Blog Post

The new Cyprus deal: victory of common sense

The new deal on Cyprus does not only have the right intentions, but averts the two major flaws of the previous deal: It fully protects insured deposits up to the €100,000 amount guaranteed by deposit insurance in all banks, and It bails-in all bondholders and shareholders.

By: Date: March 25, 2013 Topic: Macroeconomic policy

The new deal on Cyprus does not only have the right intentions, but averts the two major flaws of the previous deal:

  • It fully protects insured deposits up to the €100,000 amount guaranteed by deposit insurance in all banks, and
  • It bails-in all bondholders and shareholders.

The deal has other remarkable elements as well:

  • Marfin Laiki Popular Bank (the second biggest bank accounting for about one-third of banking assets in Cyprus), the most troubled bank, will be closed down immediately with full contribution of shareholders, bondholders and uninsured depositors. Insured depositors and the €9bn emergency liquidity assistance (ELA; which allows the central bank of the country to provide loans to banks that do not have collateral eligible at the ECB) will be transferred to the Bank of Cyprus, presumably along with sufficient performing assets (note: Bank of Cyprus is not the central bank, but the biggest commercial bank accounting for slightly more than one-third of banking assets in Cyprus).
  • There will be no capital controls: even though the main text of the Eurogroup statement is unclear on “administrative measures” which should be “temporary, proportionate and non-discriminatory” and “to allow for a swift reopening of banks”. But the Annex of the statement specified that only uninsured depositors of the Bank of Cyprus will be frozen until the recapitalisation of this bank is completed. The recapitalisation of this bank will be done by writing off equity shares and bonds and converting uninsured deposits into equity.
  • The new bank resolution framework will be used to resolve these banks and presumably other troubled banks as well.

The deal is victory of common sense. Taxpayers should not foot the bill for private-sector losses. Depositors have taken the risk of investing in Cypriot banks and thereby benefited enormously from years of low Cypriot taxes and high deposit rates. They could have taken their money to eg Germany, facing much higher tax rates and much lower deposit rates – but in exchange for more safety. Also, without a bailing-in of depositors, a publicly funded bank rescue in Cyprus would have seriously endangered fiscal sustainability, as I argued in a number of posts last week.

It was also a sensible decision of not introducing capital controls (even though we need to see the temporariness of the unspecified administrative measures). As Guntram Wolff argued, an eventual introduction of capital controls in effect would have introduced a different currency in Cyprus, with adverse consequences. Also, the example of Iceland shows that it is rather difficult to remove capital controls: in Iceland capital controls were introduced in late 2008 with the intention of keeping them in place only for a few months, but they are still in place. [Disclosure: since late last year, I am a member of a working group on the removal of Icelandic capital controls and therefore I cannot comment the specifics of Iceland.]

It was also wise resolving banks one-by-one and not distributing the burden of the losses of some banks to all other banks. For example, in 2011 (the latest bank-specific data I have) two of the seven largest Cypriot banks had a profit, and the return on assets of three other banks was about minus one percent, in contrast to the minus 12 percent return on assets of Laiki Bank. Investors of the better performing banks should not be charged with the losses of Laiki.

And also, it was wise from the Cypriot parliament to pass a bank resolution bill some days earlier, a legislation for which I called for, drawing lessons from Denmark.

Therefore, this time I share the assessment of euro-area policymakers that they have chosen the least disruptive options among the available hard choices.

But the Cyprus crisis is not yet over and there are a large number of issues to worry about.

  • Cyprus has to sign the memorandum of understanding for the financial assistance programme, including all details of the restructuring of the financial system, fiscal measures and structural reforms. The programme has to be adopted by euro-area partners as well. And quite importantly, the programme has to be implemented.
  • The banks need to open at a day and there is a major risk of a massive bank-run. Such a situation can be manageable with the ELA support of the ECB, which was indicated in the Eurogroup statement. If a large fraction of deposits leaves permanently, the banks should not collapse but they need to sell their assets in order to be able to pay back ELA. Such a process would lead to sizeable reduction of the size of the Cypriot banking system.
  • A related major risk is that the “temporary administrative measures”, which I suppose would aim to dampen deposit withdrawals, may prove to be permanent, making it uncertain when and how the Cypriot financial system will normalise, even if bank restructuring will go ahead as planned.
  • The growth outlook will be likely revised downward significantly. (See my post yesterday looking at growth and employment in three countries that suffered from massive financial crises). This will raise unemployment, which could make it more difficult for the government to implement the adjustment programme.
  • A weaker growth could endanger fiscal sustainability as well. The €10bn euro lending to the Cypriot government, as concluded by the Eurogroup, amounts to about 60 percent of Cypriot GDP. With a public debt ratio of 87 percent at the end of 2012, the rise in the debt ratio will be very significant, even though the two numbers should not be added, because the official loans will likely be distributed over three years and in part will be used to pay back maturing public debt.
  • The implications of the deal on other euro-area countries with weaker banks are not yet known. Yet as I argued before (see eg here and here), bailing-in private lenders was the right approach in Cyprus and weak banks in other countries should be strengthened immediately. There is also a strong case for speeding up efforts to complete the European banking union. Also, there is also a strong case for implementing more decisive measures to support economic growth throughout the euro area. Such changes may not come, which would make it difficult to safeguard other euro-area countries with weak banks and gloomy growth outlook.

Overall, while the new Cyprus deal is a victory for common sense, there is very long and possibly winding road till we can be assured that the Cyprus crisis is contained.


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

Improving understanding of productivity, its drivers and the way we measure it.

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