雙語閱讀｜薅央行羊毛的「創新銀行」讓美聯儲很尷尬

聲音資源載入中...

TEN years on from the financial crisis, the structure of American banking has not changed. At its core are government-guaranteed, and therefore cheap, deposits that banks put to work, primarily through lending. Deposits have become more important for bank funding in recent years; governments have become increasingly fussy about how the money is lent out. The basic set-up is so entrenched that many believe there is no alternative.

金融危機爆發十年來，美國銀行業的結構紋絲不動。這根本在於，銀行賴以用於做貸款的存款有美國政府擔保，成本低廉。近年來，存款在銀行融資中變得越來越重要;各國政府對發放貸款越來越挑剔。這種基本架構根深蒂固，讓許多人都認為別無選擇。

A startup called TNB, short for The Narrow Bank, is questioning that assumption, and causing a stir as a result. On August 31st TNB filed a complaint in federal court against the New York Fed, which, it alleges, is breaking the law by refusing to grant it access to the central bank』s payment system. The Fed has made no comment, but in response to growing pressure, it has acknowledged the complaint.

創業企業TNB(TNB是「The Narrow Bank」的縮寫)對這種構想提出質疑，引發轟動。8月31日，TNB向聯邦法院起訴紐約聯邦儲備銀行，稱後者拒絕其接入中央銀行支付系統的行為是違法的。美聯儲對此保持沉默，但面對日益增長的壓力，承認了這一指控。

The case throws light on an unusual business model. Led by a former head of research at the New York Fed, TNB is based on the idea of a narrow bank, which was first suggested by professors at the University of Chicago as a response to the banking crisis of the 1930s. The proponents of the 「Chicago plan」 argued that deposits and lending need not be linked. A bank could have a narrow mandate, restricting itself to merely receiving deposits.

此案揭示了一種不同尋常的商業模式。由紐約聯邦儲備銀行(New York Fed)前研究主管領導的TNB是基於狹義銀行的理念——這一理念最初是由芝加哥大學(University of Chicago)的教授提出的，以應對上世紀30年代的銀行業危機。「芝加哥計劃」的支持者認為，存款和貸款不需要聯繫在一起。一家銀行的許可權可能很窄，只能接受存款。

The court filing suggests that TNB planned to do just that, taking deposits from financial institutions (though not from consumers) and redepositing them at the Fed in order to take advantage of the Fed』s interest rate on reserves, which is 1.95%. There would be no need for branches or credit analysts. Compliance costs would be minimal: as the bank would not make loans, regulators would need only an audit to show the bank』s funds on account at the Fed covered its clients』 deposits. To keep costs lower still, TNB intends to avoid having deposit insurance, which can cost up to 0.4% of assets. As the money is invested with the central bank, it is already guaranteed by the government.

法庭文件顯示，TNB計劃從金融機構(而不是消費者)吸收存款，再存入美聯儲，利用美聯儲1.95%的準備金利率。這種方式不再需要分支機構或信貸分析師。這樣一來，稅務執行費用將達到最低：由於該行不會發放貸款，監管機構只需進行一次審計，就能顯示該行在美聯儲賬戶上足以支付其客戶存款的資金。為了讓成本降低，TNB打算不要存款保險，理由是存款保險的成本可能高達資產的0.4%。資金是隨中央銀行來投資的，這就得到了政府的擔保。

Most American banks pay measly rates of interest of under 0.1%, according to Bankrate.com, a data provider. With its austere model, TNB could plausibly provide a competitive rate on deposits, while keeping some of the spread between the Fed rate and the interest it pays to customers. The operating model is not without risks. The Fed could cease paying interest to banks, for example, a demand that both America』s political parties have made at times. But TNB, or a similarly minded institution, could tweak the model in response and invest its deposits in government securities instead.

數據提供商Bankrate.com的數據顯示，大多數美國銀行支付的利率都不到0.1%。憑藉這種簡單的模式，TNB可以合理地為存款提供一個有競爭力的利率，同時保留部分美聯儲利率與其支付給客戶的利息之間的利差。不過，這種運營模式並非沒有風險。例如，美聯儲可能停止向銀行支付利息，這是美國兩黨不時提出的要求。但是，TNB或者類似的一家機構可以通過調整業務模型來應對，將存款投資於政府債券。

The Fed』s silence has drawn criticism. TNB has received a temporary banking charter from Connecticut, so the state regulator clearly deems it to be legal. The central bank may worry that narrow banks, which lend to neither companies nor individuals, could hamper the effectiveness of monetary policy. Their business model may also risk unsettling incumbent banks, which could have large economic consequences. TNB』s suit says that the Fed』s actions 「have the effect of discriminating against small, innovative companies」 and 「privileging established, too-big-to-fail institutions」. The Fed may eventually be forced to explain why that is a virtue.

美聯儲的沉默招致不滿。TNB在康涅狄格州獲得了臨時銀行執照，因此該州監管機構明確認為這是合法的。美聯儲可能擔心，既不向公司也不向個人放貸的狹義銀行可能會妨礙貨幣政策的有效性。狹義銀行的商業模式也可能會讓現有的銀行感到不安，這可能會造成嚴重的經濟後果。TNB在訴訟中表示，美聯儲的行動是在「歧視小型創新企業」，並「給予老牌、大而不倒的金融機構特權」。美聯儲最終可能被迫對此作出解釋。

編譯：閆雪芹

編輯：翻吧君

來源：經濟學人（2018.09.20）

閱讀·經濟學人

美國科技巨頭划出「零存活區」創業企業無處可逃

YouTube 除了廣告，不知道怎麼賺錢

土耳其金融業比經濟表現更強

打官司也能融資並獲利，美國訴訟文化資本化

廢塑料回收利用 道路智能可期

印度航空企業「逆市」而下 全行業虧損

人民幣國際化影響正在慢慢顯現

翻吧·與你一起學翻譯