26

result(s)

Word(s)
Publication type
Policy area
Author
Date

The ECB's Asset Purchase Programmes: Experience and Future Perspectives

18-09-2020

In response to the unprecedented shock brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, the European Central Bank (ECB) has deployed a massive package of monetary policy stimulus to safeguard the monetary policy transmission mechanism and keep the euro area economy afloat. As part of this package, the ECB has stepped up its asset purchases, including with the introduction of the new pandemic emergency purchase programme (PEPP) with an envelope of EUR 1.35 trillion by June 2021. Over the years, the impact and ...

In response to the unprecedented shock brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, the European Central Bank (ECB) has deployed a massive package of monetary policy stimulus to safeguard the monetary policy transmission mechanism and keep the euro area economy afloat. As part of this package, the ECB has stepped up its asset purchases, including with the introduction of the new pandemic emergency purchase programme (PEPP) with an envelope of EUR 1.35 trillion by June 2021. Over the years, the impact and the side effects of the non-standard asset purchase programmes have been widely debated. Should they remain as part of the ECB’s toolkit in the future, considering that inflation is expected to stay low and that interest rates are in negative territory? Six papers were prepared for the ECON Committee by the Monetary Expert Panel, presenting empirical evidence and discussing future perspectives of the ECB’s asset purchase programmes. This publication is prepared by Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies for the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON), ahead of the Monetary Dialogue with ECB President Lagarde on 28 September 2020.

External author

Pierre L. SIKLOS, Christophe BLOT, Jérôme CREEL, Paul HUBERT, Luigi BONATTI, Andrea FRACASSO, Roberto TAMBORINI, Joscha BECKMANN, Salomon FIEDLER, Klaus-Jürgen GERN, Stefan KOOTHS, Josefine QUAST, Maik WOLTERS, Angela CAPOLONGO, Daniel GROS, Pierpaolo BENIGNO, Paolo CANOFARI, Giovanni DI BARTOLOMEO, Marcello MESSORI

The ‘general escape clause’ within the Stability and Growth Pact: Fiscal flexibility for severe economic shocks

27-03-2020

An important element of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic will come from European Union (EU) Member States in the form of fiscal intervention. At the same time, Member States are constrained by the fiscal rules in place at both EU and national level. The Stability and Growth Pact contains two clauses allowing Member States to undertake appropriate budgetary measures, within the Pact, in the face of exceptional circumstances. The first is known as the 'unusual events clause', while the second ...

An important element of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic will come from European Union (EU) Member States in the form of fiscal intervention. At the same time, Member States are constrained by the fiscal rules in place at both EU and national level. The Stability and Growth Pact contains two clauses allowing Member States to undertake appropriate budgetary measures, within the Pact, in the face of exceptional circumstances. The first is known as the 'unusual events clause', while the second is termed the 'general escape clause'. In essence, the clauses allow deviation from parts of the Stability and Growth Pact's preventive or corrective arms, either because an unusual event outside the control of one or more Member States has a major impact on the financial position of the general government, or because the euro area or the Union as a whole faces a severe economic downturn. As the current crisis is outside governments' control, with a major impact on public finances, the European Commission noted that it could apply the unusual events clause. However, it also noted that the magnitude of the fiscal effort necessary to protect European citizens and businesses from the effects of the pandemic, and to support the economy in the aftermath, requires the use of more far-reaching flexibility under the Pact. For this reason, the Commission has proposed to activate the general escape clause. With the Council having endorsed the Commission communication, a deviation from the medium-term budgetary objective or from the appropriate adjustment path towards it may be allowed for Member States, during both the assessment and the implementation of Stability or Convergence Programmes. In the corrective arm of the Pact, the clause will allow an extension of the deadline for the Member States to correct their excessive deficits under the excessive deficit procedure, provided those Member States take effective action as recommended by the Council.

European Stability Mechanism – Main Features, Instruments and Accountability

11-10-2019

This document presents the main features of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), including governance, capital structure and funding sources, main lending instruments, as well as its oversight and accountability framework. It also reviews recent proposals and contributions on the possible evolution of the ESM. This note is regularly updated.

This document presents the main features of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), including governance, capital structure and funding sources, main lending instruments, as well as its oversight and accountability framework. It also reviews recent proposals and contributions on the possible evolution of the ESM. This note is regularly updated.

Amending capital requirements: The 'CRD-V package'

30-07-2019

In May 2019, the European Parliament and the Council (the co-legislators) adopted the legislative proposals amending the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation, which establish the prudential framework for financial institutions operating in the EU. The amendments implement the most recent regulatory standards for banks, set at international level ('Basel III framework'). They also address some regulatory shortcomings and aim to contribute to sustainable bank financing of the economy. The ...

In May 2019, the European Parliament and the Council (the co-legislators) adopted the legislative proposals amending the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation, which establish the prudential framework for financial institutions operating in the EU. The amendments implement the most recent regulatory standards for banks, set at international level ('Basel III framework'). They also address some regulatory shortcomings and aim to contribute to sustainable bank financing of the economy. The final acts were published in the Official Journal on 7 June 2019. The new provisions will for the most part apply as of 2021. Fourth edition. The 'EU Legislation in Progress' briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Recent measures for Banca Carige from a BRRD and State Aid perspective

15-02-2019

On 8 January 2019, Banca Carige’s temporary administrators issued a press statement setting out some initiatives they have taken to secure the future of the bank. This briefing contains background information on the case of Banca Carige and links the initiatives taken to respective legal requirements stemming from the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) and the rules for State Aid (SA).

On 8 January 2019, Banca Carige’s temporary administrators issued a press statement setting out some initiatives they have taken to secure the future of the bank. This briefing contains background information on the case of Banca Carige and links the initiatives taken to respective legal requirements stemming from the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) and the rules for State Aid (SA).

Liquidation of Banks: Towards an ‘FDIC’ for the Banking Union?

08-02-2019

This briefing looks at the key differences between the US and the Banking Union resolution and liquidation framework (Section 1) including differences in terms of funding arrangements (Section 2). In view of recent liquidation and resolution experiences, the briefing further assesses what an EU insolvency regime would bring to the Banking Union both in terms of small and medium-size banks’ resolution (Section 3) and in terms of strengthening the existing BRRD resolution framework (Section 4). The ...

This briefing looks at the key differences between the US and the Banking Union resolution and liquidation framework (Section 1) including differences in terms of funding arrangements (Section 2). In view of recent liquidation and resolution experiences, the briefing further assesses what an EU insolvency regime would bring to the Banking Union both in terms of small and medium-size banks’ resolution (Section 3) and in terms of strengthening the existing BRRD resolution framework (Section 4). The briefing finally outlines (Section 5) the key building blocks of an EU liquidation regime for the Banking Union.

Valuation reports in the context of banking resolution: What are the challenges?

05-07-2018

The paper discusses the problem of valuation in bank resolution. In an overview over the most relevant principles of valuation theory, the paper notes the difficulties inherent in valuing risks and illiquidity in holding non-traded assets. Subsequently, the paper briefly reviews the resolution of Banco Popular Español, and then discusses the need for clarification of the no-investor-worse-off principle, the relation between the price in a sale of business and the presumed outcome in an insolvency ...

The paper discusses the problem of valuation in bank resolution. In an overview over the most relevant principles of valuation theory, the paper notes the difficulties inherent in valuing risks and illiquidity in holding non-traded assets. Subsequently, the paper briefly reviews the resolution of Banco Popular Español, and then discusses the need for clarification of the no-investor-worse-off principle, the relation between the price in a sale of business and the presumed outcome in an insolvency procedure, and the difficulties attached to assessing the value of an illiquid asset that is held. The paper concludes with a discussion of the need for time, for valuation and in resolution, warns against a moratorium on withdrawals and payouts, and argues that time pressures would be much reduced if funding in resolution was provided for.

Valuation reports in the context of banking resolution: What are the challenges?

05-07-2018

This study discusses the challenges concerning bank valuation reports in resolution. The resolution mechanism has three types of valuation reports, respectively to determine whether a bank is failing or likely to fail (valuation 1), to inform the use of the resolution tools including bail-in (valuation 2), and to ensure that the no creditor worse off condition is respected (valuation 3). The first experience with the preparation of valuation reports shows that even with the more formal procedures ...

This study discusses the challenges concerning bank valuation reports in resolution. The resolution mechanism has three types of valuation reports, respectively to determine whether a bank is failing or likely to fail (valuation 1), to inform the use of the resolution tools including bail-in (valuation 2), and to ensure that the no creditor worse off condition is respected (valuation 3). The first experience with the preparation of valuation reports shows that even with the more formal procedures there are still substantial uncertainties regarding the outcome of these valuations due to organisational, legal and economic challenges. Additional mitigating measures should be considered to reduce the uncertainty.

External author

Willem Pieter de Groen, CEPS

Valuation Reports in the Context of Banking Resolution: What are the Challenges?

13-06-2018

This paper discusses from a legal perspective the challenges and difficulties involved in the production of the valuation reports required by the BRRD and considers the option of a moratorium tool for use by the resolution authorities as a possible way forward, which could address the concerns about timing and flexibility in the valuation process. Given the discretionary powers of the resolution authorities and the need for SRB independence, the paper also considers the wider issues of legitimacy ...

This paper discusses from a legal perspective the challenges and difficulties involved in the production of the valuation reports required by the BRRD and considers the option of a moratorium tool for use by the resolution authorities as a possible way forward, which could address the concerns about timing and flexibility in the valuation process. Given the discretionary powers of the resolution authorities and the need for SRB independence, the paper also considers the wider issues of legitimacy and accountability in the actions and decisions taken by the Single Resolution Board in light of the unique and complex institutional structure of the SRM.

External author

Rosa María Lastra , Rodrigo Olivares-Caminal

Recovery and resolution of central counterparties (CCPs)

25-04-2018

In recent years, the role and systemic importance of central counterparties (CCPs) has expanded with the gradual implementation of the obligation to centrally clear liquid and standardised over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives. The relevant EU regulatory framework lays down prudential requirements for CCPs, as well as requirements regarding their operation, oversight and risk management. No harmonised EU rules, however, exist for the unlikely situations in which these standards prove insufficient to ...

In recent years, the role and systemic importance of central counterparties (CCPs) has expanded with the gradual implementation of the obligation to centrally clear liquid and standardised over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives. The relevant EU regulatory framework lays down prudential requirements for CCPs, as well as requirements regarding their operation, oversight and risk management. No harmonised EU rules, however, exist for the unlikely situations in which these standards prove insufficient to address major financial or operational difficulties that CCPs may incur or their outright failure. The international standard-setting organisations have developed standards for the recovery and resolution of financial market infrastructures, including CCPs. In a 2013 own-initiative resolution, the Parliament called on the Commission to prioritise the recovery and resolution of CCPs and reiterated this request in a 2015 resolution on building a capital markets union. In November 2016 the European Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation requiring CCPs to prepare recovery measures and providing resolution authorities with early intervention and resolution powers. Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) adopted its report on the proposal on 24 January 2018. Second edition. The ‘EU Legislation in Progress’ briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Upcoming events

25-01-2021
Public Hearing on "Gender aspects of precarious work"
Hearing -
FEMM
26-01-2021
Public hearing on Co-management of EU fisheries at local level
Hearing -
PECH
26-01-2021
The impact of Brexit on the level playing field in the area of taxation
Hearing -
FISC

Partners