JMF  Vol.3 No.3 A , October 2013
Can Banks Circumvent Minimum Capital Requirements? The Case of Mortgage Portfolio under Basel II
Abstract: The recent mortgage crisis has resulted in several bank failures. Under the current Basel I capital framework, banks are not required to hold a sufficient amount of capital to support the risk associated with their mortgage activities. The new Basel II capital rules are intended to be more risk based and would require the right amount of capital buffer to support bank risk. However, Basel II models could become too complex and too costly to implement, often resulting in a trade-off between complexity and model accuracy. Since the Basel II rules are meant to be principal based (rather than prescriptive), banks have the flexibility to build risk models that best fit their unique structure. We find that the variation of the model, particularly how mortgage portfolios are segmented, could have a significant impact on the default and loss estimated. This paper finds that the calculated Basel II capital varies considerably across the default prediction model and segmentation schemes, thus providing banks with an incentive to choose an approach that results in the least required capital for them. We find that a more granular segmentation model produces smaller required capital, regardless of the economic environment. Our results suggest that banks may have incentives to build risk models that meet the Basel II requirement and still yield the least amount of required capital.
Cite this paper: C. Henderson and J. Jagtiani, "Can Banks Circumvent Minimum Capital Requirements? The Case of Mortgage Portfolio under Basel II," Journal of Mathematical Finance, Vol. 3 No. 3, 2013, pp. 60-68. doi: 10.4236/jmf.2013.33A006.

[1]   W. Lang and J. Jagtiani, “The Mortgage and Financial Crises: The Role of Credit Risk Management and Corporate Governance,” Atlantic Economic Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2010, pp. 295-316.

[2]   M. Berlin and L. Mester, “Retail Credit Risk Management and Measurement: An Introduction to the Special Issue,” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 28, 2004, pp. 721-725.

[3]   L. Allen, G. DeLong and A. Saunders, “Issues in the Credit Risk Modeling of Retail Markets,” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 28, 2004, pp. 727-752.

[4]   P. Dimou, C. Lawrence and A. Milne, “Skewness of Returns, Capital Adequacy, and Mortgage Lending,” Journal of Financial Services Research, Vol. 28, No. 1-3, 2005, pp. 135-161.

[5]   A. Cowan and C. Cowan, “Default Correlation: An Empirical Investigation of a Subprime Lender,” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 28, 2004, pp. 753-771.

[6]   M. Laurent, “Asset Return Correlation in Basel II: Implications for Credit Risk Management,” Working Paper CEB 04-17, Solvay Business School, University Libre de Bruxelles, 2004.

[7]   D. Kaltofen, S. Paul and S. Stein, “Retail Loans & Basel II: Using Portfolio Segmentation to Reduce Capital Requirements,” European Credit Research Institute (ECRI) Research Report No. 8, 2006.

[8]   W. Lang and A. Santomero, “Risk Quantification of Retail Credit: Current Practices and Future Challenges,” In: Research in Banking and Finance: Monetary Integration, Markets and Regulation, Elsevier Ltd., Vol. 4, 2004, pp. 1-15.

[9]   D. Ash, S. Kelly, W. Lang, W. Nayda and H. Yin, “Segmentation, Probability of Default and Basel II Capital Measures for Credit Card Portfolios,” Unpublished Working Paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, 2007.

[10]   M. Flannery, “Capital Regulation and Insured Banks’ Choice of Individual Loan Default Risks,” Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1989, pp. 235-258.

[11]   R. Elul, N. Souleles, S. Chomsisengphet, D. Glennon and R. Hunt, “Mortgage Market and the Financial Crisis: What Triggers Mortgage Default?” American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2010, pp. 490-494.

[12]   G. Amronin and A. Paulson, “Comparing Patterns of Default among Prime and Subprime Mortgages,” Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Vol. 2, 2009, pp. 18-37.

[13]   C. Mayer, K. Pence and S. Sherlund, “The Rise in Mortgage Default,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2009, pp. 27-50.