7 ms·

Only 1) the Basel framework of bank regulation which has been internationally adopted, and 2) explanations from the Bank of England (linked above) which categor

Only 1) the Basel framework of bank regulation which has been internationally adopted, and 2) explanations from the Bank of England (linked above) which categorically states that this is actually how banks work. The Deutsche Bundesbank has also published something to this effect, and the Governer if the Reserve Bank of Australia talked about it in a speech the other day [1]. 1. https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2018/sp-ag-2018-09-19.html https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2018/sp-ag-2018-09-19.html

cm2187 8y ago
I don’t want to get into some ad hominem attacks but I don’t think Basel 3 says that. Anyway, this is simple arithmetic, Lloyds could not have such a large loan book if it wasn’t funded by deposits. There are simply just not enough wholesale funding and capital liabilities. And the liquidity requirements are only a fraction of the deposits, particularly for retail deposits which are assumed to be sticky.
- stephen_g 8y ago
  It absolutely does say that. The whole of part 1, "Minimum capital requirements and buffers" is 100% based on capital, and deposits don't factor in to any of the definitions of Tier 1 capital. The leverage ratios also factor entirely from capital that doesn't include deposits.
  - cm2187 8y ago
    100% is the conversion of a loan balance to leverage exposure. The capital requirements vary between banks and regulator, but they are typicaly 3-5% of the leverage exposure. A leverage ratio requirement of 100% would make lending uneconomical. To achieve a return on equity of 10%+, you would have to charge over 10% on your loans.
- cuboidGoat 8y ago
  My understanding is that deposits are really just a manifestation of a promise that a trusted party holds, so that the party making the deposit can make more promises to other parties. So, in banking a promise is often just as valid as holding a deposit. They aren't really lending you value, they are lending you verification of value.
  - cm2187 8y ago
    They are unsecured liabilities. But like all liabilities the bank received an asset when it issued it (cash or else), and like all liabilities the bank must have sufficient assets to pay it back on demand. The bank may not have the necessary liquidity to pay back all deposits at once (some of these assets are 30y mortgages) but it has an asset (otherwise is not solvant).

cm2187 8y ago

I don’t want to get into some ad hominem attacks but I don’t think Basel 3 says that. Anyway, this is simple arithmetic, Lloyds could not have such a large loan book if it wasn’t funded by deposits. There are simply just not enough wholesale funding and capital liabilities. And the liquidity requirements are only a fraction of the deposits, particularly for retail deposits which are assumed to be sticky.

stephen_g 8y ago
It absolutely does say that. The whole of part 1, "Minimum capital requirements and buffers" is 100% based on capital, and deposits don't factor in to any of the definitions of Tier 1 capital. The leverage ratios also factor entirely from capital that doesn't include deposits.
- cm2187 8y ago
  100% is the conversion of a loan balance to leverage exposure. The capital requirements vary between banks and regulator, but they are typicaly 3-5% of the leverage exposure. A leverage ratio requirement of 100% would make lending uneconomical. To achieve a return on equity of 10%+, you would have to charge over 10% on your loans.
cuboidGoat 8y ago
My understanding is that deposits are really just a manifestation of a promise that a trusted party holds, so that the party making the deposit can make more promises to other parties. So, in banking a promise is often just as valid as holding a deposit. They aren't really lending you value, they are lending you verification of value.
- cm2187 8y ago
  They are unsecured liabilities. But like all liabilities the bank received an asset when it issued it (cash or else), and like all liabilities the bank must have sufficient assets to pay it back on demand. The bank may not have the necessary liquidity to pay back all deposits at once (some of these assets are 30y mortgages) but it has an asset (otherwise is not solvant).