Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
e guerra valutaria
0.6
20
Percent
Index
0.5
Capital Mobility
15
0.4 (left scale)
0.2
1945 5
0.1 1918
Low 0 0
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Sources: Bordo et al. (2001), Caprio et al. (2005), Kaminsky and Reinhart (1999), Obstfeld and Taylor (2004), an
these authors.
Notes: This sample includes all countries (even those not in our core sample of 66). The full listing of banking
Fratianni crises dates are
- Presbitero shown– in
(Univpm Appendix II. On theCrisi
MoFiR) left scale, we updated our favorite
e monete index4 of
ISTAO, capital 2010
Dicembre mobility, 3 / 46
The originate & distribute model (Rant 2008)
RUS
IND
AUS
KOR
GBR
ARG
IDN
JPN
CHE
USA
BRA
CHN
CAN
SAU
EUR
TUR
POL
HUN
NOR
SWE
RUS
IND
AUS
KOR
GBR
ARG
IDN
JPN
CHE
USA
BRA
CHN
CAN
SAU
EUR
TUR
POL
HUN
NOR
SWE
footing. 09 09 PP
d aa
1.5 Policy Rate Expectations 3 Central Banks’ Total Assets
Fiscal Balance 2 30 Support
Support for
for Financial
Financial and
and Other
Other Sectors
Sectors and
and Up-Front
Up-Front Financing
Financing Need
Need 35
35 mm
(percent; months on x-axis) (percent of 2008 GDP) (as
(as of
of June
June 2009,
2009, in
in percent
percent of
of 2008
2008 GDP)
GDP)
0 25 Capital
Capital injection
injection by
by governments
governments andand other
other institutions
institutions 30
30 rr
Japan
Europe World 20
Purchase
Purchase of of assets
assets and
and lending
lending by
by governments
governments
25
25
bb
1.0 -2 Guarantees
Guarantees
Liquidity
ff
Euro area Liquidity provision
provision and
and other
other support
support by
by central
central banks
banks 20
20
15 Up-front gg
United Kingdom -4 Up-front government
government financing
financing
15
15
0.5 Emerging and United Kingdom 10 ii
United -6
developing economies 10
States 10 tt
Advanced 5
-8 55 uu
United States economies
0.0 0 tt
t t+3 t+6 t+9 t + 12 2007 08 -10
Sep. 00
1970 80 90 2000 10 14 09 Advanced
Advanced economies
economies G20
G20 emerging
emerging economies
economies
ww
PublicCredit
3000 Debt Growth in Private 300 Quantitative Liquidity Measures 512012 Sources:
Sources: Horton,
Horton, Kumar,
Kumar, and
andMauro
Mauro(2009),
(2009), Table
Table4;4; and
and IMF
IMFstaff
staff calculations.
calculations.
Nonfinancial Sectors 4 (percent of G3 GDP) 11Financial ee
Financialstress
stressindicators
indicators consist
consistof
ofseven
seven financial
financial market
market variables,
variables,including
includingthe
the beta
beta
2500 250 10 of
of banking
banking stocks,
stocks,the
theTED
TED spread,
spread,the
theslope
slopeof of the
the yield
yieldcurve,
curve, corporate
corporate bondbondspreads,
spreads,
Base money 100
United States plus reserves stock
stock market
market returns,
returns, stock
stock market
market volatility,
volatility, and
andexchange
exchangerateratevolatility.
volatility. BoE:
BoE: Bank
Bank of
of
2000 200 Advanced 8
(left scale) economies England;
England; BoJ:
BoJ:Bank
BankofofJapan;
Japan; ECB:
ECB: European
European Central
Central Bank;
Bank; Fed:
Fed: Federal
FederalReserve;
Reserve; GSE:
GSE:
80
Fratianni government-sponsored
government-sponsored enterprises;
enterprises; MBS:
MBS: mortgage-backed
mortgage-backed securities; SNB:
SNB: Swiss
securities;2010 Swiss
1500 - Presbitero (Univpm
150– MoFiR) Crisi
6 e monete ISTAO, 4 Dicembre 5/ 46 p
From Financial Crash to Debt Crisis
There is a strong link between banking crises and sovereign default across the
economic history of great many countries, advanced and emerging alike.
1 Private debt surges are a recurring antecedent to banking crises;
governments quite contribute to this stage of the borrowing boom.
2 Banking crises (both domestic ones and those emanating from international
financial centers) often precede or accompany sovereign debt crises. Indeed,
there is evidence they help predict them.
3 Public borrowing accelerates markedly ahead of a sovereign debt crisis;
governments often have “hidden debts” that far exceed the better
documented levels of external debt. These (often undocumented) hidden
debts encompass domestic public debts.
50
Share of countries in default
(or restructuring)
40
30
20
10
0
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Sources: Lindert and Morton (1989), Macdonald (2003), Purcell and Kaufman (1993), Reinhart, Rogoff,
and Savastano (2003), Suter (1992), and Standard and Poor’s (various years).
Notes: Sample includes all countries, out of a total of 70 listed in Appendix Table 1, that were independent
Publicstates
debt follows
in the a lengthy
given year. and
Specifically, repeated
the number boom-bust
of countries cycle;
increases from 19 inthe
1800 bust
to 32 inphase
1826, asinvolves a
Latin higher
markedly American incidence
colonies gained ofindependence;
sovereignfollowing World War II, newly-independent Asian states
debt crises.
swell the number to 58 and in the following decades as African nation-sates are born the number of
Publicsovereign
sectorincreases
borrowing surges
to a total as full
of 70—the thesample.
crisis nears
Public debt follows a lengthy and repeated boom-bust cycle; the bust phase
Fratianni - Presbitero (Univpm – MoFiR) Crisi e monete ISTAO, 4 Dicembre 2010 7 / 46
.
Sovereign Default on External Debt, Total (domestic plus external) Public
FIGURE 14. Sovereign Default on External Debt, Total (domestic plus external) Public
Debt, Debt,
andandSystemic Banking
Systemic Banking Crises: Economies,
Crises: Advanced Advanced Economies, 1880-2010
1880-2010
(debt as a percent of GDP)
Years during which 25% or more
25 of advanced economies
entered the first year of a 90
banking crisis (black bars)
1893
1907
20 1914 80
1931
2008
70
15
60
10 50
40
5
Advanced economies
Percent of advanced Average public debt/GDP 30
economies in default (in percent, line, right scale)
or restructuring
(shaded, left scale)
0 20
1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
1
For countries that became independent prior to 1800 the calculations are for 1800–2006.
Fratianni - Presbitero (Univpm –Sources:
MoFiR) Authors’ calculations, Standard and Poor’s,
Crisi
Savastano (2003) and sources cited therein.
e Purcell
moneteand Kaufman (1993), Reinhart, Rogoff ISTAO,
and 4 Dicembre 2010 9 / 46
Debt and growth
Reinhart and Rogoff (2009, 2010) analysise newly compiled data on forty-four
countries spanning about two hundred years and find that:
1 the relationship between government debt and real GDP growth is weak for
debt/GDP ratios below 90% of GDP. Above the threshold of 90%, median
growth rates fall by 1%, and average growth falls considerably more.
2 emerging markets face lower thresholds for total external debt (public and
levels for the advanced countries as a group (some countries, such as the US,
have experienced higher inflation when debt/GDP is high). The story is
entirely different for emerging markets, where inflation rises sharply as debt
increases.
Debt–to–growth
Public debt surges are associated with a higher incidence of debt crises and lower
GDP growth.
At a very basic level, a high public debt burden implies higher future taxes
(inflation is also a tax) or lower future government spending, if the government is
expected to repay its debts (debt overhang and crowding out effects).
The recent turmoil in Ireland, Greece and other European countries can be
importantly traced to the adverse impacts of high levels of government debt (or
potentially guaranteed debt) on county risk and economic outcomes.
The global financial crisis triggered a sharp increase in public debt levels, both in
absolute terms and relative to GDP.
The level of aggregate net government debt in the world rose from $23 trillion in
2007 to an expected $34 trillion in 2010.
IMF forecasts indicate the level will reach $48 trillion in 2015. The ratio of world
debt to world GDP rose from 44% in 2007 to 59% in 2010, and is expected to
climb to 65% in 2015.
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Belgium
France
Indonesia
Japan
Australia
Iceland
Austria
Spain
Sweden
India
Malaysia
Pakistan
Estonia
Bulgaria
Thailand
Lithuania
South Africa
Colombia
Poland
Kenya
Russia
Chile
Italy
Israel
UK
US
Finland
Ireland
Slovenia
Hungary
Brazil
Turkey
Philippines
Nigeria
Greece
Singapore
Switzerland
Czech Rep
Korea
Slovak Rep
Canada
New Zealand
Hong Kong
Argentina
Mexico
Latvia
Ukraine
Romania
Peru
China
Saudi Arabia
Portugal
Germany
Netherlands
Denmark
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
Source: IMF Fiscal Monitor, May 2010
Notes: The darker bars indicate G-20 countries, along with Spain and the Netherlands. The solid lines show medians for the advanced economies (blue) and emerging
markets (maroon). Gross debt data are used for the following countries that do not report net debt data: Advanced Economies -- Czech Rep, Finland, Greece, Korea,
Singapore, Slovak Rep and Slovenia; Emerging Market Economies -- Argentina, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russia and Thailand
Norway, which has a large negative net debt position, is excluded from this figure.
Advanced economies (AEs) account for much of the increase in world public debt,
putting their own as well as global financial stability in jeopardy.
AEs account for the bulk of the increase in global public debt since the start of the
crisis. By contrast, debt ratios will shrink for emerging markets (EMs).
EMs contribute far more to growth in global GDP than to the growth in global
public debt, reflecting an improvement in their fiscal positions while AEs
experience a fiscal deterioration in both absolute and relative terms.
The average per capita debt in AEs was $19,400 in 2007, rises to $29,100 in 2010
and will go up to $41,000 in 2015 (in EMs per capita debt will reach $1,500 in
2015). The burden of debt for U.S. citizens will rise from $19,700 in 2007 to
$31,600 in 2010 and then to $48,000 by 2015. The debt burden for Japanese
citizens will hit $75,900 in 2015, the highest level in the world.
AEs as a group:
1 are experiencing little population growth.
2 they are facing rapidly aging populations.
3 their economies are likely to register slow growth (relative to the EMs).
4 entitlement spending on health care and pensions is likely to explode due to
unfavorable demographics.
At the international level legal restrictions matter much less than at the national
level; consequently, there is competition among national monies.
At least, two factors play in this competition:
1 the relative purchasing power of the national monies: people prefer
away slowly.
In the 19th century, Britain was the leading industrial economy in the world and
the British pound became the leading international currency. Britain’s
economic preeminence came to an end after World War I, but the key status of the
pound lasted for more than four more decades. As late as 1965, 20 per cent of
official reserves were denominated in pound.
I Once a network has been acquired, the decline occurs slowly.
The U.S. dollar emerged as the dominant international currency after World
War II, but lost some ground towards the end of the 20th century, first with
respect to the Deutsche mark and the Japanese yen and later to the euro.
I Its decline appears also to be slow.
Used to denominate financial assets held by monetary authorities and the private
sector.
Table 1
U.S. dollar use in the export and import invoicing of 24 countries
Asia
Japan 2001 52.4 70.7 36.1 23.5
Korea 2001 84.9 82.2 – –
Malaysia 1996 66.0 66.0 17.8 17.8
Thailand 1996 83.9 83.9 1.0 1.0
Australia 2002 67.9 50.1 27.6 30.6
European Union
Belgium a 2002 31.9 33.5 54.2 54.2
France a 2002 34.2 43.2 55.8 48.6
Germany a 2002 32.3 37.9 45.9 45.5
Greece a 2002 71.0 62.0 24.1 30.7
Italy 2002 20.5 30.8 70.6 64.1
Luxembourg a 2002 35.7 38.0 49.1 37.4
Portugal a 2002 33.4 34.5 48.1 57.8
Spain a 2002 32.8 39.5 58.1 54.7
United Kingdom 2002 26.0 37.0 51.0 33.0
EU accession
Bulgaria 2002 44.5 37.1 – –
Cyprus 2002 44.7 34.9 – –
Czech 2002 14.7 19.5 10.2 8.7
Estonia 2003 8.5 22.0 – –
Hungary 2002 12.2 18.5 – –
Latvia 2002 36.2 29.8 6.6 6.6
Poland 2002 29.9 28.6 – –
Slovakia 2002 11.6 21.2 – –
Slovenia 2002 9.6 13.3 – –
a
Invoicing data refer only to the invoicing of “extra euro-area” trade.
b
Latest Observations are annual except for: Japan — January 2001, Germany and Germanya — 2002Q3, Estonia — Jan–Aug 2003. United States data are for
2003Q1. Malaysia and Thailand are for overall trade and are not broken down by imports.
Assets
All Currencies 33,440.6 31,193.3 30,023.5 29,731.1 –1,435.1 –1,903.0 –422.4 –278.4 –397.2 647.5
A) Domestic currency 13,992.7 12,970.1 12,792.7 12,559.2 –459.7 –613.7 –115.0 –178.4 –169.6 346.3
U.S. dollar 2,791.0 2,537.9 2,833.5 3,025.4 –403.1 279.2 24.7 113.0 49.2 191.9
Euro 8,820.0 8,389.2 8,109.9 7,702.9 59.6 –537.6 –80.9 –97.4 –175.9 117.9
Yen 619.0 715.5 588.2 591.0 –55.5 –116.8 29.8 –60.1 –12.9 10.7
Pound sterling 1,212.5 846.0 777.7 757.5 –49.0 –170.0 –72.4 –121.0 –0.5 26.1
Swiss franc 136.5 115.3 99.4 95.6 –25.2 –18.9 –6.6 –1.9 –8.7 –1.0
Other 413.5 366.2 384.0 386.7 13.5 –49.6 –9.6 –11.0 –20.8 0.7
B) Foreign currency 17,924.5 16,667.9 15,752.9 15,676.0 –963.9 –1,199.8 –297.6 –73.3 –224.8 260.8
U.S. dollar 9,940.1 9,657.0 9,015.6 9,068.9 –299.5 –666.5 –303.4 37.8 –50.0 53.9
Euro 4,132.3 3,741.2 3,511.8 3,405.3 –242.2 –351.7 –28.6 –87.3 –99.7 106.5
Yen 671.1 654.1 451.2 446.0 –186.0 –196.4 56.6 –25.7 –90.7 0.7
Pound sterling 1,257.1 919.0 924.0 864.7 –0.5 –101.8 –63.4 –65.5 –26.5 0.3
Swiss franc 389.9 368.7 329.2 316.6 –42.1 –50.6 –7.4 –33.1 –14.1 –3.4
Other 1,534.0 1,327.8 1,521.1 1,574.5 –193.5 167.1 48.6 100.4 56.3 102.9
C) Unallocated 1,523.4 1,555.3 1,477.9 1,495.9 –11.4 –89.4 –9.8 –26.6 –2.8 40.5
Liabilities
All Currencies 31,418.1 29,067.4 28,093.5 27,836.3 –1,390.8 –1,714.4 –451.7 –215.8 –299.2 524.0
A) Domestic currency 12,649.2 11,757.9 11,496.9 11,340.5 –206.3 –705.1 –208.8 –27.6 –155.3 293.9
US dollar 3,454.0 3,298.3 3,178.5 3,258.4 –393.3 –119.8 –105.7 157.2 75.1 79.8
Euro 6,834.8 6,429.7 6,246.3 6,091.4 124.7 –398.8 –42.7 –110.4 –158.0 253.8
Yen 252.6 381.3 334.8 303.9 61.0 –41.5 18.9 –17.9 –10.7 –27.4
Pound sterling 1,484.0 1,032.1 1,044.1 1,004.8 –80.8 –118.9 –74.0 –62.1 –39.1 –2.3
Swiss franc 91.8 91.4 92.6 90.1 –4.6 –2.3 4.8 –17.6 4.4 0.1
Other 532.0 525.2 600.5 591.9 86.7 –23.8 –10.1 23.2 –26.9 –10.1
B) Foreign currency 17,527.5 16,042.7 15,398.4 15,261.3 –1,226.5 –928.7 –227.1 –175.1 –154.5 171.7
U.S. dollar 10,021.5 9,261.0 9,070.6 9,021.0 –756.6 –211.9 –111.1 31.6 –11.0 –49.6
Euro 3,475.0 3,262.2 3,158.1 3,074.7 –78.2 –229.1 –80.1 –84.3 –22.6 107.3
Yen 824.2 825.8 578.5 585.9 –203.2 –239.3 39.8 –44.7 –102.5 15.2
Pound sterling 1,326.1 1,006.5 857.0 801.0 33.6 –251.2 –61.2 –90.2 –24.7 –0.7
Swiss franc 395.2 405.6 371.0 359.6 –20.8 –49.6 –21.9 –29.8 –11.6 –1.0
Other 1,485.4 1,281.6 1,363.2 1,419.1 –201.2 52.4 7.4 42.3 17.9 100.5
C) Unallocated 1,241.4 1,266.8 1,198.3 1,234.6 41.9 –80.6 –15.8 –13.0 10.5 58.4
All currencies 56,238 62,983 44,200 48,775 49,196 1,807 2,262 3,591 2,470 2,069
Australian dollar 2,227 2,396 1,360 1,741 2,325 76 105 135 110 97
Canadian dollar 2,404 2,226 1,568 1,735 1,858 134 93 123 95 78
Danish krone 241 224 195 203 213 5 6 10 5 5
Euro 21,806 25,963 18,583 20,653 20,364 790 1,010 1,409 1,032 864
Hong Kong dollar 988 857 608 422 297 5 13 4 3 3
Japanese yen 12,857 13,616 11,292 11,438 11,238 371 433 884 531 538
New Zealand dollar 60 58 28 15 11 2 1 3 1 1
Norwegian krone 420 478 369 223 238 10 14 38 10 7
Pound sterling 7,979 8,377 4,732 6,213 5,929 260 280 633 435 282
Swedish krona 1,525 1,589 1,178 1,255 1,309 29 30 88 54 39
Swiss franc 3,662 3,964 3,034 3,072 3,106 91 119 194 103 98
Thai baht 3 6 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0
US dollar 46,947 52,152 37,516 40,737 40,921 1,471 1,838 2,846 1,961 1,662
Other 11,358 14,060 7,932 9,840 10,582 370 582 817 600 465
There is an alternative explanation for the fact that the dollar has been holding up:
political hegemony:
The United States’ political leadership in security, commercial and even
cultural affairs globally has a critical impact on the usage of the dollar in the
monetary realm [. . . ] Private decisions to invest in the United States [. . . ]
are supported by the desire to gain insider access to key decision-making
processes and to membership in transnational elites; in fact, it is this desire
for membership and access that is a major source [. . . ] of the United States’
exorbitant privilege to pay for its current account deficits in its own currency.
The European Union, let alone the eurozone itself, is unable or unwilling to
offer these systemic or security benefits beyond a very limited area, and thus
is fundamentally limited in its ability to attract currency adherents, despite
the success of the euro on its own terms as a currency and store of value.
The value in having a political hegemon is that this country enforces integration in
the world and an international monetary order (Empire).
For this service, the hegemon imposes its money as the international money and
obtains the very special benefit of issuing debt in its own currency.
At mid-November 2010 the USA are making a few top ten lists (CMA data)
The probability of Greek default has surged in recent weeks as pressures in Europe have
reemerged.
The key differentiating factor between the USA and EU is the lack of true unity in EU.
Persistent rise in Greek funding costs, despite an ECB claiming to have everything under
control.
Governance. If you merge 16 small open economies, you get a large closed
economy. But here is the catch. If you assemble the leaders of the 16 small open
economies, you get a roomful of 16 small-economy politicians.
Contagion. UK and German banks have loans outstanding of $149bn and $139bn.
A second channel of contagion is via the capital markets, to Portugal. The biggest
creditor to Portugal is Spain, itself in a precarious position.
Bail out. The EFSF has managed to find a way to offer loans with relatively low
interest rates. But the EFSF is not large enough to handle any problems that
might arise in Spain. In that sense, it is not an umbrella for the eurozone.
Solvency. Having already implemented structural reforms, at a time of extreme
fiscal tightening, moderate monetary tightening and weak global demand, how can
Ireland grow?
I Does Dublin really think to attract FDI by low corporate tax rates, given the current
uncertainties?
I Can Ireland really produce a devaluation to create an export boom?
Intra-eurozone imbalances. Germany’s current account surplus will head back
towards 7% of GDP by 2012. We are planting the seeds for the next crisis, for
which the EU has no institution, no facility and no task force.
Maastricht Treaty
Art. 103 states the “no bail-out” clause, meaning that neither the Community
nor any Member State is liable for or can assume the commitments of any other
Member State.
But, Art. 100 introduces solidarity:
. . . “Where a Member State is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with severe
difficulties caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences beyond its
control, the Council . . . may grant, under certain conditions, Community financial
assistance to the Member State concerned . . . ”
financing problems;
I extraordinary measures from the ECB to purchases selected sovereign
securities;
I the European Commission published proposal for tighter fiscal policy
coordination;
Are we on the verge of fiscal union in the EU to avert a large sovereign debt crisis?