RBNZ External Stakeholder Engagement Survey

The Reserve Bank today released in its Bulletin the results of the survey, conducted by global market research company, Ipsos, as well as the Bank’s responses. Ipsos’ overall finding of the Bank’s stakeholder relationships was that “this was a positive story and one that provides a pathway to even greater levels of trust and familiarity.” The survey found that stakeholders welcome the Bank’s recent efforts to broaden its communications. The survey was conducted in the latter half of 2014, covering the general public, business, industries regulated by the Bank, financial markets, educators and researchers, and government. The survey was based on a framework to assess the Bank’s reputation, based on levels of familiarity, favourability, trust, and advocacy.

RBNZ should be congratulated for being proactive in terms of feedback from its stakeholders. RBA, please note.

The Impact of Evolving Financial Regulation

The BIS published an interesting report on how financial regulation is evolving. In short, significantly more capital will be required as the screws are tightened, or in other words capital rules have been too lax. These changes will have an impact on monetary policy; sometimes limiting credit availability; it will impact asset prices; weaken the relationship between policy rates and real-life interest rates; and make the banks reliance on the central bank stronger. It also provided a good summary of changes proposed under Basel III.

Financial regulation is evolving, as policymakers seek to strengthen the financial system in order to make it more robust and resilient. Changes in the regulatory environment are likely to have an impact on financial system structure and on the behaviour of financial intermediaries that central banks will need to take into account in how they implement monetary policy. Against this background, in February 2014, the Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS) and Markets Committee (MC) jointly established a Working Group – co-chaired by Ulrich Bindseil (European Central Bank) and William Nelson (Federal Reserve Board) – to assess the combined impact of key new regulations on monetary policy.

The BIS has now released their report which presents the Group’s findings. It is based on information from a range of sources, including central bank case studies as well as structured interviews with private sector market participants. It argues that the likely impacts of the new financial regulations on financial institutions and markets should have only limited and manageable effects on monetary policy operations and transmission. Hence, as necessary, central banks should be able to make adjustments within their existing policy frameworks and in ways that preserve policy effectiveness. These adjustments will tend to differ across jurisdictions according to the financial systems and policy frameworks in place. Specific implications, and examples of potential policy responses, are set out and elaborated in the report.

The report’s findings can be characterised in terms of five distinct sets of implications. In addition, more general effects of the emerging regulatory environment that are independent of specific macroeconomic conditions can be differentiated from those that pertain in the context of the current environment of low policy rates. All of these, and examples of potential policy responses. In brief, they are as follows:

Safer financial systems and their implications for policymaking. The emerging regulatory environment will contribute to enhanced bank resilience, reducing the risk of spillovers from the banking sector to the real economy, and is expected to limit the extent of liquidity and maturity transformation undertaken at banks. Therefore, if the regulations are effective, bank credit will be more stable on average, because credit cycles will be less severe and less frequent. At the same time, at some points of the credit cycle, the supply of bank credit for the non-financial sector will tend to be lower than it would be in the absence of the new regulations (and with everything else unchanged). Thus, to achieve the same economic outcomes, central banks may end up adopting a policy stance that is somewhat more accommodating during some parts of the cycle than would otherwise be the case.

Shifting asset price relationships and their implications for policy targets. As markets adjust to the new regulatory requirements, the equilibrium relationships between financial asset prices and central bank policy rates will shift, adding to the existing uncertainty around these relationships – at least during the transition period. As a result, central banks may need to adjust the settings of their policy instruments to achieve the same stance of monetary policy. A complicating factor is that different regulations, considered in isolation, can have consequences that go in opposite directions. Moreover, the interaction of these regulations could add to the difficulties in predicting their overall impact. As a result, central banks will need to monitor these changes and respond to them as they manifest themselves.

Reduced arbitrage activity and its impact on policy implementation. New regulations, such as the leverage ratio, may disincentivise certain low-margin arbitrage activities, such as banks’ matched repo book business. This reduction would tend to weaken, and make more uncertain, the links between policy rates and other interest rates, weakening the transmission of monetary policy impulses along the yield curve as well as to other asset prices relevant for economic activity. More difficult reserve demand forecasting. For central banks with an operational target of steering a short-term interest rate within a corridor system, if the rate paid on reserve balances is close to the interest rate on other types of high quality liquid assets (HQLA Level 1), small changes in interest rates could result in relatively large swings in reserve demand as banks substitute freely between reserves and these other assets. Additionally, new limits on counterparty concentration may mean that forecasts of the level of reserve balances will depend more strongly than in the past on the distribution of those reserves across counterparties. Similarly, with periodic calculation of regulatory ratios (such as at year- or quarter-ends), window dressing behaviour and associated movements in short-term interest rates are likely to intensify.

More central bank intermediation. Many of the new regulations will increase the tendency of banks to take recourse to the central bank as an intermediary in financial markets – a trend that the central bank can either accommodate or resist. Weakened incentives for arbitrage and greater difficulty of forecasting the level of reserve balances, for example, may lead central banks to decide to interact with a wider set of counterparties or in a wider set of markets. In addition, in a number of instances, the regulations treat transactions with the central bank more favourably than those with private counterparties. For example, Liquidity Coverage Ratio rollover rates on a maturing loan from a central bank, depending on the collateral provided, can be much higher than those for loans from private counterparties.

Effects specific to the current low interest rate environment. In addition to these more general implications, there are a number of effects for monetary policy that are specific to the current environment of low policy rates in the major advanced economies. For example, effects that tend to lower market interest rates relative to policy rates will support monetary policy in jurisdictions at the zero lower bound, but may hinder efforts to normalise the stance of policy. Effects that tend to raise market rates relative to policy rates will have the opposite consequence. Moreover, any temporary reduction of credit supply resulting from the new regulations and their phasing-in may imply the need for additional unconventional measures for central banks operating at the zero lower bound, with the added complication that some unconventional measures may make the new regulations more binding.

The four key regulations identified by the Working Group as being the most likely ones to significantly affect monetary policy implementation:

Liquidity Coverage Ratio. The stated objective of the LCR is to ensure that banks maintain an adequate level of unencumbered, high-quality liquid assets (HQLA) that can be converted into cash to meet their liquidity needs under a 30-day scenario of severe funding stress. It is defined as the ratio of the stock of HQLA (numerator) to net cash outflows expected over the stress period (denominator). The initial minimum requirement of 60%, effective January 2015, will be increased in a stepwise fashion to 100% by 2019. The HQLA definition groups eligible assets into two discrete categories (Level 1 and Level 2). Level 1 assets, which can be included without limit, are those with 0% risk weights for Basel II capital calculations, such as cash, central bank reserves and sovereign debt (which may be subject to haircuts). Level 2 assets, which can make up no more than 40% of the buffer, include assets with low capital risk weights as well as highly rated non-financial corporate and covered bonds, subject to a 15% haircut. (Under certain conditions, supervisors may choose to include additional asset types, termed Level 2B, up to a limit of 15% of the total HQLA stock and carrying haircuts of 25% or higher.) Net cash outflows, in turn, are calculated on the basis of agreed run-off and inflow rates that are applied to different sources of cash out- and inflows (with an aggregate cap of 75% of total cash outflows).

Net Stable Funding Ratio. The aim of the NSFR, which will be introduced as of January 2018, is to (i) limit overreliance on short-term wholesale funding, (ii) encourage better assessment of funding risk across all on-and offbalance sheet items, and (iii) promote funding from stable sources on a structural basis. The NSFR is defined as the ratio of available stable funding (ASF) to required stable funding (RSF), which needs to be equal to at least 100% on an ongoing basis. The numerator is determined by applying ASF factors to a bank’s liability positions, with higher factors assigned for longer maturities (according to pre-defined buckets: less than six months, between six and 12 months, and higher), and more stable funding sources. The denominator reflects the product of RSF factors and the bank’s assets, differentiated according to HQLA/non-HQLA definitions and by counterparty (financial/non-financial). Asset encumbrance generally results in higher RSF factors, especially for longer encumbrance periods (eg assets encumbered for a period of one year or more receive the maximum RSF factor of 100%, while central bank reserves have a factor of 0% (with discretion to apply a higher rate) and other Level 1 assets a factor of 5%). Differentiated RSF factors also apply according to whether assets are secured against Level 1 assets or not.

Leverage ratio. The Basel III minimum leverage ratio is intended to restrict the build-up of leverage in the banking sector, and to backstop the risk-based capital requirements with a simple, non-risk-based measure. Public disclosure of the regulatory LR by banks commenced on 1 January 2015. The final calibration and any further adjustments to the definition will be completed by 2017 with a view to migrating to a binding Pillar 1 requirement on 1 January 2018. The LR is defined as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to total exposures. The denominator consists of the sum of all onbalance sheet exposures, derivative positions, securities financing transactions and off-balance sheet items. As such, the total exposure measure includes central bank reserves and repo positions. Netting of cash legs (ie of receivables and payables) of repo exposures (with the same counterparty) is permitted under certain conditions, but netting across counterparties or of cash positions against collateral is not.

Large exposure limits. The large exposures (LE) framework of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is a set of rules for internationally active banks aimed at reducing system-wide contagion risk. It imposes limits on banks’ exposures to single counterparties in order to constrain the maximum loss a bank could face in the event of sudden counterparty failure. The framework is due to be fully implemented on 1 January 2019. Under the LE framework, a bank’s exposure to any single counterparty or group of connected counterparties cannot exceed 25% of the bank’s Tier 1 capital. A tighter limit of 15% is set for exposures between banks that have been designated as globally systemically important. While exposure measurement is aligned with the standardised approach under risk-based capital rules, exposures to sovereigns and central banks, as well as intraday interbankexposures, are exempt from the limit.

Basel III capital regulation includes a number of new elements to boost banks’ capital base. First, it incorporates a significant expansion in risk coverage, which increases risk-weighted assets. Specifically, it targets the instruments and markets that were deemed most problematic during the crisis – that is, trading book exposures, counterparty credit risk and securitised assets. This builds on the earlier approach under Basel II, which introduced differentiated risk weights (which are either internal model-based or set by regulation). A key differentiation from the perspective of monetary policy is that central bank reserves carry a zero risk weight under the risk-weighted standard, whereas the leverage ratio introduces an implied capital charge that is equal for all assets. Riskweighted capital charges also differ according to whether a transaction is secured or unsecured. Second, and critically, Basel III tightens the definition of eligible capital, with a strong focus on common equity. This represents a
move away from complex hybrid capital instruments that proved incapable of absorbing losses in periods of stress. A unique feature of Basel III is the introduction of capital buffers that banks can use without compromising their solvency, and surcharges, which counter individual banks’ contribution to systemic risk.

BaselIIIChartBISMay2015First, a conservation buffer is designed to help preserve a bank as a going concern by restricting discretionary distributions (such as dividends and bonus payments) when the bank’s capital ratio deteriorates. Second, a countercyclical buffer – capital that accumulates in good times and that can be drawn down in periods of stress – will help protect banks against risks that evolve over the financial cycle. Finally, a capital surcharge will be applied to global systemically important banks (G-SIBs), or banks with large, highly interconnected and complex operations, in order to discourage the concentration of risk. These international standards impose lower bounds on regulators: countries may choose to implement higher standards to address particular risks in their national contexts. Combining these elements will significantly increase banks’ capital requirements.

 

Federal Reserve Minutes From April Suggest Rates US Rates Will Be Lower For Longer

From the Fed: Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in March suggests that economic growth slowed during the winter months, in part reflecting transitory factors. The pace of job gains moderated, and the unemployment rate remained steady. A range of labor market indicators suggests that underutilization of labor resources was little changed. Growth in household spending declined; households’ real incomes rose strongly, partly reflecting earlier declines in energy prices, and consumer sentiment re-mains high. Business fixed investment softened, the recovery in the housing sector remained slow, and exports declined. Inflation continued to run below the Committee’s longer-run objective, partly reflecting earlier declines in energy prices and decreasing prices of non-energy imports. Market-based measures of inflation compensation remain low; survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. Although growth in output and employment slowed during the first quarter, the Committee continues to expect that, with appropriate policy accommo-dation, economic activity will expand at a moderate pace, with labor market indicators continuing to move toward levels the Committee judges consistent with its dual man-date. The Committee continues to see the risks to the outlook for economic activity and the labor market as nearly balanced. Inflation is anticipated to remain near its recent low level in the near term, but the Committee expects inflation to rise gradually toward 2 per-cent over the medium term as the labor market improves further and the transitory effects of declines in energy and import prices dissi-pate. The Committee continues to monitor inflation developments closely.

To support continued progress toward maxi-mum employment and price stability, the Committee today reaffirmed its view that the current 0 to ¼ percent target range for the federal funds rate remains appropriate. In de-termining how long to maintain this target range, the Committee will assess progress—both realized and expected—toward its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation. This assessment will take into ac-count a wide range of information, including measures of labor market conditions, indica-tors of inflation pressures and inflation expec-tations, and readings on financial and interna-tional developments. The Committee antici-pates that it will be appropriate to raise the  target range for the federal funds rate when it has seen further improvement in the labor market and is reasonably confident that infla-tion will move back to its 2 percent objective over the medium term.

The Committee is maintaining its existing pol-icy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. This policy, by keeping the Committee’s holdings of longer-term securities at sizable levels, should help maintain accommodative financial conditions. When the Committee decides to begin to re-move policy accommodation, it will take a balanced approach consistent with its longer-run goals of maximum employment and inflation of 2 percent. The Committee currently anticipates that, even after employment and inflation are near mandate-consistent levels, economic conditions may, for some time, warrant keeping the target federal funds rate below levels the Committee views as normal in the longer run

Federal Reserve Fines Six Major Banking Organisations $1.8 billion For Rigging FX Markets

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday announced it will impose fines totaling more than $1.8 billion against six major banking organizations for their unsafe and unsound practices in the foreign exchange (FX) markets. The fines, among the largest ever assessed by the Federal Reserve, include: $342 million each for UBS AG, Barclays Bank PLC, Citigroup Inc., and JPMorgan Chase & Co.; $274 million for Royal Bank of Scotland PLC (RBS); and $205 million for Bank of America Corporation. The Federal Reserve also issued cease and desist orders requiring the firms to improve their policies and procedures for oversight and controls over activities in the wholesale FX and similar types of markets.

The Federal Reserve is requiring the firms to correct deficiencies in their oversight and internal controls over traders who buy and sell U.S. dollars and foreign currencies for the organizations’ own accounts and for customers. As a result of these deficient policies and procedures, the organizations engaged in unsafe and unsound conduct by failing to detect and address improper actions by their traders. These actions included the disclosure in electronic chatrooms of confidential customer information to traders at other organizations. Five of the banks failed to detect and address illegal agreements among traders to manipulate benchmark currency prices. Bank of America failed to detect and address conduct by traders who discussed the possibility of entering into similar agreements to manipulate prices. In addition, the Federal Reserve found UBS, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and Barclays engaged in unsafe and unsound conduct in FX sales, including conduct relating to how the organizations disclosed to customers the methods for determining price quotes.

The Federal Reserve is requiring the six organizations to improve their senior management oversight, internal controls, risk management, and internal audit policies and procedures for their FX activities and for similar kinds of trading activities and is requiring four of the organizations to improve controls over their sales practices. The Federal Reserve is also requiring all six organizations to cooperate in its investigation of the individuals involved in the conduct underlying these enforcement actions and is prohibiting the organizations from re-employing or otherwise engaging individuals who were involved in unsafe and unsound conduct.

The Federal Reserve is taking action against UBS, Barclays, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and RBS concurrently with the Department of Justice’s criminal charges against these five organizations related to misconduct in the FX markets. Bank of America was not part of the actions taken by the Department of Justice and has not been charged by the Department of Justice in this matter.

The Connecticut Department of Banking has joined the cease and desist provisions of the Federal Reserve’s action against UBS, which has a branch located in Stamford, Connecticut. The New York Department of Financial Services has taken a separate action against Barclays and its New York branch based on FX-related conduct.

Treasury Consults on Proposed Financial Institutions Supervisory Levies for 2015-16

The financial institutions supervisory levies are set to recover the operational costs of APRA and other specific costs incurred by certain Commonwealth agencies and departments, including the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, the Australian Taxation Office, and the Department of Human Services.

By way of background, in December 2002, the Government adopted a formal cost recovery policy to improve the consistency, transparency and accountability of cost recovered activities and promote the efficient allocation of resources. Cost recovery involves government entities charging individuals or non-government organisations some or all of the efficient costs of a specific government activity.

On 16 April 2014, Treasury released a paper responding to the submissions received on the methodology review and its conclusions informed last year’s discussion paper on the levies to be imposed in 2014-15. In the 2014-15 discussion paper, industry was further asked to provide Government with their views in relation to whether:  The 2014-15 levies should be calculated in the same way as the 2013-14 levies (Option 1), or; For the 2014-15 levies, the costs of all activities, except for APRA’s prudential supervision, should be allocated to the unrestricted levy component with the maximum cap for superannuation funds lowered to reflect the cost of SuperStream being met from the unrestricted component, and Pooled Superannuation Trusts to be levied at a lower rate to reflect the lower intensity of regulation required (Option 2).

Industry was also asked to provide Government with their views on whether the SuperStream levy payable should continue to be calculated on a net assets basis or with reference to the number of superannuation fund members. Following industry consultation, the Government elected to determine the levies payable in 2014-15 using the methodology outlined in Option 2. This methodology will be used to determine the levies payable in 2015-16.

APRA’s net funding requirements under the levies for 2015-16 is $125.1 million, a $2.7 million (2.2 per cent) increase relative to budget for 2014-15. $6.6 million of these costs will be met through other sources of APRA revenue (referred to as net cost offsets) and Government appropriations, including a special levy for the National Claims and Policies Database (NCPD). Taking into account $1.0 million in projected over-collected 2014-15 levies to be returned to industry, APRA’s underlying net levies funding requirement for 2015-16 is $117.5 million, an increase of $0.6 million (0.5 per cent) relative to budget for 2014-15.

A component of the levies is collected to partially offset the expenses of ASIC in relation to consumer protection, financial literacy, regulatory and enforcement activities relating to the products and services of APRA regulated institutions as well as the operation of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT). In addition, the levies are used to offset the cost of a number of Government initiatives including the over the counter (OTC) derivatives market supervision reforms and ASIC’s MoneySmart programmes. $28.2 million will be recovered for ASIC through the levies in 2015-16.

Funding from the levies collected from the superannuation industry includes a component to cover the expenses of the ATO in administering the Superannuation Lost Member Register (LMR) and Unclaimed Superannuation Money (USM) frameworks. The estimated total cost to the ATO of undertaking these functions in 2014-15 is $18.3 million, of which $7.1 million was recovered through the levies. In 2015-16, it is estimated that the total cost to the ATO in undertaking these functions will be $17.9 million with the full amount to be recovered through the levies in line with the requirements of the Government’s CRGs.

The Department of Human Services administers the early release of superannuation benefits on compassionate grounds. The compassionate grounds enable the Regulator (the Chief Executive of Medicare) to consider the early release of a person’s preserved superannuation in specified circumstances. In 2013-14, the Early Release of Superannuation Benefits programme received 19,286 applications. This was a 7 per cent increase compared with the previous year. In 2014-15, the Early Release of Superannuation Benefits programme is forecast to receive approximately 20,500 applications. This will represent an approximate increase in volume of 6.3 per cent compared with the previous year.
The programme is expected to cost the Government $4.7 million in 2015-16 and, in line with the CRGs, this amount will be recovered in full through the levies.

Announced as part of the former Government’s Stronger Super reforms, SuperStream is a collection of measures that are designed to deliver greater efficiency in back-office processing across the superannuation industry. Superannuation funds will benefit from standardised and simplified data and payment administration processes when dealing with employers and other funds and from easier matching and consolidation of superannuation accounts. The costs associated with the implementation of the SuperStream measures are to be collected as part of the levies on superannuation funds. The levies will recover the full cost of the implementation of the SuperStream reforms and are to be imposed as a temporary levy on APRA-regulated superannuation entities from 2012-13 to 2017-18 inclusive. The levy payable is subject to the Minister’s determination. The costs associated with the implementation of the SuperStream reforms are estimated to be $61.8 million in 2015-16, $35.5 million in 2016-17, and $32.0 million in 2017-18.

The Treasury paper, prepared in conjunction with the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA), seeks submissions on the proposed financial institutions supervisory levies that will apply for the 2015-16 financial year. Closing date for submissions: Wednesday, 10 June 2015

 

 

 

Average Super Fund Return Was 13% In 2014 – APRA

APRA just released their Superannuation Fund-level Profiles and Financial Performance (interim edition). Superannuation funds included in this publication represent the vast majority of superannuation assets regulated by APRA. It contains data for all APRA-regulated superannuation funds with more than four members. Pooled superannuation trusts (PSTs) have been excluded from the publication publications as their assets are captured in other superannuation funds. Exempt public sector superannuation schemes (EPSSS) have also been excluded.

The fund by fund data tells an interesting story. The average across retail, corporate, public sector and industry funds was 13%. This is calculated by taking the returns and costs at a fund level to create a net fund return. Individual members within a fund will see different true returns, based on the options they choose and other elements. However, it gets interesting if we look across the nearly 2oo funds.  Several funds are returning below 5%, and a few above 14%.

SuperReturnsAll2014What is even more interesting is that the size of the fund is not a good predictor of performance. We can see this by mapping returns to number of members.  The biggest fund returned under 10%, the next two between 12% and 14%. But we see some smaller funds out performing, and others languishing. That said, one year’s performance is not necessarily a good indicator of longer term performance anyhow.

MemberMapAll2014What is clear, is that Industry Funds, on average, still return more than retail funds. Corporate (private) funds do even better.

AveragePerSuper2014So, we can then look across each of the main types of fund. First, retail. There are about 100 retail funds. The average returns varies widely. Not all individual funds are listed here, but the graph includes all data points.

RetailFundsReturns2014If we look across the membership, and return map, we see wide variations again. Some smaller funds outperformed the larger ones in 2014.

MemberMapRetail2014The industry funds, of which there are more than 40, did better, with no funds below 8%, even if their peak performance was 14%.

IndustryFunds2014We also see that larger industry funds did better than the smaller ones, on average in 2014.

MemberMapIndustry2014Finally, we look at public sector funds. The 18 funds here did better than retail funds …

PublicSectorSuper2014… and larger funds (by membership) tended to do better.

MemberMapPublicSector2014

Life Insurance Companies Net Profit Up 29.7% In 2015 – APRA

The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) today released the Quarterly Life Insurance Performance Statistics publication for the March 2015 reference period.

The Quarterly Life Insurance Performance Statistics publication provides industry aggregate summaries of financial performance, financial position, capital adequacy and key ratios in a time series.

Net premium for the industry in the year ended 31 March 2015 was $61.8 billion, up from $50.0 billion in the previous year. Net policy payments for the industry for the same period were $60.8 billion, up from the previous year’s $45.6 billion.

Net profit after tax was $2.6 billion for the year ending 31 March 2015, up from $2.0 billion in the previous year. The March 2015 quarter profit was $830 million compared with the December 2014 quarter profit of $644 million.

The total assets for the industry were $306.5 billion as at 31 March 2015, up from $276.5 billion a year earlier.

The prescribed capital amount coverage ratio for the industry was 1.71 times the prescribed capital amount as at 31 March 2015, down from 1.88 times in the previous year.

Latest RBA Minutes Deliberately Gives No Forward Indication

The RBA released their board minutes from the Monetary Policy Meeting held earlier in May. They continue to balance generally weaker indicators with the risks of stoking the housing market in Sydney and Melbourne with a rate cut. They also agreed that, as at the time of the reduction in the cash rate in February, the statement communicating the decision would not contain any guidance on the future path of monetary policy.

International Economic Conditions

Members noted that growth of Australia’s major trading partners had eased a little in the early months of 2015, but was forecast to remain close to its long-run average in 2015 and 2016. Minor revisions to the outlook largely reflected weaker growth in China in the March quarter, which had also been reflected in lower bulk commodity prices and hence a slightly lower terms of trade than previously forecast by staff. Monetary conditions remained very accommodative across the globe and low oil prices were also supporting growth of Australia’s trading partners. Core inflation rates were below central banks’ targets in many economies.

Economic growth in China had eased further in the March quarter across a broad range of indicators. The Chinese property market had continued to be a source of weakness in the economy and represented a key source of uncertainty for the outlook, both through the effects on demand for industrial products and on the finances of local governments that relied on land sales to fund infrastructure projects. Members noted that residential property prices had continued to fall, albeit at a more gradual pace, and sales were lower than in the previous year. Chinese demand for steel had eased and had been accompanied by a fall in Chinese iron ore production and relatively flat imports of iron ore, although Australian iron ore exports to China continued to grow. Members noted that the authorities had introduced several measures to address the overhang of housing supply, while the People’s Bank of China (PBC) had lowered the reserve requirement ratio for banks.

Although the prices of iron ore, thermal coal and oil prices had rebounded somewhat from recent lows, members observed that the slowing in the growth of Chinese demand for steel had contributed to declines in the prices of bulk commodities since the start of 2015. As a result, the terms of trade had declined and were expected to continue doing so as lower spot prices gradually fed their way into contract prices for commodities, including liquefied natural gas (LNG). Notwithstanding this, members noted that the forecast terms of trade were considerably higher than they had been prior to the mid 2000s.

Growth in the US economy had moderated in the March quarter, largely reflecting the temporary effects of disruptions related to severe weather and industrial action in West Coast ports. Over the same period, conditions in the labour market had continued to improve. Non-farm payrolls employment had continued to grow strongly over the past six months and the unemployment rate had declined further. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) had indicated that it was likely to begin the process of normalising interest rates in the second half of the year as long as economic conditions continued to evolve as expected.

Growth in the Japanese economy looked to have been modest in the March quarter and there were signs that tight labour market conditions were generating stronger wage growth. In the rest of east Asia, growth of both exports and domestic activity appeared to have slowed a little in the March quarter. Economic activity in the euro area had continued to recover gradually over past few months.

Domestic Economic Conditions

Members observed that the forces underpinning developments in the domestic economy were much as they had been for some time. The available data suggested that growth in the domestic economy had continued at a pace a bit below average in the March quarter. Members noted that growth was expected to continue at a similar pace over the coming year before picking up gradually to an above-average pace over the course of 2016/17.

Household consumption growth had picked up late in 2014 and recent indicators were consistent with expectations that consumption would continue to rise gradually, supported by very low interest rates, relatively strong population growth and a gradual decline in the saving ratio. Members noted that if households respond to very low interest rates and higher asset prices to a similar degree as they had in the period prior to the global financial crisis, expected outcomes would include a lower saving ratio and higher consumption growth than embodied in the forecasts. Alternatively, if households were less inclined to bring forward their consumption than had been factored into the forecasts, perhaps to limit the increase in their leverage, consumption growth would be likely to be weaker and the saving ratio higher than forecast.

Conditions in the established housing market had remained strong in Sydney and Melbourne. However, across the rest of the country, which accounts for around 60 per cent of Australia’s dwelling stock, housing price growth had declined. The available data suggested that dwelling investment had grown strongly in the March quarter, supported by low interest rates and above-average population growth. Forward-looking indicators, including residential building and loan approvals, suggested that dwelling investment would continue to grow strongly in the next few quarters. Members noted that growth of housing credit for both owner-occupiers and investors had remained relatively stable in recent months, with overall credit growth broadly in line with longer-term income growth.

Survey data had suggested that business conditions in the non-mining sector were around average and that business credit had picked up of late. However, forward-looking measures of business confidence had remained a little below average and non-residential building approvals had also been running at a relatively low level. Members noted that non-mining business investment was expected to recover later than had been thought at the time the forecasts for the February Statement on Monetary Policy had been prepared. This reassessment was consistent with the weak reading on investment intentions for 2015/16 from the December quarter ABS capital expenditure survey as well as business liaison by the Bank, which had suggested for some time that businesses would commit to increasing investment only after observing a durable improvement in the growth of demand. Members noted that exchange rate developments were also likely to remain important for investment decisions. Uncertainty about both the timing and speed of the recovery in non-mining business investment remained key risks to the forecasts. Mining investment was still expected to decline sharply, but the speed of that decline continued to be uncertain.

Resource export volumes had grown strongly in the March quarter, in part reflecting the absence of substantial weather-related disruptions across the country. Resource exports were expected to continue making a strong contribution to growth as new production, particularly of LNG, came on line over 2015. Members noted that the capacity to maintain production plans in the face of lower commodity prices had been enhanced by further cost-cutting by producers, and that this had been assisted by the decline in the price of oil (an input into production) over the past year.

Fiscal consolidation by the federal and state governments was expected to contribute to subdued growth of domestic demand over the forecast period. Members noted that the Commonwealth Budget, which would be announced the following week, would provide important information for updating these forecasts.

The most recent labour force data indicated that employment growth had been increasing over the past six months or more, to be a little above the rate of population growth. Members noted that the revised labour force data also indicated that the unemployment rate had been stable through most of this period at about 6¼ per cent, and observed that the extended period of slow wage growth may help to reconcile these data with the below-trend growth in the economy over 2014. Forward-looking indicators of labour demand had continued to point to modest growth of employment over coming months.

Members noted that the delayed pick-up in GDP growth in the revised outlook meant that the unemployment rate was forecast to rise further, before starting to decline gradually towards the end of the forecast period. Wage growth was not expected to increase from current low levels for some time. Members discussed the possibility that employment growth could grow fast enough such that the unemployment rate did not increase, especially if there was ongoing moderation in wage growth.

Inflation in the March quarter had been broadly as expected. CPI inflation had slowed over the past year, reflecting the large falls in fuel prices and repeal of the carbon price. Underlying inflation had remained around ½–¾ per cent in the quarter and 2¼–2½ per cent over the past year. Domestic inflationary pressures – as indicated by non-tradables inflation – had remained below average, consistent with the extended period of slower wage growth. Inflation in consumer prices related to housing was marginally above its historical average, driven by inflation in new dwelling costs reflecting the strength of the housing market. Tradables inflation (excluding volatile items and tobacco) had picked up in response to the depreciation of the Australian dollar over the past year or so.

Members noted that the inflation forecast had been revised down slightly since February, reflecting the expectation that growth of economic activity would remain below trend for a little longer than previously forecast. Domestic labour cost pressures were expected to remain well contained and underlying inflation was expected to remain consistent with the inflation target over the forecast period. Headline inflation was forecast to remain below 2 per cent in year-ended terms through to mid 2015, before picking up to be consistent with the inflation target thereafter.

Financial Markets

The Board’s discussion of financial markets commenced with the unusual trading in the Australian dollar in the period immediately prior to the announcement of the Board’s decisions in February, March and April. Members were briefed on the Australian Securities and Investment Commission’s preliminary finding, which had been announced the previous day, that each of those moves in the Australian dollar had been a result of ‘normal market operations in an environment of lower liquidity immediately ahead of the RBA announcement’.

Members observed that financial markets continued to focus on the situation in Greece and monetary policy developments in the major economies.

Negotiations between the Greek Government and its official sector creditors remained at an impasse. Greece appeared to have sufficient funds to meet its scheduled payments in May only after the introduction of further stopgap measures. The next Eurogroup meeting was scheduled for 11 May and at least partial agreement would be needed on Greece’s reform agenda before further assistance funds were released. Overall, Greek banks’ reliance on emergency liquidity assistance had increased significantly recently and total Eurosystem lending to Greek banks now exceeded one-quarter of their total liabilities.

Members noted that the apparent deadlock in Greece had had little impact on broader financial markets until recently, when spreads on the debt of other euro area periphery countries – including Portugal and Spain – had increased as concerns surrounding Greek finances continued to rise.

In contrast, yields on German and other highly rated European sovereign debt fell to new lows in April following the continued expansion of the European Central Bank’s balance sheet, with the 10-year Bund yield declining to 8 basis points. In recent days, however, there had been a marked retracement, with 10 year yields rising by more than 30 basis points in Germany and the United States.

In the United States, market pricing continued to suggest that the first increase in the US policy rate could be closer to the end of the year, and the subsequent pace of policy tightening could be slower than that envisaged by members of the FOMC as published in mid March.

In China, the PBC had taken steps to boost liquidity by reducing the reserve requirement ratio. This step had partly sought to offset the reduction in liquidity resulting from sales of foreign reserves by the PBC in recent months. Equity prices had continued to record particularly large rises in mainland China, leading to prices more than doubling since mid 2014. Members noted that the rally in the Chinese share market had coincided with rapid growth in retail financial investments funded by debt, which raised concerns about the sustainability of the rise in share prices and the potential effects of any decline.

The appreciation of the US dollar since mid 2014 had continued its modest reversal over the past month, resulting in a depreciation of the US dollar against most currencies. Reflecting that, together with recent domestic data, the Australian dollar had appreciated by 3 per cent against the US dollar and by 2½ per cent on a trade-weighted basis over the past month. Nevertheless, compared with its level in mid 2014, the Australian dollar remained around 17 per cent lower against the US dollar and around 10 per cent lower on a trade-weighted basis. In contrast, the Chinese renminbi had been little changed against the US dollar over the past month and in trade-weighted terms remained around 12 per cent above its level in mid 2014.

Members noted that equity prices in the major developed economy markets had risen during April, with the exception of Europe, where equity prices fell a little after large rises earlier in the year. In Australia, equity prices also recorded a small decline in April, although the resources sector had outperformed, with energy sector share prices rising following an increase in the oil price.

Corporate bond issuance by Australian entities remained robust in both domestic and international markets amid favourable pricing conditions. In the money market, pricing on money market instruments pointed to around an 80 per cent chance of a reduction in the cash rate target at the present meeting.

Considerations for Monetary Policy

Members assessed that the outlook for global economic growth had been revised only marginally lower in the near term and would continue to be supported by stimulatory monetary policies and the low price of oil. They noted that growth appeared to have slowed in China and that the weakness in the Chinese property market continued to represent a significant risk both for Chinese growth and demand for construction-related commodities. Lower growth in the demand for commodities had contributed to the lower prices of Australia’s key commodity exports since the beginning of the year. As a result, Australia’s terms of trade were expected to decline a little more than was forecast three months ago.

In their discussion of the appropriate course for monetary policy, members noted the revised staff forecasts for the domestic economy. Although the recent flow of data had been generally positive, there had also been indications that future capital spending in both the mining and non-mining sectors would be weaker than expected. Overall, compared with the previous set of forecasts, growth was now expected to take longer to strengthen and the unemployment rate was likely to remain elevated for longer. This change, and generally subdued growth of domestic costs, including wages, implied that inflation was expected to be slightly lower than in earlier forecasts though still consistent with the target. On the face of it, this meant that it would be appropriate to consider an easing of monetary policy.

Members also discussed the potential risk that low levels of interest rates could foster imbalances in the housing market. While concerned about the very strong pace of growth of housing prices in Sydney, and observing that conditions in Melbourne were strong, members saw much more muted trends in other capital cities. As at previous meetings, they acknowledged the risks that could accompany a sustained increase in leverage from already high levels, should that occur, and that the expansionary effects of lower interest rates could be less than in the past. On the data available for this meeting, however, it did not appear that the growth of housing credit, either for investment or owner-occupancy purposes, had been increasing over recent months. The Bank would continue to work with other regulators to assess and contain the risks arising from the housing market.

More broadly, members noted that the low levels of interest rates were helping to support demand in the face of a number of persistent headwinds and that a further reduction in the cash rate would provide some additional support to economic activity by reinforcing recent encouraging trends in household demand. In turn, this would support non-mining business investment insofar as demand conditions were the main factor constraining these decisions. Such outcomes would be expected ultimately to lead to stronger labour market conditions. Members also noted that further depreciation of the exchange rate seemed to be both likely and necessary, particularly given the significant declines in key commodity prices, and that such an outcome would help to achieve more balanced growth in the economy and assist with the transition to a lower terms of trade.

Members discussed the timing of any interest rate adjustment. They could see cases both for moving at this meeting or at the subsequent meeting. The latter course would bring the advantage of additional information on the economy, including details of the forthcoming Commonwealth Budget. On the other hand, with the revised staff forecasts scheduled to be released a few days after the meeting, members acknowledged that the challenges of communication might be more effectively met with a reduction in the cash rate at this meeting.

On balance, taking all these factors into account, the Board decided that the best course was to ease monetary policy further at this meeting. Members agreed that, as at the time of the reduction in the cash rate in February, the statement communicating the decision would not contain any guidance on the future path of monetary policy. Members did not see this as limiting the Board’s scope for any action that might be appropriate at future meetings.

The Decision

The Board decided to lower the cash rate by 25 basis points to 2.0 per cent, effective 6 May.

Why And How Central Bank Issue Securities

An IMF Working Paper entitled “Issuance of Central Bank Securities: International Experiences and Guidelines” by Simon Gray and Runchana Pongsaparn has been released.

Most emerging market central banks (CBs) have a long history of operating in a context of surplus reserve balances. CB balance sheets in these markets have commonly been ‘asset driven’ whereby the CB takes on certain assets—in particular, foreign exchange (FX) reserves, lending to government, or in some cases lender of last resort (LOLR) assistance to weak banks—whether to serve policy goals or for lack of choice. Doing so generates reserve balances in the accounts of commercial banks which exceed the demand for their use. Since excess reserve balances will tend to depress short-term interest rates (and/or lead to exchange rate pressures), many CBs undertake sterilization operations to minimize adverse consequences. This may involve increasing reserve requirements, paying interest on excess reserves, using instruments such as term deposits, reverse repo (or FX swaps), or the issuance of CB bills.

In recent years a number of advanced economy banking systems have moved from a structural deficit of reserve balances to a structural surplus as a result of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). In Japan, the U.S. and the U.K. CB purchases of securities (Quantitative Easing (QE)) have resulted in substantial balance sheet increases and large excess reserve positions held by commercial banks, while in the euro zone, liquidity provision via lending to banks, in response to the GFC, has also led to excess reserve balances.

In addition, a surge in cross-border capital flows following the GFC has renewed the challenges for emerging market CBs in the effective management of reserve balances. Initially, many emerging market economies experienced capital outflows as financial institutions pulled liquidity back to the U.S. and Europe. The sale of FX by CBs, to smooth exchange rate depreciation, drained excess domestic-currency reserve balances. But shortly thereafter, loose monetary policy (notably QE) in response to the GFC reignited capital inflows into emerging markets, putting upwards pressure on their domestic currencies. To ward off such pressure, FX intervention has been common, causing an increase in domestic currency reserve balances. To avoid an adverse consequence on financial stability, careful management of such balances is essential.

Issuance of CB securities may be an attractive option for effective ‘liquidity management’ as it provides a degree of autonomy to the CB which is not to be available with all other instruments. Issuance of CB securities represents one of the most marketfriendly approaches and can be considered as one of the major open market operation (OMO) tools for several CBs. Direct instruments such as reserve requirements normally act as a tax on financial intermediation via commercial banks, unless they are fully remunerated. In a number of countries, recently introduced constraints on commercial bank intermediation have led to the growth of non-bank channels (sometimes referred to as ‘shadow banking’), with attendant financial stability risks. The use of other OMO (market friendly) instruments – such as the sale of government securities, or using reverse repurchase and FX swaps—relies necessarily on the availability of collateral (or FX) in the CB’s portfolio. CB securities provide a CB with autonomy in this respect. CB securities could also be used to facilitate bond market development purposes. For some countries, a lack of need from the fiscal side may prevent the government from issuing securities in sufficient amount or range of maturities to meet the market demand for domestic currency credit-risk free assets. Issuance of CB securities can fill in the gap and help establish the benchmark yield curve.

This paper seeks to summarize recent cross-country experiences with issuance of CB securities and draw ‘best practices’ that can serve as an operational guideline for CBs. Existing literature on this particular topic has been rather broad in nature, focusing more on the conceptual side of CB securities issuance. This paper attempts to bridge the conceptual and practical aspects of CB securities issuance, covering such issues as differing maturities of issuance, investor access and secondary market trading.

IMF-CB-IssueThey conclude that CB securities are issued mainly to absorb excess liquidity, and complement other short term market-based liquidity management tools. Recipients of large capital inflows, such as some countries in Asia and Latin America, are more likely to issue CB securities due to the need to sterilize excess liquidity, and able to do so because of a sufficient level of market development. For most countries, CB securities are used to complement other market-based  liquidity management tools such as repo and FX swap but tend to substitute for the use of reserve requirement or government securities.

The ISIMP survey also suggests that inflation targeting countries are more inclined to issue CB securities while low-income countries are least likely to issue them. Inflation targeting CBs would require active liquidity management to steer short-term market rates close to the policy target. CB securities can serve as an effective OMO tool in support this objective. On the other hand, the issuance of CB securities by low-income countries may be hindered by high administrative costs, or the lack of a supportive market infrastructure. While the operational details of CB securities issuance differ across countries, the maturities of securities issued tend to concentrate at the shorter segment of the yield curve. There are of course exceptions especially in the case where excess liquidity is structural and there is insufficient government bond supply. Importantly, the plan of CB securities issuance should be closely coordinated with that of the government to ensure consistency and facilitate well-functioning and appropriate development of the sovereign domestic bond market.

The paper also provides some general guidelines on the four major building blocks of CB securities issuance. The guidelines encompass several important steps—from the planning stage (which includes for instance liquidity forecasting, allocation of OMO instruments and market assessment), auction process (whether and how to allow for discretion in the allocation of bids) and post-auction assessment. Drawing on international experiences, these steps provide CBs some guidance on best practices on the operational aspects of CB securities issuance.

Note that IMF Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to encourage debate. The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management.

 

Islamic Financial Products And Banking Regulation

An IMF Working Paper entitled “Islamic Finance, Consumer Protection, and Financial Stability” by Inutu Lukong has been released. This is relevant because Islamic finance is growing rapidly in value and geographical reach. The banking sector is now systemically important in a dozen countries and growing in many other countries.

Consumers of Islamic financial products have increased to critical proportions, thus consumer protection frameworks that cater to the specifics of Islamic financial products should be an integral part of regulatory frameworks in countries where the industry exists. Although still a small share of global finance, Islamic finance is growing rapidly in value and geographical reach. The banking sector is now systemically important in a dozen countries and growing in many other countries. By end December 2013, consumers of Islamic banking products were estimated at 30 million (Enerst and Young (2013)). The Sukuk market has also registered phenomenal growth; the structures have become increasingly complex; and the issuer base has broadened to include advanced, emerging market and developing countries on one hand, and sovereigns and corporates on the other. The growing complexity of products can make it difficult for consumers and investors to discern risks while the broadening of issuers exposes investors to differing counterparty risks.

In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, many countries integrated consumer protection in their regulatory frameworks, but progress has been uneven across countries and few have tailored the frameworks to address the unique risks of Islamic finance. A number of international bodies, including the Islamic Financial Standards Board (IFSB), the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI); and the International Islamic Financial Market (IIFM), have issued standards to cater to the specifics of the Islamic finance industry, but adoption of the standards has been uneven across countries and the development of standards is still evolving.

This paper aims to contribute to ongoing efforts to strengthen the architecture for consumer protection in Islamic finance as part of the broader effort to safeguard the sound development of the sector. Outside the work of the regulatory bodies, research on the protection of consumers of Islamic financial products is limited and remaining gaps in the regulatory architecture for consumer protection in Islamic finance have not been assessed. The few studies on consumer protection in Islamic finance include the paper by Mamhood [2012] which analyzed the prospects of extending an Investor Protection Framework to the Islamic Capital Market in Malaysia; the IFSB [2013] paper that analyzes product regulation that could foster stronger protection for consumers of Islamic financial products; and the IFSB/IOSCO [2013] joint review on issues, risks and challenges arising from potential inadequate disclosure in the areas of Sukuk and Islamic Collective Investment Schemes.

The paper focuses on Islamic banking products and Sukuk, which together account for 95 percent of the Islamic finance industry. It highlights sources of information asymmetries that can result in consumers making uninformed decisions, as well as potential avenues for consumer exploitation in the design of Islamic financial products that could affect the sound development of the industry. It also evaluates the adequacy of current legal and regulatory frameworks for consumer protection, and discusses policy options for strengthening them. The analysis is based on the experiences of a sample of countries, including Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and Yemen.

The main conclusions of the paper are that Shar’iah principles, which govern Islamic finance, provide a strong foundation for consumer protection, but the features alone cannot guarantee adequate protection for consumers, because not all providers are motivated by ethical precepts, and the practice sometimes deviate from the principles. Consumer protection frameworks for conventional financial products are relevant to Islamic finance, but they need some adaptation to address risks specific to Islamic financial products. In particular, reforms are needed to address consumer vulnerabilities from current practices with respect to Profit Sharing Investment Accounts (PSIA), Ijārah Muntahia Bittamlīk, and conventional deposit insurance schemes as well as to address the legal risks for investors in Sukuk, particularly in cross border default cases.

Note that IMF Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to encourage debate. The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management.