Final published version, 552 KB, PDF document
Research output: Working paper
Research output: Working paper
}
TY - UNPB
T1 - Bank Ownership and Margins of Trade
T2 - Evidence from a Firm-Bank Matched Dataset
AU - Chakraborty, Pavel
PY - 2019/11/30
Y1 - 2019/11/30
N2 - Does a bank's ownership matter for a firm's performance (to which it is connected)? Especially, in the event of a crisis? I study this question through the effect of 2008-09 crisis to provide evidence on a new channel which matters significantly for a firm's export performance - bank ownership. In particular, I find: (a) firms connected to private and/or foreign banks earn around 7.7- 39% less in terms of their export earnings during the crisis as compared to firms' having banking relationships with public-sector banks. This happened as the public-sector banks were differentially treated by the Central Bank of India during the crisis due to a clause in the Indian Banking Act of 1969; (b) effect is concentrated only on the intensive margin of trade; (c) drop in exports is driven by firms' client to big domestic-private banks and banks of US origin; (d) firmsnot connected to public-sector banks also laid-o¤ workers (both managers and non-managers), employed less capital and imported less raw materials. In addition, I also find that firms with lower average product of capital (than the median) received about 50% more loans from the public-sector sources, suggesting a significant reinforcement of inefficiency in the Indian economydue to misallocation of credit.
AB - Does a bank's ownership matter for a firm's performance (to which it is connected)? Especially, in the event of a crisis? I study this question through the effect of 2008-09 crisis to provide evidence on a new channel which matters significantly for a firm's export performance - bank ownership. In particular, I find: (a) firms connected to private and/or foreign banks earn around 7.7- 39% less in terms of their export earnings during the crisis as compared to firms' having banking relationships with public-sector banks. This happened as the public-sector banks were differentially treated by the Central Bank of India during the crisis due to a clause in the Indian Banking Act of 1969; (b) effect is concentrated only on the intensive margin of trade; (c) drop in exports is driven by firms' client to big domestic-private banks and banks of US origin; (d) firmsnot connected to public-sector banks also laid-o¤ workers (both managers and non-managers), employed less capital and imported less raw materials. In addition, I also find that firms with lower average product of capital (than the median) received about 50% more loans from the public-sector sources, suggesting a significant reinforcement of inefficiency in the Indian economydue to misallocation of credit.
KW - Bank Ownership
KW - 2008-09 Financial Crisis
KW - Public-sector Banks
KW - Private and/or Foreign Banks
KW - Exports
M3 - Working paper
T3 - Economics Working Papers Series
BT - Bank Ownership and Margins of Trade
PB - Lancaster University, Department of Economics
CY - Lancaster
ER -