The common justification, in financial theory, for the existence of debt covenants is their use as contractual devices that reduce agency problems between borrowers and lenders. The thesis first examines the extent to which debt covenants alleviate these agency problems, and how they affect a borrower's debt financing decisions. Then, building on recent theories on the costs of bank financing, the dissertation suggests a new economic rationale for debt covenants as instruments that can reduce these costs. The thesis consists of three essays: / The first essay shows that, debt covenants create underinvestment incentives while reducing the overinvestment cost of debt It also finds that the borrower's choice between different contracts with, and without covenants, depends on the magnitude of the agency problems, and the quality of the lender's monitoring technology. / The second essay shows how debt covenants reduce the costs of banks information monopoly. In fact, contingent contracting with debt covenants can be used by banks to precommit against using their informational advantage to hold up borrowers and extract rents, thus giving borrowers incentives to exert greater effort. / The third essay shows that the renegotiation that debt covenants permit, can reduce liquidity risk defined as the risk that a solvent but illiquid borrower is unable to obtain refinancing. It also shows that a debt contract with covenants is similar to a mix of debt contracts with different maturities. / The thesis concludes with a review of the determinants of corporate debt maturity structure, and the literature on corporate reliance on bank financing and suggests future research in this area.

No description available.

The problem of credit rationing/borrowing constraint has recently received considerable attention. Individuals who are denied any credit by a financial institution, or who find it difficult to borrow against future incomes, are said to be credit rationed or borrowing constrained in the credit markets. This dissertation tries to identify the circumstances under which individuals may be rationed (or not), and analyses the actions undertaken to overcome future constraints. Chapter 2 analyses the problem of credit rationing as it arises in equilibrium, when borrowers differ with respect to their demands for loans. It is shown that if the principal can costlessly observe the agent’s type, then (i) the agents who meet the collateral requirements are not rationed in the sense of Stiglitz-Weiss (1981), (ii) the agents who do not meet the collateral requirements are rationed in the sense of Jaffee-Russell (1976). We further show that if the principal cannot distinguish between different agents, then the previous rationing results still hold in the second best contract which is pooling : agents of different types pick the same contract. Chapter 3 analyses the problem of credit rationing as it emerges in a dynamic setting, when a renegotiation of the original contract may be undertaken. It is conjectured that (i) the principal uses the information revealed about an agent’s type at the time of first repayment, to design future contracts, (ii) the agents who show consistently honest behavior are never rationed, (iii) the agents who showed dishonest behavior impose a negative externality on the agents who were honest; they are rationed in later periods. Finally, in chapter 3, we analyse the role of an exogenously imposed borrowing constraint prompting the individuals to change their life-cycle decisions. This chapter provides an explicit link between human and non-human wealth by making income endogenous through investment in human capital. The chapter also discusses the econometric aspects of the problem: the possible empirical work that can be undertaken in the future using a micro data set. / Ph. D.