Defunding controversial industries: Can targeted credit rationing choke firms?

This paper examines the effects of targeted credit rationing by banks on firms likely to generate negative externalities. We exploit an initiative of the U.S. Department of Justice, labeled Operation Choke Point, which compelled banks to limit relationships with firms in controversial industries. Using supervisory loan-level data, we show that, as intended, targeted banks reduced lending and terminated relationships with affected firms. However, most of these firms fully substituted credit through nontargeted banks under similar terms. Overall, we find no significant shifts in the performance and investment of affected firms, suggesting that targeted credit rationing is widely ineffective in promoting change.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Financial Economics
Published
2025-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2025.104133
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Banking stability, regulation, efficiency
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.62
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Defunding controversial industries: Can targeted credit rationing choke firms?

André F. Silva, Pablo Slutzky, Billy Xu, Kunal Sachdeva
3 citations
Journal of Financial Economics
Banking stability, regulation, efficiency
6.62
article

Defunding controversial industries: Can targeted credit rationing choke firms?

André F. Silva, Pablo Slutzky, Billy Xu, Kunal Sachdeva
article en
3 citations

Abstract

This paper examines the effects of targeted credit rationing by banks on firms likely to generate negative externalities. We exploit an initiative of the U.S. Department of Justice, labeled Operation Choke Point, which compelled banks to limit relationships with firms in controversial industries. Using supervisory loan-level data, we show that, as intended, targeted banks reduced lending and terminated relationships with affected firms. However, most of these firms fully substituted credit through nontargeted banks under similar terms. Overall, we find no significant shifts in the performance and investment of affected firms, suggesting that targeted credit rationing is widely ineffective in promoting change.

Journal of Financial EconomicsVol. 172
Federal Reserve (US), University of Michigan (US), Federal Reserve Board of Governors (US), Ross School (US), University of Rochester (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Banking stability, regulation, efficiency
6.62
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.

Defunding controversial industries: Can targeted credit rationing choke firms? — André F. Silva, Pablo Slutzky, et al. · Journal of Financial Economics (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS