سید حسین میرجلیلی

Providing financial services for social projects represents corporate social responsibility (CSR), because it indicates ethical commitment for creating better social environment. It improves public image and loyalty of customers, increases the commercial value of the trademark, promote public trust, create confidence of the beneficiaries, and attract valuable resources by the corporate. Corporates have realized that they are responsible for the society in which they operate. We examined the impact of CSR on the efficiency and profitability of banks. The statistical population of the research is 16 banks listed in Tehran Stock Exchange during the period 2014-2018. Four variables represent efficiency and profitability. Also, six variables included in the model as control variables. The results indicated a positive and significant effect of social responsibility on the efficiency and profitability of the banks, so that the CSR has most effect on the return on assets, net profit margin and return on equity respectively.

Financing decisions such as capital structure have gained much attention in literature of financial development over the last decade. Capital structure deviations from its optimal level can occur for various reasons. According to the dynamic trade-off theory, continuous adjustment of capital structure to maximize company value is essential. If companies adjust their capital structure quickly towards the target leverage, past financing activities and historical market conditions will only have short-term effects on the current capital structure. Conversely, if companies adjust their capital structure slowly, the opposite is true. We examine the relationship between organizational and performance characteristics and capital structure, as well as the speed of adjustment, in financial and non-financial firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange and compare these effects between the two categories of companies. The statistical population consists of companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange from 2017 to 2022. The results show that the speed of capital structure adjustment is lower in the financial sector compared to the non-financial sector. Additionally, three performance variables—profitability, growth opportunities, and liquidity—are statistically significant and impact capital structure and its adjustment speed in both financial and non-financial sectors. However, the growth opportunities variable has a different effect direction in the financial sector compared to the non-financial sector, while the age variable does not have a significant effect. Regarding organizational characteristics—complexity, institutional ownership, and size—only organizational complexity in the financial sector is significant at a 95% confidence level, while all organizational characteristics are significant in the non-financial sector

Financial sanctions have many economic consequences for the oil exporting economies. The sanctioned economy adopts economic policies to deal with it. This paper examines the relationship between financial sanctions, oil revenues and monetary and fiscal policies in Iran and explicates how financial sanctions have affected Iran's access to oil revenues. It also examines the role of fiscal and monetary policies in financial stability and resilience in Iran's economy. To this end, we employed a DSGE model with the new Keynesian approach. The results indicate that the interest rate, consumption, imports and inflation have a positive reaction to the oil revenue shock resulting from financial sanctions. However, the production, export, private sector investment and oil sales indicate a negative reaction to the oil revenues’ shock. Regarding the monetary policy shock, the reaction of production and consumption to the shock is positive. However, the reaction of oil sales and interest rate to this shock is negative. In terms of financial policy shock, production, consumption, investment and export indicated a positive reaction to this shock. However, the interest rate, imports and oil sales indicated a negative reaction to the fiscal policy shock. Monetary and fiscal policy shocks increase the effect of financial sanctions for a short period, while monetary policy shock has reduced the effect of financial sanctions for three periods. Therefore, monetary policy has been more effective than fiscal policy in reducing the effect of financial sanctions.