Blog Post

Europe’s banks still need restructuring

Whether in G20 summits or in more local venues, most current discussions on financial stability tend to focus on ensuring that last year’s meltdown does not happen again, with tighter regulation of capital and compensation policies, prevention of moral hazard through new resolution mechanisms, overhaul of supervisory structures, and reform of governance and disclosures. But […]

By: Date: October 27, 2009 Topic: Macroeconomic policy

Whether in G20 summits or in more local venues, most current discussions on financial stability tend to focus on ensuring that last year’s meltdown does not happen again, with tighter regulation of capital and compensation policies, prevention of moral hazard through new resolution mechanisms, overhaul of supervisory structures, and reform of governance and disclosures.

But while Europe’s policymakers ponder how to prevent the next crisis, they should remind themselves that the current one has not been solved yet. True, the market is no longer in panic mode, and macroeconomic contagion has been successfully prevented so far in the EU’s more volatile central and eastern countries. But while some banks have started repaying state aid, the banking system remains largely under state guarantee. The latest numbers from the International Monetary Fund suggest huge losses remain undisclosed, especially in the euro area. And government finances are being stretched to an unprecedented limit.

Meanwhile, weak banks will keep financing weak companies to delay the day of reckoning, even in cases where it is overdue. Simultaneously, the economic agents which would extract most value from credit, especially companies with a potential for high growth, will not have access to it. Experience tells us that the resulting economic “zombification”, which is not only about credit crunch but misallocation of capital on a vast scale, has a powerful negative impact on growth.

We also know that the financial system will remain crippled as long as there has not been a system-wide ‘triage’, in which government authorities check the health of all large banks under a single methodology to value assets more reliably than in the published financial statements, share the result with all market participants – and take action if some institutions are too weak to be brought back to health by market solutions alone, let alone insolvent. Past examples, including the US savings and loan banks in the 1980s or Sweden in 1992-93 or Japan in the 1990s, illustrate that such triage is the key to exiting systemic banking crises. In the US, the “stress tests” of this spring have had a comparable effect. They have enhanced trust, enabled considerable levels of capital-raising, and are at this point considered by most observers as a resounding policy success.

A triage process is always politically difficult to initiate, as it differentiates winners from losers and can trigger the use of public money, though there was no such direct effect in the US case. In Europe, this difficulty is compounded by the mismatch between a basically integrated EU banking market, where competitive forces largely (if imperfectly) straddle borders, and supervisory institutions which until now have remained essentially national.

Integration is too advanced for nations to act alone: with economic nationalism running high, policymakers prefer a dysfunctional status quo to revealing weaknesses in some of “their” banks that would expose them to the risk of being taken over by “foreigners”. At supranational level, no player is strong enough to force action. The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) has almost no power of its own. A European Banking Authority is planned to replace it and will probably develop some teeth eventually, but not before many years. The European Commission’s competition services are doing a remarkable job of forcing restructuring as a counterpart for state aid, but have no systemic stability mandate and are at risk of overextension. The result is, to a large degree, policy paralysis.
Just contrast the three-page results of the “stress tests” carried out by CEBS, released earlier this month, with the US communication back in May.

CEBS assures us that things are all right, but gives no bank-by-bank numbers, so the market cannot identify which institutions need more capital and how much. In spite of carrying the same name, the US stress tests delivered triage, while the EU ones do not. The latter seem not to have moved the market an inch.

Given the institutional mismatch, only political leadership can break this stalemate. Germany is the pivotal country here, being both the EU’s largest player and one where a number of major financial firms, starting with most Landesbanken, are believed to be financially feeble. But not coincidentally, Germany’s banking and political communities are uniquely intertwined. This has impeded bold action under the “grand coalition” that governed Germany until late September. Whether it can change following the recent election is a major question for Europe’s future.

If such change happens, then Germany would have enough heft to foster EU-level action. This could take the form of a temporary multi-country fiduciary entity to do the triage, broker any intergovernmental negotiations if joint interventions are needed, and manage those assets that would fall under public ownership as a result.

The good news is that contrary to some maximalist views, the crisis has taught us that the burden of such intervention can be shared among countries on an ad hoc, bank-by-bank basis. In other words, unity of action is required for successful handling of banking situations, but fiscal federalism is not. Just as the single currency has proved fairly resilient even in the absence of an EU federal budget, a credible supranational crisis management framework can be created without asking member states to abandon their fiscal discretion.

With this in mind, Germany’s options look fairly simple. Either it leads a triage process jointly with its neighbours, a difficult task that calls for unprecedented solutions but a necessary condition to restoring sound credit conditions. Or it continues defending sticking-plaster fixes that amount to inaction, with the price being sluggish growth for an unlimited period of time, as in Japan during the “lost decade”. Your choice now, Ms Merkel.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

May
25
14:30

How can we support and restructure firms hit by the COVID-19 crisis?

What are the vulnerabilities and risks in the enterprise sector and how prepared are countries to handle a large-scale restructuring of businesses?

Speakers: Ceyla Pazarbasioglu and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

May - Jun
31-1
10:30

MICROPROD Final Event

Final conference of the MICROPROD project

Speakers: Carlo Altomonte, Eric Bartelsman, Marta Bisztray, Italo Colantone, Maria Demertzis, Wolfhard Kaus, Javier Miranda, Steffen Müller, Verena Plümpe, Niclas Poitiers, Andrea Roventini, Gianluca Santoni, Valerie Smeets, Nicola Viegi and Markus Zimmermann Topic: Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

[Cancelled] Shifting taxes in order to achieve green goals

[This event is cancelled until further notice] How could shifting the tax burden from labour to pollution and resources help the EU reach its climate goals?

Speakers: Niclas Poitiers and Femke Groothuis Topic: Green economy, Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 12, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

How are crises changing central bank doctrines?

How is monetary policy evolving in the face of recent crises? With central banks taking on new roles, how accountable are they to democratic institutions?

Speakers: Maria Demertzis, Benoît Coeuré, Pervenche Berès, Hans-Helmut Kotz and Athanasios Orphanides Topic: Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 11, 2022
Read article Download PDF More by this author
 

Book/Special report

European governanceInclusive growth

Bruegel annual report 2021

The Bruegel annual report provides a broad overview of the organisation's work in the previous year.

By: Bruegel Topic: Banking and capital markets, Digital economy and innovation, European governance, Global economy and trade, Green economy, Inclusive growth, Macroeconomic policy Date: May 6, 2022
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

European governance

Fiscal support and monetary vigilance: economic policy implications of the Russia-Ukraine war for the European Union

Policymakers must think coherently about the joint implications of their actions, from sanctions on Russia to subsidies and transfers to their own citizens, and avoid taking measures that contradict each other. This is what we try to do in this Policy Contribution, focusing on the macroeconomic aspects of relevance for Europe.

By: Olivier Blanchard and Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European governance, Macroeconomic policy Date: April 29, 2022
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

Working Paper

The low productivity of European firms: how can policies enhance the allocation of resources?

A summary of the most important policy lessons from research undertaken in the MICROPROD project work package 4, related to the allocation of the factors of production, with a special focus on the weak dynamism of European small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

By: Grégory Claeys, Marie Le Mouel and Giovanni Sgaravatti Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: April 25, 2022
Read article More on this topic
 

External Publication

What drives implementation of the European Union’s policy recommendations to its member countries?

Article published in the Journal of Economic Policy Reform.

By: Konstantinos Efstathiou and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: April 13, 2022
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author
 

Working Paper

Measuring the intangible economy to address policy challenges

The purpose of the first work package of the MICROPROD project was to improve the firm-level data infrastructure, expand the measurement of intangible assets and enable cross-country analyses of these productivity trends.

By: Marie Le Mouel Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: April 11, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Macroeconomic and financial stability in changing times: conversation with Andrew Bailey

Guntram Wolff will be joined in conversation by Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England.

Speakers: Andrew Bailey and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: March 28, 2022
Read article
 

Opinion

European governance

How to reconcile increased green public investment needs with fiscal consolidation

The EU’s ambitious emissions reduction targets will require a major increase in green investments. This column considers options for increasing public green investment when major consolidations are needed after the fiscal support provided during the pandemic. The authors make the case for a green golden rule allowing green investment to be funded by deficits that would not count in the fiscal rules. Concerns about ‘greenwashing’ could be addressed through a narrow definition of green investments and strong institutional scrutiny, while countries with debt sustainability concerns could initially rely only on NGEU for their green investment.

By: Zsolt Darvas and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European governance, Green economy, Macroeconomic policy Date: March 8, 2022
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

The week inflation became entrenched

The events that have unfolded since 24 February have solved one dispute: inflation is no longer temporary.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: March 8, 2022
Load more posts