Review of The Case Study: The Savings and Loan Crisis

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 3

Review of the Case Study: The Savings and Loan Crisis

Introduction

Creation of Savings and Loan (S&Ls) industries started in 1932. The industry aimed to help

the working class in the US to acquire a self-owned home. In 1980s, the industries suffered

series of crisis due to the over-regulation and deregulation by the regulators. A new

regulatory body was later created to fix the mess which closed many S&Ls.

Role players from the inception to the demise of the Savings and Loan Market

The direct and indirect role players from the inception to the demise of the Savings and Loan

Market were:

1. The Federal Home Loan Bank Board which was the creator of Savings and Loan

industries in 1932.

2. The Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) which was responsible for

insuring the Savings and Loan Industries created in 1934. The FSLIC insured 4,000

Savings and Loans industries with $604 billion within the period of her creation to 1980.

3. State Sponsored Insurance Programs through FSLIC insured 590 Savings and Loans

Industries with $12.2 billion assets.

4. The Federal Reserve with responsibility of managing inflation.

5. The Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) was founded in late 1980s to restore the lost

glory of the Savings and Loan Industries.

Shortfalls of the regulation which affected the Savings and Loan Market

1. Deregulation by The Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC): Greater

concentration of Savings and Loan Industries due to deregulation by the FSLIC which

insured too many Savings and Loan Industries; 4,000 S&Ls directly and 590 S&Ls
indirectly through State-sponsored insurance programs led to high inflation which was a

major S&Ls crisis.

2. Increment of Interest rate by The Federal Reserve: Increasing the interest rate by the

Federal Reserve with the aim to end double-digit inflation created an unfavourable

interest return for the savers which prompted them to withdraw their savings from S&L

industries and invests in banks with favourable interest returns. The regulation was over-

regulation and a major shortfall which caused another major S&Ls crisis.

3. Elimination of the interest rate cap: The Garn-St.Germain Depository Institutions Act

signed by President Reagan was a deregulatory law which allowed the Savings and Loan

industries to make use of the federally-insured deposits to make highly risky loan. The

loose regulatory response led to vital financial problems for many Savings and Loan

industries.

Level of regulation of the Garn-St.Germain Depository Institutions Act

 Domestic

The Garn-St.Germain Depository Institutions Act applied to a specific country, US.

Hence, it was at the Domestic level of regulation.

 Governmental

Implementation of the Garn-St.Germain Depository Institutions Act was made by the

President Reagan of the US which makes it to be at the Governmental level.

 Industry-specific

The regulation was to address a specific issue (interest rate) within a particular sector

(Savings and Loan Industries). Therefore, the regulation was at industry-specific level.

 Direct

The Garn-St.Germain Depository Institutions Act was a regulation directed to a particular


industry (Savings and Loan) with the aim of reviving the industry from crisis. Hence, it

was at the direct level of regulation.

Conclusion

Over-regulation and deregulation can cause a major crisis in any financial industry as it did to

the Savings and Loan Industries in the 1980s. it is therefore a necessity for regulators to

strike a balance between stringently and loosely regulations and ensure constant and

continuous modification.

Sources

Kenneth J., Savings and Loan Crisis, www.federalreservehistory.org

“The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography,” FDIC.gov

“The Savings and Loan Crisis and its Relationship in Banking,” FDIC.gov

You might also like