Showing posts with label banking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label banking. Show all posts

Monday, January 9, 2012

The unexpected global financial crisis: researching its root cause

The world is currently still struggling with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Following a description of the eruption, evolution and consequences of the global crisis, this paper reviews alternative hypotheses for the causes of the global financial crisis as well as their empirical evidence. The paper refutes the frequently voiced view that the global crisis was caused by global imbalances that reflected economic policies of East Asian countries. Instead, it argues that global imbalances were the result of excess demand in the United States, resulting from both the public debt in the United States arising from the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars and tax cuts and the overconsumption by households supported by the wealth effect from the housing bubble in the United States. 

The housing bubble itself was the outcome of the Federal Reserve's low interest rate policy in the aftermath of the burst of the "dot-com" bubble in 2001, the lack of appropriate financial regulation, and housing policies aimed at expanding the mortgage market to low-income borrowers. It was possible to maintain the large trade deficits of the United States for such a long period of time because of the dollar's reserve currency status. When the housing bubble in the United States burst, the global crisis ensued. The paper also analyzes why China's trade surplus increased significantly in general and with the United States in particular in recent years, and argues that this increase was caused by both the relocation of the labor-intensive tradable sector of East Asian economies to China and high corporate saving rates in China as a result of its dual-track approach to reform.

The world is currently still struggling with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. While a handful of economists predicted the crisis, it was largely unforeseen. As late as April 2007, the IMF in its World Economic Outlook concluded that risks to the global economy had become extremely low, and that, for the moment, there were no great concerns. Despite large and widening global imbalances before the crisis, optimism on the robustness of the world economy emanated from confidence in the United States‘ system of financial regulation, its financial and political system and the fact that it had the world‘s largest capital markets. Global imbalances were viewed as sustainable, given that rapidly growing developing economies needed a secure place to invest their funds for diversification purposes and increased global financial integration was deepening global capital markets and allowing countries to sustain higher debt burdens over the long term. In addition, the U.S. was considered to have superior monetary policy institutions and monetary policy makers. Only a few economists did not share these views and expressed concern about a disorderly unwinding of
rising global imbalances, as well as of the housing bubble.

The concerns of these economists were dramatically validated by the unfolding of the global financial crisis since September 2008. The coordinated policy response by the G-20 nations helped the world avoid a global depression. According to the IMF, these interventions involved cash infusions, debt guarantees, and other assistance to the tune of a staggering $10 trillion.

However, economic growth remains fragile. Recovery is taking place at two different paces: on the one hand, there are the high-income countries that are experiencing a sluggish recovery. On the other hand, there are the developing countries whose economic performance isfar superior to that of the advanced countries. The recovery of the world economy is threatened by high unemployment in the advanced economies, high levels of sovereign debt and the crisis in the Euro-zone. Moreover, the severity of the recent global crisis has highlighted the need to revisit basic policy recommendations, e.g., in the area of capital flows, the supervision of the financial sector, and macroeconomic management. And with emerging and developing economies recovering from the global economic crisis much faster than advanced countries, it also reinforced a trend toward a new multi-polar world economy with several growth poles, a trend that had already become apparent before the crisis.

The precise genesis of the global crisis remains subject to debate. While global imbalances are widely viewed to have played an important role in its evolution, some economists consider them to be the primary cause of the crisis, while others view them as only facilitating its development.8 A correct diagnosis of the genesis and driving forces behind the crisis is, however, important in order to draw appropriate conclusions to prevent its recurrence.

Section II describes the world economy before the crisis, and the eruption, evolution and consequences of the global crisis. Section III reviews alternative hypotheses for the causes of the global economic crisis as well as their empirical evidence. We will refute the frequently voiced view that the global crisis was caused by global imbalances that reflected the export-oriented strategy of East Asian countries, the accumulation of international reserves for self-insurance motives by countries with surpluses, China‘s undervaluation of its exchange rate and the global savings glut. Instead, we will argue that global imbalances were the result of the large excess demand in the U.S. over an extended period—the financing of which was made possible by the reserve currency status of the US dollar. This excess demand resulted from both the public debt in the U.S. arising from the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars, tax cuts and the overconsumption by households supported by the wealth effect from the housing bubble in the U.S. The housing bubble itself was the outcome of the Fed‘s low interest rate policy in the aftermath of the burst of the ―dot-com‖ bubble in 2001, the lack of appropriate financial regulation after the deregulation

in the 1980s and housing policies aimed at expanding the mortgage market to low-income borrowers which was primarily a result of lobbying by the financial sector aimed at increasing profits through further deregulation. When the housing bubble in the U.S. burst, the global crisis ensued. Section IV discusses why China‘s trade surplus increased significantly in general and with the U.S. in particular in recent years. We will argue that this increase was caused by both the high corporate saving rates in China as a result of its dual-track approach to reform and the relocation of the labor-intensive tradable sector of East Asian economies to China, which started in the 1980s but accelerated after China‘s accession to WTO in 2001. Finally, the paper reflects on the lessons for policy prescriptions from the crisis.

Author: Lin,Justin Yifu; Treichel, Volker. Document Date: 2012/01/01.Document Type: Policy Research Working Paper. Report Number: WPS5937



x

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

The Nonbank-Bank Nexus and the Shadow Banking System

The present way of thinking about financial intermediation does not fully incorporate the rise of asset managers as a major source of funding for banks through the shadow banking system. Asset managers are dominant sources of demand for non-M2 types of money and serve as source collateral ‘mines’ for the shadow banking system. Banks receive funding through the re-use of pledged collateral ‘mined’ from asset managers.

Accounting for this, the size of the shadow banking system in the U.S. may be up to $25 trillion at year-end 2007 and $18 trillion at year-end 2010, higher than earlier estimates. In terms of policy, regulators will need to consider the re-use of pledged collateral when defining bank leverage ratios. Also, given asset managers’ demand for non-M2 types of money, monitoring the shadow banking system will warrant closer attention well beyond the regulatory perimeter.

IMF.Working Paper No. 11/289. Author/Editor:Pozsar, Zoltan ; Singh, Manmohan


x

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Dodd-Frank Rules Will Crush Employment

December 13, 2011.By Paul Sperry, for Investor’s Business Daily. Job-killing bank regulations threaten to wipe out all the gains in private-sector employment since the recovery began, the industry warns. Washington, however, is hiring thousands more bureaucrats to enforce the rules.

Signed into law last year, the Dodd-Frank Act is the biggest rewrite of financial regulations since the New Deal. It was intended to rein in Wall Street "excesses." But the banking industry says burdensome red tape is hurting economic growth and jobs in a still-sluggish labor market.



"The level of real GDP could be 2.7% less by the year 2015 than would otherwise be the case for the United States," said Stephen Wilson, outgoing chairman of the American Bankers Association. "This could result in 2.9 million fewer jobs being created.”

By comparison, the economy has created 1.78 million private jobs since the recovery officially began in June 2009.

Wilson says Dodd-Frank has resulted in more than 5,230 pages of proposed and final rules, which laid end-to-end would exceed the height of New York's Empire State Building — five times over.

Only a fourth of the rules have gone into effect so far, he says; yet the law in its first year has already imposed almost 20 million hours of paperwork on U.S. businesses. It took an estimated 5.5 million man-hours, in contrast, to build every iPhone sold.

Dodd-Frank compliance costs for the financial industry already top $12 billion. That is expected to swell as the remaining 77% of required rules are finalized.

Also, price controls imposed by Dodd-Frank will result in a 45% loss in debit card interchange revenue for banks, Wilson pointed out. Banks have laid off workers to raise revenue to meet higher capital reserves mandated under the law.

"In the end," he said, "it means fewer loans get made, slower job growth and a weaker economy.

Wilson, who also runs a small bank in Ohio, made the remarks last month during a speech on international finance in Tokyo.

The new regulatory regime, however, is a boon for lawyers and government workers.

A Government Accountability Office study this summer concluded that implementing Dodd-Frank rules would require 2,850 additional federal employees just through fiscal 2012 (which ends Sept. 30) — at a cost to taxpayers of $1.3 billion.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will command the bulk of new hires and funding. Created by Dodd-Frank, the watchdog agency started with a staff of 1,225 and a budget of $330 million.

Patrice Ficklin, who heads CFPB's Office of Fair Lending, says she's hiring lawyers, statisticians, analysts and enforcement agents. These are high-paying jobs. In fact, the CFPB has hired at least a dozen employees at salaries of more than $225,000 a year.

The White House denies the financial regulations it championed are costing companies revenue and slowing hiring. It cites, for example, higher corporate profits.

"If you look at corporate profits, it's hard to make the case that regulations have caused companies to be scared about (hiring) or (that they're) hurting their job growth," argued Alan Krueger, President Obama's top economist.

"I think the main reason (for weak hiring) is that the companies feel that they could satisfy the demand that they face with the workers that they have," Krueger added in a recent CNBC interview. "Until they are more confident that consumers are coming back at a greater clip — that the demand will be there — I think we'll continue to see job growth at the kind of moderate pace that we've seen.

But analysts note that hiring still lags consumer spending. And they say profits are up mainly because businesses have slashed payrolls and other costs.

Even Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., admits the regulation he co-sponsored has cost jobs in the financial sector. But he says it's a "reasonable price" to pay to bring "greedy" bankers to heel. "If you lock up drug dealers," he said in a recent interview, "you're going to have fewer jobs.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce official David Hirschmann says employers remain uneasy about Dodd-Frank.

"Instead of creating jobs, the law has created uncertainty for job creators," he said. "The economic statistics bear that out.

Hirschmann added: "We are simply not going to see American companies spending capital until they can begin to navigate their way through this tangled web of regulation.

Dodd-Frank Hits Small Firms By forcing banks to increase the capital they have on hand to cover losses, Dodd-Frank has reduced capital available for small-business loans. This in turn has slowed hiring.

Tom Boyle of State Bank of Countryside in La Grange, Ill., says Dodd-Frank is "handicapping our ability to meet the credit needs" of small firms. "The consequences are real," Boyle said. "It means fewer loans get made. It means slower job growth.

Product marketer K&M of VA Inc., for one, wanted to expand this year but for the first time had trouble getting a line of credit. Owner Mike Bucci blames the new bank law. So does American Business Group, an Orlando, Fla.-based company that matches small-business buyers and sellers. If buyers can't access a loan thanks to Dodd-Frank, CEO Jessica Hadler Baines told IBD, "then the other option is to close the business down, putting more workers into unemployment.

The credit crunch could worsen if Dodd-Frank drives smaller banks out of business as predicted.

"Dodd-Frank and the related burdens are threatening not just our industry but our very banks," ABA's Wilson said. "The most conservative estimates predict that by the end of the decade, there will be 1,000 fewer banks in the United States.

That means fewer financial jobs in a sector that has already lost hundreds of thousands of workers.

v

Monday, December 5, 2011

How Costly Are Debt Crises?

The aim of this paper is to assess the short- and medium-term impact of debt crises on GDP. Using an unbalanced panel of 154 countries from 1970 to 2008, the paper shows that debt crises produce significant and long-lasting output losses, reducing output by about 10 percent after eight years.
The results also suggest that debt crises tend to be more detrimental than banking and currency crises. The significance of the results is robust to different specifications, identification and endogeneity checks, and datasets.

IMF.Series:Working Paper.No.11/280.
Author/Editor:Furceri,Davide;Zdzienicka,Aleksandra.Authorized for Distribution:December 01, 2011.

This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate
How Costly Are Debt Crises?

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Cross-Cutting Themes in Advanced Economies with Emerging Market Banking Links

IMF.November 14, 2011. The most recent decade has seen a growing presence of banks headquartered in advanced economies (AEs) expanding into emerging markets (EMs). These expansions have brought some benefits to both home and host countries, but the global financial crisis has also unmasked significant vulnerabilities inherent in such relationships.

In keeping with past cross-cutting themes papers, this paper focuses on the experiences of four medium-sized ―home countries,‖ each with significant retail banking links to EMs—Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. These countries were chosen because of their banks' diverse approaches to EM expansion (including the centralization of their funding models) and equally diverse crisis outcomes (fears over Eastern European exposures resulted in extraordinary policy efforts to maintain bank lending), providing fertile ground for analysis and for drawing lessons in the future.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Modeling Correlated Systemic Liquidity and Solvency Risks in a Financial Environment with Incomplete Information

This paper proposes and demonstrates a methodology for modeling correlated systemic solvency and liquidity risks for a banking system. Using a forward looking simulation of many risk factors applied to detailed balance sheets for a 10 bank stylized United States banking system, we analyze correlated market and credit risk and estimate the probability that multiple banks will fail or experience liquidity runs simultaneously.

Significant systemic risk factors are shown to include financial and economic environment regime shifts to stressful conditions, poor initial loan credit quality, loan portfolio sector and regional concentrations, bank creditors’ sensitivity to and uncertainties regarding solvency risk, and inadequate capital. Systemic banking system solvency risk is driven by the correlated defaults of many borrowers, other market risks, and inter-bank defaults. Liquidity runs are modeled as a response to elevated solvency risk and uncertainties and are shown to increase correlated bank failures.

Potential bank funding outflows and contractions in lending with significant real economic impacts are estimated. Increases in equity capital levels needed to reduce bank solvency and liquidity risk levels to a target confidence level are also estimated to range from 3 percent to 20 percent of assets. For a future environment that replicates the 1987-2006 volatilities and correlations, we find only a small risk of U.S. bank failures focused on thinly capitalized and regionally concentrated smaller banks. For the 2007-2010 financial environment calibration we find substantially elevated solvency and liquidity risks for all banks and the banking system.

IMF.Author/Editor: Schumacher, Liliana ; Barnhill, Theodore M. Authorized for Distribution: November 01, 2011.Working Paper No. 11/263
This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

IDB releases first regional survey about Latin American and Caribbean banks’ sustainability

Nov 15, 2011.IDB. Miami. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) released today the first regional survey about environmental, social and corporate governance sustainability of banks in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The survey, launched today during the Federation of Latin American Banks (FELABAN)’s annual meeting, showed that financial institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean have strong standards for corporate governance but more improvements are needed in terms of environmental and social sustainability.

Ninety-eight percent of the 55 financial institutions surveyed in the region have policies in place to combat money laundering and 93 percent have a policy to fight bribery and corruption. Yet, in terms of environmental sustainability, only 62 percent of those surveyed in the region incorporate environmental and social standards for their credit and loan business and only 36 percent have initiatives to reduce direct greenhouse emissions.

"This survey is a valuable benchmark and management tool for banks to measure their progress in terms of sustainability,” said Daniela Carrera-Marquis, Chief of the IDB Financial Markets Division at the Structured and Corporate Finance Department. “The IDB is committed in developing financial markets in the region in a sustainable manner and this survey will allow us to better tailor our products and services to meet the needs of our clients and their end users, maximizing our development impact.”

The survey, carried out among banks from 19 countries, also showed that 42 percent of the institutions surveyed have initiatives to increase workforce diversity and 55 percent have initiatives to promote access to financial services to minorities.

Twenty-two institutions from Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, 15 from Andean Countries and 18 from the Southern Cone participated in the survey, which contained 46 questions divided in three topics: corporate governance, environmental and social sustainability.

Top-ranked banks
The survey is complemented by a study produced by Sustainalytics, a world leader in research and analysis of environmental, social and corporate governance issues, which has created a ‘sustainability rating’ that allows each bank to see their position over its competitors in any of these three aspects.
Following this methodology, the five banks in the region that are better positioned when it comes to environmental and social responsibility and corporate governance are: Grupo Financiero BBVA Bancomer, Bancolombia S.A., Banco Santander (Brazil), Banco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A. and HSBC Latin America Holding Limited.

“This project provides a unique opportunity to examine the financial sector in Latin America and the Caribbean as a whole, visualize trends and identify areas for improvement,’’ added Gema Sacristán, IDB beyondBanking program coordinator. “It also offers an opportunity for other banks to learn from the successes and adapt such best practices moving forward. We hope this study sends a clear message to the region about the new role for sustainability in financial intermediaries.”

The study is part of the IDB’s beyondBanking program aimed at promoting sustainability and stressing the competitive advantages that result when sustainable practices are mainstreamed in traditional bank management.

About beyondBanking
Banking on global sustainability is a program developed by the Financial Markets Division of the IDB’s Structured and Corporate Finance Department that seeks to promote sustainable environmental, social and corporate governance principles among Latin American and Caribbean financial intermediaries through financial and technical cooperation.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Paraguay:Rural financial services via village banking

The objective of the project is to expand and diversify the supply of sound microfinance services in rural areas, by improving the capacity of financial intermediaries to reach underserved clients. The purpose of the project is to implement the methodology of village banking in Financiera El Comercio's operations, so that it can expand its credit and savings services to low income populations in rural areas of Paraguay. The project will consist of a Technical Cooperation.

Inter American Develepment Bank.
Project Status: APP. Country: Paraguay. Project Number: PR-M1022. Approval date: Oct 28, 2011

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Unpacking the causal chain of financial literacy

A growing body of literature examines the causal impact of financial literacy on individual, household, and firm level outcomes. This paper unpacks the mechanism of impact by focusing on the first link in the causal chain. Specifically, it studies the experimental impact of financial literacy on three distinct dimensions of financial knowledge.

The analysis finds that financial literacy does not immediately enable individuals to discern costs and rewards that require high numeracy skills, but it does significantly improve basic awareness of financial choices and attitudes toward financial decisions.

Monetary incentives do not induce better performance, suggesting cognitive constraints rather than lack of attention are a key barrier to improving financial knowledge. These results illuminate the strengths and limitations of financial literacy training, which can inform the design and anticipated effects of such programs.

Author:  Carpena, Fenella; Cole, Shawn; Shapiro, Jeremy ; Zia, Bilal. Document Date: 2011/09/01.Document Type: Policy Research Working Paper.Report Number:  WPS5798.Volume No:  1 of 1

Click here to see PDF filePDF36 pagesOfficial Version[2.52 mb]
Click here to see text fileTextText Version*