The paper finds that, given Australia’s conservative approach in implementing the Basel II framework, Australian banks’ headline capital ratios underestimate their capital strengths. Given their high capital quality and the progress in their funding profiles since the global financial crisis, the Australian banks are making good progress toward meeting the Basel III requirements, including the new liquidity standards. Stress tests calibrated on the Irish crisis experience show that the banks could withstand sizable shocks to their exposure to residential mortgages. However, combining residential mortgage shocks with corporate losses expected at the peak of the global financial crisis would put more pressure on Australian banks’ capital. Therefore, it would be useful to consider the merits of higher capital requirements for systemically important domestic banks.
The Australian banking system was resilient during the global financial crisis, attributed in part to intensive supervision and sound regulation. The banking sector is profitable with capital above regulatory minimums and is dominated by four major banks (all Australianowned). They are individually and collectively large relative to the size of the banking system and their combined assets are large relative to GDP.
Banks’ main vulnerabilities are their exposure to highly indebted households through residential mortgage lending, together with their sizable short-term offshore borrowing. Household debt is high at about 150 percent of disposable income but is held mainly by higher income households. Moreover, exposure to high-risk mortgages is small. The potential risks associated with household lending are mitigated by a number of factors, including banks’ prudent lending practices and Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA)’s conservative approach in implementing the Basel II framework. Banks also have reduced their use of short-term offshore wholesale funding by increasing deposits and lengthening the tenor of their funding, but short-term external debt remains sizable.
The paper finds that the four major Australian banks have capital well about the regulatory requirements with high quality capital. While their headline capital ratios are below the global average for large banks in a sample of advanced and emerging market economies, Australia’s more conservative approach in implementing the Basel II framework implies that Australian banks’ headline capital ratios underestimate their capital strength. For example, a comparison with Canadian banks highlights the impact of Australia’s more conservative approach. The four major Australian banks are well-positioned to meet the higher capital requirements under Basel III, and with the improvements in their funding profiles since the global financial crisis they are making good progress toward meeting the Basel III liquidity standards.
Stress tests calibrated on the Irish crisis experience show that the banks are largely able to withstand sizable shocks to their exposure to residential mortgages. However, combining residential mortgage shocks with corporate losses expected at the peak of the global financial crisis would bring down the banks’ average total capital ratio below the regulatory minimum. Given high bank concentration and market uncertainty, therefore, the merits of higher capital requirements need to be considered for systemically important domestic banks, taking into account the currently evolving international standards.
IMF- Author/Editor:Jang, B.; Sheridan, Niamh.Series: Working Paper No. 12/25
c
No comments:
Post a Comment
prueba