<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Vitaly M. Bord | Macro Paper Warehouse</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/vitaly-m.-bord/</link><description>Vitaly M. Bord</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/vitaly-m.-bord/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Automated credit limit increases and consumer welfare</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/automated-credit-limit-increases-and-consumer-welfare/</link><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/automated-credit-limit-increases-and-consumer-welfare/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Research Question.&lt;/strong&gt; Should regulators restrict banks from proactively raising credit card limits using machine-learning algorithms, and if so, how? The paper asks: to what extent are bank-initiated credit limit increases directed toward revolving borrowers (those who carry interest-accruing balances month-to-month), and what are the welfare consequences of policies that constrain such increases?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Data.&lt;/strong&gt; The empirical analysis uses the Federal Reserve&amp;rsquo;s Capital Assessments and Stress Testing (Y-14M) regulatory data, January 2014 to December 2024, covering monthly account-level records for all credit cards issued by large stress-tested banks (assets &amp;gt; $100B). The 26 banks in the sample collectively represent more than 70% of U.S. credit card balances. A 0.5% sample yields more than 150 million observations across more than 3.6 million unique active credit cards. A key advantage of Y-14 over credit bureau data is that it identifies whether each limit change was bank-initiated or consumer-initiated — a distinction not available in other datasets.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>