Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 128, Issue 1, pp 197–206 | Cite as

Oil and Water Do Not Mix, or: Aliud Est Credere, Aliud Deponere

  • Philipp Bagus
  • David Howden
  • Amadeus Gabriel


The financial crisis has led to new interest in the ethics of financial markets. In this article, we further the debate on the nature of banking contracts by showing that the fundamental subjective purposes of loan and deposit contracts are irreconcilable. Any resultant mixture of the two contracts is a legal aberration. We consider a mutual fund as an important and legitimate alternative to the common demand deposit to provide high liquidity and some yield without offering full availability of a nominal sum. Besides being a close substitute for how many deposit accounts function today, the mutual fund has the additional benefit of satisfying all legal and ethical requirements. Loan and investment contracts (such as money market mutual funds) allow for the “bank” to make use of their clients’ funds while the intents of money owners are clearly classified without running into legal or ethical problems.


Fractional-reserve banking Maturity mismatching Fraud Legal purpose Deposit Loans 


  1. Bagus, P. (2010). Austrian business cycle theory: Are 100 percent sufficient to prevent a business cycle. Libertarian Papers, 2(2), 1–18.Google Scholar
  2. Bagus, P., Gabriel, A., & Howden, D. (2014). Dubious financial practices? Callable loans, perpetual bonds, insurance policies and securities lending. Working paper.Google Scholar
  3. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (2009). The legitimacy of loan maturity mismatching: A risky, but not fraudulent, undertaking. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(3), 399–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (2010a). Fractional reserve free banking: Some quibbles. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 13(4), 29–55.Google Scholar
  5. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (2010b). The term structure of savings, the yield curve, and maturity mismatching. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 13(3), 64–85.Google Scholar
  6. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (2011). Unanswered quibbles: George Selgin still gets it wrong with fractional reserve free banking. Procesos de Mercado: Revista Europea de Economía Política, 8(2), 83–112.Google Scholar
  7. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (2012). The continuing continuum problem of deposits and loans. Journal of Business Ethics, 106, 295–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (2013). Some ethical dilemmas of modern banking. Business Ethics a European Review, 22(3), 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bagus, P., & Howden, D. (forthcoming). The economic and legal significance of “full” deposit availability. European Journal of Law and Economics.Google Scholar
  10. Bagus, P., Howden, D., & Block, W. E. (2013). Deposits, loans and banking: Clarifying the debate. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 72(3), 627–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barnett, W., & Block, W. E. (2009). Time deposits, dimensions and fraud. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(4), 711–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bitner, M., Gamrot, M., Gertchev, N., & Howden, D. (forthcoming). The great debate: Economic and legal consequences of fractional and full-reserve banking. Journal of Prices & Markets.Google Scholar
  13. Cachanosky, N. (2011). A comment on Barnett and Block on time deposit and Bagus and Howden on loan maturity mismatching. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 219–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davidson, L., & Block, W. E. (2011). The case against fiduciary media: Ethics is the key. The Journal of Business Ethics, 98(3), 505–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evans, A. J. (2010). Public attitudes to banking, a student consultancy project. Paris: ESCP Europe for the Cobden Centre.Google Scholar
  16. Evans, A. J. (forthcoming). In defense of ‘demand deposits’: Contractual solutions to the Barnett and Block, Bagus and Howden debate. Journal of Business Ethics. Google Scholar
  17. Gertchev, N. (2013). The inter-bank market in the perspective of fractional reserve banking. In J.-G. Hülsmann (Ed.), The theory of money and fiduciary media. Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar
  18. Hayek, F. (1939). Freedom and the economic system. Public policy pamphlet no. 29. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hoppe, H. H. (1994). How is fiat money possible? Or the devolution of money and credit. Review of Austrian Economics, 7(2), 49–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Howden, D. (forthcoming). A pre-history of the federal reserve. In D. Howden & J. T. Salerno (Eds.), The fed at one hundred: A critical review of the federal reserve system. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Huerta de Soto, J. (2009). Money, bank credit and economic cycles (2nd ed.). Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar
  22. Hülsmann, J. G. (1996). Free banking and the free bankers. Review of Austrian Economics, 9(1), 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hülsmann, J. G. (2003). Has fractional-reserve banking really passed the market test. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 7(3), 399–422.Google Scholar
  24. Kim, J. (2011). How modern banking originated: The London goldsmith-bankers’ institutionalisation of trust. Business History, 53(6), 939–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Köhler, M. (2013). Humes dilemma—Oder: Was ist geld? Geldschöpfung der Banken als Vermögensrechtsverletzung. In Festschrift für Wolfgang Frisch zum 70. Geburtstag, hrsg. von G. Freund, U. Murmann, R. Bloy & W. Perron (Eds.), Grundlagen und Dogmatik des gesamten Strafrechtssystems (pp. 878–923). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  26. Rothbard, M. N. (1994). The case against the fed. Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar
  27. Selgin, G. (1988). The theory of free banking: Money supply under competitive note issue. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  28. Selgin, G. (2010). Those dishonest goldsmiths. Financial History Review, 19(3), 269–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Selgin, G. [1989] 1996. Legal restrictions, financial weakening, and the lender of last resort. reprinted In G. Selgin (Ed.), Bank deregulation and monetary order (pp. 207–235). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. von Mises, L. (1953). The theory of money and credit. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. von Mises, L. (1998). Human action. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  32. White, L. H. (2007). Huerta de Soto’s case against fractional reserves. Free Market News Network, 8th January 2007. Retrieved September 2, from
  33. White, L. H. [1994] 1996. How would the invisible hand handle money. reprinted In G. Selgin (Ed.), Bank deregulation and monetary order (pp. 15–56). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Williams, J. C. (1984). Fractional reserve banking in grain. Journal of Money Credit and Banking, 16(4), 488–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yeager, L B. (1997). In G. Selgin, (Ed.), The fluttering veil: Essays on monetary disequilibrium. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  36. Yeager, L. B. (2010). Bank reserves: A dispute over words and classification. The Review of Austrian Economics, 23(2), 183–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Economics IUniversidad Rey Juan CarlosMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Business and EconomicsSt. Louis UniversityMadridSpain
  3. 3.Economics, Strategy and Organization DepartmentLa Rochelle Business SchoolLa RochelleFrance

Personalised recommendations