Basel III has given rise to the active use of the macroprudential tools in the area of the banking regulation. The older and hence more frequently used one is the increase in the capital cost for the highly-risky loans (i.e., risk-weight add-ons). The more novel one is the quantitative limit without the direct capital cost implication. The regulators are limited in time to experiment when designing and introducing new regulatory tools. To respond to prudential regulators’ needs and to offer a regulatory toolbox for an appropriate experiment, we develop a banking system agent-based model (ABM). Due to experimenting with 70 ABM simulation scenarios, we are able to document the specific conditions that shape the efficiency of the macroprudential tools to limit credit and systemic risks, as well as to accumulate capital buffers to withstand prospective losses. First, we recommend considering the opportunity of new players’ entry. Second, we argue that the macroprudential tools are more efficient in normal times, rather than in the turbulent ones. Third, we recommend introducing banking-system-wide limits in addition to the bank-specific ones. We expect it to be of value for the regulators primarily in developing economies like Argentine, Thailand, as well as in part of developed ones like Ireland, Slovakia.
AcharyaV. V.BergantK.CrosignaniM.EisertT.McCannF. (2022). The anatomy of the transmission of macroprudential policies. Journal of Finance, 77(5), 2533–2575. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.13170
BCBS. (2005). An explanatory note on the basel II IRB risk weight functions. [Online] Available at: http://www.bis.org/bcbs/irbriskweight.htm [Accessed 12 Novembre 2018]
4.
BCBS. (2019). Guiding principles for the operationalisation of a sectoral countercyclical capital buffer. [Online] Available at: https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d487.htm [Accessed 07 January 2020]
BiondiY.ZhouF. (2019). Interbank credit and the money manufacturing process: A systemic perspective on financial stability. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, 437–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-018-0230-y
ErmolovaM.LeonidovA.NechitailoV.PenikasH.PilnikN.SerebryannikovaE. (2021). Agent-based model of the Russian banking system: Calibration for the maturity, interest rate spread, credit risk, and capital regulation. Journal of Simulation, 15(1–2), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477778.2020.1774430
12.
GambacortaL.MurciaA. (2020). The impact of macroprudential policies in Latin America: An empirical analysis using credit registry data. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2019.04.004
GoodhartC. (2011). The basel committee on banking supervision. A history of the early years 1974-1997. Cambridge University Press.
15.
GordyM. (2003). A risk-factor model foundation for ratings-based bank capital rules. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 12(3), 199–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-9573(03)00040-8
16.
HayekF. A. v. (1929). Geldtheorie und Konjunkturtheorie. Beitrage zur Konjunkturforschung, vol. 1, ed.Springer. Osterreichisches Institue fur Konjunkturforschung.
17.
Huerta De SotoJ. (2006). Money, bank credit, and economic cycles. 2nd, translated from Spanish ed. Mises Institute.
KozlovtcevaI.PenikasH.PetrenevaE.UshakovaY. (2022). Macroprudential policy efficiency in Russia: assessment for the uncollateralized consumer loans. Emerging Markets Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2022.100910
21.
LubisA.AlexiouC.NellisJ. G. (2019). What can we learn from the implementation of monetary and macroprudential policies: A systematic literature review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 33(4), 1123–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12313
22.
MakarovV.BakhtizinA.EpsteinJ. (2022). Agent-based modeling for a complex world. Scientific Publications Department, GAUGN.
23.
McCannF.O’TooleC. (2019). Cross-border macroprudential policy spillovers and bank risk-taking. International Journal of Central Banking, 15(4), 267–311. https://www.ijcb.org/journal/ijcb19q4a8.pdf
24.
MisesL. v. (1953). Theory of money and credit. Yale University Press.
25.
NechitailoV.PenikasH. (2021). Benchmarking banking regulation regimes: Application for the CBDC. Model Assisted Statistics and Applications, 16(4), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.3233/MAS-210540
