Systemic Usury and the European Consumer Credit Directive
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Systemic Usury and the European Consumer Credit Directive
Neuberger, Doris | Reifner, Udo
Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung, Vol. 89 (2020), Iss. 1 : pp. 115–132
4 Citations (CrossRef)
Additional Information
Article Details
Author Details
Doris Neuberger, University of Rostock, German Institute for Economic Research DIW Berlin
Udo Reifner, Institute for Financial Services iff Hamburg
- Prof. Dr. Udo Reifner (1948) studied sociology and law in Berlin and Marburg. He is founder and long term Director of the independent institute for financial services (iff reg. ass.). In 1981 he became a professor of commercial law and sociology of law at the Hamburg University of Economics and Politics which became the Department of Socio-Economics at Hamburg University. After his retirement he obtained a chair at Trento University law faculty in Italy. He was guest professor with a focus on financial consumer law at McGill University, Montreal (1986), Université de Louvain-la-Neuve (1990), De Paul University, Chicago (1994), Birmingham University (1997), New York University (Spring 2000). The International Association of Consumer Law awards a price to young scholars in his name. In 2017 he summarized his interdisciplinary research and more than 280 publications many of them in English in four volumes on “money” entitled (1) economics of money, (2) sociology of money, (3) law of money and (4) financial crisis. He recently cofounded the Coalition against Usury in Germany (www.stopwucher.de). He was president of the EU financial user committee and served from 2013 – 2018 as an expert in the advisory board to the German Financial Services Authorities (BAFIN). He is presently attorney at law and research director at iff.
- Search in Google Scholar
Cited By
-
Verbraucherkreditzinsen und Zinsobergrenzen bei steigendem Zinsniveau
Neuberger, Doris
Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung, Vol. 92 (2023), Iss. 3 P.75
https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.92.3.75 [Citations: 0] -
Kann guter Verbraucherschutz finanzielle Bildung ersetzen?
Peters, Sally | Roggemann, HanneVierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung, Vol. 90 (2021), Iss. 1 P.125
https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.90.1.125 [Citations: 0] -
Usury vulnerability: measuring and modelling the phenomenon in Italy
Stefanizzi, Sonia | Lysova, TatianaQuality & Quantity, Vol. 58 (2024), Iss. 4 P.3845
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-01841-w [Citations: 0] -
Verantwortliche Vergabe von Ratenkrediten durch Banken; Konzeption, Praxis und Potenziale
Größl, Ingrid | Peters, SallyVierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung, Vol. 88 (2019), Iss. 4 P.103
https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.88.4.103 [Citations: 2]
References
-
Ards, Sheila D., Inhyuck Steve Ha, Jose Luis Mazas, and Samuel L. Myers (2015): Bad Credit and Intergroup Differences in Loan Denial Rates. The Review of Black Political Economy, 42(1 – 2), 19 – 34.
Google Scholar -
ASB (2019): Over-indebtedness Report Austria 2019, ASB Schuldnerberatungen GmbH, Linz. https://www.schuldenberatung.at/downloads/fachpublikum/asbFactSheet_SR19_Overindebtedness-Report-Austria.pdf (retrieved: November 21, 2019).
Google Scholar -
ASCI-AFM (2019): Disclosure: Why it shouldn’t be the default, A joint report from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) (October 2019). https://download.asic.gov.au/media/5303322/rep632-published-14-october-2019.pdf (retrieved: November 21, 2019).
Google Scholar -
Avery, Robert B., and Katherine A. Samolyk (2011): Payday Loans versus Pawn Shops: The Effects of Loan Fee Limits on Household Use (September 9, 2011). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2634584 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2634584.
Google Scholar -
BaFin (2017): Ergebnisbericht zur Marktuntersuchung Restschuldversicherungen. Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, Berlin, 21. 06. 2017.
Google Scholar -
Baker, Justice David, and Mackenzie Breitenstein (2010): History repeats itself: Why interest rate caps pave the way for the return of the loan sharks. Banking Law Journal, 127, 581 – 603.
Google Scholar -
Banque de France (2014): Study of Paths Leading to Over-Indebtedness. Directorate General, Cash Management and Branch Network Activities Consumer Affairs, Research and Projects Department, Paris.
Google Scholar -
Bayer, Patrick, Fernando Ferreira, and Stephen L. Ross (2018): What Drives Racial and Ethnic Differences in High-Cost Mortgages? The Role of High-Risk Lenders. The Review of Financial Studies, 31(1), 175 – 205.
Google Scholar -
Becker, Gary S. (1957): The Economics of Discrimination, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Google Scholar -
Belleflamme, Paul, and Martin Peitz (2015): Industrial Organization – Markets and Strategies. 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Google Scholar -
Bentham, Jeremy (1787): Defense of usury; shewing the impolicy of the present legal restraints on the terms of pecuniary bargains. London: T. Payne and Son.
Google Scholar -
Bertrand, Marianne, and Adair Morse (2011): Information disclosure, cognitive biases, and payday borrowing. Journal of Finance, 66, 1865 – 1893.
Google Scholar -
Boot, Arnoud W. A. (2000): Relationship Banking: What Do We Know? Journal of Financial Intermediation, 9, 7 – 25.
Google Scholar -
Caplovitz, David (1963): The poor pay more: Consumer practices of low- income families. New York: Free Press.
Google Scholar -
Caskey, John P. (2010): Payday lending: New research and the big question. Working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
Google Scholar -
CCD (2008): Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC. Official Journal of the European Union, L 133/66, 22. 5. 2008.
Google Scholar -
Civic Consulting (2013): The over-indebtedness of European households: updated mapping of the situation, nature and causes, effects and initiatives for alleviating its impact – Part 1: Synthesis of findings, Berlin.
Google Scholar -
Coco, Giuseppe, and David de Meza (2009): In defense of usury laws. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 41, 1691 – 1703.
Google Scholar -
ECRC (2014): Principles of Responsible Credit. https://www.responsible-credit.net/index.php?id=2516 (retrieved: November 21, 2019).
Google Scholar -
Friedman, Milton (1957): The Permanent Income Hypothesis. A Theory of the Consumption Function. Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar -
Größl, Ingrid, and Sally Peters (2019): Verantwortliche Vergabe von Ratenkrediten durch Banken; Konzeption, Praxis und Potenziale, Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung/Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, 88(4), 103 – 114.
Google Scholar -
Hecker, Christian (2019): “Ex contingente necessarium …” (M. Luther) – Der ökonomische Kern moralphilosophischer Zinskritik. Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung/Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, 88(4), 23 – 38.
Google Scholar -
Kau, James B., Donald C. Keenan, and Henry J. Munneke (2012): Racial Discrimination and Mortgage Lending. Journal of Real Estate Financial Economics, 45, 289 – 304.
Google Scholar -
Labat, Alyssa, and Walter E. Block (2012): Money does not grow on trees: An argument for usury. Journal of Business Ethics, 106, 383 – 387.
Google Scholar -
Li, Mingliang, Kevin J. Mumford, and Justin L. Tobias (2012): A Bayesian analysis of payday loans and their regulation. Journal of Econometrics, 171(2), 205 – 216.
Google Scholar -
Lindley, James T., Edward B. Selby, and John D. Jackson (1984): Racial Discrimination in the Provision of Financial Services. The American Economic Review, 74 (4), 735 – 741.
Google Scholar -
Lombardi, Marco, Madhusudan Mohanty, and Ilhyock Shim (2017): The real effects of household debt in the short and long run. BIS Working Papers No. 607. Bank for International Settlements.
Google Scholar -
Mayer, Robert (2013): When and Why Usury Should be Prohibited. Journal of Business Ethics, 116, 513 – 527.
Google Scholar -
Melzer, Brian T. (2011): The real costs of credit access: Evidence from the payday lending market. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126, 517 – 555.
Google Scholar -
Mill, John Stuart (1891): Principles of Political Economy. London: Longmans, Greens and Co. People’s Edition.
Google Scholar -
Modigliani, Franco, and Richard H. Brumberg (1954): Utility analysis and the consumption function: an interpretation of cross-section data. In: Kenneth K. Kurihara, ed., Post-Keynesian Economics, New Brunswick, NJ. Rutgers University Press, 388 – 436.
Google Scholar -
Morse, Adair (2011): Payday lenders: Heroes or villains? Journal of Financial Economics, 102, 28 – 44.
Google Scholar -
OECD (2011): G20 High-level Principles on Financial Consumer Protection. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, October 2011.
Google Scholar -
Posner, Eric A. (1995): Contract law in the welfare state: A defense of the unconscionability doctrine, usury laws, and related limitations on the freedom to contract. Journal of Legal Studies, 24, 283 – 319.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo (2017a): Das Geld Band 2: Soziologie des Geldes – Heuristik und Mythos. Springer, Wiesbaden.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo (2017b): Die Finanzkrise – Für ein Wucher- und Glücksspielverbot. Springer, Wiesbaden.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo (2018): Responsible Credit in European Law. The Italian Law Journal, 4(2), 421 – 448.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo, Damon Gibbons, Doris Neuberger, and Christine Riefa (2019): Evaluation of Directive 2008/48/EU with regard to the spread of Usurious Credit in Europe. Paper mandated by the German Coalition against Usury in connection with the European Coalition for Responsible Credit (ECRC), Hamburg.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo, Elena Pérez-Carillo, Kai-Oliver Knops, Achim Tiffe, Sebastien Clerc-Renaud (2006): Analysis of the Economic Impact of Directive 2002/65/EC concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services on the conclusion of cross-border contracts for financial services between suppliers and consumers within the Internal Market Final Report. Institut für Finanzdienstleistungen to DG Sanco, Project No. SANCO/2006/B4/034.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo, and Michael Schroeder (2012): Usury Laws – A legal and economic Evaluation of Interest Rate Restrictions in the European Union. BoD: Norderstedt.
Google Scholar -
Reifner, Udo, Marcus Wüst, Leo Haida, and Carole Bonhomme (1998): Harmonisation of Cost Elements of the Annual Percentage Rate of Charge, APR. Project No.: AO-2600/97/000169, Hamburg, http://www.responsible-credit.net/media.php?t=media&f=file&id=2221 (retrieved: November 21, 2019).
Google Scholar -
Robb, Alicia, and David T. Robinson (2018): Testing for racial bias in business credit scores. Small Business Economics, 50, 429 – 443.
Google Scholar -
Schumann, Jochen, Ulrich Meyer, and Wolfgang Ströbele (2011): Grundzüge der mikroökonomischen Theorie. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Google Scholar -
Ulbricht, Dirk, Michael Feigl, Ulrike Freistedt, Sally Peters, and Gideon Schacht (2019): Faire Kreditvergabe. iff institut für finanzdienstleistungen, Hamburg.
Google Scholar -
Ulbricht, Dirk, and Sally Peters (2018): iff-Überschuldungsreport 2018. Überschuldung in Deutschland. iff institut für finanzdienstleistungen, Hamburg.
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper reviews the economic rationale for usury legislation and evaluates the European Consumer Credit Directive 2008/48/EC in this context. It identifies systemic usury as the product of market failure: the most powerful explanations for which are monopoly power, where the consumer is locked in a bilateral credit relationship; discrimination through risk-based pricing, and negative externalities. Contrary to the main focus of the European Consumer Credit Directive, improved disclosure of contract terms and other relevant information to consumers at the point of contracting cannot address systemic usury in credit markets. Even fully informed consumers can be discriminated against and become trapped in a situation of bilateral monopoly. As a consequence, the Directive is found to be ineffective: it implicitly acknowledges usurious practices and products as legal and undermines the national fight against usury. The Directive must be reformed.