Discussion of real effects of lagged guidance from prudential regulators on CECL

• 成果类型: Article
• 署名作者: Ryan, Stephen G.
• 署名单位: New York University
• 刊物名称: JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING & ECONOMICS
• ISSN/ISSBN: 0165-4101; 1879-1980
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2025.101807
• 发表日期: 2025
• 页码: 101807
• 关键词: CECL; ASU 2016-13; accounting standards; banks; capital regulation; Real effects; financial constraints

摘要

Basu, Roychowdhury, and Sinha (BRS, this issue) examine effects of U.S. bank regulators' provision of guidance regarding the incorporation of the current expected credit loss (CECL) approach in capital regulation two and a half years after the issuance of ASU 2016-13. BRS argue and provide evidence that, for CECL-adopting banks and their borrowers in syndicated corporate loans, this lagged provision of guidance adversely affected (1) the amounts and interest rates for more affected term loan As (TLAs) typically held by originating banks compared to less affected term loan Bs (TLBs) typically sold to institutional lenders; and (2) investments by TLA-dependent borrowers compared to other borrowers. In this discussion, I highlight BRS's importance and attractive research-design features, making a few criticisms and suggestions. I discuss the lack of alternatives to the provision of lagged guidance and the limited generalizability of the study's setting, approach, and results beyond banks and ASU 2016-13.