Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/emerald-publishing/impact-of-regulatory-changes-on-government-bond-market-liquidity-k0ZfQCuaft
References (10)
-
W. Dudley (2016)
Market and funding liquidity: an overview, remarks at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta 2016 Financial Markets Conference, Fernandina Beach, Florida, May 2016 -
S. Fischer (2016)
Is There a Liquidity Problem Post-Crisis? : a speech at "Do We Have a Liquidity Problem Post-Crisis?", a conference sponsored by the Initiative on Business and Public Policy at the Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., November 15, 2016 -
H. Blommestein, J. Santiso (2007)
New Strategies for Emerging Domestic Sovereign Bond Markets in the Global Financial LandscapeGlobal Economy Journal, 7
-
H. Blommestein, F. Kalkan (2008)
Sovereign asset and liability management – Practical steps towards integrated risk management, 2008
-
Market and funding liquidity: an overview
-
Negative rates + QE = Less liquidity in government bond markets
-
Resilience of market liquidity
-
Is there a liquidity problem post-crisis?, Remarks by the Vice Chairman, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, ‘Do we have a liquidity problem post-crisis?’
-
Why the leverage ratio distorts market-making
Risk-Net, 3
-
Is the micro portfolio approach to government debt management still appropriate?
- Publisher
- Emerald Publishing
- Copyright
- Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
- ISSN
- 1358-1988
- DOI
- 10.1108/JFRC-01-2017-0001
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to assess the seriousness of the impact of new regulatory factors on liquidity in government bond markets since the onset of the global financial crisis.Design/methodology/approachQuestionnaires were circulated for examining the adverse impact of regulatory changes on liquidity. New evidence was presented about the adverse impact of the process of regulatory changes on market liquidity.FindingsThe paper presents new survey results on the adverse liquidity impact of regulations on market liquidity. Responses show that government issuers differ in their assessment on the severity of the impact of the various regulations. Determining this longer-term impact is quite complex because measures of liquidity may not only reflect the impact of regulatory changes, but also the responses by policymakers and market participants (to these regulatory changes), covering in particular the following: market transparency, trading practices, market infrastructure and other policies to promote liquidity, including by reducing unconventional monetary policy measures. Also, market dynamics may have become more complex due to responses by market participants.Practical implicationsDebt managers need to take into account regulations with a significant adverse influence on both market liquidity and the price discovery process. As liquidity in government bond markets also has a direct impact on funding possibilities and financing costs, funding liquidity may also be affected, especially during periods with market stress. This means that the funding strategy may need to be adapted.Originality/valueThe paper presents new survey results on the impact of new regulations on market liquidity. This assessment is quite complex because measures of longer-term liquidity may reflect the impact of regulatory changes and the responses by policymakers and market participants to these changes.
Journal
Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jul 10, 2017