Impact of Government Bailout on Banks’ Cost of Equity: Additional Evidence from the Financial Bailout of 2008–2009

The Capital Purchase Program (CPP) was the first and most significant program under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) during 2008–2009 financial crisis. This study evaluates the effect of the CPP during this period on the cost of equity of 170 publicly listed banks in the United States that received funding. To control for the potential effects of endogeneity on our results, we use a propensity score matched sample of non-CPP banks. Using this approach, we document robust evidence that the liquidity provided by the government bailout reduced the cost of equity for recipient banks, especially for those banks that repaid their bailout funds in full. This decrease in the cost of equity is particularly significant for banks with high market-to-book ratios, low concentrations of institutional ownership, and those banks with at least one large blockholder. Our findings have important implications for the assessment of government bailout programs and the future regulation of financial institutions.

Book Reviews

Anjan V. Thakor of Washington University in St. Louis reviews “TARP and Other Bank Bailouts and Bail-Ins around the World: Connecting Wall Street, Main Street, and the Financial System,” by Allen N. Berger and Raluca A. Roman. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Analyzes theoretical and empirical research evidence on the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in the United States and other bank bailouts and bail-ins in the US and around the world, assessing the important costs and benefits of these programs in order to suggest potential policy implications for the future.”

The politics of bailouts: Estimating the causal effects of political connections on corporate bailouts during the 2008–2009 US financial crisis

In 2008, as the financial crisis unfolded in the United States, the banking industry elevated its lobbying and campaign spending activities. By the end of 2008, and during 2009, the biggest political spenders, on average, received the largest bailout packages. Is that relationship causal? In this paper, I examine the effect of political connections on the allocation of funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to the US financial services industry during the 2008–2009 financial crisis. I find that TARP recipients that lobbied the government, donated to political campaigns, or whose top executives had direct connections to politics received better bailout deals. I estimate regression discontinuity design and instrumental variable models to uncover how election outcomes for politicians in close races affected the distribution of bailout funds for connected firms. The results do not imply that some banks were deliberately favored over others, just that favored banks benefited because of their proximity to the right people in power. If being politically connected matters in general, in times of crisis it matters even more.

The Virtues of Economic Rescue Legislation: Distributive Justice, Civil Law, and the Troubled Asset Relief Program

This study constitutes an ethical analysis through the lens of distributive justice in the case of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), which was enacted in the midst of the Great Recession of 2007–2009. It begins by engaging with the visions of justice constructed by John Rawls and Robert Nozick, using their insights to locate the injustices of TARP according to their moral imaginations. However, this study argues that Rawls’ and Nozick’s theories of justice primarily envision the nature of law as being restrictive of vice, not as instructors of virtue. Thus, it resources the legal philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas to demonstrate how the positive pedagogy of law can enable a more just construction of economic rescue legislation, one that not only prevents future repetitions of economic vices and injustice, but is also formative for a society that prizes economic justice and virtues. In doing so, the study proposes two criteria for a more just consideration of economic rescue legislation that embraces law’s positive pedagogy.

Bailouts Without End

The Fed’s rescue of Bear Stearns and the Treasury Department’s nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2008 provoked widespread criticism. Consequently, the Fed and Treasury were very reluctant to approve further bailouts, and they allowed Lehman Brothers to fail in September 2008. Lehman’s collapse triggered a global panic and a meltdown of financial markets around the world. The Fed and Treasury quickly arranged a bailout of AIG, and Congress approved a $700 billion financial rescue bill. Treasury established the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which injected capital into large universal banks, while the Fed provided trillions of dollars of emergency loans and the FDIC established new guarantee programs for bank debts and deposits. In February 2009, federal regulators pledged to provide any further capital that the nineteen largest U.S. banks needed to survive, thereby cementing the “too big to fail” status of U.S. megabanks. The U.K. and other European nations arranged similar bailouts for their universal banks. Meanwhile, thousands of small banks and small businesses failed, millions of people lost their jobs, and millions of families lost their homes during the Great Recession.

Discussion of Troubled Asset Relief Program and earnings informativeness

PurposeVega et al. (2020) find that incentives in executive compensation result in higher earnings informativeness. The discussion focuses on two areas for improvement. First, the authors could look into additional measures of earnings quality. This further analysis could help us understand whether the enhanced earning informativeness stems from capital market effects or real effects. Second, the authors could consider replacing their main earnings response coefficient (ERC) model with one of the alternative ERC models in the literature. Three different ERC models are discussed.Design/methodology/approachThis paper discusses capital market effects versus real effects and illustrates different ERC models.FindingsThe discussed paper could differentiate between capital market effects and real effects and use an alternative ERC model.Originality/valueAn accounting audience could be interested in the discussion on capital market effects versus real effects and the illustration on various ERC models.

Troubled Asset Relief Program and earnings informativeness

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine restrictions placed by the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) on executive compensation during the financial crisis. Since it remains unclear if TARP restored public confidence in financial institutions, the authors also analyze what effect such regulations had on investors’ confidence in the information provided by earning with respect to executive compensation during this critical period. Design/methodology/approach To test the assertions, the authors employ an Earnings Response Coefficient model, which captures the association between firms’ earnings surprise (ES) and perceived earnings informativeness. The authors implement both a long- and short-window test to obtain a better understanding of the effects of TARP on financial institutions’ earnings informativeness. The authors use the long-window approach to gather evidence about whether and how financial institutions’ ES are absorbed into security prices conditional on both their participation in TARP and their compliance with TARP’s compensation restrictions. The authors attempt to establish a stronger causal link by also using a short-window approach. Findings The authors find that firms paying their CEOs above the TARP threshold show higher earnings informativeness. Financial institutions that paid their CEOs above the TARP threshold achieved better performance during their participation in TARP. The authors also find that a decrease in total compensation while participating in TARP is associated with improved earnings informativeness. Lastly, separating total compensation into its cash and stock-based components, the authors find that firms improve earnings informativeness when they increase (decrease) cash (performance) compensation during TARP. However, overall earnings informativeness decreases during and after TARP relative to the pre-TARP period. Practical implications The research suggests that executive compensation incentives affect earnings informativeness and that tradeoffs are made between direct and indirect costs in retaining executives. The results have implications for policy makers, investors and researchers because the results allow policy makers and regulators to improve on how they design and implement accounting, market and finance regulations and reforms. Investors may potentially use the results when evaluating firm experiencing financial and, in some case, political distress. It also helps firms and offering optimal compensation contracts to create proper incentives for executives and ensure that managerial actions result in successful firm performance. Social implications The study shows how firms react to changing regulations that affect executive compensation and earning informativeness. The results of the study allow regulators to potentially design more effective regulations by targeting certain aspects of firms’ operation such excessive risk-taking behavior and rent extraction opportunities. Originality/value There are very few studies that deal with how firms react to regulation that affect executive compensation. The authors provide evidence regarding what effect TARP and its compensation restrictions had on financial institutions’ earnings informativeness. The evidence in the study will further regulators’ understanding of whether TARP improved investors’ confidence in financial institutions. The paper also contributes to the understanding in how changes in executive compensation in times of high political scrutiny affect investors’ perceptions of firm performance.

Corporate social responsibility and financial stability: evidence from the Troubled Asset Relief Program

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to test the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the banking industry using Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) as an experimental backdrop. Design/methodology/approach The authors match banks that received TARP with CSR data on publicly available firms. Using this data set, the authors are able to perform both univariate and multivariate analyses to determine the impact of CSR on bank management behavior. Findings The authors find evidence that supports stakeholder theory as applied to a sample of large financial institutions. The authors show that banks increased their CSR involvement and intensity following TARP, evidence that CSR is not merely transitory in nature but structural and an important aspect of firm value. The authors also find that capital ratios increase to a greater degree in banks whose CSR ratings were stronger prior to TARP. Finally, while all banks in the sample repaid Treasury, it took strong CSR banks a longer time to repay than banks with weaker CSR. The authors show how CEO compensation played a role in this relationship. Research limitations/implications The findings are limited to large banks. Practical implications Practically speaking, this study helps to discern the motivations and actions of large financial institutions. This is especially important from a regulator perspective, whose function is to maintain overall national financial stability. Originality/value This is the first study to link TARP and CSR literatures. Overall, there are a limited number of studies on CSR in the banking industry, and this paper adds to this burgeoning area. It is important and valuable to managers and policymakers to understand implications of CSR in the financial sector.

Changing Attitudes toward Executive Perquisites: Indications from TARP

This paper examines what happened to Chief Executive Officer (CEO) monetary and nonmonetary compensation at Standard & Poors (S&P) 500 firms in the years surrounding the 2008 financial crisis and in the context of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) legislation. We use novel data on executive perks at S&P 500 firms from 2006 to 2012. Overall, the results are consistent with lasting impact on nonmonetary compensation and temporary impact on monetary compensation.

Bank Capital and Lending: Evidence from Syndicated Loans

Using within-loan estimations to remove the impact of demand-side factors, we find that the capital levels of banks participating in the same syndicated loan are positively associated with the banks’ contributions to the loan. Consistent with the argument that higher capital reduces the cost of uninsured debt, the positive effect of bank capital on lending is stronger among banks that rely more on wholesale funding. Furthermore, we find that banks increase their contributions to syndicated loans after receiving Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funding. Taken together, we provide new evidence on the importance and causal effect of bank capital on lending.