Posted on October 10, 2014 by iMFdirect
By Serkan Arslanalp, David Jones, and Sanjay Hazarika
Six years after the start of the global financial crisis, low interest rates and other central bank policies in the United States remain critical to encourage economic risk-taking—increased consumption by households, and greater willingness to invest and hire by businesses. However, this prolonged monetary ease also may have encouraged excessive financial risk-taking. Our analysis in the latest Global Financial Stability Report suggests that although economic benefits are becoming more evident, U.S. officials should remain alert to excessive financial risk-taking, particularly in lower-rated corporate debt markets.
Bullish financial risk-taking bears monitoring
Persistently low global interest rates have prompted investors to search for higher returns in a wide range of markets, such as stocks, and investment-grade and high-yield bonds. This has resulted in escalating asset prices, and enabled issuers to sell assets with a reduced degree of protection for investors (we give you an example below). The combined trends of more expensive assets and a weakening quality of issuance could pose risks to stability.
Filed under: Advanced Economies, Annual Meetings, Economic Crisis, Economic outlook, Economic research, Emerging Markets, Finance, Financial Crisis, Fiscal policy, Globalization, IMF, International Monetary Fund, Investment | Tagged: banking system, corporate debt, emerging market, Global Financial Stability Report, interest rates, U.S. Fed, United States | Leave a comment »
Posted on October 8, 2014 by iMFdirect
By José Viñals
(Versions in Español, 中文)
I have three key messages for you today:
1. Policymakers are facing a new global imbalance: not enough economic risk-taking in support of growth, but increasing excesses in financial risk-taking posing stability challenges.
2. Banks are safer but may not be strong enough to vigorously support the recovery. And risks are shifting to the shadow banking system in the form of rising market and liquidity risks. If left unaddressed, these risks could compromise global financial stability.
3. In order to address this new global imbalance, we must promote economic risk-taking by improving the transmission of monetary policy to the real economy. And we must address financial excesses through better micro- and macroprudential policies.
Filed under: Advanced Economies, Asia, Emerging Markets, Europe, Finance, Financial Crisis, IMF, International Monetary Fund, Investment, Politics, Reform | Tagged: bank credit, banking sector, economic recovery, Europe, GFSR, Global Financial Stability Report, Japan, José Viñals, liquidity, macroprudential policies, monetary policy, shadow banking, United States | Leave a comment »
Posted on October 3, 2014 by iMFdirect
By Gaston Gelos and Nico Valckx
Shadow banking has grown by leaps and bounds around the world in the last decade. It is now worth over $70 trillion. We take a closer look at what has driven this growth to help countries figure out what policies to use to minimize the risks involved.
In our analysis, we’ve found that shadow banks are both a boon and a bane for countries. Many people are worried about institutions that provide credit intermediation, borrow and lend money like banks, but are not regulated like them and lack a formal safety net. The largest shadow banking markets are in the United States and Europe, but in emerging markets, they have also expanded very rapidly, albeit from a low base.
Filed under: Advanced Economies, Economic outlook, Economic research, Emerging Markets, Europe, Finance, Financial Crisis, Financial regulation, growth, International Monetary Fund, Investment, Politics | Tagged: banks, euro area, Financial Stability Board, GFSR, Global Financial Stability Report, interest rates, investment, shadow banking, United States | Leave a comment »
Posted on September 15, 2014 by iMFdirect
By Steven Barnett and Shaun Roache
(Versions in 中文)
“Shadow” banking: a surprisingly colorful term for our staid economics profession. Intended or not, it conjures images of dark, sinister, and even shady transactions. With a name like “shadow banking” it must be bad. This is unfair. While the profession lacks a uniform definition, the idea is financial intermediation that takes place outside of banks—and this can be good, bad, or otherwise.
Our goal here is to shine a light on shadow banking in China. We at the IMF have used many terms. Last year, we had a descriptive one, albeit a mouthful—off-balance sheet and nonbank financial intermediation. The April 2014 Global Financial Sector Report (GFSR) called it nonbank intermediation. This year our China Article IV report used the term shadow banking.
Filed under: Asia, Economic research, Emerging Markets, Finance, Globalization, growth, IMF, International Monetary Fund | Tagged: bank credit, China, corporate bonds, emerging economies, Global Financial Stability Report, loans, shadow banking | Leave a comment »
Posted on September 4, 2014 by iMFdirect
As you trudge back to the office or cubie with a little sand still crunching in your backpack, you know the holiday is over. To help you catch up, here are some blogs to re-read to get you back into the swing of things.
Remember Europe? I thought so. The European Central Bank is center stage this week as inflation in Europe has hit a trough, which reminded me of our blog about deflation back in March that rattled a few cages.
Which brings us to what will or won’t happen with global interest rates, and their impact on well, pretty much everyone. We’ve analyzed the tea leaves so you don’t have to.
Filed under: Asia, Economic Crisis, Economic research, Emerging Markets, Europe, IMF, Inequality, International Monetary Fund, Low-income countries | Tagged: China, deflation, Europe, European Central Bank, Fiscal Monitor, Global Financial Stability Report, IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings, inequality, interest rates, United States, World Economic Outlook | Leave a comment »
Posted on May 14, 2014 by iMFdirect
By Luc Laeven, Lev Ratnovski, and Hui Tong
Large banks were at the center of the recent financial crisis. The public dismay at costly but necessary bailouts of “too-big-to-fail” banks has triggered an active debate on the optimal size and range of activities of banks.
But this debate remains inconclusive, in part because the economics of an “optimal” bank size is far from clear. Our recent study tries to fill this gap by summarizing what we know about large banks using data for a large cross-section of banking firms in 52 countries.
We find that while large banks are riskier, and create most of the systemic risk in the financial system, it is difficult to determine an “optimal” bank size. In this setting, we find that the best policy option may not be outright restrictions on bank size, but capital—requiring large banks to hold more capital—and better bank resolution and governance.
Filed under: Economic research, Finance, Financial Crisis, Financial regulation, Fiscal, Fiscal policy, Government, International Monetary Fund, Reform | Tagged: banking regulation, banks, big banks, financial markets, Financial regulation, financial stability, Global Financial Stability Report, IMF, iMFdirect, iMFdirect blog, International Monetary Fund, monetary policy | Leave a comment »