マーケット・ブログ

ECONOMY
13 April 2020

Europe—Fiscal Solidarity (Still) Lies in the Eyes of the Beholder

By Andreas Billmeier, PhD

We think that last week’s economic response package in Europe does not quite go far enough to count as “true” fiscal solidarity, but a limited, jointly financed Recovery Fund can go a long way to overcome the standard criticism of “just another European fudge” while harnessing country-level efforts to provide a broader public good in the form of a European recovery.

Last week’s meetings of European finance ministers were timely, to say the least. As the COVID-19 pandemic spread across the continent, the national policy responses have been uneven, both in terms of timing, but also in terms of budgetary resources committed—ranging from very little in some countries to more than 20% of GDP elsewhere. This partly reflects the (perceived) severity of the crisis but also shows the unevenly distributed fiscal space available in different counties as debt-to-GDP ratios in the larger economies range from about 60% in Germany to 135% in Italy.

Yet, at the same time, the impact in terms of death toll has been much harder on countries like Italy and Spain. Their respective healthcare systems have been put under severe stress and their economies have slumped into deep recessions, likely worse than those experienced in 2008/2009. With less fiscal space at the national level, these countries have led a renewed push for their vision of solidarity—a further liability mutualisation via joint borrowing at the European level, dubbed “Corona bonds”. These countries have been supported by several other member states, including—importantly—France. On the other side of the debate, the EU’s “frugal four” (Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden), supported by Germany, have been historically lukewarm about expansionary fiscal policies in general. In fact, these countries have opposed some of the policies quite vehemently, including joint debt issuance. Instead, they perceive existing instruments such as the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and the associated access to preferential lending as a sufficient display of solidarity, in combination with other measures. In many ways, this is an old discussion; during the European sovereign crisis in 2011/2012, similar suggestions to “Corona bonds” had been floated by some but were opposed by others for fear of open-ended financial commitments.

This inevitably meant that the task at last week’s first conference call of the enlarged Eurogroup finance ministers and the subsequent overtime wrap-up was evidently a tricky one: how to bridge opposing views of solidarity? Can European solidarity only be guaranteed via joint debt issuance or are there other ways to provide adequate support to countries that require more government borrowing but are constrained by their lack of fiscal space? Can solidarity be a loan or does it have to be a grant? The noise level in the press had increased dramatically over the previous few weeks, with recriminations flying back and forth between “the North” (i.e., the frugal four) and “the South” (i.e., Italy and Spain).

European Crisis Response Measures

Against that backdrop, the outcome warrants some attention. The measures that were agreed upon, subject to sign-off by the heads of state where needed, include:

  1. A quick operationalization of the planned European unemployment re-insurance facility known as “SURE” (Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency) to supplement short-time work schemes already in place in all member states. These types of programs have been very successful in avoiding a massive spike in unemployment in some countries during previous recessions, including in 2008/2009, and SURE is intended to bridge member states over the current crisis. The novel element is that the temporary loans come on favourable terms from the European Commission (EC), which, in turn, will borrow up to €100 billion in the markets to benefit from its (potentially) superior credit rating.
  2. Additional guarantees from member states for the EU’s development bank, the European Investment Bank (EIB), to lever up and provide lending on the order of €200 billion to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and midcap companies in Europe.
  3. A decision to enable borrowing from the ESM under a specific short-term precautionary credit line for the duration of one year (but renewable until the crisis is over). Access granted will be 2% of each nation’s 2019 GDP with a minimal level of conditionality, worth up to €240 billion for the eurozone as a whole. Minimizing the conditionality (simply “to support domestic financing of […] costs due to the COVID-19 crisis”) is a strong positive but still leaves the stigma of accessing the ESM funding. That said, one of the longer-term benefits for member states engaged in ESM programs is the potential eligibility for the ECB’s targeted bond purchase program, Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT), if that were to become necessary.
  4. Finally, the finance ministers have also agreed to work on a Recovery Fund for the period after the acute crisis is over, but the details are still unclear. In particular, the timing and size of this Fund and, more importantly, the financing have been left to further discussions—a reflection of the fact that no agreement could be found at this stage.

Assessing the Measures

The overall sum of measures (€540 billion, or a bit more than 4% of eurozone GDP, not taking into account the Recovery Fund) certainly makes for an impressive headline but the devil is, as usual, in the detail. First, access to SURE and the ESM facility appears to be designed as transitory, and might not come on more attractive terms than market borrowing as long as this is feasible; in fact, to the contrary, given where front-end sovereign curves are currently trading. In other words, the effective resource envelope in use could collapse to something much smaller than €340 billion for those SURE and the ESM. Second, EIB lending is demand driven, and the scaling-up process could take a good amount of time. Finally, while the Recovery Fund (still) has some potential to develop into a true solidarity instrument based on joint borrowing for a joint cause, statements by some of the ministers involved have already sown doubts even before we know any further details.

Forging a joint borrowing capacity with meaningful open-ended commitments by national member states requires overcoming constitutional hurdles—as well as societal opposition—in some member states, and continues to be a bridge too far to cross, even at the current stage. That said, dealing with the fallout from COVID-19 and the ensuing recovery effort is clearly a well-defined public good with massive spillover effects across economies in an integrated area such as the EU and especially the eurozone. Moreover, it is not clear a priori whether export-oriented economies will fare better or worse in this recovery as the world moves toward more robust supply chains—in other words, “winners” and “losers” within the eurozone have yet to be defined.

For those reasons, we think a more convincing public case can and should be made that, in the face of the current crisis, joint financing of at least a limited common recovery effort, such as the one under consideration, should be perceived as true reciprocal solidarity in everybody’s eyes and not just a one-directional transfer scheme as some seem to believe.

投資一任契約および金融商品に係る手数料(消費税を含む):
投資一任契約の場合は運用財産の額に対して、年率1.0%(抜き)を上限とする運用手数料を、運用戦略ごとに定めております。また、別途運用成果に応じてお支払いいただく手数料(成功報酬)を設定する場合があります。その料率は、運用成果の評価方法や固定報酬率の設定方法により変動しますので、手数料の金額や計算方法をこの書面に記載することはできません。投資信託の場合は投資信託ごとに信託報酬が定められておりますので、目論見書または投資信託約款でご確認下さい。
有価証券の売買又はデリバティブ取引の売買手数料を運用財産の中からお支払い頂きます。投資信託に投資する場合は信託報酬、管理報酬等の手数料が必要となります。これらの手数料には多様な料率が設定されているためこの書面に記載することはできません。デリバティブ取引を利用する場合、運用財産から委託証拠金その他の保証金を預託する場合がありますが、デリバティブ取引の額がそれらの額を上回る可能性があります。その額や計算方法はこの書面に記載することはできません。投資一任契約に基づき、または金融商品において、運用財産の運用を行った結果、金利、通貨の価格、金融商品市場における相場その他の指標に係る変動により、損失が生ずるおそれがあります。損失の額が、運用財産から預託された委託証拠金その他の保証金の額を上回る恐れがあります。個別交渉により、一部のお客様とより低い料率で投資一任契約を締結する場合があります。
© Western Asset Management Company Ltd 2020. 当資料の著作権は、ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント株式会社およびその関連会社(以下「ウエスタン・アセット」という)に帰属するものであり、ウエスタン・アセットの顧客、その投資コンサルタント及びその他の当社が意図した受取人のみを対象として作成されたものです。第三者への提供はお断りいたします。当資料の内容は、秘密情報及び専有情報としてお取り扱い下さい。無断で当資料のコピーを作成することや転載することを禁じます。
過去の実績は将来の投資成果を保証するものではありません。当資料は情報の提供のみを目的としており、作成日におけるウエスタン・アセットの意見を反映したものです。ウエスタン・アセットは、ここに提供した情報が正確なものであるものと信じておりますが、それを保証するものではありません。当資料に記載の意見は、特定の有価証券の売買のオファーや勧誘を目的としたものではなく、事前の予告なく変更されることがあります。当資料に書かれた内容は、投資助言ではありません。ウエスタン・アセットの役職員及び顧客は、当資料記載の有価証券を保有している可能性があります。当資料は、お客様の投資目的、経済状況或いは要望を考慮することなく作成されたものです。お客様は、当資料に基づいて投資判断をされる前に、お客様の投資目的、経済状況或いは要望に照らして、それが適切であるかどうかご検討されることをお勧めいたします。お客様の居住国において適用される法律や規制を理解し、それらを考慮する責任はお客様にあります。
ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント・カンパニーDTVM(Distribuidora de Títulos e Valores Mobiliários)リミターダ(ブラジル、サンパウロ拠点)はブラジル証券取引委員会(CVM)とブラジル中央銀行(Bacen)により認可、規制を受けます。ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント・カンパニー・ピーティーワイ・リミテッド (ABN 41 117 767 923) (オーストラリア、メルボルン拠点)はオーストラリアの金融サービスライセンス303160を保有。ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント・カンパニー・ピーティーイー・リミテッド(シンガポール拠点)は、キャピタル・マーケット・サービス(CMS)ライセンス(Co. Reg. No. 200007692R) を保有し、シンガポール通貨監督庁に監督されています。ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント株式会社(日本拠点)は金融商品取引業者として登録、日本のFSAの規制を受けます。ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント・カンパニー・リミテッド(英国、ロンドン拠点)は英金融行動監視機構(FCA)により認可、規制を受けます。当資料は英国および欧州経済領域(EEA)加盟国においては、FCAまたはMiFID IIに定義された「プロフェッショナルな顧客」のみを対象とした宣伝目的に使用されるものです。
ウエスタン・アセット・マネジメント株式会社について
業務の種類: 金融商品取引業者(投資運用業、投資助言・代理業、第二種金融商品取引業)
登録番号: 関東財務局長(金商)第427号
加入協会: 一般社団法人日本投資顧問業協会(会員番号 011-01319)
一般社団法人投資信託協会

-->