  We study the incentives of banks in a financial network, where the network
consists of debt contracts and credit default swaps (CDSs) between banks. One
of the most important questions in such a system is the problem of deciding
which of the banks are in default, and how much of their liabilities these
banks can pay. We study the payoff and preferences of the banks in the
different solutions to this problem. We also introduce a more refined model
which allows assigning priorities to payment obligations; this provides a more
expressive and realistic model of real-life financial systems, while it always
ensures the existence of a solution.
  The main focus of the paper is an analysis of the actions that a single bank
can execute in a financial system in order to influence the outcome to its
advantage. We show that removing an incoming debt, or donating funds to another
bank can result in a single new solution that is strictly more favorable to the
acting bank. We also show that increasing the bank's external funds or
modifying the priorities of outgoing payments cannot introduce a more favorable
new solution into the system, but may allow the bank to remove some unfavorable
solutions, or to increase its recovery rate. Finally, we show how the actions
of two banks in a simple financial system can result in classical game
theoretic situations like the prisoner's dilemma or the dollar auction,
demonstrating the wide expressive capability of the financial system model.
