Post-Resolution Treatment of Depositors at Failed Banks: Implications for the Severity of Banking Crises, Systemic Risk and Too-Big-To-Fail
Bank failures are widely viewed in all countries as more damaging to the economy than
the failure of other firms of similar size for a number of reasons. The failures may produce losses
to depositors and other creditors, break longstanding bank-customers loan relationships, disrupt
the payments system and spill over in domino fashion to other banks, financial institutions and
markets, and even to the macroeconomy (Kaufman, 1996). Thus, bank failures are viewed as
potentially more likely to involve contagion or systemic risk than the collapse of other firms.
The risk of such actual or perceived damage is often a popular justification for explicit or
implicit government-provided or sponsored safety nets under banks, including explicit deposit
insurance and implicit government guarantees, such as "too-big-to-fail" (TBTF), that may protect
de jure uninsured depositors and possibly other bank stakeholders against some or all of the
loss.