Search

Begin New Search Topic Financial Markets Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 3 Years

1. Sanction-busting through tax havens

Author:
Kerim Can Kavakli, Giovanna Marcolongo, and Diego Zambiasi
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
United Nations University
Abstract:
Financial sanctions, which aim to economically hurt a target by restricting its access to financial assets and markets, require the ability to identify who owns an asset. Although experts have long claimed that offshore financial centres that offer secrecy (‘tax havens’) undermine sanctions by hiding ownership information, so far data limitations have prevented a rigorous test of this claim. We overcome this constraint using data from the Bank of International Settlements and the Offshore Leaks Database and conduct the first systematic analysis of the role that tax havens play in financial sanction evasion. Our main finding is that sanction targets reduce their funds in sanctioning countries while increasing their funds in tax havens. This displacement effect is stronger when the sanction coalition includes the United States or comprises more FATF or OECD members. Lastly, whether a tax haven is in the sanctioning coalition does not seem to make a difference. These findings confirm that target countries evade sanctions by moving large portions of their funds from sanctioning countries to tax havens. More broadly, our paper highlights a novel and geostrategically important role of tax havens in global finance.
Topic:
Sanctions, Financial Markets, Leaks, and Tax Havens
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Signaling Virtue or Vulnerability? The Changing Impact of Exchange Rate Regimes on Government Bond Yields

Author:
Z. Barta, Lucio Baccaro, and A. Johnston
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
Do exchange rate regimes affect the conditions under which developed countries borrow? This paper argues that they do, but their impact on yields depends on the prevailing macroeconomic context. When investors regard inflation as the most relevant risk to bond holdings, monetary union has a distinct advantage over floating and fixed exchange rates because of its credible in-built mechanism to control inflation. However, once default is seen as the most relevant risk, exchange rate rigidity becomes a liability due to its constraining effect on governments’ ability to respond to adverse shocks. We test our argument with a moving window panel analysis for twenty-three OECD countries from 1980 to 2017. We find that before the late 2000s, inflation was penalized under floating and (to a lesser extent) fixed exchange rate regimes, but not in countries in monetary union. Since the 2010s, inflation carries no penalty under any exchange rate regime. Variables linked to default risk (debt and entitlement spending) did not affect yields under any exchange rate arrangements until the mid-2000s. Afterwards, countries in monetary union (and to a lesser extent in fixed exchange rate regimes) were significantly penalized for public debt and entitlement spending, whereas countries with floating regimes were not. Our results speak to the literatures on governments’ institutional commitments and “room to move.”
Topic:
Financial Markets, Bonds, Exchange Rates, and Euro
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Signaling Virtue or Vulnerability? The Changing Impact of Exchange Rate Regimes on Government Bond Yields

Author:
Zsófia Barta, Lucio Baccaro, and Alison Johnston
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Sciences Po Center on Coping with Instability in Market Societies (MaxPo)
Abstract:
Do exchange rate regimes affect the conditions under which developed countries borrow? This paper argues that they do, but their impact on yields depends on the prevailing macroeconomic context. When investors regard inflation as the most relevant risk to bond holdings, monetary union has a distinct advantage over floating and fixed exchange rates because of its credible in-built mechanism to control inflation. However, once default is seen as the most relevant risk, exchange rate rigidity becomes a liability due to its constraining effect on governments’ ability to respond to adverse shocks. We test our argument with a moving window panel analysis for twenty-three OECD countries from 1980 to 2017. We find that before the late 2000s, inflation was penalized under floating and (to a lesser extent) fixed exchange rate regimes, but not in countries in monetary union. Since the 2010s, inflation carries no penalty under any exchange rate regime. Variables linked to default risk (debt and entitlement spending) did not affect yields under any exchange rate arrangements until the mid-2000s. Afterwards, countries in monetary union (and to a lesser extent in fixed exchange rate regimes) were significantly penalized for public debt and entitlement spending, whereas countries with floating regimes were not. Our results speak to the literatures on governments’ institutional commitments and “room to move.”
Topic:
International Political Economy, Financial Markets, Bonds, Exchange Rates, and Euro
Political Geography:
Global Focus