The Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure (MIP) Jonas Fischer European Commission, DG ECFIN EP, 10 July 2018
[Di/con]vergence in euro area external positions Group A (surplus/creditor countries): AT, BE, DE, FI, NL, LU. 2
[Di/con]vergence in adjustment process Group A (surplus/creditor countries): AT, BE, DE, FI, NL, LU. 3
Examples Macroeconomic imbalances External imbalances affecting current accounts, stocks of external liabilities (risk of sharp corrections, capital flights, accumulation of creditor risk and spillovers in case of surplus) Housing bubbles (risk sharp corrections) Excess debt growth affecting repayment capacity and/or bank balance sheets Competitiveness or productivity trends affecting the sustainability of current account and/or debt/gdp ratios 4
November February MIP: broad stages Screening Commission publishes Alert Mechanism Report (AMR), selects countries for IDRs (Art. 3 & 4, Reg. 1176/2011) Analysis and identification of imbalances Commission presents In-depth Reviews (IDRs) for the selected countries countries for IDRs (Art. 5, Reg. 1176/2011) S c r e e n i n g Recommendations, monitoring, enforcement Preventive action: Country-specific recommendations June (Art. 6, Reg. 1176/2011) [Specific monitoring] Corrective action: Excessive Imbalance Procedure (EIP) (Chapter III, Reg. 1176/2011) Possible sanctions for euro area countries (Reg. 1174/2011) 5
Fiscal compact More effective preventive arm of SGP - Expenditure benchmark - Draft Budget Plans - Autonomous recommendations Economic governance Focus on debt developments Numerical benchmark in the corrective arm of the SGP ESM Crisis Resolution EFSM/EFSF/ ESM Better enforcement of rules -Larger range of sanctions, starting more gradual, quasiautomaticity (RQMV) -Strengthened national fiscal frameworks Sound Fiscal Policy Prevention and correction of macro imbalances New surveillance procedure and possible sanctions Structural reforms Europe 2020 strategy 6 Financial Stability Sustained Economic Growth Banking Union Based on a single rule book for the EU 28 Single Supervisory Mechanism Single Resolution Mechanism Price stability ECB - LTRO - OMT - Forward guidance
The European surveillance cycle November Autumn forecast Annual Growth Survey Alert Mechanism Report Commission's opinions on Draft Budgetary Plans Winter forecast In-Depth Reviews 15 October 15 April Euro-area Member States: Draft Budgetary Plans Stability/Convergence Programmes National Reform Programmes Country-Specific Recommendations Spring forecast May/June 7 7
Imbalance evolution 8
MIP results 2018 MIP categories 2017 2018 No imbalances FI SI Imbalances Excessive imbalances No in-depth review DE, IE, ES, NL, SI, SE BG, FR, HR, IT, PT, CY BE, CZ, DK, EE, LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, AT, PL, RO, SK, UK BG, DE, IE, ES, FR, NL, PT, SE HR, IT, CY BE, CZ, DK, EE, LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, AT, PL, RO, SK, FI, UK 9
Sources of identified imbalances (2018) External position Competitiveness and/or productivity Household indebtedness and/or housing sector Corporate indebtedness Public debt / fiscal risks Financial sector DE, IE, ES, HR, CY, NL, PT FR, HR, IT, CY, PT IE, ES, HR, CY, NL, SE BG, IE, ES, HR, CY, PT IE, ES, FR, HR, IT, CY, PT BG, IE, IT, CY, PT --------------------------------------------------------------------- Labour market adjustment issues ------------------------------------------ BG, ES, IT, CY 10
MIP recommendations Countries identified with imbalances in IDRs may receive country-specific recommendations (CSRs) CSRs are proposed by the Commission and formally issued, possibly amended, by the EU Council in May, following discussions in Council Committees MIP CSRs are based on IDR/CR and assessment of National Reform Programmes (NRPs) Recital indicates which CSRs are relevant to address MIP imbalances
MIP recommendations MIP countries received more CSR than non-mip countries, mostly in policy areas relevant for macro-stability and adjustment Most CSRs to countries under MIP were tagged as MIP-relevant, notably for countries with excessive imbalances CSR progress generally stronger in countries under MIP surveillance 12
Follow up to the identification of excessive imbalances Once excessive imbalances are identified the Commission can propose the EIP at any moment The Commission did not recommend EIP as soon as excessive imbalances were identified, but Issued prescriptive and often time bound recommendations Have asked for enhanced policy commitments to be included in National Reform Programmes Put in place a system of enhanced specific monitoring entailing fact finding missions and reporting The possibility of launching the EIP for countries with excessive imbalances was never ruled out in case of worsening conditions. 13
Overall assessment Implementation of MIP evolved over time, on the basis of experience MIP contributed to enhance the policy dialogue with Member States and focus policy priorities Broadly supportive evidence that the MIP had impact on outcomes. 14
References MIP compendium Official documents and legislation https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/economyfinance/macroeconomic-imbalance-procedure-rationaleprocess-application-compendium_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/economicand-fiscal-policy-coordination/eu-economic-governancemonitoring-prevention-correction/macroeconomic-imbalanceprocedure_en 15
TACK 16
EXTRA SLIDES 17
Simple flowchart of the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure
Legal and procedural aspects MIP imbalances categorisation The categorisation evolved over time and stabilised in 2104 The categorisation was streamlined in 2016. Specific monitoring extended to all countries identified with imbalances. Categories used in 2014 and 2015 Streamlined categories No imbalances No imbalances Imbalances, which require policy action and monitoring Imbalances, which require decisive policy action and monitoring Imbalances* Imbalances, which require decisive policy action and specific monitoring Excessive imbalances, which require decisive policy action and specific monitoring Excessive imbalances* Excessive imbalances with Corrective Action Plan (EIP) Excessive imbalances with Corrective Action Plan (EIP) 19
The MIP scoreboard: indicators Group Indicator Threshold External Current account bal. (3-y av) -4% and +6% of GDP Net int'l investment position -35% of GDP Export market share growth over 5 y -6% Nom. ULC change over 3 years +9% (EA) or +12% REER change over 3 years ±5% (EA) or ±11% Internal Private sector debt (consolidated) +133% of GDP Private sector credit flow (consolidated) +14% of GDP Real house price growth year-on-year +6% Government debt 60% of GDP Unemployment rate (3-year av.) +10% Growth of fin. sector liabilities YoY +16.5% Employment Activity rate change over 3y -0.2 pp. Long-term unemp. rate change 3y +0.5 pp. Youth unemployment rate change 3y +2 pp. 20
Table 1.1: MIP Scoreboard 2016 Year 2016 Current account balance - % of GDP (3 year average) Net international investment position (% of GDP) Thresholds -4/6% -35% The MIP scoreboard: AMR-2018 Real effective exchange rate - 42 trading partners, HICP deflator (3 year % change) ±5% (EA) ±11% (Non-EA) Export market share - % of world exports (5 year % change) -6% Nominal unit labour cost index (2010=100) (3 year % change) 9% (EA) 12% (Non-EA) House price index (2015=100), deflated (1 year % change) Private sector credit flow, consolidated (% of GDP) Private sector debt, consolidated (% of GDP) General government gross debt (% of GDP) Unemployment rate (3 year average) Total financial sector liabilities, nonconsolidated (1 year % change) Activity rate - % of total population aged 15-64 (3 year change in pp) Long-term unemployment rate - % of active population aged 15-74 (3 year change in pp) Youth unemployment rate - % of active population aged 15-24 (3 year change in pp) 6% 14% 133% 60% 10% 16.5% -0.2 pp 0.5 pp 2 pp BE -0.3 51.2-0.4-2.3-0.6 1.0p 13.3 190.1 105.7 8.3 1.2 0.1 0.1-3.6 BG 1.8-47.0-4.7 8.2 9.5p 7.1p 4.0 104.9 29.0 9.4 11.1 0.3-2.9-11.2 CZ 0.5-24.6-3.7 2.9 2.9 6.7p 4.4 68.7 36.8 5.1 14.5 2.1-1.3-8.4 DK 8.4 54.8-1.5-4.2 3.4 4.2-10.4 210.7 37.7 6.3 3.3 1.9b -0.4b -1.0 DE 8.1 54.4-2.6 2.8 5.2 5.4 3.8 99.3 68.1 4.6 5.2 0.3-0.6-0.7 EE 1.4-37.1 4.5-0.7 13.4 3.8 5.9 115.4 9.4 6.8 7.2 2.4-1.7-5.3 IE 5.5-176.2-6.6 59.8-20.5 6.6p -19.0 278.1 72.8 9.5 2.5 0.7-3.6-9.6 EL -1.0-139.4-3.9-19.0-3.3p -2.0e -1.7p 124.7p 180.8 25.0-16.6 0.7-1.5-11.0 ES 1.4-83.9-4.3 2.2 0.4p 4.7-1.0p 146.7p 99.0 22.1 0.9-0.1-3.5-11.1 FR -0.7-15.7-3.1-2.4 1.4p 1.0 6.2p 146.9p 96.5 10.3 4.3 0.7 0.2-0.3 HR 2.9-70.1 0.1 8.1-5.9d 2.1-0.1e 106.1e 82.9 15.6 2.5 1.9-4.4-18.1 IT 2.1-9.8-3.4-2.8 1.9-0.8p 0.6 113.6 132.0 12.1 3.2 1.5-0.2-2.2 CY -3.6-127.8-6.5-3.0-6.2p 1.6 10.2p 344.6p 107.1 14.7 0.7-0.2-0.3-9.8 LV -0.3-58.9 4.9 9.3 16.5 7.4 0.3 88.3 40.6 10.1 5.8 2.3-1.7-5.9 LT -0.3-43.2 5.4 5.4 14.7 4.5 4.3 56.2 40.1 9.2 16.3 3.1-2.1-7.4 LU 5.0 34.7-1.5 26.2 2.5 5.9 1.5 343.6 20.8 6.3 7.5 0.1 0.4 2.2 HU 3.6-65.0-5.0-0.4 3.3 13.6-3.6 77.0 73.9 6.5 19.5 5.4-2.5-13.7 MT 6.7 47.6-2.5 8.7-0.1 4.8p 11.1 128.4 57.6 5.3 1.7 4.1-1.0-2.0 NL 8.8 69.1-2.3 0.1-1.1p 4.4 1.5p 221.5p 61.8 6.8 5.3p 0.3 0.0-2.4 AT 2.2 5.6 1.0-4.0 5.8 7.2 3.2 124.0 83.6 5.8-2.4 0.7 0.6 1.5 PL -1.0-60.7-5.0 18.1 2.1p 2.5 4.7 81.6 54.1 7.6 8.9 1.8-2.2-9.6 PT 0.3-104.7-1.9 5.8 0.9p 6.1-2.2p 171.4p 130.1 12.6-0.2 0.7-3.1-9.9 RO -1.3-49.9-2.5 23.6 6.0p 6.5 0.6p 55.8p 37.6 6.5 7.6 0.7-0.2-3.1 SI 5.1-36.9-0.5 4.0 0.7 3.6-0.8 80.5 78.5 8.9 3.2 1.1-0.9-6.4 SK -0.7-62.4-1.6 7.3 3.5 7.0 9.2 94.7 51.8 11.5 8.5 2.0-4.2-11.5 FI -1.2-2.3 0.5-14.1 2.1-0.3 2.2 149.3 63.1 9.0 4.5 0.7 0.6 0.2 SE 4.6 11.2-9.2-7.9 2.0 7.6 7.6 188.5 42.2 7.4 9.0 1.0-0.1-4.7 UK -5.5-1.1 0.2-0.1 3.1 5.5 8.2 168.1 88.3 5.4 11.6 0.9-1.4-7.7 Flags:b:Break in series. e:estimated. p:provisional. External imbalances and competitiveness Internal imbalances Employment indicators 1) For the employment indicators, see page 2 of the AM R 2016. 2) House price index e = source NCB for EL. 3) For NULC HR, d: employment data use national concept instead of domestic concept. 4) Private sector debt, private sector credit flow: the decline for IE relative to 2015 predominantly reflects restructuring and re-domiciling activities of large multinational companies. Source: European Commission, Eurostat and Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs (for Real Effective Exchange Rate), and International Monetary Fund data, WEO (for world exports series) 21
CSR progress indicator Taking stock of the MIP implementation Average CSR progress indicator, breakdown by change in MIP imbalances classification (countries with IDRs over the 2013-2015 period) 60 50 40 EU average 30 20 10 0 stepped down unchanged stepped up
Taking stock of the MIP implementation Average number of CSRs for MIP and non-mip countries per policy area (average 2013, 2014 and 2015) 1.2 1 MIP countries Non-MIP countries 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Public finances and taxation Financial sector Labour market Social inclusion and education Structural policies Public administration and business environment 23
Did the MIP have an impact? A look at the data MIP surveillance and policy compliance CSR progress indicator for MIP versus non- MIP countries (arithmetic average)