At the end of last month, the IMF launched its new Global Debt Database. For the first time, IMF statisticians have compiled a comprehensive set of calculations of both public and private debt, country by country, constructing a time series stretching back to the end of World War II. It is an impressive piece of work.
The headline figure is striking. Global debt has hit a high of 225 percent of world GDP, exceeding the previous record of 213 percent in 2009. So, as the IMF points out, there has been no deleveraging at all at the global level since the 2007-2008 financial crisis. In some countries, the composition of debt changed, as public debt replaced private debt in the post-crisis recession, but that shift has mostly stopped.
Are these large figures alarming? In aggregate terms, perhaps not. At a time when economic growth is robust almost everywhere, financial markets are relaxed about debt sustainability.
Long-term interest rates remain remarkably low, but the numbers do tend to support the hypothesis that the so-called debt intensity of growth has increased: We seem to need higher levels of debt to support a given rate of economic growth than we did before.
Perhaps that is partly because the growth in income and wealth inequality in developed countries has distributed spending power to those with a propensity to spend less than their income. That trend has leveled off recently, but the implications are still with us.
It also seems that productivity growth has slowed, so a given quantum of investment generates less output than it used to do.
The IMF’s recommendation to governments is that they should fix the roof while the sun is shining: accumulate a fiscal surplus, or at least reduce deficits, in good times so that they are better prepared for the next downturn, which will surely come before too long.
The current upturn is now quite mature. That puts the IMF on a collision course with the tax-cutting US administration and Italy’s new government.
If the Italians’ grandiose plans for a minimum income and more public investment are implemented, they might soon find themselves in difficult discussions with the IMF. The team that has been in Athens for the past few years might soon be booked on a flight to Rome.
Yet what are the implications if the growth in debt is principally in the private sector? That is a question for the financial stability authorities in each country.
Since the crisis, new, far tougher capital requirements have been introduced for banks, and a set of macroprudential tools has been developed for regulators.
The idea is that regulators should be able to “lean into the wind” of excessive credit expansions, by increasing the amount of capital a bank must hold, with the aim of dampening the supply of credit before it reaches a dangerous level. The increase might be imposed across the board, or focused on mortgage lending, for example, if growth in house prices looks worryingly rapid.
Other alternatives could be to impose maximum loan-to-value limits, or minimum down payments on home purchases.
New authorities were established to oversee the use of these new macroprudential tools. The European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), chaired by European Central Bank (ECB) President Mario Draghi, does the job in the EU, and the Financial Policy Committee (FPC) of the Bank of England has domestic jurisdiction in the UK, although the governor of the Bank of England is also deputy chair of the ESRB. What will happen to that position after Brexit is unclear. In the US, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) is the coordinating body.
However, there are important differences between them. The FPC is in some ways the most powerful of the three. It can impose a countercyclical capital buffer on UK banks, and has at times threatened to do so. For a time, the committee took the view that unsecured personal lending was growing too fast.
The ESRB cannot act discretely, but it monitors EU and European Free Trade Association member states closely and publishes regular reports. The most recent review last month showed that additional buffers are in force in Sweden, Norway, Iceland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, in response to the particular credit conditions in those countries. France has since joined the list.
In the eurozone of course, the ECB is the supervisor, so Draghi can put on a different hat and act directly, if necessary, through his own staff.
The US position is less clear. The FSOC is a coordinator, not regulator with its own powers. It is a bowl in which the alphabet soup of US financial regulators is stirred from time to time. It has no authority over its members and cannot impose countercyclical buffers. Its attempts to categorize large US insurers as globally systemic firms have been thwarted by the courts.
There are those at the US Federal Reserve who wish it were otherwise, recognizing that without the support of the FSOC, which is chaired by the US secretary of the Treasury, they will find it hard, if not impossible, to dig into the macroprudential toolkit.
Therefore, we must hope that the Basel-based capital requirements imposed by the various US banking regulators are adequate. So far, the ratios have not been cut, although other deregulatory initiatives, proposed by appointees of US President Donald Trump in the relevant agencies, are in the works.
Macroprudential policy might be working as intended in Slovakia, but it is unlikely to come to the rescue where it needed the most: in the world’s biggest financial market.
Howard Davies, former first chairman of the UK’s Financial Services Authority, is chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland. He was director of the London School of Economics and served as deputy governor of the Bank of England and director-general of the Confederation of British Industry.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS