Universitätspublikationen
Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (141) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (72)
- Part of Periodical (55)
- Article (7)
- Book (2)
- Contribution to a Periodical (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Preprint (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (141) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (141)
Keywords
- Financial Institutions (18)
- ECB (16)
- Capital Markets Union (14)
- Banking Union (9)
- Monetary Policy (8)
- Climate Change (6)
- Cryptocurrency (6)
- Financial Markets (6)
- Sustainable Finance (6)
- TARGET (6)
Institute
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (141) (remove)
The term structure of interest rates is crucial for the transmission of monetary policy to financial markets and the macroeconomy. Disentangling the impact of monetary policy on the components of interest rates, expected short rates and term premia, is essential to understanding this channel. To accomplish this, we provide a quantitative structural model with endogenous, time-varying term premia that are consistent with empirical findings. News about future policy, in contrast to unexpected policy shocks, has quantitatively significant effects on term premia along the entire term structure. This provides a plausible explanation for partly contradictory estimates in the empirical literature.
German proposal for a common European deposit insurance, new rules for investment firms and covered bonds, and new EU legal framework on Sustainable Finance: a selection of financial regulatory developments from this month.
Recently, Fuest and Sinn (2018) have demanded a change of rules for the Eurozone’s Target 2 payment system, claiming it would violate the Statutes of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank. The authors present a stylized model based on a set of macro-economic assumptions, and show that Target 2 may lead to loss sharing among national central banks (NCBs), thus violating the no risk-sharing requirement laid out by the Eurosystem Statutes.
In this note, I present an augmented model that incorporates essential features of the micro- and macroprudential regulatory and supervisory regime that today is hard-wired into Europe’s banking system. The model shows that the original no-risk-sharing principle is not necessarily violated during a financial crisis of a member state. Moreover, it shows that under a banking union regime, financial crisis asset value losses at or below the 99.9th percentile are borne by private investors, not by taxpayers, and particularly not by central banks.
Therefore, policy conclusions from the micro-founded model differ significantly from those suggested by Fuest and Sinn (2018).