SAFE policy letter
https://safe-frankfurt.de/policy-center/policy-publications.html
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (64)
Language
- English (64) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (64)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (64)
Keywords
- financial stability (7)
- coronavirus (4)
- regulation (4)
- systemic risk (3)
- Banking Union (2)
- ECB (2)
- Greece (2)
- Monetary Policy (2)
- Monetary Union (2)
- Solvency II (2)
- banking supervision (2)
- central banks (2)
- financial crisis (2)
- insurance (2)
- monetary policy (2)
- regulatory arbitrage (2)
- structural reforms (2)
- Asset Quality Review (1)
- BRRD (1)
- BVerfG (1)
- Bankenunion (1)
- Banks (1)
- Big Techs (1)
- Bitcoin (1)
- CBDC (1)
- CMU (1)
- Capital Markets Union (1)
- Central Bank (1)
- Central Banks (1)
- Central Counterparties (1)
- Climate Change (1)
- Coco bonds (1)
- Commerzbank (1)
- Commodities (1)
- Conditionality (1)
- Coronavirus (1)
- Covid-19-Crisis (1)
- Cryptocurrencies (1)
- Cyprus (1)
- DMA (1)
- DSA (1)
- Deutsche Bank (1)
- Digital (1)
- ECJ (1)
- EGC (1)
- EIOPA (1)
- EMIR (1)
- ESMA (1)
- Energy Embargo (1)
- Enforcement (1)
- Equity fund (1)
- Euro (1)
- Europe (1)
- European Central Bank (1)
- European Central Bankor (1)
- European Commision (1)
- European Insurance Union (1)
- European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (1)
- European Supervisory Architecture (1)
- European Supervisory Authorities (1)
- Eurosystem (1)
- Financial Assistance (1)
- Financial Regulation and Banking (1)
- Financial Stability (1)
- Financial stability (1)
- Fiscal Compact (1)
- Fiscal Union (1)
- Fiskalunion (1)
- Fusion (1)
- German banks (1)
- German financial system (1)
- German retirement system (1)
- Greek economic crisis (1)
- High-Level-Forum (1)
- IT innovations (1)
- Insurance (1)
- Insurance Supervision (1)
- Interim Report (1)
- Invasion (1)
- Landeskreditbank Baden-Württemberg (1)
- Lender of Last Resort (1)
- Libra (1)
- Life insurance companies (1)
- Merger (1)
- MiCA (1)
- Money Market Funds (1)
- NCAs (1)
- OMT (1)
- Open Banking Platform Germany (1)
- Outright Monetary Transactions (1)
- Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (1)
- Pension system (1)
- Policy measures in the EU (1)
- Political Union (1)
- Politische Union (1)
- Public Finance (1)
- Quantitative Easing (1)
- Risk sharing (1)
- Russia (1)
- Russian Economy (1)
- Russian Sanction (1)
- SRM (1)
- SSM (1)
- SWIFT (1)
- Sanctions (1)
- Single Supervisy Mechanism (1)
- Social Security solvency (1)
- Target 2 (1)
- UK (1)
- USA (1)
- Ukraine (1)
- Wirecard (1)
- Währungsunion (1)
- bail-in (1)
- bailout (1)
- bank resolution regimes (1)
- banking (1)
- banking regulation (1)
- banking resolution (1)
- banking supervision, (1)
- banks (1)
- blockchain (1)
- capital liquidations (1)
- capture (1)
- catastrophe bond (1)
- collective action (1)
- comprehensive assessment (1)
- corona bonds (1)
- corona crisis (1)
- corporate governance (1)
- crisis (1)
- cryptocurrencies (1)
- cryptocurrency (1)
- currency board (1)
- debt restructuring (1)
- debt sustainability (1)
- digitalization (1)
- distributed ledger technology (1)
- economic and monetary union (1)
- economic reforms (1)
- emergency liquidity assistance (ELA) (1)
- emergency loans (1)
- euro area (1)
- eurozone (1)
- financial innovation (1)
- financial innovations (1)
- financial institutions (1)
- financial market data (1)
- financial markets regulation (1)
- financial reporting quality (1)
- financial resilience (1)
- financial services (1)
- financial supervision (1)
- fiscal crisis (1)
- forward guidance (1)
- government debt (1)
- greek crisis (1)
- household liquidity (1)
- household savings (1)
- incentives for investment (1)
- investment decisions (1)
- leasing (1)
- life-cycle models (1)
- macroprudential franework (1)
- market discipline (1)
- market supervision (1)
- micro data transparency (1)
- nachrangiges Fremdkapital (1)
- pandemic insurance (1)
- payment system (1)
- peer to peer payment systems (1)
- pensions (1)
- policy measures in the EU (1)
- productivity (1)
- public debt (1)
- public private partnership (1)
- public-private relations (1)
- restatements (1)
- risk premia (1)
- risk sharing (1)
- risk-taking (1)
- securities markets (1)
- social impact bonds (1)
- social relations (1)
- social security claiming (1)
- spillover effects (1)
- statistical risk measurement (1)
- statistics (1)
- strategies (1)
- supervisory arbitrage (1)
- systemic risk analysis (1)
- taxation (1)
- too big to fail (1)
- total loss absorbing capacity (TLAC) (1)
- troika (1)
Institute
103
A safe core mandate
(2023)
Central banks have vastly expanded their footprint on capital markets. At a time of extraordinary pressure by many sides, a simple benchmark for the scale and scope of their core mandate of price and financial stability may be useful.
We make a case for a narrow mandate to maintain and safeguard the border between safe and quasi safe assets. This ex-ante definition minimizes ambiguity and discourages risk creation and limit panic runs, primarily by separating market demand for reliable liquidity from risk-intolerant, price-insensitive demand for a safe store of value. The central bank may be occasionally forced to intervene beyond the safe core but should not be bound by any such ex-ante mandate, unless directed to specific goals set by legislation with explicit fiscal support.
We review distinct features of liquidity and safety demand, seeking a definition of the safety border, and discuss LOLR support for borderline safe assets such as MMF or uninsured deposits.
A safe core formulation is close to the historical focus on regulated entities, collateralized lending and attention to the public debt market, but its specific framing offers some context on controversial issues such as the extent of LOLR responsibilities. It also justifies a persistently large scale for central bank liabilities (Greenwood, Hansom and Stein 2016), as safety demand is related to financial wealth rather than GDP. Finally, it is consistent with an active central bank role in supporting liquidity in government debt markets trading and clearing (Duffie 2020, 2021).
102
This Policy Letter presents two event studies based on the pre-war data that foreshadows the remarkable way in which Russian economy was able to withstand the pressure from unprecedented package of international sanctions. First, it shows that a sudden stop of one of the two domestic producers of zinc in 2018 did not lead to a slowdown in the steel industry, which heavily relied on this input. Second, it demonstrates that a huge increase in cost of fuel called mazut in 2020 had virtually no impact on firms that used it, even in the regions where it was hard to substitute it for alternative fuels. This Policy Letter argues that such stability in production can be explained by the fact that Russian economy is heavily oriented toward commodities. It is much easier to replace a commodity supplier than a supplier of manufacturing goods, and many commodity producers operate at high profit margins that allow them to continue to operate even after big increases in their costs. Thus, sanctions had a much smaller impact on Russia than they would have on an economy with larger manufacturing sector, where inputs are less substitutable and profit margins are smaller.
100
Climate risk has become a major concern for financial institutions and financial markets. Yet, climate policy is still in its infancy and contributes to increased uncertainty. For example, the lack of a sufficiently high carbon price and the variety of definitions for green activities lower the value of existing and new capital, and complicate risk management. This column argues that it would be welfare-enhancing if policy changes were to follow a predictable longer-term path. Accordingly, the authors suggest a role for financial regulation in the transition.
99
There is much discussion today about a possible digital euro (PDE). Is this attention exaggerated? Are “central bank digital currencies” (CBDCs) “a solution in search of a problem”, as some have argued? This article summarizes the main facts about the PDE and concludes that, if the decision on adoption had to be taken today, the arguments against would outweigh those in favor. However, there may be future circumstances in which having a CBDC ready for use can indeed be useful. Therefore, preparing is a good thing, even if the odds of its usefulness in normal conditions are slim.
98
The SVB case is a wake-up call for Europe’s regulators as it demonstrates the destructive power of a bank-run: it undermines the role of loss absorbing capital, elbowing governments to bailout affected banks. Many types of bank management weaknesses, like excessive duration risk, may raise concerns of bank losses – but to serve as a run-trigger, there needs to be a large enough group of bank depositors that fails to be fully covered by a deposit insurance scheme. Latent run-risk is the root cause of inefficient liquidations, and we argue that a run on SVB assets could have been avoided altogether by a more thoughtful deposit insurance scheme, sharply distinguishing between loss absorbing capital (equity plus bail-in debt) and other liabilities which are deemed not to be bail-inable, namely demand deposits. These evidence-based insights have direct implications for Europe’s banking regulation, suggesting a minimum and a maximum for a banks’ loss absorption capacity.
97
Large technology firms («BigTechs») increasingly extend their influence in finance, primarily taking over market shares in payment services. A further expansion of their businesses into the territory of cryptocurrencies could entail new and unprecedented risks for the future, namely for financial stability, competition in the private sector and monetary policy. When creating a regulatory toolbox to address these risks, financial regulatory, antitrust, and platform-specific solutions should be closely intertwined in order to fully absorb all the potential threats and to take account of the complex risks these platform companies bear. This policy letter evaluates the solutions lately proposed by the European Commission, with specific focus on the upcoming regulation of Markets in crypto-assets (MiCA), but also the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital services act (DSA), against the background of cryptocurrencies issued by BigTechs and sheds light on financial regulatory, competition and monetary law issues coming along with the possible designs of these cryptocurrencies.
96
This policy letter collects elementary economic statistics and provides a very basic look on Russian public finances (i) to inform the reader’s opinion on a possible planning process behind the war against Ukraine and (ii) to discuss prospects of an energy embargo and its capability to affect the stability of the Russian economy.
95
This policy note summarizes our assessment of financial sanctions against Russia. We see an increase in sanctions severity starting from (1) the widely discussed SWIFT exclusions, followed by (2) blocking of correspondent banking relationships with Russian banks, including the Central Bank, alongside secondary sanctions, and (3) a full blacklisting of the ‘real’ export-import flows underlying the financial transactions. We assess option (1) as being less impactful than often believed yet sending a strong signal of EU unity; option (2) as an effective way to isolate the Russian banking system, particularly if secondary sanctions are in place, to avoid workarounds. Option (3) represents possibly the most effective way to apply economic and financial pressure, interrupting trade relationships.
92
Historically Central Bank Independence (CBI) was anything but the norm. CBI seems to contradict core principles of democracy. Most economists were also against CBI. After the Great Inflation of the 1970ies many empirical studies demonstrated that there is a strong negative correlation between the degree of CBI and the rate of inflation. In 1990 most major countries had endowed their central bank with the status of independence. Overburdening with elevated expectations and additional competences are threatening the reputation of central banks and undermining the case for CBI.
88
The Wirecard scandal is a wake-up call alerting German politics to the importance of securities market integrity. The role of market supervision is to ensure the smooth functioning of capital markets and their integrity, creating trust among and acceptance by investors locally and globally. The existing patchwork of national supervisory practice in Europe is under discussion today, in the wake of Brexit that will end the role of London as a de-facto lead supervisor in stock and bond markets. A fundamental overhaul of a fragmented securities markets supervisory regime in Europe would offer the potential to lead to the establishment of an independent European Single Market Supervisor (ESMS). Endowed with strong enforcement powers, and supported by the existing national agencies, the ESMS would be entrusted with ensuring a uniform market standard as to transparency and other issues of market integrity across Europe. This would not rule out maintaining a variety of market organization structures at the national level. The ESMS would need executive powers in the world of markets (i.e. securities and trading), much like the SSM in the world of banking. To fill this new role, ESMS would have to be established as a new, independent institution, including an enormously scaled up staff if compared, e.g., to ESMA.
86
This Policy Letter outlines a pandemic insurance solution through a pandemic-related “Insurance Linked Bond”. It would be originated by governments, with a principal amount to cover significant costs resulting from a pandemic. These bonds, which would be traded on a secondary market, generate a risk-adequate return for private and institutional investors that is financed through the insurance premiums paid by the public domain. In case of a pre-defined pandemic trigger event, the principal of the bond becomes available for the originating governments to cover pandemic-related costs. Through this approach, governments can insure themselves against future pandemic-related risks, while funding comes primarily from private and institutional investors.
85
The European Commission is trying to reboot the CMU project: The High-Level Forum on Capital Markets Union – a group of 28 selected experts from industry, academia and civil society – is expected to submit policy recommendations by the end of May 2020 which will feed into the Commission’s new CMU agenda. This contribution is largely based on a letter to the High-Level Forum that gives feedback on the Interim Report published in February. There, we introduce a comprehensive approach to distinguish, from a functional finance perspective, between the ‘game changers’ and what is nice to have. We highlight the importance of common and consistent supervisory practices across Member States and recommend building up a European Securities and Exchange Commission (E-SEC) according to the American model.
84
This Policy Letter presents a proposal for designing a program of government assistance for firms hurt by the Coronavirus crisis in the European Union (EU). In our recent Policy Letter 81, we introduced a new, equity-type instrument, a cash-against-tax surcharge scheme, bundled across firms and countries in a European Pandemic Equity Fund (EPEF). The present Policy Letter 84 focuses on the principles and conditions relevant for the operationalization of a EPEF. Our proposal has several desirable features. It: a) offers better risk sharing opportunities, augmenting the resilience of businesses and EU economies; b) is need-based, thereby contributing to an effective use of resources; c) builds on conditions and credible controls, addressing adverse selection and moral hazard; d) is accessible to smaller and medium-sized firms, the backbone of Europe’s economy; e) applies Europe-wide uniform eligibility criteria, strengthening support among member states; f) is a scheme of limited duration, reducing (perceived) government interference in businesses; g) creates a template for a growth-oriented public policy, aligning public and private sector interests; and h) builds on the existing institutional infrastructure and requires minimal legislative adjustments.
82
The case for corona bonds
(2020)
Corona bonds are feasible and important to preserve the European project. We set out a number of principles that might serve as a blueprint for the European institutions. Importantly, Corona bonds could be issued through a new public law entity and include all the safeguards required for the protection of the fundamental values of the EU. This proposal is pragmatic in the sense that it facilitates the choice European leaders have to make now; necessary to secure the resilience of the European Union. The political risks are significantly higher now than in 2010. The gargantuan challenge of tackling the combined impact of climate change, migration, digitalization, geopolitical shifts, and the spread of autocracy, requires leadership and joint action by the Council and the Eurogroup.
81
This policy letter adds to the current discussion on how to design a program of government assistance for firms hurt by the Coronavirus crisis. While not pretending to provide a cure-all proposal, the advocated scheme could help to bring funding to firms, even small firms, quickly, without increasing their leverage and default risk. The plan combines outright cash transfers to firms with a temporary, elevated corporate profit tax at the firm level as a form of conditional payback. The implied equity-like payment structure has positive risk-sharing features for firms, without impinging on ownership structures. The proposal has to be implemented at the pan-European level to strengthen Euro area resilience.
78
The spreading of the Covid-19 virus causes a reduction in economic activity worldwide and may lead to new risks to financial stability. The authors draw attention to the urgency of the targeted mitigation strategies on the European level and suggest taking coordinated action on the fiscal side to provide liquidity to affected firms in the corporate sector. Otherwise, virus-related cashflow interruptions could lead to a new full-blown banking crisis. Monetary policy measures are unlikely to mitigate cash liquidity shortages at the level of individual firms. Coordinated action at European level is decisive to prevent markets from losing confidence in the resilience of banks, particularly in countries with limited fiscal capacity. In contrast to the euro crisis of 2011, the cause of the current crisis does not lie in the financial markets; therefore, the risk of moral hazard for banks or states is low.
77
Discussions about the banking union have restarted. Its success so far is limited: national banking sectors are still overwhelmingly exposed to their own countries’ economies, cross border banking has not increased and capital and liquidity remain locked within national boundaries. The policy letter highlights that the current debate, centered on sovereign exposures and deposit insurance, misses critical underlying problems in the supervision and resolution frameworks. The ECB supervisors’ efforts to facilitate cross-border banking have been hampered by national ringfencing. The resolution framework is not up to its task: limited powers of the SRB, prohibitive access conditions and limited size of the Single Resolution Fund limit its effectiveness. A lack of a coherent European framework for insolvency unlevels the regulatory field and creates incentives to bypass European rules. The new Commission and European Parliament, with the new ECB leadership, provide a unique opportunity to address these shortcomings and make the banking union work.
76
Facebook’s proposal to create a global digital currency, Libra, has generated a wide discussion about its potential benefits and drawbacks. This note contributes to this discussion and, first, characterizes similarities and dissimilarities of Libra’s building blocks with existing institutions. Second, the note discusses open questions about Libra which arise from this characterization and, third, potential future developments and their policy implications. A central issue is that Libra raises considerable questions about its role in and impact on the international monetary and financial system that should be addressed before policymakers and regulators give Libra the green light.