United States Financial History

Author(s):  
Christy Ford Chapin

The history of US finance—spanning from the republic’s founding through the 2007–2008 financial crisis—exhibits two primary themes. The first theme is that Americans have frequently expressed suspicion of financiers and bankers. This abiding distrust has generated ferocious political debates through which voters either have opposed government policies that empower financial interests or have advocated proposals to steer financial institutions toward serving the public. A second, related theme that emerges from this history is that government policy—both state and federal—has shaped and reshaped financial markets. This feature follows the pattern of American capitalism, which rather than appearing as laissez-faire market competition, instead materializes as interactions between government and private enterprise structuring each economic sector in a distinctive manner. International comparison illustrates this premise. Because state and federal policies produced a highly splintered commercial banking sector that discouraged the development of large, consolidated banks, American big business has frequently had to rely on securities financing. This shareholder model creates a different corporate form than a commercial-bank model. In Germany, for example, large banks often provide firms with financing as well as business consulting and management strategy services. In this commercial-bank model, German business executives cede some autonomy to bankers but also have more ability to engage in long-term planning than do American executives who tend to cater to short-term stock market demands. Under the banner of the public–private financial system two subthemes appear: fragmented institutional arrangements and welfare programming. Because of government policy, the United States, compared to other western nations, has an unusually fragmented financial system. Adding to this complexity, some of these institutions can be either state or federally chartered; meanwhile, the commercial banking sector has traditionally hosted thousands of banks, ranging from urban, money-center institutions to small unit banks. Space constraints exclude examination of numerous additional organizations, such as venture capital firms, hedge funds, securities brokers, mutual funds, real estate investment trusts, and mortgage brokers. The US regulatory framework reflects this fragmentation, as a bevy of federal and state agencies supervise the financial sector. Since policymakers passed deregulatory measures during the 1980s and 1990s, the sector has moved toward consolidation and universal banking, which permits a large assortment of financial services to coexist under one institutional umbrella. Nevertheless, the US financial sector continues to be more fragmented than other industrialized countries. The public–private financial system has also delivered many government benefits, revealing that the American welfare state is perhaps more robust than scholars often claim. Welfare programming through financial policy tends be “hidden,” frequently because significant portions of benefits provision reside “off the books,” either as government-sponsored enterprises that are nominally private or as government guarantees in the place of direct spending. Yet these programs have heavily affected both their beneficiaries and the nation’s economy. The government, for example, has directed significant resources toward the construction and maintenance of a massive farm credit system. Moreover, policymakers established mortgage insurance and residential financing programs, creating an economy and consumer culture that revolve around home ownership. While both agricultural and mortgage programs have helped low-income beneficiaries, they have dispensed more aid to middle-class and corporate recipients. These programs, along with the institutional configuration of the banking and credit system, demonstrate just how important US financial policy has been to the nation’s unfolding history.

2021 ◽  
pp. 24-46
Author(s):  
João Rafael Cunha

The 1980s was one of the most eventful and consequential decades in the development of the US financial system. During this decade, the regulatory framework established in response to the Great Depression started to be dismantled. These regulatory changes were a key driving force behind the transformation of the banking sector. Moreover, the end of the decade saw the most serious banking crisis since the Great Depression. This pattern of deregulation and crises, which started in the 1980s, has continued until the present. Thus, it is worth study this period in greater detail and the consequences it has had for the US banking and financial system. The chapter argues that the deregulatory process that started in the 1980s in the banking industry in the United States has changed the profile of this sector. Between the Great Depression and the 1980s, the banking sector in the United States was a stable, yet not competitive sector. The financial deregulation of the 1980s changed this sector to a competitive, yet unstable one. This deregulatory process occurred mostly as a response to the economic conditions of the 1970s.


Author(s):  
Halyna Shchyhelska

2018 marks the 100th anniversary of the proclamation of Ukrainian independence. OnJanuary 22, 1918, the Ukrainian People’s Republic proclaimed its independence by adopting the IV Universal of the Ukrainian Central Rada, although this significant event was «wiped out» from the public consciousness on the territory of Ukraine during the years of the Soviet totalitarian regime. At the same time, January 22 was a crucial event for the Ukrainian diaspora in the USA. This article examines how American Ukrainians interacted with the USA Government institutions regarding the celebration and recognition of the Ukrainian Independence day on January 22. The attention is focused on the activities of ethnic Ukrainians in the United States, directed at the organization of the special celebration of the Ukrainian Independence anniversaries in the US Congress and cities. Drawing from the diaspora press and Congressional Records, this article argues that many members of Congress participated in the observed celebration and expressed kind feelings to the Ukrainian people, recognised their fight for freedom, during the House of Representatives and Senate sessions. Several Congressmen submitted the resolutions in the US Congress urging the President of United States to designate January 22 as «Ukrainian lndependence Day». January 22 was proclaimed Ukrainian Day by the governors of fifteen States and mayors of many cities. Keywords: January 22, Ukrainian independence day, Ukrainian diaspora, USA, interaction, Congress


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (TNEA) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Christian Bucio Pacheco ◽  
Luis Villanueva ◽  
Raúl de Jesús Gutiérrez

The objective of this work is to estimate the patterns of dependence between the yields of the stock prices of the main banks of the United States (US) and Mexico. We estimate the patterns of absolute dependence and tail dependence through copulas of the Archimedean family and the use of rolling windows of 245 days. The data employed come from the daily share prices at closing from January 2, 2015, to December 31, 2020, for seven banks. Our results show that: i) there are patterns of high dependence among the main banks in the US, ii) there are patterns of very low dependence among the main banks in the US and Mexico, and iii) there are patterns of low dependence among the main banks in Mexico. These results have several implications, among them that the high-dependency patterns obtained among major US banks limit the joint selection of these US bank equity assets in an investment portfolio. Although this paper focuses on a small sample of banks, they represent an important portion of the banking sector in both countries. Given the limited literature on this subject in Mexico, our paper contributes to expanding this literature with a novel approach.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Aikman ◽  
Jonathan Bridges ◽  
Anil Kashyap ◽  
Caspar Siegert

How well equipped are today’s macroprudential regimes to deal with a rerun of the factors that led to the global financial crisis? To address the factors that made the last crisis so severe, a macroprudential regulator would need to implement policies to tackle vulnerabilities from financial system leverage, fragile funding structures, and the build-up in household indebtedness. We specify and calibrate a package of policy interventions to address these vulnerabilities—policies that include implementing the countercyclical capital buffer, requiring that banks extend the maturity of their funding, and restricting mortgage lending at high loan-to-income multiples. We then assess how well placed are two prominent macroprudential regulators, set up since the crisis, to implement such a package. The US Financial Stability Oversight Council has not been designed to implement such measures and would therefore make little difference were we to experience a rerun of the factors that preceded the last crisis. A macroprudential regulator modeled on the UK’s Financial Policy Committee stands a better chance because it has many of the necessary powers. But it too would face challenges associated with spotting build-ups in risk with sufficient prescience, acting sufficiently aggressively, and maintaining political backing for its actions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (5) ◽  
pp. 1281-1303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Norrlöf

Abstract COVID-19 is the most invasive global crisis in the postwar era, jeopardizing all dimensions of human activity. By theorizing COVID-19 as a public bad, I shed light on one of the great debates of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries regarding the relationship between the United States and liberal international order (LIO). Conceptualizing the pandemic as a public bad, I analyze its consequences for US hegemony. Unlike other international public bads and many of the most important public goods that make up the LIO, the COVID-19 public bad not only has some degree of rivalry but can be made partially excludable, transforming it into more of a club good. Domestically, I demonstrate how the failure to effectively manage the COVID-19 public bad has compromised America's ability to secure the health of its citizens and the domestic economy, the very foundations for its international leadership. These failures jeopardize US provision of other global public goods. Internationally, I show how the US has already used the crisis strategically to reinforce its opposition to free international movement while abandoning the primary international institution tasked with fighting the public bad, the World Health Organization (WHO). While the only area where the United States has exercised leadership is in the monetary sphere, I argue this feat is more consequential for maintaining hegemony. However, even monetary hegemony could be at risk if the pandemic continues to be mismanaged.


Subject The transition away from LIBOR. Significance The London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) has been relied upon worldwide since 1970 for setting interest rates on syndicated loans, corporate debt, consumer loans, interest rate swaps and other derivatives. Following the 'LIBOR scandal' of 2008, the UK Financial Conduct Authority took over the regulation and administration of the rate, and no manipulation has emerged since 2013. Nevertheless, the United Kingdom and United States are determined to replace LIBOR. Impacts COVID-19 could prompt the US Fed to increase its support to the repo market, exacerbating fears that SOFR is not market determined. The scale and duration of COVID-19-related economic disruptions loom over banking sector profitability. Banks will struggle to balance immediate priorities triggered by COVID-19, and the need to devote staff and funds to the LIBOR transition.


2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Olsen ◽  
Arne L. Kalleberg

This article examines organizations’ use of non-standard work arrangements - fixed-term employees hired directly by the organization, workers from temporary help agencies (THA), and contractors - in the United States and Norway. Our analysis is based on information obtained from surveys of 802 establishments in the US and 2130 in Norway. We find that Norwegian establishments make greater use of non-standard arrangements than the US establishments; we argue that this is due in part to the greater overall restrictive labour market regulations on hiring and firing regular workers, and greater demand for temporary labour resulting from generous access to leaves of absence, in Norway. We also find that certain institutional factors have a similar impact in both countries. First, establishments in the public sector are more likely to use direct-hired temporary workers and less apt to use contractors and THAs; this pattern is particularly striking in Norway, but is also evident in the United States. Second, highly unionized establishments tend to have the lowest use of non-standard arrangements in both countries.


2021 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 931-986
Author(s):  
Michael H. Lubetsky

Subsection 220(3.1) of the Income Tax Act authorizes the minister of national revenue to waive or cancel interest on income tax debts. This power is typically exercised in four circumstances: where interest has accumulated owing to circumstances beyond a taxpayer's control; where the interest has accumulated owing to error or delay by the Canada Revenue Agency; where the accumulated interest causes hardship; or in the context of a voluntary disclosure. South of the border, section 6404 of the Internal Revenue Code authorizes the secretary of the Treasury to "abate" interest on tax debts. As a practical matter, discretionary interest relief under section 6404 is available only in very limited circumstances. The restrictive approach to discretionary interest relief is, however, offset by a greater array of interest-relieving provisions, as well as by the power of the secretary to "compromise" tax liabilities on various grounds, some of which overlap with grounds for interest relief recognized in Canada. This article compares the Canadian and US interest relief regimes, with a view to identifying aspects of the US regime that may merit further consideration in Canada. The differences in the US approach that are of particular interest include • a wider, and arguably more coherent, range of relieving provisions applicable to interest, particularly with regard to interest netting and carrybacks; • the jurisdiction of the United States Tax Court to review refusals to abate interest and/or to accept an offer in compromise; • dealing with situations of hardship and extraordinary circumstances under the aegis of the offer-in-compromise regime, which allows for consideration of the underlying tax liability in addition to the interest, and which also allows for relief to be made conditional on the taxpayer's future compliance with filing and payment obligations; • in certain older cases, a willingness to use interest relief to settle longstanding and complex tax disputes; and • the absence of statutory time limits on the power of the secretary to abate or compromise interest. The comparative study also reveals how Canada and the United States place different weight on policy rationales that underlie interest relief. Canada focuses mainly on ensuring that the consequences of non-compliance for individual taxpayers are fair and equitable. The United States, on the other hand, focuses more on rehabilitating non-compliant taxpayers in the long term, as well as ensuring that interest reflects fair compensation for such taxpayers' use of the public treasury's money—both of which could be given greater attention on this side of the border.


2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 312-326
Author(s):  
Nand L Dhameja ◽  
Shilpa Arora

Banks, a significant part of financial system of a country, are essential for its economic development. They have developed over the years and are faced with the challenges for the bright future. The article discusses development and future of banking sector in India in the light of the reforms over the years and is divided into four parts. The paper traces evolution and significance of banking, discusses reforms during pre-liberalisation and post-liberalisation as recommended by various Committees, namely, Narasimham Committees (1991 & 1998), Verma Committee (1996) and Khan Committee (1997) along with the structural and operational reforms. The performance challenges in terms of fee-based income, profitability, credit deposit ratio, business and profitability per employee are highlighted, comparing the public sector banks and private banks.


Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Caverley

In a period in which much conventional wisdom about American politics has been thrown into question two essential facts remain: the public popularity of the US military remains high relative to any other US institution and the level of partisan polarization continues to climb. Recent crises in US civil-military relations suggest it unlikely that both of these facts can continue to simultaneously be true. This essay therefore introduces the concept of affective polarization to the study of civil-military relations. When a population is affectively polarized, multiple social identities reinforce a disdain within a group for members outside of it. In the contemporary United States, these social identities have coalesced within political parties. While the US military may not be interested in affective polarization, affective polarization is definitely interested in the US military. This essay lays out how, as it continues to evolve into an exercise in fiscal rather than social mobilization, the US military may grow more prone, like most other national institutions, to being swallowed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document