Does interest rate liberalization affect corporate debt structure?

Abstract This study examines how interest rate deregulation affects debt structure of Chinese listed firms through two quasi‐natural experiments: the cap removal (2002–2006) and floor removal (2011–2015). Following deregulation, risky firms increase short‐term debt while decreasing long‐term and total debt, whereas non‐risky firms exhibit opposite patterns. These changes are influenced by collateral requirements, industry cluster proximity, bank relationships, and ownership structure. The divergent outcomes reflect increased borrowing costs for risky firms and reduced costs for non‐risky firms due to enhanced banking competition. Post‐liberalization, risky firms face reduced risk exposure but increased asset‐liability mismatches, while experiencing declining growth prospects. Conversely, non‐risky firms demonstrate improved growth prospects and higher profitability with increased long‐term debt. These findings illuminate how banking sector liberalization shapes corporate financial strategies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Financial Research
Published
2024-12-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jfir.12449
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Credit Risk and Financial Regulations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.54

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does interest rate liberalization affect corporate debt structure?

Linghao Zhang, Kai Wu, Obaid Ur Rehman
1 citations
The Journal of Financial Research
Credit Risk and Financial Regulations
0.54
article

Does interest rate liberalization affect corporate debt structure?

Linghao Zhang, Kai Wu, Obaid Ur Rehman
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This study examines how interest rate deregulation affects debt structure of Chinese listed firms through two quasi‐natural experiments: the cap removal (2002–2006) and floor removal (2011–2015). Following deregulation, risky firms increase short‐term debt while decreasing long‐term and total debt, whereas non‐risky firms exhibit opposite patterns. These changes are influenced by collateral requirements, industry cluster proximity, bank relationships, and ownership structure. The divergent outcomes reflect increased borrowing costs for risky firms and reduced costs for non‐risky firms due to enhanced banking competition. Post‐liberalization, risky firms face reduced risk exposure but increased asset‐liability mismatches, while experiencing declining growth prospects. Conversely, non‐risky firms demonstrate improved growth prospects and higher profitability with increased long‐term debt. These findings illuminate how banking sector liberalization shapes corporate financial strategies.

The Journal of Financial ResearchVol. 49(1)
Central University of Finance and Economics (CN), Tianjin University of Finance and Economics (CN), Nankai University (CN), Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Credit Risk and Financial Regulations
0.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Does interest rate liberalization affect corporate debt structure? — Linghao Zhang, Kai Wu, et al. · The Journal of Financial Research (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS