Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (15)
- Report (2)
Language
- English (17) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (17)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (17)
Keywords
- Deutschland (2)
- monetary policy (2)
- Altersversorgung (1)
- Bevölkerungsentwicklung (1)
- ECB (1)
- EFSF (1)
- ESM (1)
- Europäische Union (1)
- Finanzverfassung (1)
- Landesbank (1)
- OMT (1)
- Recht (1)
- Restrukturierung (1)
- Sparkasse (1)
- control by Court of Auditors (1)
- economic and monetary union (1)
- economic policy (1)
- euro (1)
- fiscal policy (1)
- fiscal responsibility (1)
- new fiscal compact (1)
- sovereign debt crisis (1)
In its decision of December 13, 2011, the Constitutional Court of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia ruled that a State Court of Auditors is granted by the constitution a broad scope of powers not only to control the immediate state administration but also entities outside the direct state administration, as far as they exercise financial responsibility for the state. This ruling may have serious implications for the capital guarantees extended by EU Member States to the newly established institutions on the European level, as for instance the European Stability Mechanism (ESM).
In the communication of the European Central Bank (ECB), the statement that „we act within our mandate“ is often referred to. Also among practitioners of the Eurosystem the term „mandate“ has become popular. In his Working Paper, Helmut Siekmann analyzes the legal foundation of the tasks and objectives of the Eurosysstem and price stability as a legal term. He finds that the primary law of the EU only very sparsely employs the term „mandate“. It is never used in the context of monetary policy and its institutions. Moreover, he comes to the conclusion that inflation targeting as a task, competence, or objective of the Eurosystem is legally highly questionable according to the common standards of interpretation.
The European Monetary Union euro has done very well since its initiation. Price stability has been secured and the external value of the new currency is more than satisfactory. The confidence in it is also shown by its increasing use as a global reserve currency. It has been a stabilizing factor in the current crisis. The recent budgetary problems of some member states are principally not a problem of the Monetary Union. It is therefore in no way justified to speak of a "Euro-crisis". It is true, however, that the Monetary Union restricts the number of possibilities for member states to solve their financial problems but it does not eliminate them entirely that outside help would have become indispensible. The purchase of debt instruments of member states in financial distress by the ECB is questionable from an economic, and more important, from a legal point of view. The longer the duration, the less legally justifiable is it. Financial support for member states in severe financial distress might be acceptable as a temporary crisis resolution mechanism. A permanent support mechanism needs a basis in the primary law of the EU. The treatment of the risk of "sovereign" debt in the legal framework for financial institutions urgently needs improvement. Especially the capital requirements for credit institutions have to be adjusted.
After initial temporary measures in support of Greece prooved insufficient to end the sovereign debt crisis, extensive countermeasures have ensued. The heads of state of the euro group have agreed to permanent support mechanims over the course of the past two years. In addition, the European Central Bank (ECB) has become involved in the assistance program. The article provides an overview of the various support mechanisms installed and cautions against the connected legal problems.
In the course of the crisis, the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) has acted several times to support the EU Member States and banking systems in financial distress by purchasing debt instruments: Covered Bonds Programmes (CBP), Securities Market Programmes (SMP), Long Term Refinancing Operations (LTRO), and Targeted Long Term Refinancing Operations (TLTRO), followed by the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) and then the Extended Asset Purchase Programmes (EAPP) – colloquially labelled as Quantitative Easing (QE).
Initially, the support measures of the ESCB might have to be judged as monetary policy but the selectivity of OMT and – even more – SMP in conjunction with the transfer of risks to the ESCB speak against it.