Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The 2007/8 Global Financial Crisis: A Decade On

Abstract

The case provides an overview of the causes of the global financial crisis of 2007 to 2008 and the responses taken by the U.S. government in the short term and the new regulation implemented, namely the Dodd-Frank Act, to ensure that the crisis would not happen again. Students are invited to consider how the financial market in the U.S. has changed in the decade after the crisis and whether current financial regulation will be sufficient to prevent another crisis.

This case was prepared for inclusion in Sage Business Cases primarily as a basis for classroom discussion or self-study, and is not meant to illustrate either effective or ineffective management styles. Nothing herein shall be deemed to be an endorsement of any kind. This case is for scholarly, educational, or personal use only within your university, and cannot be forwarded outside the university or used for other commercial purposes.

2026 Sage Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Resources

Exhibit 1: Rising Debt in the US, 1982–2012

The graph is titled “US Debt Composition % of GDP.” The x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from 0.00% to 100.00% with a gap of 10.00% and labeled “Debt % of GDP.” The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated below:

Years

Debt % of GDP

Household

Corporation

Government

Financial

Q4-1982

48%

54%

42%

18%

Q3-1984

48%

55%

44%

19%

Q2-1986

50%

60%

50%

20%

Q1-1988

56%

64%

56%

24%

Q4-1989

60%

66%

58%

22%

Q3-1991

62%

61%

62%

21%

Q2-1993

62%

58%

63%

22%

Q1-1995

63%

57%

63%

25%

Q4-1996

64%

58%

60%

28%

Q3-1998

65%

60%

55%

35%

Q2-2000

68%

66%

50%

40%

Q1-2002

73%

68%

47%

45%

Q4-2003

83%

67%

50%

48%

Q3-2005

90%

68%

58%

48%

Q2-2007

97%

70%

58%

48%

Q1-2009

98%

84%

70%

59%

Q4-2010

87%

78%

85%

47%

Q3-2012

82%

78%

91%

40%

The text at the bottom of the graph reads:

www.economicshelp.org|McKinsey Global Institute”

A line graph shows the percentage of debts in the United States from 1982 to 2012.

Source: Pettinger, T. (2013), “Total US Debt, Public + Private”, Economicshelp, available at: www.economicshelp.org/blog/6775/debt/total-us-debt-public-private/ (accessed 7 July 2018).

Exhibit 2: Rising Debt in the UK, 1987–2011

The graph is titled “Total UK Debt.” The x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from 0.0% to 600.0% with a gap of 100.0% and labeled “Debt as % of GDP.” The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated below:

Years

Debt as % of GDP

Households

Corporations

Government

Financial

Total

Q1-1987

50%

50%

50%

50%

190%

Q3-1988

55%

55%

55%

55%

195%

Q1-1990

70%

70%

40%

70%

220%

Q3-1991

75%

75%

40%

60%

230%

Q1-1993

75%

75%

45%

75%

240%

Q3-1994

75%

75%

45%

80%

230%

Q1-1996

75%

75%

50%

90%

260%

Q3-1997

75%

75%

55%

110%

280%

Q1-1999

80%

80%

51%

120%

285%

Q3-2000

80%

85%

45%

125%

300%

Q1-2002

85%

90%

40%

135%

330%

Q3-2003

90%

90%

40%

135%

340%

Q1-2005

95%

95%

45%

160%

400%

Q3-2006

95%

100%

45%

170%

415%

Q1-2008

100%

110%

45%

220%

460%

Q3-2009

100%

115%

70%

220%

480%

Q1-2011

100%

110%

90%

190%

500%

The text at the bottom of the graph reads:

www.economicshelp.org | Source: McKinsey Global Institute”

A line graph shows the percentage of debts in the United Kingdom from 1987 to 2011.

Source: Pettinger, T. (2013), “Total US Debt, Public + Private”, Economicshelp, available at: www.economicshelp.org/blog/6775/debt/total-us-debt-public-private/ (accessed 7 July 2018).

Exhibit 3: New Issue Volume of Asset-Backed Securities in the US From 2000 to 2016

In the graph, x-axis lists the asset-backed securities and left y-axis is scaled from 0 to 1400 with a gap of 200 units and labeled “US$ Billion” and right y-axis is scaled from 0 to 12 with a gap of 2 units. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Asset-backed securities

2000 (lhs)

2007 (lhs)

Relative Increase from 2000 to 2007 (rhs)

CDO-Squared

10

290

11

CDO

180

1000

6.5

RMBS

200

1250

6.3

ABS

260

420

1.8

ABCP

690

1180

2

A bar graph compares the values of asset-backed securities in the United States.

CDO = collateralised debt obligation; RMBS = residential mortgage-backed security; ABS = asset-backed security; ABCP = asset-backed commercial paper.

Notes: CDO-squared denotes CDOs whose collateral was generally sourced from other ABS-CDO tranches, either of the cash or the synthetic type. RMBS here includes residential mortgage subprime ABS, which are excluded from the ABS category in this figure.

Source: IMF staff (2009) in Segoviano, M., Jones, B., Lindner, P. and Blankenheim, J. (2013), “Securitisation: Lessons Learned and the Road Ahead”, International Monetary Fund Working Paper WP/13/255, November, available at: www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2016/12/31/Securitization-Lessons-Learned-and-the-Road-Ahead-41153 (accessed 19 September 2018).

Exhibit 4: US Subprime Mortgage Issuance 2000–2012

In the graph, x-axis lists the years and left y-axis is scaled from 0 to 700 with a gap of 100 units and right y-axis is scaled from 0% to 25% with a gap of 5%. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Years

Subprime Mortgage Issuance (in billions of dollars, lhs)

Subprime Mortgage Issuance, as Percentage Share of Total Mortgage Issuance (rhs)

2000

100

9%

2001

170

7%

2002

200

6.5%

2003

320

8%

2004

540

18%

2005

630

20%

2006

600

20%

2007

190

8%

2008

20

2%

2009

0

0%

2010

0

0%

2011

0

0%

2012

0

0%

A bar and line graph show the values of subprime mortgage issuance in the United States from the year 2000 to 2012.

Source: Inside Mortgage Finance and IMF staff in Segoviano, M., Jones, B., Lindner, P. and Blankenheim, J. (2013), “Securitisation: Lessons Learned and the Road Ahead”, International Monetary Fund Working Paper WP/13/255, November, available at: www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2016/12/31/Securitization-Lessons-Learned-and-the-Road-Ahead-41153 (accessed 19 September 2018).

Exhibit 5: Example of Sloppy Lending Practices

The text reads: “1% Low Staff Rate, Stated Income, No Documentation Loans, 100% Finance Available, Interest Only Loans, Debt Consolidation, SE HABLA ESPANOL.”

A photo shows lists different lending practices.

Source: Bernanke, B. (2012), “Lecture 3: The Federal Reserve’s Response to the Financial Crisis”, p. 12, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/files/bernanke-lecture-three-20120327.pdf (accessed 2 March 2018).

Exhibit 6: Lending Pattern That Arose in Build-Up to the Crisis

The illustration is in the form of a chart. The text inside the box on the left reads: “Low quality mortgages.” A rightward arrow from the box points at another box that reads: “Financial firms created securities made up of mortgages and other assets.” An upward arrow points at it from a box below that reads: “Credit rating agencies.” Two rightward arrows from the box labeled “Financial firms created securities made up of mortgages and other assets” point at boxes labeled “Investors” and “Financial firms,” respectively. At the bottom is a box that reads: “Credit insurers.” Two upward arrows from it point at Investors and Financial firms, respectively.

An illustration explains a type of lending pattern.

Source: Bernanke, B. (2012), “Lecture 3: The Federal Reserve’s Response to the Financial Crisis”, p. 16, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/files/bernanke-lecture-three-20120327.pdf (accessed 2 March 2018).

Exhibit 7: GDP Growth Figures for the US, UK, South Africa and China 2004–2015

In the graph, x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from −6 to 10 with a gap of 2 units and labeled “GDP growth.” The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Years

GDP Growth

US

UK

SA

China

2004

3.9

2.4

4.8

8.4

2005

3.3

3.2

5.4

7.5

2006

2.9

2.4

5.7

6.8

2007

1.9

2.4

5.5

6.5

2008

−0.9

0

4.0

2.0

2009

−2.5

−4.2

−1.6

−2.7

2010

2.3

1.8

3.1

6.8

2011

1.8

1.7

3.3

4.9

2012

2.1

1.6

2.3

1.8

2013

1.9

2.0

2.4

3.2

2014

2.7

3.0

1.7

2.8

2015

2.9

2.6

1.5

2.6

A line graph compares the GDP of different countries from 2004 to 2015.

Source: Created from statistics obtained from World Bank data, available at: http://databank.worldbank.org/data/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG/1ff4a498/Popular-Indicators (accessed 6 July 2018).

Exhibit 8: The Rise and Fall of Housing Prices

The graph is titled “Prices of Existing Single-Family Houses.” Text below it reads: Index, Jan. 2000=100. The x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from 0 to 200 with a gap of 40 units. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated below:

Year

Housing Prices

1980

40

1985

55

1990

78

1995

80

2000

95

2005

200

2010

140

The text at the bottom of the graph reads:

Note: Includes purchase transactions only.

Source: CoreLogic.”

A line graph shows housing prices from 1980 to 2010.

Source: Bernanke, B. (2012), “Lecture 4: The Aftermath of the Crisis”, p. 32, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/files/bernanke-lecture-four-20120329.pdf (accessed 2 March 2018).

Exhibit 9: Unemployment in the UK and US, 2000–2017

The graph is titled “Unemployment Rate.” The x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from 0.0% to 12.0% with a gap of 2.0%. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Years

US

UK

2000

4.0%

5.6%

2001

5.4%

5.4%

2002

5.4%

5.9%

2003

6.0%

5.0%

2004

5.7%

5.0%

2005

5.2%

5.2%

2006

4.8%

5.6%

2007

4.8%

5.5%

2008

5.7%

5.7%

2009

9.5%

7.8%

2010

9.7%

8.0%

2011

9.0%

8.0%

2012

8.2%

8.0%

2013

6.7%

6.8%

2014

6.2%

6.2%

2015

5.8%

5.8%

2016

5.0%

5.0%

2017

4.4%

4.4%

A line graph compares unemployment rates in the United Kingdom and United States from 2000 to 2017.

Source: Created from statistics obtained from The Statistics Portal, available at: www.statista.com/statistics/279898/unemployment-rate-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/ (accessed 27 January 2109) and www.statista.com/statistics/217029/forecast-to-the-unemployment-rate-in-the-united-states/ (accessed 27 January 2019).

Exhibit 10: Economic Recovery Slower Than Previous Post-World War II Average Recoveries

The graph is titled “Real GDP.” The text below it reads: “Billions of chained (2005) dollars.” The x-axis lists years and y-axis is scaled from 12000 to 14500 with a gap of 500 units. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated below:

Years

Real GDP

Average recovery

2007

13300

2008

12600

2009

12800

13100

2010

13200

13500

2011

13400

14200

2012

The text below the graph reads: “Note: Vertical shading represents NBER recession dates. The average recovery is calculated using the average growth rate in quarters following NBER troughs since 1949.

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis.”

A line graph shows real GDP and average recovery.

Source: Bernanke, B. (2012), “Lecture 4: The Aftermath of the Crisis”, p. 27, available at: www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/files/bernanke-lecture-three-20120327.pdf (accessed 2 March 2018).

Exhibit 11: The Banks’ Slow Recovery

The text on the top reads: “A long road back. Share prices, January 1st 2007=100.” The x-axis is scaled from 2007 to 2017 and lists the events and y-axis is scaled from 0 to 120 with a gap of 20 units. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are listed as follows:

Year

S&P 500 banks

STOXX Europe 600 banks

2007

  • HSBC writedown
  • Bear Steams funds collapse
  • BNP Paribas funds frozen
  • Northern Rock rescued
  • RBS-led group buys ABN AMRO

2008

  • Bear Steams bought by JPMorgan Chase
  • Lehman Brothers collapses
  • TARP enacted
  • Fed cuts interest rates to near zero
  • RBS bailed out
  • UBS bailed out; Credit Suisse recapitalized

2009

  • Treasury recapitalizes banks
  • Fed’s first stress tests

2010

  • Dodd-Frank act becomes law
  • Basel 3 agreed on
  • First pan-European stress tests

2011

2012

2013

2014

  • Treasury sells last TARP stake
  • ECB cuts deposits rates below zero
  • Single Supervisory Mechanism begins overseeing euro-zone banks

2015

  • Fed raises rates for first time since 2006
  • ECB begins bond-buying

2016

  • Donald Trump elected
  • Brexit Referendum

2017

  • Trump orders review of regulation

The text below the graph reads:

Source: Thomson Reuters; The Economist

Economist.com”

A line graph shows a timeline of the banks’ recovery.

Source: Economist.com in Lane, P. (2017), “A decade after the crisis, how are the world’s banks doing?”, The Economist, 6 May, available at: www.economist.com/special-report/2017/05/06/a-decade-after-the-crisis-how-are-the-worlds-banks-doing (accessed 6 July 2018).

Exhibit 12: Relative Sizes of Largest Commercial Banks in the US in 2017 and 2007, Measured by Share of Deposits Held

The graph is titled “Bulking Up”. In the left graph, the text reads: “Share of U.S. deposits held in 2017.” The horizontal scale shows 0% to 15% with a gap of 5% and the vertical scale lists the banks. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Commercial Banks

Percentage

Bank of America

10.9%

JPMorgan

10.7%

Wells Fargo

10.5%

Citi

4.0%

US Bank

3.0%

PNC

2.5%

TD Bank

2.3%

Capital One

2.0%

Commercial Banks

Percentage

Bank of America

9%

JPMorgan

7%

Wachovia

6%

Wells Fargo

4%

Citi

3.5%

Washington Mutual

3%

US Bank

2%

SunTrust

2%

Two horizontal bar graphs show shares of deposits of largest commercial banks of the U.S. in the years 2017 and 2007.

Source: De Luce, A. (2018), “Too big to fail banks, they continue to get bigger and bigger”, The Gold Telegraph, 29 March, available at: www.goldtelegraph.com/too-big-to-fail-bigger-and-bigger (accessed 9 September 2018).

Exhibit 13: Improved Funding Models of the Banks, Resulting in Lower Profits

The title reads: “No more buccaneers.” The top graph is titled “Bank’s funding structure. Deposits as % of total funding.” The x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from 0 to 80 with a gap of 20 units. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Year/Country

Emerging Markets

Japan

United States

Britain

Euro area

France

Germany

2006

77

74

64

44

37

35

14

2008

77

75

64

44

39

33

13

2010

80

76

70

52

40

37

15

2012

80

71

75

54

40

38

17

2014

80

69

76

62

44

39

18

2016

63

70

77

63

49

41

18

Year/Country

Emerging Markets

Japan

United States

Britain

Euro area

France

Germany

2005–06

19

14

13

16

11

16

7

2007–08

18

0

4

5

4

6

0

2009–10

15

7

2

5

4

7

−1

2011–12

17

8

8

2.5

0

4

2.5

2013–14

16

9

9

2.3

3

5

2.3

2015–16

14

8

9

2

4.9

7

3

The text at the bottom of the graph reads:

“Source: BIS”

The Economist

Two line graphs compare funding models of banks of different countries.

Source: The Economist (2018), “Briefing: the financial crisis: unresolved”, The Economist Print Edition, 8 September, available at: www.economist.com/briefing/2018/09/06/lehman-ten-years-on-more-has-changed-than-meets-the-eye (accessed 10 September 2018).

Exhibit 14: A Brief History of Economic Crises

Episode

Type

Global financial centres most affected

At least two distinct regions

Number of countries in each region

The crisis of 1825–1826

Global

United Kingdom

Europe and Latin America

Greece and Portugal defaulted, as did practically all of newly independent Latin America.

The panic of 1907

Global

United States

Europe, Asia and Latin America

Notably France, Italy, Japan, Mexico and Chile suffered from banking panics.

The Great Depression, 1929–1938

Global

United States and France

All regions

Widespread defaults and banking crises across all regions.

Debt crisis of the 1980s

Multicountry (developing countries and emerging markets)

United States (affected, but crisis was not systemic)

Developing countries in Africa, Latin America and, to a lesser extent, Asia

Sovereign default, currency crashes and high inflation were rampant.

The Asian crisis of 1997–1998

Multicountry, extending beyond Asia in 1998

Japan (affected, but by then it was five years into the resolution of its own systemic banking crisis)

Asia, Europe and Latin America

Affected South-east Asia initially. By 1998, Russia, Ukraine, Colombia and Brazil were affected.

The Global Contraction of 2008

Global

United States, United Kingdom

All regions

Banking crises proliferated in Europe, and stock market and currency crashes versus dollar cut across the regions.

Source: Reinhart, C. and Rogoff, K. (2009), This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly, Chapter 16, Loc 3912 of 7805, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

Exhibit 15: China’s Debt-to-GDP Ratio 1980 to First Half 2017

In the graph, x-axis lists the years and y-axis is scaled from 50% to 300% with a gap of 50%. The data shown by the graph, with approximate values, are tabulated as follows:

Years

Percentages

1982

50%

1984

57%

1986

85%

1988

70%

1990

98%

1992

95%

1994

86%

1996

85%

1998

125%

2000

125%

2002

140%

2004

148%

2006

140%

2008

130%

2010

180%

2012

200%

2014

250%

2016

255%

The text at the bottom of the graph reads:

“ATLAS | Data: Deutsche Bank Research”

A line graph shows debt-to-GDP ratio of China.

Source: Huang, Z. (2018), “China’s economy will cool this year – but it’s a good thing”, Quartz, 18 January, available at: www.qz.com/1182504/chinas-economy-will-cool-this-year-but-its-a-good-thing/ (accessed 6 February 2019).

This case was prepared for inclusion in Sage Business Cases primarily as a basis for classroom discussion or self-study, and is not meant to illustrate either effective or ineffective management styles. Nothing herein shall be deemed to be an endorsement of any kind. This case is for scholarly, educational, or personal use only within your university, and cannot be forwarded outside the university or used for other commercial purposes.

2026 Sage Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved

locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading