Refine
Document Type
- Article (14)
- Part of Periodical (8)
- Working Paper (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (28)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (28)
Keywords
- ECB (7)
- Monetary Policy (6)
- Banking Union (5)
- Coronavirus (5)
- Banking Supervision (4)
- Financial Institutions (4)
- Systemic Risk (4)
- Financial Stability (3)
- Bitcoin (2)
- Corona Bonds (2)
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.
Si bien el discurso sobre los derechos humanos se volvió fundamental para desafiar la austeridad en el período que siguió a la Gran Crisis Financiera desde una perspectiva histórica, el que los derechos humanos desempeñen este papel es más la excepción que la regla. El discurso en materia de derechos humanos en el contexto de la austeridad inducida por la deuda soberana ha variado mucho con el tiempo. Lejos de mostrar progreso, su historia revela los cambios del paradigma del derecho de los derechos humanos. Las páginas que siguen hacen foco en uno de esos cambios, ocurrido en la transición entre las décadas de los setenta y ochenta. En la década de los setenta, los Estados recientemente independizados invocaban los derechos humanos en especial para afirmar su soberanía y alejar la interferencia internacional. El paradigma estructural sobre derechos humanos desapareció abruptamente de los debates sobre austeridad en la década de los ochenta, cuando la crisis de deuda soberana golpeó al Sur Global y creó la necesidad de asistencias multilaterales para obtener liquidez. Frente a la presión de reconsiderar el impacto social de los programas de ajuste estructural que promovía, el Fondo Monetario Internacional desplazó los términos del debate y en lugar de hablar de “necesidades humanas”, un término relacionado con los derechos humanos, pasó a hablar de “capital humano”. En consecuencia, en el momento en que los derechos humanos adquirían el estatus de “última utopía”, dejaron de tener relevancia para la austeridad. Por lo tanto, que el discurso sobre los derechos humanos promueva o no los objetivos sociales dependerá del contexto y del momento histórico. El artículo culmina con una propuesta de paradigma político del derecho de los derechos humanos que refleja estas perspectivas.
Christine Lagarde verband die Ankündigung ihres ersten, moderaten Rettungspakets mit der Aufforderung an die Mitgliedstaaten, fiskalische Hilfen bereitzustellen. Die Märkte scheinen sich das Vertrauen in die Fiskalpolitik indessen abgewöhnt zu haben. Da starke geldpolitische Signale zunächst ausblieben, ging die Talfahrt weiter, bis Lagarde im zweiten Versuch in die Fußstapfen ihres Vorgängers trat und die Schleusen öffnete.
The recovery plan of the Commission entitled "Next Generation EU" proposes a compromise that goes beyond the ominous lowest common denominator. With a package of EUR 750bn in total, comprising EUR 250bn in loans and the rest in grants, the Commission paves the way for both forward-looking public finance and constitutional innovation. The proposals are masterpieces of high-tech legal engineering. Again, European constitutional law evolves through crisis. Yet, again, it stands to reason how far the proposed instruments will shift the European Union towards enhancing solidarity and democracy.
When Christine Lagarde announced her first, moderate rescue package, she called upon member states to provide fiscal aid. But the markets showed to have lost confidence in fiscal policy. In the absence of strong monetary policy signals, the slide continued until Lagarde in her second attempt opened the floodgates.
Warum das Stichwort Corona Bonds so viele falsche Assoziationen weckt, und wie sie beschaffen sein müssten, damit auch Deutschland damit gut klarkommt: Vor der morgigen Sitzung der Eurogruppe spricht Max Steinbeis mit MATTHIAS GOLDMANN über seinen Vorschlag und die damit verknüpften Chancen und Risiken.
Governments, economists and intellectuals have called for common European bonds or increased own EU funds to address the recession induced by Covid19. Unfortunately, the German government, joined by the other members of the “Frugal Four” (Austria, Finland, the Netherlands), has categorically rejected to look into any such measures and favours using the ESM. This reaction created a déjà vu experience for citizens and governments of the heavily affected southern Member States of the EU. The proposal to use the ESM raises fears of another wave of austerity amounting to yet another lost decade for economic, social, and ecological development in Europe.
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.
Bitcoin stands like no other cryptocurrency for the profound transformation of financial markets in the digital economy. While the last few months saw the free trade in goods struggle against trends towards protectionism, cryptocurrencies seemed to tear down one border after the other – physical, geographic, and legal ones alike. A libertarian’s wet dream. Blockchain presents itself as a fortress against state intervention, for whatever purpose. Finally, a technological, market-based solution would put an end to the problem of monetary policy, payment transactions, and make whole chunks of government regulation superfluous. ...