Digital Finance Analytics (DFA) Blog – Page 1037

UK’s Financial System Not “Entirely Safe”

The UK’s financial system is not “entirely safe” according to former Bank of England governor Lord Mervyn King, speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. He questioned the banking system’s ability to withstand another crisis and argued the core problems that led to the meltdown have not yet been dealt with.

“I don’t think we’re yet at the point where we can be confident that the banking system would be entirely safe. I don’t think we’ve really yet got to the heart of what went wrong.”

The warning comes despite banks and other financial institutions being forced to hold more capital to prevent the risk of failure in the event of another downturn.

King, went on to say that imbalances between global economies have not yet been resolved. He added keeping base rate at the low of 0.5 per cent cannot go on .

“The idea that we can go on indefinitely with very low interest rates doesn’t make much sense.” However raising interest rates now “would probably lead to another downturn”.

He was at the helm of the Bank of England during the GFC.

His comments mirror some of the concerns highlighted in the recent Murray report.

Household Savings Intentions in 2015

We have updated our savings intentions data, using results from our latest household surveys. Today we outline the main findings from the research. Using the DFA property segmentation, we can compare the relative value of savings across the segments, and compare this distribution with last year. In addition, we expect savings rates to be cut further next year.

We see that Down-Traders hold the largest relative share of savings, up from 32% last year to 38% this year. All other segments are at the same relative values as last year, or at lower levels. This highlights that people looking to sell and move to smaller properties are hold the most significant savings.

In this analysis, savings includes balances in current accounts, call and term deposit accounts, and other liquid savings vehicles, but excludes property, shares are superannuation.

Looking at savings intentions, we see that Down-Traders are expecting to save more next year (55%), and only 5% are expecting to be savings smaller amounts. Investors, Portfolio Investors and Refinancers are more likely to be saving less next year. Want to Buys and First Time Buyers are also quite likely to do the same next year.

We can also look at the relative distribution of saving and investment vehicles by type. For some, the main vehicle is statutory superannuation, whereas for some other groups, bank deposits and cash management accounts are more significant. We also highlight the importance of pre-paying the mortgage for some segments.

At this point, we introduce our master household segments, and show the relative savings distribution across these segments. By far the largest balances are held by the Exclusive segment, followed by Self-Funded Retirees. The chart shows the relative distribution, with the yellow box showing the 50% distribution bounding.

We also see some trends by looking across segments over time. Exclusive and Stables household segments are seeing balances increasing, whereas Seniors and Self-Funded Retirees are seeing balances falling. In our analysis we saw that these older groups are especially feeling the impact of lower savings rates.

Another way to look at the savings scene, is to examine the motivations for savings. The chart below shows the relative distribution by age bands. Significantly, many households in the 20-30 and 30-40 age ranges are not saving at all. Older households are more likely to be saving for growth, whereas the oldest households are most likely to be saving for income.

65% of younger households are most likely saving for a specific event (e.g. holiday, car, wedding) or for a rainy day. We see that saving for property purchase peaks in the 30-40 years age group.

We believe that households will continue to be cautious in 2015, and that will savings rates continuing to fall, we will see many saving more, not less. The RBA remains keen to encourage households to spend more, but the research shows that saving remains important for those with the largest balances, and many are stress by costs of living rising, savings rates falling, and therefore are expecting to save less.

This is the last post for 2014. Thanks to all those who follow, read and comment on the DFA Blog. We will be back early in 2015, with fresh insight and updated surveys. Meantime happy holidays.

The Capital Conundrum II

A series of separate but connected events will see capital requirements of banks continue to steadily increase from 2015 onwards. You can read about the capital issues in the earlier post. This is consistent with the outcomes from the G20. The international environment is driving capital requirements higher (on the back of the northern hemisphere government bailouts post the GFC). Locally the regulators are also making moves, and the recommendations from the Murray Financial Systems Inquiry (FSI) are also in play. Overall, some of the most significant elements are:

Globally Significantly Banks (GSIBs) likely to need to hold more capital, and this will likely flow down to other banks also.
Latest BIS recommendations on floors and ratios
APRA changing the liquidity coverage ratio
FIS on capital ratios
FIS on advanced IRB banks

There are other steps in the works also. The net effect is that capital requirements will be lifting in 2015, irrespective of the FSI (and the capital changes recommended do not need parliamentary approvals).

Here is DFA’s view of how these outcomes will translate in the Australian context

Banks need to raise $20-40 bn over next couple of years, – that is doable – and they will access the now functioning global markets. It will be ratings positive.
Smaller banks will be helped by the FSI changes to advanced IRB, if they translate, but will still be at a funding disadvantage
Deposit rates will be cut, they have been falling already despite RBA rate being static, this has not received enough commentary, there are millions of households reliant on income from deposits
Mortgage rates will lift a little, and discounting will be even more selective – Murray’s estimates on the costs are about right.
Lending rates for small business will rise further
Competition won’t be that impacted, and the four big banks will remain super profitable
We will still have four banks too big to fail, and the tax payer would have to bail them out in the event of a failure (highly unlikely but not impossible given the slowing economic environment here, and uncertainly overseas). The implicit government guarantee is the real issue.

Capital floors: The Design of a Framework Based on Standardised Approaches

The BIS also released a consultative paper which outlines the Basel Committee’s proposals to design a capital floor based on standardised, non-internal modelled approaches. The proposed floor would replace the existing transitional capital floor based on the Basel I framework. The floor will be based on revised standardised approaches for credit, market and operational risk, which are currently under consultation.

The floor is meant to mitigate model risk and measurement error stemming from internally-modelled approaches. It would enhance the comparability of capital outcomes across banks, and also ensure that the level of capital across the banking system does not fall below a certain level.

As noted in the Committee’s November 2014 report to the G20 Leaders, the Committee is taking steps to reduce variation in capital ratios between banks. The proposed capital floor is part of a range of policy and supervisory measures that aim to enhance the reliability and comparability of risk-weighted capital ratios. The Committee will consider the calibration of the floor alongside its work on finalising the revised standardised approaches.

Revisions to the Standardised Approach for Credit Risk

BIS has just released a proposal to strengthen the existing regulatory capital standards for discussion. This is one of a number of initiatives which are all driving capital requirements higher.

The proposed Revisions to the Standardised Approach for credit risk seek to strengthen the existing regulatory capital standard in several ways. These include:

reduced reliance on external credit ratings;

enhanced granularity and risk sensitivity;

updated risk weight calibrations, which for purposes of this consultation are indicative risk weights and will be further informed by the results of a quantitative impact study;

more comparability with the internal ratings-based (IRB) approach with respect to the definition and treatment of similar exposures; and

better clarity on the application of the standards.

The Committee is considering replacing references to external ratings, as used in the current standardised approach, with a limited number of risk drivers. These alternative risk drivers vary based on the particular type of exposure and have been selected on the basis that they are simple, intuitive, readily available and capable of explaining risk across jurisdictions.

Given the challenges associated with identifying risk drivers that can be applied globally but which also reflect the local nature of some exposures – such as retail credit and mortgages – the Committee recognises that the proposals are still at an early stage of development. Thus, the Committee seeks respondents’ comments and analysis with a view to enhancing the proposals set out in this consultative document.

The key aspects of the proposals are:

Bank exposures: would no longer be risk-weighted by reference to the bank’s external credit rating or that of its sovereign of incorporation, but would instead be based on two risk drivers: the bank’s capital adequacy and its asset quality.

Corporate exposures: would no longer be risk-weighted by reference to the borrowing firm’s external credit rating, but would instead be based on the firm’s revenue and leverage.

Further, risk sensitivity and comparability with the IRB approach would be increased by introducing a specific treatment for specialised lending.

Retail category: would be enhanced by tightening the criteria to qualify for a preferential risk weight, and by introducing an alternative treatment for exposures that do not meet the criteria.

Residential real estate: would no longer receive a 35% risk weight. Instead, risk weights would be based on two commonly used loan underwriting ratios: the amount of the loan relative to the value of the real estate securing the loan (ie the loan-to-value ratio) and the borrower’s indebtedness (ie a debt-service coverage ratio).

Commercial real estate: two options are currently under consideration: (a) treating the exposures as unsecured with national discretion for a preferential risk weight under certain conditions; or (b) determining the risk weight based on the loan-to-value ratio.

Credit risk mitigation: the framework would be amended by reducing the number of approaches, recalibrating supervisory haircuts and updating the corporate guarantor eligibility criteria.

ASIC Provides Relief for 31-day Notice Term Deposits

ASIC today released a class order to facilitate term deposits that are only breakable on 31 days’ notice.

The Class Order [CO 14/1262] gives relief for 18 months to enable 31-day notice term deposits of up to five years to be given concessional regulatory treatment as basic deposit products under the Corporations Act (the Act). This is intended to give Government the opportunity to consider law reform.

As part of the Basel III reforms, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) will implement the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) requirement from 1 January 2015, as set out in Prudential Standard APS 210 Liquidity (APS 210).

Term deposits that require 31 days’ notice for early withdrawal will receive favourable liquidity treatment under APS 210.

The new class order will provide industry with certainty that these sorts of term deposits will be treated as basic deposit products, subject to meeting the relief conditions.

The class order formalises ASIC’s previous conditional no-action position on 31-day notice term deposits. The relief conditions are about ensuring consumers can make confident and informed decisions when investing in the new type of term deposit.

They also help consumers understand the new requirement to give 31 days’ notice to ‘break’ their term deposit and ensure this is considered when the term deposit rolls-over.

ASIC will continue to work with industry to help ADIs meet the relief conditions, including carryover of arrangements from the previous no-action position to the class order, while ensuring consumer protection.

Background

The definition of basic deposit product in section 761A of the Act does not specify the period of notice an ADI may require a depositor to give in order to make an early withdrawal from a term deposit of up to two years.

It is therefore unclear what notice period for withdrawal could be imposed that is consistent with the characterisation of a term deposit of up to two years as basic deposit product. ASIC’s view is that a notice period as long as 31 days for early withdrawal is unlikely to meet the definition of basic deposit product.

Section 761A of the Act provides that term deposits of between two and five years must allow an early withdrawal without prior notice in order to meet the basic deposit product definition (except for the special provision for mutual ADIs contained in reg 7.1.03A of the Corporations Regulations 2001).

Long-Term Unemployment Will Impact Wage Growth

In economic circles, the relationship between wage growth and unemployment is an important factor. Many will focus on the relationship between short-term unemployment and wage growth, but a paper released by the Bank of England highlights that long-term unemployment is also an important factor in the equation. Given the fact that wage growth is slowing in Australia, and long-term unemployment is rising, these findings are important.

The relationship between wage growth and unemployment is a key trade-off concerning monetary policy makers, as labour costs form a critical part of the inflationary transmission mechanism. One important question is how the composition of the unemployment pool, and specifically the share of long-term unemployment, affects that tradeoff. Detachment from the labour force is likely to increase with unemployment duration, so that the long-term unemployed search less actively for jobs and therefore exert less downward pressure on wages. If so, short-term unemployment may pull down on wage inflation more than long-term unemployment does. In this situation, policymakers might anticipate a period of high wage growth if short-term unemployment starts to fall to low levels even if the long-term unemployment rate remains elevated.

But there may be complications arising from the integral dynamics of unemployment. In this paper it emerges that the estimated disinflationary effects of long-term unemployment hinge on whether or not wage growth becomes less sensitive to unemployment as the latter rises – a form of non-linearity. One reason why the negative relationship between wages and unemployment might become flatter at high levels of unemployment is that workers may tend to resist cuts in their nominal wages. When unemployment is low, wage growth tends to be high as firms compete for a scarce pool of resources. But due to worker resistance to wage cuts the reverse might not hold to the same extent, with a relatively large increase in unemployment needed to reduce wage growth during a recession.

Why does this non-linearity matter for the measured effect of long-term unemployment on wage growth? It is because long-term unemployment inevitably lags behind movements in short-term unemployment as it takes time for the new unemployed to move into the long-term category. So high levels of long-term unemployed are only associated with lengthy periods of high unemployment. A flattening off of the relationship between wages and unemployment at high levels of unemployment would then imply that long-term unemployment does little to reduce wage inflation further. The apparently different effects of short and long-term unemployment on wage inflation could therefore be merely as a result of timing rather than labour market detachment among the long-term unemployed.

By modifying statistical models of labour market dynamics to incorporate this insight, this paper finds that there appears to be much less difference between the short and long-term unemployed in terms of their marginal influence on wage behaviour than is suggested by the recent literature. When the non-linearity described above is not taken into account, estimation results corroborate the finding already established in the literature that it is predominantly the short-term unemployed that matter for wage inflation. Long-term unemployment in this specification tends to have no statistically significant effect on wage inflation. When the non-linearity is taken into account, long-term unemployment has a much larger effect on wage inflation. For some of the specifications considered, the data fail to reject the hypothesis that short and long-term unemployment rates have equal effects on inflation. In some instances, the models even suggest that long-term unemployment creates more of a drag on wage growth than short-term unemployment does, all else equal. Statistical uncertainty makes it difficult to draw a very precise conclusion, but the results in this paper caution against excluding long-term unemployment from estimates of aggregate labour market slack as is suggested by much of the recent literature. Both the short-term unemployment rate and the long-term unemployment rate are likely to contain useful information for judging the degree of wage pressure in the economy.

How The Mining Boom Lifted Living Standards

In the RBA Bulletin for December 2014, there is a detailed analysis and modelling to show how the mining boom impacted the Australian economy. This is important because as we know the boom is fading, and the RBA has been looking for the housing sector to take up the slack.

The world price of Australia’s mining exports more than tripled over the 10 years to 2012, while investment spending by the mining sector increased from 2 per cent of GDP to 8 per cent. This ‘mining boom’ represents one of the largest shocks to the Australian economy in generations. This article presents estimates of its effects, using a macroeconometric model of the Australian economy. It summarises a longer research paper, which contains further details and discussion of the results (see Downes, Hanslow and Tulip (2014)). The model estimates suggest that the mining boom increased Australian living standards substantially. By 2013, the boom is estimated to have raised real per capita household disposable income by 13 per cent, raised real wages by 6 per cent and lowered the unemployment rate by about 1¼ percentage points. However, not all parts of the economy have benefited. The mining boom has also led to a large appreciation of the Australian dollar that has weighed on other industries exposed to trade, such as manufacturing and agriculture. However, because manufacturing benefits from higher demand for inputs to mining, the deindustrialisation that sometimes accompanies resource booms – the so-called ‘Dutch disease’ – has not been strong. Model estimates suggest that manufacturing output in 2013 was about 5 per cent below what it would have been without the mining boom.

Graph 3 also shows an estimate of the increase in the volume of goods and services produced arising from the boom. Higher mining investment directly contributes to higher aggregate demand. Furthermore, higher national purchasing power boosts consumption and other spending components. Higher mining investment also increases the national capital stock and hence aggregate supply. There are many further compounding and offsetting effects. The estimated net effect is to increase real GDP by 6 per cent.

The mining boom raises household income through several different channels within the model (Graph 8). As of 2013, employment was 3 per cent higher than in the counterfactual, largely due to the boost to aggregate demand. Real consumer wages were about 6 per cent higher, reflecting the effect of the higher exchange rate on import prices. Property income increased, reflecting greater returns to equities and real estate. A larger tax base led to lower average tax rates, all of which helped raise real household disposable income by about 13 per cent. As can be seen in Graph 8, household consumption is estimated to initially rise more slowly than real household disposable income. That is, the saving rate increases. This reflects inertia in consumption behaviour, coupled with a default assumption that households initially view the boom as temporary. In the medium to long run, as it becomes apparent that the change in income is persistent, savings return toward normal and consumption rises further. In the long run, consumption will adjust by about the same proportion as the rise in household disposable income.

Changes in the composition of consumption are an important determinant of how the mining boom affected different industries (Graph 9). Demand for motor vehicles and other consumer durables are estimated to have increased strongly, reflecting lower import prices and strong income growth. Relative price changes for most other categories of consumption were smaller, with consequently less effect on their relative demand.

The mining boom can be viewed as a confluence of events that have boosted mineral commodity prices, mining investment and resources production. This combination of shocks has boosted the purchasing power and volume of Australian output. It has also led to large changes in relative prices, most noticeably an appreciation of the exchange rate. The combination of changes in income, production and relative prices has meant large changes in the composition of economic activity. While mining, construction and importing industries have boomed, agriculture, manufacturing and other trade-exposed services have declined relative to their expected paths in the absence of the boom. Households that own mining shares (including through superannuation) or real estate have done well, while renters and those who work in import-competing industries have done less well.

Payment Card Access Regimes

The Reserve Bank has varied the Access Regimes for the MasterCard and Visa credit card systems and revoked the Access Regime for the Visa Debit system. The variations and revocation are effective from 1 January 2015.

In March 2014, the Payments System Board made an in-principle decision to modify the Access Regimes. This reflected its conclusion that, while the original Access Regimes were appropriate when introduced, changes in industry structure and in the ownership of the card systems had meant that the regimes were now unduly restricting access. Accordingly, the amended framework will provide the card systems with the flexibility to expand membership beyond existing participants. The card systems will be required to have in place transparent eligibility and assessment criteria and to report information about membership and applications to the Bank.

The Visa Debit regime was originally introduced to deal with technical issues arising from the interaction of Visa’s rules and the credit card Access Regime; these issues no longer apply and accordingly the Visa Debit regime will be revoked.

At the time of its in-principle decision in March, the Board noted that implementation was contingent on a number of other factors. Most importantly, amendment of the Banking Regulations 1966 was required for the variations to be effective. Amendments to the Banking Regulations that mean that credit card issuing and acquiring will no longer be considered banking business come into force on 1 January 2015.

Fast Retail Payment Systems

In the December 2014 edition of the RBA Bulletin, there is an important article on the emerging fast retail payment systems. Here are some of the most salient points:

In December 2014, a group of Australian financial institutions announced that funding had been secured for the next phase of the New Payments Platform (NPP), which will provide the capability for Australian consumers and businesses to make and receive payments in near to real time. The NPP is one example of a fast retail payment system, a number of which have been implemented in other countries in recent years.

Advances in technology – in particular improved telecommunications, faster processing speeds and wide penetration of internet connectivity – mean that real-time payments can be extended to the high-volume, low-value payments used by consumers and businesses (‘retail payments’). Systems implemented in a number of countries allow businesses and consumers to make and receive payments in near to real time, with close-to-immediate funds availability to the recipient. Fast retail payment systems can benefit end users of payments systems, and also payment providers themselves – for example, by replacing the use of relatively costly cheque payments with real-time transfers using a payment application on a mobile device.

Fast retail payments can be thought of as payments that are available for use by the recipient a short time after the payment has been initiated by the sender – within minutes, or indeed seconds. This contrasts with many established retail payment systems that rely on batch processing where funds are made available on the next business day, or even several days later – particularly in the case of cheques. There are three steps within the payment process relevant for achieving fast payments – clearing, posting and settlement. First, following the initiation of a payment by the customer (payer), the exchange of payment instructions and the calculation of payment obligations between financial institutions (referred to collectively as ‘clearing’) need to be performed in real time. Many retail payment systems have tended to clear payments infrequently in batches, making timely receipt of funds by the payee impossible. Second, the recipient’s financial institution must act on the payment instructions it receives in the clearing process to make funds available to the recipient (‘posting’) in near to real time. Finally, the payer’s financial institution needs to ‘settle’ the funds owing to the receiver’s financial institution for the payment. This typically occurs by transferring funds between accounts held by financial institutions at the central bank (Exchange Settlement Accounts in Australia’s case). Clearing and posting need to occur quickly for a system to be, in effect, a ‘fast’ system. However, settlement between financial institutions need not be completed before funds are made available to the recipient customer. There is therefore freedom for settlement to occur in a number of ways and indeed the fast retail payment systems implemented to date have taken varying approaches. While there have been significant developments in recent years, the concept of fast retail payments is not new. For example, Japan’s Zengin Data Telecommunication System (Zengin System) was established in 1973. The development of fast payment systems has generally occurred in one of two ways: through the extension of existing infrastructures (such as high-value systems or real-time ATM infrastructure) to accommodate high-volume, fast retail payments, or through new purpose-built infrastructure. In most cases, new specialised infrastructure has been adopted for retail payments, but there are examples of hybrid systems processing both high-value and retail payments. For example, Japan’s Zengin System clears both high-value and low-value funds transfers in near to real time, but settlement arrangements vary with transaction size. Switzerland’s Swiss Interbank Clearing (SIC) provides for near to real time clearing and settlement of high-value payments and some retail funds transfers. A range of other countries have introduced fast retail payment systems either as hybrid systems or as dedicated low-value systems since 2000. Australia’s NPP system will rely on newly developed clearing infrastructure, with settlement occurring in real time through a new component of the Reserve Bank’s high-value settlement system, the Reserve Bank Information and Transfer System (RITS).

The use of mobile phones as an access channel for fast payment services is a focus for a number of fast payment systems, including in the United Kingdom, Sweden and Singapore. This dovetails particularly well with some services for easier addressing of payments. For instance, the Paym service recently introduced in the United Kingdom enables mobile phone numbers to be used as payment addresses for person-to-person payments (Payments Council 2014). Users register their mobile phone number and link it to their bank account number. They can then send and receive real-time payments to other registered users using their mobile phone numbers through their bank’s internet portal.

The broad approach to providing infrastructure that would support fast retail payments in Australia was established by the industry Real-Time Payments Committee (RTPC) and published in February 2013 (APCA 2013). The RTPC proposed the establishment of a mutual collaborative clearing utility to provide the payments infrastructure to which authorised deposit-taking institutions would be connected for real-time clearing of payments. This utility, known as the Basic Infrastructure (BI), will not be commercial in nature and will provide a platform through which a variety of payment services can be offered. While financial institutions will be able to offer basic payment services to their customers using only the BI, the model proposed by the RTPC anticipates that a variety of ‘overlay services’ will be able to use the BI to offer commercially oriented services, for instance through a commercial scheme. Participation by financial institutions in any particular commercial overlay would be voluntary. This model was chosen with the view that it would provide the greatest scope for innovation and competition between financial institutions and payment providers in the services that can be offered to end users. The RTPC also proposed that an agreed overlay service, referred to as the ‘Initial Convenience Service’ (ICS), would be built at the same time as the BI, to help establish a compelling proposition for use of the NPP from the outset. While the ICS will be the first overlay to give payments system users access to fast retail payments, it is intended to be the first of a number of overlay services that could be developed over time. The BI and the ICS comprise two of the three main components of the NPP. In addition, the Reserve Bank is developing a Fast Settlement Service (FSS) that will provide line-by-line real-time settlement of transactions processed through the NPP. This model will enable real-time clearing and settlement for retail payments, with the recipient’s financial institution able to provide fast access to funds without incurring interbank settlement risk. The interaction of these three components – BI, ICS and FSS – is illustrated below (Figure 1). Consistent with the approach taken in recently developed fast retail payment systems, the NPP will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and will incorporate ISO 20022 messaging standards to facilitate the inclusion of richer remittance information with transactions. The NPP model also includes an addressing solution, enabling users to receive payments without having to supply BSB and account numbers to the payer. This combination – of real-time capability, 24/7 operations, richer messaging functionality and easier addressing – addresses the key gaps in the payments system identified by the Strategic Review. The capacity for new overlay services to utilise the system should also be a vehicle for innovation and competition.