Wednesday, March 27, 2013

How Effective are Macroprudential Policies in China? By Bin Wang and Tao Sun

How Effective are Macroprudential Policies in China? By Bin Wang and Tao Sun
IMF Working Paper No. 13/75
March 27, 2013

Summary: This paper investigates macroprudential policies and their role in containing systemic risk in China. It shows that China faces systemic risk in both the time (procyclicality) and cross-sectional (contagion) dimensions. The former is reflected as credit and asset price risks, while the latter is reflected as the links between the banking sector and informal financing and local government financing platforms. Empirical analysis based on 171 banks shows that some macroprudential policy tools (e.g., the reserve requirement ratio and house-related policies) are useful, but they cannot guarantee protection against systemic risk in the current economic and financial environment. Nevertheless, better-targeted macroprudential policies have greater potential to contain systemic risk pertaining to the different sizes of the banks and their location in regions with different levels of economic development. Complementing macroprudential policies with further reforms, including further commercialization of large banks, would help improve the effectiveness of those policies in containing systemic risk in China.

ISBN/ISSN: 9781484355886 / 2227-8885

Supervisory framework for measuirng and controlling large exposures

Supervisory framework for measuirng and controlling large exposures
BCBS, Mar 2013

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has today published a proposed supervisory framework for measuring and controlling large exposures.

 One of the key lessons from the financial crisis is that banks did not always consistently measure, aggregate and control exposures to single counterparties across their books and operations. And throughout history there have been instances of banks failing due to concentrated exposures to individual counterparties (eg Johnson Matthey Bankers in the UK in 1984, the Korean banking crisis in the late 1990s). Large exposures regulation has arisen as a tool for containing the maximum loss a bank could face in the event of a sudden counterparty failure to a level that does not endanger the bank's solvency.

A separate key lesson from the crisis is that material losses in one systemically important financial institution (SIFI) can trigger concerns about the solvency of other SIFIs, with potentially catastrophic consequences for global financial stability. The Committee is of the view that the large exposures framework is a tool that could be used to mitigate the risk of contagion between global systemically important banks, thus underpinning financial stability.

Finally, the consultation paper presents proposals to strengthen the oversight and regulation of the shadow banking system in relation to large exposures.  In particular, the proposals include policy measures designed to capture bank-like activities conducted by non-banks that are of concern to supervisors.

The proposed new standard aims to ensure greater consistency in the way banks and supervisors measure, aggregate and control exposures to single counterparties. Acting as a backstop to risk-based capital requirements, the standard would supplement the existing risk-based capital framework by protecting banks from substantive losses caused by the sudden default of a counterparty or group of connected counterparties. The consultative paper would replace the Basel Committee's 1991 guidance Measuring and controlling large credit exposures.