{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019756838905775075, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.101851851851852, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Distorted Risk Incentives from Size Threshold-Based Regulations

Many regulations are based on size thresholds. We develop a model that shows that such regulations distort risk-taking incentives, providing above-threshold firms with greater incentives to take risk and below-threshold firms the opposite. Risk distortion varies nonlinearly as a function of the distance from the size threshold, and is increasing in the magnitude of the regulatory costs. We test our model by examining changes in risk around the Dodd-Frank Act, a major regulation with size thresholds. We provide empirical evidence that is consistent with the main predictions of the model.