Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Business

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Business

Comment on Jones and King and Cummins et al

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.

Author: Eisenbais, Robert A.
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Publication Name: Journal of Banking & Finance
Subject: Business
ISSN: 0378-4266
Year: 1995
Analysis

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


A market evaluation of the risk-based capital standards for the U.S. financial system

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.

Author: King, Kathleen Kuester, Cordell, Lawrence R.
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Publication Name: Journal of Banking & Finance
Subject: Business
ISSN: 0378-4266
Year: 1995
Standards, Research, Venture capital, Financial institutions

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The implementation of prompt corrective action: an assessment

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.

Author: Jones, David S., King, Kathleen Kuester
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Publication Name: Journal of Banking & Finance
Subject: Business
ISSN: 0378-4266
Year: 1995

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Banking industry, Risk assessment, Laws, regulations and rules, Banks (Finance), Banking law
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: An investigation of the pricing of audit services for financial institutions. To swear early or not to swear early? An empirical investigation of factors affecting CEO's decisions
  • Abstracts: Implications of superhero metaphors for the issue of banking powers. Three paradigms for the role of capitalization requirements in insured financial institutions
  • Abstracts: Bank regulation and the credit crunch. Financial innovation, new assets, and the behavior of money demand
  • Abstracts: Scale and scope economies at large banks: including off-balance sheet products and regulatory effects (1984-1991)
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.