In so far as this occurs, it can be interpreted as meaning that the deposit guarantee scheme in practice subsidises risky lending, which would be unfortunate. The picture is, however, complicated by the fact that smaller banks contribute positively by increasing competition in the banking market. Larger banks may also be too large for the authorities to let them fail, which is also a problem. There are difficult considerations to make here. Experiences from the United States When the bank run on the US Silicon Valley Bank began, only about 6 per cent of its deposits were guaranteed by the US deposit guarantee scheme. The rest were unsecured deposits, primarily because they were for larger amounts. This is an example of the fact that deposits in many banks today do not only come from small savers. Many of them, including the Swedish ones, finance themselves to a large extent in the financial markets. Some of the market funding takes the form of direct deposits from financial actors and is not covered by any deposit guarantee and it is normally very volatile. Another part is funding is through the bank issuing securities with a specific maturity. These are therefore not immediately available and thus not exposed to the same risk as the deposit, but on the other hand give rise to a refinancing risk. The run on Silicon Valley Bank also highlighted that contagion effects can be large even when relatively smaller banks get into trouble.
Bank collapses in the USA and Switzerland The bank collapses in the United States and Switzerland in March created uncertainty in the global financial markets. To understand these developments, it is important to analyse the underlying problems. They are largely well known. However, there are also a number of new elements that may exacerbate the wellknown problems and that need to be analysed further. We want to avoid problems in the banking sector in one area spreading to other parts of the financial system or to other countries. At the same time, it must be possible to wind down banks with serious problems in an orderly manner. It is important to learn from crises. What we have now seen means that I think we will have to change some regulations. The financial regulatory framework is governed to a very large extent by global standards, so that is where the analysis must begin. Any future agreements reached at global level will also clearly affect the rules in the EU and thus in Sweden. Let me first focus on the more familiar problems and then return to what I see as new ones. In a sense, you can probably talk about the financial sector before and  2 See, for example, the discussion in Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (2022). 4 [30]  after the Silicon Valley Bank crash. I think it can be a watershed in the way we think about the design of some financial regulation.