The Socio-Economic Consequences of Implementing Usury Ceilings in the Republic of Armenia

Authors

  • Tigran Gabrielyan Yerevan State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:G/2022.13.2.032

Keywords:

loan, interest rate, interest rate cap, debt trap, loan organization, access to loans, usury ceiling

Abstract

Usury ceilings/interest rate caps are a tool commonly used by governments to protect consumers from abusive lending practices and to prevent extreme forms of borrower exploitation by loan providers. However, numerous studies indicate that this tool can often have the opposite effect – it can make it harder for financially vulnerable individuals to obtain loans, which they rely on for food, rent, and other essential needs. Consumer loans are widespread in Armenia and the organizations that provide these loans are often criticized for exploiting borrowers and charging excessive or unfair prices. For these reasons, a bill to implement interest rate caps was proposed in 2019 but was not approved by the parliament. However, considering the high risk of “debt traps” in Armenia, it is likely that the enactment of this bill will return to the agenda of policymakers in the future.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the consequences of a potential interest rate cap in Armenia and how it would affect the financial well-being of financially vulnerable individuals. Firstly, we find that interest rates, on average, are not high enough to be considered unfair or excessive taking into account the characteristics unique to “universal loan organizations” and using the interest rates of similar organizations in other countries as a guideline. Secondly, we find that the interest rate cap proposed in 2019 was lower than the market average for similar loans, which means that if this bill were to pass, access to these types of loans would significantly decline for financially vulnerable individuals, who use these loans to pay for essential needs. The study proposes that policymakers take the average market interest rate of consumer loans provided by these organizations into account and propose a usury ceiling relative to the market average. Furthermore, the use of alternative methods of consumer protection is encouraged.

Author Biography

Tigran Gabrielyan, Yerevan State University

PhD student

References

DeYoung, R., & Phillips, R. J. (January 01, 2013). Interest rate caps and implicit collusion: the case of payday lending. International Journal of Banking, Accounting and Finance, 5, 1,

Alter, A., Valckx, N., & Feng, A. X. (2018). Understanding the Macro-Financial Ef-fects of Household Debt: A Global Perspective,

Igan, D., Leigh, D., Simon, J., & Topalova, P. (January 01, 2013). Dealing with household debt. Financial Crises,

Maimbo, S. M., Henriquez, G. C. A., & World Bank Group. (2014). Interest rate caps around the world: Still popular, but a blunt instrument. Washington, D.C.: World Bank,

Fernando, Nimal. (2006). Understanding and dealing with high interest rates on microcredit: a note to policy makers in the Asia and Pacific Region. Manila: East Asia Dept., Asian Development Bank,

Ferrari, A., Masetti, O., & Ren, J. (2018). Interest Rate Caps: The Theory and the Practice. Washington, D.C: The World Bank,

Helms, B. and X. Reille. (2004). Interest Rate Ceilings and Microfinance: The Story so Far, Occasional Paper № 9, CGAP,

Vandenbrink, D. (1982). The effects of usury ceilings, Economic Perspectives, vol. 6, issue Midyear,

Nepal Rastra Bank, Banking and Financial Statistics,

PwC, SIDBI, Vision of Microfinance in India, 2019, էջ 6:

ՀՀ Կենտրոնական բանկ, ֆինանսական համակարգ և վերահսկողություն,

Asian Development Bank. Impact of Restrictions on Interest Rates in Microfinance. ADB Sustainable Development Working Paper Series, № 45, September 2016,

ՀՀ Կենտրոնական բանկ, Ֆինանսական կայունության հաշվետվություն, 2021 թ․,

ՀՀ Կենտրոնական բանկ, Ֆինանսական կայունության հաշվետվություն, 2018-2020 թթ․,

United States. (2013). Payday loans and deposit advance products: A white paper of initial data findings,

Peirce, Hester, and Benjamin Klutsey. 2016. Rethinking financial regulation: enhancing stability and protecting consumers. Mercatus Center, George Mason University,

Hardy, Daniel C., Paul Holden, and Vassili Prokopenko. 2002. Microfinance in-stitutions and public policy. [Washington, DC]: IMF․

Published

2022-10-17

How to Cite

Gabrielyan, T. (2022). The Socio-Economic Consequences of Implementing Usury Ceilings in the Republic of Armenia. Bulletin of Yerevan University G: Economics, 13(2 (38), 32–46. https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:G/2022.13.2.032

Issue

Section

Management