| Abstract [eng] |
The thesis aims to examine the impact of the increase in capital requirements on credit growth. The work consists of three main parts: the first part provides an overview and analysis of credit development and capital requirements in Lithuania. The second part provides a scientific literature analysis and the research methodology. The third part provides an overview of the dynamics of variables, analyzes the correlations of variables, and verifies the research model. The last part presents the research results and conclusions. Research has shown that in order to ensure the sustainability of the financial system and reduce the risk of unsustainable credit, in 2015 the Bank of Lithuania introduced higher capital requirements for commercial banks. The aim of the introduction of the higher capital requirements was to ensure that the financial system has the necessary capital adequacy and resilience to systemic risks. In order to meet higher capital requirements, commercial banks could have: 1) increased the cost of lending; 2) increased the level of available capital (by raising new capital or refraining from paying dividends) 3) reduced risk-weighted assets. By reducing risk-weighted assets, banks could also change their lending structure and shift lending to the less risky lending sector. An analysis of the scientific literature has shown that increases in capital requirements generally have a negative impact on credit flows. Based on the analysis, macroeconomic variables and bank-level variables were included in the research model. The research model was constructed based on panel regression. Hypothesis H1 of the study stated that the increase in capital requirements should have a positive effect on housing credit flows. Hypothesis H2 stated that the growth of capital requirements should have a negative impact on the lending flow of business loans. Research on the H1 hypothesis has shown an opposite, statistically significant relationship, therefore the hypothesis was rejected. The H2 hypothesis proved to be valid but the established relationship was statistically insignificant.  . |
