated. At-risk banks are often presumed undercapitalized but a survey conducted for the period 1984-1989 showed that the interpretation of undercapitalization under standards on current risk-based capital was lax. It is therefore suggested that such standards be tightened.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic: