Search

Begin New Search Topic Debt Political Geography Europe

1. Three risks that must be addressed for new European Union fiscal rules to succeed

Author:
Lucio Pench
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The debate on the reform of the European Union’s fiscal rules, the Stability and Growth Pact, has largely focused on their design. This nearly exclusive focus has distracted attention from the equally, if not more, important aspects of implementation. The reform, completed in April 2024, left implementation unaddressed, or at least open to very different potential outcomes. In particular, the reform failed to clarify the interplay between EU countries’ medium-term fiscal structural plans (MTFSPs), which embody the new focus on debt sustainability, and the excessive deficit procedure (EDP), which remains the main enforcement tool under the rules. The need for clarification is urgent as several countries are set to enter EDPs for breaching the SGP’s 3 percent of GDP deficit threshold at the same time as their first MTFSPs are endorsed in autumn 2024. There is a risk that the adjustment paths prescribed by EDPs may be at least temporarily less demanding than the debt-sustainability requirements of the MTFSPs would normally imply. Even if consistency between EDPs and MTFSPs is ensured from the start, inconsistencies may arise over time and be resolved in a way that further postpones the necessary adjustment. The main risk is that the 3 percent of GDP deficit might be perceived as the only target that matters for countries that enter EDPs in 2024, as repeated revisions of the MTFSPs undermine the cogency of the debt sustainability requirements. This scenario is likely to materialise if the countries are allowed to exit their EDPs upon bringing their deficits to or below 3 percent of GDP, while being still far from the necessary correction of the debt trajectory. It is important to shape countries’ expectations on the implementation of the upcoming EDPs in a way that is conducive to the immediate internalisation of the debt sustainability constraint implied by the new rules, rather than allowing it to be viewed as a distant objective. This change in expectations could be achieved by clarifying that, even if a country has been placed in an EDP only for breach of the deficit criterion, it should also satisfy the debt criterion for the procedure to be abrogated.
Topic:
Debt, Reform, European Union, Fiscal Policy, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Europe

2. The Greek Tragedy: Narratives and Imagined Futures in the Greek Sovereign Debt Crisis

Author:
Jens Beckert and Hans Lukas Richard Arndt
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
Between 2009 and 2015 Greece underwent a profound sovereign debt crisis that led to a serious political crisis in Europe and the restructuring of Greek debt. We argue that the prevalence of negative narratives about the future contributed to the changes in spreads of Greek bonds during the crisis. We support our argument by presenting results from text mining a corpus of 9,435 articles from the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal. Based on sentiments and a machine learning model predicting future reference, we identify newspaper articles which generate negative and uncertain outlooks for the future in the expert discourse. We provide evidence from time series regression analysis showing that these negative imagined futures have explanatory power in models estimating spread development of Greek vs. German sovereign bonds. We suggest that these findings provide good evidence for the relevance of “imagined futures” for investors’ behavior, and give directions for an innovative contribution of sociology to understanding the microfoundations of financial crises.
Topic:
Debt, Financial Crisis, Financial Markets, Future, Sovereign Debt, Economic Sociology, Sentiment Analysis, and Valuation
Political Geography:
Europe and Greece

3. The rising cost of European Union borrowing and what to do about it

Author:
Gregory Claeys and Conor McCaffrey
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Debt issuance by the European Commission on behalf of the European Union has increased massively. Of the approximately €400 billion in outstanding EU debt as of May 2023, 85 percent has arisen from borrowing since 2020. Large-scale borrowing is expected to continue until 2026 to fund the remainder of NextGenerationEU, and concessional loans to support Ukraine. When these programmes were launched, interest rates were at historic lows – even negative for maturities below 10 years. However, interest rates rose sharply in 2022. Beyond the widespread rise in euro-denominated interest rates due to monetary tightening by the European Central Bank in response to the inflation surge, the EU has also faced a widening of the spread between its yields and those of major European issuers, including France and Germany. This widening is driven by a combination of market features, circumstantial factors and institutional features. The EU cannot affect the overall cyclical movement of interest rates and will have to learn to live with it, like sovereigns do. However, the European Commission should continue to try to narrow the spread with major European sovereigns by further developing the relevant market infrastructure and improving its issuance strategy. The Commission will not be able to do this alone. Institutional developments, including progress on the development of new own resources and a long-term substantial presence in the bond market, will be necessary to fully reap the benefits of EU borrowing. A large share of EU borrowing (around €421 billion in total by the end of 2026, in current prices) is intended to finance unprecedented non-repayable support: Recovery and Resilience Fund grants and additional funding for existing EU programmes under the EU budget. The interest costs associated with this part of the debt lie with the EU budget. Our estimates suggest that, because of the high current and expected levels of interest rates, this cost could be twice as high as what was initially estimated at the start of the EU’s 2021-27 budget cycle. As a result, because interest costs for the borrowing of the non-repayable support are accounted for under the EU budget’s ‘expenditure ceiling’, this will exert further pressure on the funding of important EU programmes, which are already affected by inflation. The EU should thus quickly review how interest costs are accounted for in its budget and financial framework.
Topic:
Debt, Budget, European Union, and European Commission
Political Geography:
Europe

4. European Union debt financing: leeway and barriers from a legal perspective

Author:
Sebastian Grund and Armin Steinbach
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
We explore legal leeway for two approaches to debt-financing European Union spending: creation of extra-budgetary, one-off and temporary EU funds to finance European public goods (similarly to NextGenerationEU), and debt-financing the EU’s regular budget, hence creating an on-budget, permanent borrowing capacity at EU level. We find that NGEU could in principle be replicated. This would require an amendment to the Own Resources Decision (ORD) – a unanimous Council decision that designates the main sources of EU financing and requires ratification by each member state – to authorise borrowing and specify how the borrowing proceeds are to be used. However, this approach would be constrained by the legal requirement that financing EU spending through ‘other revenues’ (as opposed to ‘own resources’ designated as such in the ORD) remain exceptional. As a result, no permanent EU tasks could be financed through NGEU-like funds and NGEU-like financing could not exceed financing through ‘own resources’. We also find that, while EU primary law does not stop the EU from debt-financing its budget, the scope for EU borrowing would remain severely limited compared to a sovereign state. The permissible amount of borrowing must be specified in the ORD and the EU must be able to meet its debt service in any year, which must be secured by a sufficient amount of (non-borrowed) own resources. Finally, considerable flexibility exists for the spending of borrowed funds, regardless of whether this occurs through new NGEU-like extrabudgetary funds or on budget. Borrowed funds could be allocated to climate funding, cohesion policy, infrastructure or research. In the event that borrowing proceeds are established as an ‘own resource’ in an appropriately amended ORD, borrowed funds could even be used for general financing of the EU budget.
Topic:
Debt, Markets, European Union, Finance, and Public Goods
Political Geography:
Europe

5. Using RRF resources to kick-start a job-rich recovery in Greece

Author:
Manos Matsaganis and Georgios Manalis
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is a golden opportunity for those member states that were most badly hit first by the debt crisis then by the pandemic. Greece, one of the largest beneficiaries in per capita terms, is due to receive very significant resources that can help arrest the decline of the 2010s. Can these resources be spent wisely and efficiently enough to kickstart the process of inclusive and sustainable growth? This paper briefly reviews the Greek National Recovery and Resilience Plan (Greece 2.0), assessing its potential contribution to upgrading the economy’s growth model, enhancing skills, and boosting employment. In 2007-19, total investment in Greece shrank by a stunning 70% in real terms. Over the same period, public investment fell by 62%, business investment by 44%, and household investment (on housing, mostly) by 89%. Under-investment constrains growth and undermines the future prospects of the Greek economy. The Recovery and Resilience Facility offers Greece a unique opportunity to bridge the investment gap, giving a boost to the sustainable recovery of the Greek economy. Technically, Greece 2.0, the country’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan is competently drafted, as its favourable reception by the European Commission indicates. Still, critical issues abound. In this sense, Greece 2.0 embodies the contradictions of the current juncture. On the one hand, there is a consensus that the Greek economy should rebalance, by pursuing a growth strategy that relies much more on exports than in the recent past, and much less on domestic consumer demand fuelled by debt. On the other hand, the legacy of the past weighs heavily on social and political actors, limiting their room for manoeuvre. The list is daunting. It remains to be seen how the above will play out over the next few years.
Topic:
Debt, Economy, Crisis Management, Resilience, and Economic Recovery
Political Geography:
Europe and Greece

6. Household Wealth Inequalities in the wake of the Greek Debt Crisis

Author:
Apostolos Fasianos
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
Despite the renowned interest in wealth disparities, the distribution of wealth in Greece is largely understudied. This study maps the levels, dynamics, and composition of household wealth using data from the three waves of the Household Finance and Consumption Survey for Greece for the period after the debt crisis of 2009-10 till 2017. The evidence suggests that the richest 1% of the population holds roughly as much wealth as the poorest 50%, while the richest 10% holds about four times the wealth of the poorest 50%. Most inequality indicators employed indicate increasing trends in wealth disparities between 2009 and 2017. During this period, average and median wealth holdings decreased by about one third, and the share of financially fragile households increased by about 20%. Estimates from factor inequality decompositions suggest that, although relatively evenly distributed, housing asset holdings explain much of the increase in overall wealth inequality in Greece, followed by self-employment business equity; financial assets play a negligible role. Financial wealth inequality is much more pronounced than housing wealth inequality in Greece. The findings of the paper carry important implications for the design of appropriate policies aiming at reducing wealth inequalities and strengthening financial resilience.
Topic:
Debt, Income Inequality, Economic Crisis, and Wealth
Political Geography:
Europe and Greece

7. Istanbul Journal of Economics: Volume 72 Issue 1

Author:
Gökhan Karabulut
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Istanbul Journal of Economics
Institution:
Istanbul University Faculty of Economics
Abstract:
Istanbul Journal of Economics-İstanbul İktisat Dergisi is an open access, peer-reviewed, scholarly journal published two times a year in June and December. It has been an official publication of Istanbul University Faculty of Economics since 1939. The manuscripts submitted for publication in the journal must be scientific and original work in Turkish or English. Being one of the earliest peer-reviewed academic journals in Turkey in the area of economics, Istanbul Journal of Economics-İstanbul İktisat Dergisi aims to provide a forum for exploring issues in basicly economics and publish both disciplinary and multidisciplinary articles. Economics is the main scope of the journal. However, multidisciplinary and comparative approaches are encouraged as well and articles from various social science areas such as sociology of economics, history, social policy, international relations, financial studies are welcomed in this regard. The target group of the journal consists of academicians, researchers, professionals, students, related professional and academic bodies and institutions.
Topic:
Debt, Development, Economics, Budget, Finance, Investment, Trade, Unemployment, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

8. Don’t look only to Brussels to increase the supply of safe assets in the European Union

Author:
Francesco Papadia and Heliodoro Temprano Arroyo
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
A sufficient supply of safe assets denominated in euros is critical if the European Union is to achieve full banking and capital markets union while fostering the euro’s international role. The European debate on developing the supply of safe assets has so far focused on the possible creation of a common safe asset. This has tended to underplay the potential contribution of sovereign assets. Expanding the supply of national safe assets, notably through the gradual implementation of fiscal and growth-oriented structural policies in euro-area countries, leading to upgrading of their sovereign ratings, provides a promising, and perhaps more feasible, option. An upgrade to triple A of those euro-area countries that are currently rated double A could produce substantially more safe assets than most common safe asset proposals, including those based on the development of ‘synthetic’ safe assets. There has been a remarkable increase in the share of supranational assets in the stock of euro-based safe assets since 2008, reflecting downgrades in sovereign ratings and the EU’s financial responses to the euro-area crisis and the pandemic. However, safe assets in euro remain dominated by those issued by euro-area governments. Although common safe assets have certain advantages over national safe assets, reflecting their built-in risk diversification properties, there is currently not much political appetite for such proposals. Meanwhile, sovereign safe assets already offer many of the advantages of common safe assets. Sound fiscal policies and growth-stimulating reforms, which are in any case desirable, should be implemented to improve the credit ratings of euro-area sovereigns. This might not be politically feasible in the short-term, given the difficult economic environment currently faced by the EU, but it should be a key component of the EU’s medium-term safe asset strategy. Should the political consensus be found to create a common safe asset, such an asset could be incorporated into the euro area’s existing safe asset system, reinforcing its positive effects.
Topic:
Debt, Markets, Monetary Policy, European Union, Regional Integration, European Monetary Union, and Banking
Political Geography:
Europe

9. Risk Shocks and Divergence between the Euro Area and the US in the aftermath of the Great Recession

Author:
Thomas Brand and Fabien Tripier
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre d'Etudes Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales (CEPII)
Abstract:
Highly synchronized during the Great Recession of 2008-2009, the Euro area and the US have diverged in the period that followed. To explain this divergence, we provide a structural interpretation of these episodes through the estimation for both economies of a business cycle model with financial frictions and risk shocks, measured as the volatility of idiosyncratic uncertainty in the financial sector. Our results show that risk shocks have stimulated US growth in the aftermath of the Great Recession and have been the main driver of the double-dip recession in the Euro area. They play a positive role in the Euro area only after 2015. Risk shocks therefore seem well suited to account for the consequences of the sovereign debt crisis in Europe and the subsequent positive effects of unconventional monetary policies, notably the ECB’s Asset Purchase Programme (APP).
Topic:
Debt, Economics, International Political Economy, Global Recession, Finance, Europe Union, Economic Growth, and Risk
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Global Focus

10. Will corporate debt choke the post-COVID-19 recovery?

Author:
Frederico Mollet
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
Europe’s economic recovery is threatened by the corporate debt overhang created in the wake of the pandemic. Even as vaccines roll out, Europe faces the prospect of a prolonged retrenchment as indebted firms pull back investments and repair their balance sheets. Insolvency procedures have gradually improved over the past decade in Europe, but decisive and swift public action is needed to take advantage of these reforms. Given the scale of the crisis, Frederico Mollet argues in favour of a comprehensive European restructuring strategy. EU member states and the Commission must step in to provide the resources, guidance, and coordination necessary to push through this monumental restructuring. This strategy would furthermore benefit from common European guidelines and criteria for creditors and debtors. It will not only increase the likelihood of success but also protect the level playing field. Lack of a clear strategy and coordinated approach will result in a drawn-out restructuring process that pushes too many viable firms into liquidation and permanently hampers the economic recovery. Centring on private restructurings would also minimise the use of public funds at a time when governments have to deal with multiple competing fiscal pressures.
Topic:
Debt, Political Economy, and Economic Recovery
Political Geography:
Europe