g.georgakopoulos international waves of regulation the cost to the economy 19 06 2012 final
DESCRIPTION
Presentation @ Risk Management Conferece - Athens on 19/6/12. George GeorgakopoulosTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
International waves of regulation
The cost for banks and the economy
4th Risk Management & Compliance Forum
Athens,
June 19th 2012
George Georgakopoulos
Executive Vice President – Bancpost
President of the BOD – EFG Retail Services
![Page 2: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction and Summary
2
� A wide set of international reforms, as well as many nation–specific changes are being introduced, aimed at
improving the stability of the global financial system.
� The prevailing regulatory rationale is micro-prudential, attempting to stabilize the financial system through
higher capital & liquidity requirements.
� Banks are four years into what will probably be a decade–long phase of adjustment to tougher regulatory
standards.
� Tougher regulations might increase capital needs , for Euro area banks only, by 700 bn euro, and long–term
debt issuance by 300 bn. by 2015.
� These funding demands will likely lead to an increase in bank lending rates of about 364bps over the next
five years.
� Much of the adjustment to date has occurred through de–leveraging, which has been an impediment for the
global economy.
� Higher lending rates will likely reduce the level of real GDP of the Euro area by about 3% up to 2015, or by
about 0.7% per year.
� CEE economies will be affected more, since they rely heavily on bank financing
� This would lead to about 2.8 million fewer jobs being created over the next four years.
� Alternatives to pro-cyclical regulation such as macro-prudential measures, or mitigators such as direct
support from governments and central banks to ensure lower cost of funding for banks, and, therefore,
more lending, might well come to the forefront of the public policy debate in the near future.
![Page 3: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Key Areas of Regulatory Changes
3
Regulatory Changes
Internationally agreed-on measures Nation-specific measures
Capital related measures Liquidity related measures
• Internationally capital agreed-on measures may include the following:
� higher core ratios
� re-definition of capital
� changes in risk-weighting
� capital surcharges
e.g. Romania:
• additional capital and liquidity rules
• consumer protection
• restriction on credit expansion
![Page 4: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The Regulatory Agenda Facing Financial Firms
4Source: IIF “The Cumulative Impact on the Global Economy of Changes in the Financial Regulatory Framework” _ Sept 2011
CAPITAL Liquidity
� Liquidity coverage ratio
� Net stable funding ratio
� Liquid asset definition
� Role of central bank
� Local restrictions
� Off-balance sheet commitments
� Treatment of financial institutions
� Money market fund regulation
� New minimum capital levels
� Capital conservation buffer
� Counter-cyclical buffer
� Revised definition of capital
� Trading book capital
� Counterparty credit risk charge
� Contingent capital
� Leverage ratio
![Page 5: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Basel III Minimum Capital Ratios and Phase-in Plans
5Source: BCBS
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
1. Minimum Common Equity
Capital Ratio2% 2% 3.50% 4% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50%
2. Capital Conservation Buffer 0.625% 1.25% 1.875% 2.5%
3. Total (1+2) 2% 2% 3.5% 4% 4.5% 5.125% 5.75% 6.375% 7%
4. Phase-in of deductions from core Tier
1equity due to capital redefinitions20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
5. Phase-out of instruments that non longer
qualify as non-core Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Memo:
Minimum Tier 1 Capital 4% 4% 4.5% 5.5% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6%
Minimum Total Capital 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%
![Page 6: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
What Changes Occurred since the Crisis Started? (I)
6
� Many financial institutions across the world have been either liquidated or merged; whole sectors
of the financial industry have disappeared or been reformed; market mechanisms and transparency
have improved; and, perhaps most importantly, Industry behavior has been radically changed by the
experiences of 2007 – 2008.
� Among the key changes already registered have been significant efforts by banks to boost capital
and liquidity ratios (like Basel II)
� The crisis has made bank managers themselves far more conservative in their behavior & in the
desired structure of their balance sheets. “Fortress balance sheets” have become desirable and
attractive to regulators, bank managements and investors
![Page 7: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
What Changes Occurred since the Crisis Started? (II)
7
� Supervisors have begun to enforce higher capital and liquidity ratios well ahead of the
implementation of globally agreed-on norms. In some cases, this reflects the introduction of new, local
specific norms (in Switzerland, where banks were required to raise capital and liquidity ratios in 2008).
� In the United States, the stress test of early 2009 (otherwise known as the Supervisory Capital
Assessment Program, or SCAP ) showed that under an adverse scenario, 10 of the 19 SCAP banks
would need to raise a total of $75 billion in capital in order to have the capital buffers that were
targeted under the SCAP.
� In Europe, the publication of the results of the 2011 European Banking Authority (EBA ) stress
test exercise revealed that several banks had made substantial efforts to improve their capital position
in the first half of the year, largely in anticipation of the exercise itself.
� Many banks are adjusting as rapidly as possible to new international norms for both capital and
liquidity well ahead of their formal timetable introduction.
![Page 8: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
How Regulatory Reforms Impact the Economy?
8
Globally Coordinated Reforms Distance for banks to adjust National reforms
Time for implementation
Economy’s dependence on banks for credit intermediation
Other factors shaping banking health
Impact on economy
![Page 9: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Costs of Additional Equity and Debt Funding will Define the Impact on the Economy
9
Cost of Bank
Equity Capital
Perceived riskiness of
banking sector
Near term
supply
Ability of banks to
deliver on investors’
expectations
Cost of Long-
Term Bank
Debt
Increased demand for bank
debt will increase the
spreads, however the
stronger capital ratios will
reduce the risk of bank
bond-holders
All 3 are likely to
work negatively for
SE Europe in the
near term
Perceived riskiness
of the region might
well disadvantage
SEE banks
The Bank of England already announced on June 14th that it is looking to give to banks cheap funding for several years as to ensure bank lending in periods of extended uncertainty.
![Page 10: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Mar
-08
Jun-
08Se
p-08
Dec
-08
Mar
-09
Jun-
09Se
p-09
Dec
-09
Mar
-10
Jun-
10Se
p-10
Dec
-10
Mar
-11
Jun-
11Se
p-11
Dec
-11
Mar
-12
RZB Unicredit Erste EFG Eurobank Alpha Bank NBG
The Price to Book Ratios though Indicate Low Appetite for Equity Investment in Banks
10Source: Bancpost internal estimates; Reuters
Price to book = Market Capitalization / Tangible Book
Tangible Book = Total Equity – Intangibles - Goodwill
![Page 11: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Regulatory Reforms will Have an Impact on the Real Economy
11
Regulatory
Change
Impact on banks Lower credit supply
Impact on non-bank credit intermediation
Higher bank lending rates
Higher private sector borrowing costs
Higher non-bank lending rates
Lower aggregate
demand
![Page 12: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Estimated Costs for Economies & Banks
Higher lending rates will reduce the level of real GDP by about 3% up to 2015, or by about 0.7%/ year for the Euro area. This would lead to about 2.8 million fewer jobs being created over the next five years.
Sources: International sources and IIF report _ Sept 2011 12
� By 2015, banks are projected to need to raise about 1.8 trillion USD.
� The impact of reform is to reduce avg. GDP (of the 5 regions) by 0.7 pp / year for the next 5 years. This leads to a lower GDP by 3 pp than where it would otherwise be.
� In 2015, employment impact implies that governments would make a dent for the 17 mil shortfall registered between Q3 ’08 & Q1 ’10.
Change in real GDP & employment
-3.0%
-2,825
-0.6%
![Page 13: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
What About the Impact of the international Regulation Reform
on Eastern Europe?
The impact on the GDP of the CEE between 2011 and 2015 is likely to be higher than the 3% of the
Euro area because of:
1. Higher cost of equity capital, driven by higher credit risks in the CEE
2. Higher cost of debt funding, driven by higher CDS rates
3. The reliance on banks as the main financing option in the region
4. Local measures in the region which further accentuate slow-down in lending (e.g. regulatory
ceilings of indebtedness, regulation on tenors, etc)
13
![Page 14: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Benefits of Regulatory Reform
14
� Higher capital and liquidity requirements will lead to a greater degree of shock absorbency. This will make the banking system more resilient to costly future financial crisis.
� One can consider current regulatory changes as an insurance premium in view of future crisis.
� Higher capital ratios provide insurance to banks against business decisions going wrong, but also against issues caused by economic volatility.
� The higher capital and liquidity ratios might convince investors that it is attractive to invest in banks across the economic cycle since their capital is safer
![Page 15: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Are There Alternatives to Micro-Prudential Regulation?
15
I expect alternative approaches to the current path of regulatory reform to get stronger support in the future, and specifically measures that do not slow-down lending in the recession or post crisis:
• Time varying capital requirements
• Higher quality capital
• Corrective action targeted at Euro amounts – not capital ratios
• Regulation of debt maturity
• Regulation of the shadow banking system (ABS funded short term)
Source: Hanson, Kahyap and J Stein, A macro-prudential approach to Financial Regulation
![Page 16: G.Georgakopoulos International Waves Of Regulation The Cost To The Economy 19 06 2012 Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022052910/559bfc1a1a28ab59668b46cd/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Conclusions
16
� Following the financial crisis, regulators have introduced requirements for additional capital and liquidity – an adjustment process that will last for several more years
� The key argument in favor is that such regulation is that it will protect the economy in future crises
� However, it is equally expected that such regulation will impact GDP and employment in the short & medium term, due to the increase in lending rates and contraction of demand
� The negative impact is likely to be higher in Eastern Europe, since the costs of equity and debt capital will be higher
� Micro-prudential regulations have been criticized as untimely. Alternative macro-prudential regulations are likely to get more support in the future
� Central banks and governments are likely to consider the plans of the Bank of England to provide cheap long term funding to banks so that they do extend lending in uncertain times