Abstract
This paper analyzes a government's incentives to provide financial assistance to a public bank which is hit by a liquidity shock. We show that discretionary decisions about emergency liquidity assistance result in either excessively small or excessively large liquidity injections in a wide variety of circumstances. Also, adding a lender of last resort does not generally ensure a socially optimal policy. However, optimal rules exist that align the preferences of the government and/or a lender of last resort with social preferences by either subsidizing or taxing liquidity aid.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 193-204 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | European Journal of Political Economy |
| Volume | 32 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2013 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Emergency liquidity provision to public banks: rules versus discretion'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver