Title: New Financial Architecture
1New Financial Architecture
2Liquidity Crises
- A solvent borrower with
- Illiquid assets
- Short-term liabilities
- Two equilibria
- Bank run
- No bank run
- Diamond and Dybvig (1983)
- A bank run is a coordination failure Not just a
lump-sum redistribution of financial claims
3How do you deal with liquidity crises?
- Bagehot (1873) In a crisis, the lender of last
resort should lend freely, at a penalty rate, on
good collateral. - There are three points here
- The lender of last resort must be willing and
able to lend freely. - It should lend at a penalty rate this is to
mitigate moral hazard problems. - It should lend on good collateral. Meltzer
(1988) This is collateral that is good if there
were no panic. This is to distinguish solvent but
illiquid institutions from insolvent
institutions. - A good discussion of this Fischer (1999)
4In a global financial system, liquidity crises
can become financial crises
- Consider banks in a country with a fixed exchange
rate. Suppose that they are fundamentally
solvent - Short-term foreign-currency debt
- High-quality long-term domestic currency loans
- If there is no panic, the foreign debt is rolled
over and serviced in full. - If there is a panic, the banks need foreign
exchange - If the amount of foreign exchange that they need
exceeds the central banks reserves there will be
a currency crisis. - The central bank is forced to devalue the banks
assets and liabilities are now mismatched it is
unsound. - Foreign lenders write off their loans. The crisis
may spread.
5Example Mexico
- After the December 1994 devaluation of the peso
Mexico had - About 29 billion of dollar-denominated debts due
in 1995 - Reserves of about 6 billion.
- Each holder of dollar-denominated debt realised
that if other holders of the dollar debt refused
to roll over their debts, then Mexico would
default despite its long-run solvency. - Mexico was pushed to the brink of default
6Two things that would improve matters
- Most countries should abandon the use of fixed,
but adjustable, exchange rate systems. - Bank regulation should discourage excessive
currency mismatches. The IMF should publish data
on currency mismatches and make reduction a
condition for loans. Goldstein (2005).
Governments, instead, have deliberately courted
mismatches Mexican issuance of Tesobonos
Thailand gave tax breaks for offshore foreign
borrowing Russia attempted to attract foreign
capital to the domestic bond market.
7UK Proposal
- Standing Committee for Global Financial
Regulation - establish and implement international standards
for financial supervision and regulation - Henry Kaufman suggests a similar International
Regulator and Rating Agency
8Is there a potential lender of last resort for
global financial markets?
- In a domestic liquidity crisis, the central bank
is typically the lender of last resort. - The main problem in managing global liquidity
crises is the lack of an obvious global lender of
last resort. - Fischer (1999) The lender of last resort plays
two roles - It provides the funding.
- It manages the crisis.
- Potentially, these functions could be provided by
two different institutions.
9Could the IMF act as global lender of last resort?
- This is suggested by Fischer (1999)
- The 1997 Supplemental Reserve Facility allows the
Fund to make short-term loans in large amounts at
penalty rates to countries in crisis. - Lender role The IMF has access to resources, but
are they large enough? - Manager role Countries with crises avoid
approaching the IMF because they do not want to
carry out IMF-mandated reforms. - The IMF can ask for collateral, but generally
does not. Is it able and willing to distinguish
between solvent but illiquid countries and
insolvent countries?
10United States proposal
- A contingency finance mechanism within the IMF
- Countries with good policy fundamentals would
have access to short-term borrowing at high
interests rates
11Can the Private Sector Act as Lender of Last
Resort
- JP Morgan led consortiums of private US banks
that acted as lender of last resort to domestic
banks before the creation of the Federal Reserve. - Collective action problems probably make this
infeasible.
12A Global Central Bank
- If the global central bank were to act as lender
of last resort, it would have to have access to
funds equal to the liquidity gap the difference
between short-term foreign currency liabilities
and liquid foreign currency assets. - If it acted as lender of last resort it would
probably have to have a regulatory role this may
not be politically possible.
13Bailouts vs. Bail-ins
- Suppose there is a pure liquidity crisis.
- If the lender of last resort could guarantee
sufficient loans, there would be no reason for a
crisis. - Alternatively, if it could force a comprehensive
standstill on the part of creditors (a full
bail-in), it could also stop the crisis. No
creditor would want to withdraw its funds if all
other creditors were unable to do so. - If it is known that the crisis is a pure
liquidity crisis, borrowers and creditors are
equally happy with either solution. In
equilibrium, the outcomes are the same.
14But, bail-ins can be difficult
- If there is some chance that the crisis is a
solvency crisis, rather than a liquidity crisis,
creditors prefer bailouts to bail-ins. - If the bail-in is negotiated ex post, almost
every creditor would like to get out rather than
to agree to defer payment. It is difficult to get
all creditors to be part of the stand still and
those who are not are apt to flee. - If creditors think that a stand still is in the
offing, they may flee.
15Canadian proposal
- Part of the proposal is that the IMF should have
the power to invoke an Emergency Standstill
Clause affecting all cross-border financial
contracts.
16Replace the Lender of Last Resort with a
Mechanism that Automatically Bails Everyone In
- UDROP (Buiter and Sibert (1999))
- Universal Debt Rollover Option with a Penalty
- All foreign-currency loans must have a rollover
option attached to them.
17The Scheme Must be Universal
- All foreign currency obligations (loans) must
have the option attached. - This includes private and sovereign, long-term
and short-term, marketable and non-marketable,
negotiable and non-negotiable it includes
overdrafts, credit lines and contingent claims. - All borrowers, both public and private, must be
given the option.
18Rollover Option
- Each borrower, at his sole discretion, has the
right to extend the loan for a specified period
(say, three to six months). - The option is only available if all debt has been
serviced in full up until the rollover is
requested. - The rollover option can only be requested once
- Allowing multiple rollovers at ever higher
penalties allow the borrower to engage in Ponzi
financing without the lender being able to invoke
the formal sactions of default and bankruptcy - Liquidity crises tend to be short lived three to
six months ought to be enough to stave them off.
19The option carries a penalty rate
- For the scheme to work, the interest rate charged
must be high enough that market participants
would not choose to exercise the rollover option
under orderly market conditions. - It might be a large surcharge over the spread
over LIBOR that the borrower would normally pay. - Who should determine the penalty? Not necessarily
the market. Individual lenders do not take into
account the social benefit of lowering the
probability of a liquidity crisis. It may be
necessary to mandate a maximum rate.
20Could UDROP Make Things Worse if the Lender
Hedges?
- When a financial institution grants a rollover
option, it will cover its contingent exposure by
shorting some of the borrowers assets the
amount will depend on the perceived probability
that the rollover is invoked. - If the option is invoked, the lender will want to
hedge more fully, but given that the borrower is
unlikely to be obtaining any other private funds
it is unlikely that this implies a reduction in
funds to the borrower. - Thus, UDROP will lower inflows in normal times
and raise them in crises. - See Ortiz (2002) for a discussion of contingent
credit and lender hedging.
21Variants of UDROP
- Instead of allowing individual borrowers to
exercise the option at their discretion, allow
the option to be exercised only when markets are
disorderly. - Allow some specified institution (the IMF,
national central bank or regulatory authority)
or mechanical rule to specify when markets are
disorderly. - The benefit is that it may reduce the moral
hazard problem of insolvent, rather than merely
illiquid, borrowers invoking the option. - The cost is that the institution given the
authority to say when markets are disorderly may
be subject to moral hazard problems, politically
motivated or slow to act. It might increase the
likelihood of corruption. Simple rules may be
inadequate the conditions for complicated ones
may be difficult to verify.
22Should the Option be Strippable?
- It might be efficient to allow the option to be
stripped from the debt and traded. - Market participants could create a reinsurance
market to spread the risk of UDROP being
exercised. - However, borrowers should not be allowed to sell
their option. - If the option is exercised, the current lender
must roll over the debt this ensures funds are
always available.
23Could UDROP be Voluntary?
- As borrowers do not take into account the affect
of their actions on lowering the likelihood of a
liquidity crisis, voluntary insurance schemes
similar to UDROP are unlikely to be successful. - One such scheme is the Contingent Credit Line
scheme. Borrowers pay a fee to foreign banks to
have the right to draw upon a foreign-currency
credit line. This has been tried by borrowers in
Indonesia, Mexico and Argentina. Participation
was limited and neither borrowers nor lenders
enjoyed the experience.