the stability and growth pact and its reform from the perspective of the new member states gábor...
TRANSCRIPT
The Stability and Growth Pact and its
Reform from the Perspective of the
New Member States
Gábor Orbán – György SzapáryMagyar Nemzeti BankMagyar Nemzeti Bank
11th Dubrovnik Economic Conference
30 June 2005
2
Outline
• Fiscal consolidation in the run-up to the euro
• A reformed SGP framework – a different challenge?
• Country-specific medium-term objectives
• The ageing problem and the SGP
• The introduction of fully funded pension pillars
3
Initial budgetary conditions: Distance from the 3% reference value
in the run-up to the euroDeviation from the deficit criterion 4 years prior to euro adoption
-1.9 -2-2.7 -2.5
0.6
-4.4
1
-6.3
5.7
-3.6 -3.6
-0.5-1.2
0
4.8
-2.4
2.2
0.5
-2.2
-3.8
-0.3
1.1
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
% o
f GD
P
4
Lower debt ratios: in 2004 and in the run-up to the euro
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
% of GDP
AustriaBelgiumFinlandFrance
GermanyGreeceIreland
ItalyLuxembourg
PortugalSpain
NetherlandsCyprusCzech
EstoniaHungary
LatviaLithuania
MaltaPoland
SlovakiaSlovenia
5 years prior to EMU
2004
5
As debt ratios are lower and yield convergence is at a more advanced
stage...
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
percentage points
AustriaBelgiumFinlandFrance
GermanyGreeceIreland
ItalyLuxembourg
PortugalSpainThe
CyprusCzech
EstoniaHungary
LatviaLithuania
MaltaPoland
SlovakiaSlovenia
The long term bond yield criterion 3 years prior to assessment (12-month averages)
6
…we may expect smaller fiscal gains from convergence…
-0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
percent of GDP
Czech RepublicLuxembourg
EstoniaLatvia
LithuaniaSlovakia
MaltaCyprus
SloveniaFrance
The NetherlandsIrelandPolandAustria
GermanyHungaryFinland
SpainBelgium
ItalyGreece
Portugal
7
… so not even high debt countries may afford to rely on the reduction
in interest payments.
2.98 2.78
1.90 1.861.30
0.84 0.81 0.780.48 0.29 0.05 0.02
-0.26-0.67
-0.98-1.27
-1.59 -1.69 -1.78-2.34
-4.81
-5.69
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
perc
ent o
f GD
P
8
The reformed SGP
• Trade-off: transparency vs. soundness– New SGP: increases complexity but
risks softening up EDP– Changes not because of NMS but
reform affects them, too• Reforms affecting new member states
– Taking more account of country differences in the setting of MTO’s
– The treatment of systemic pension reforms
9
Cyclical effects on the budgets of new member
states• Higher output volatility + lower cyclical
sensitivity of budgets lower cyclical safety margins, potentially looser medium-term targets
in percent in percent in percent
EU-15 0.50 3.83 1.97 -1.03
CEE-8 0.41 4.26 1.68 -1.32
Czech Republic 0.40 4.20 1.70 -1.30Estonia 0.41 4.78 1.95 -1.05Hungary 0.44 3.65 1.62 -1.38Latvia 0.33 4.22 1.39 -1.61Lithuania 0.33 6.05 2.01 -0.99Poland 0.49 3.87 1.88 -1.12Slovakia 0.40 3.87 1.55 -1.45Slovenia 0.45 3.44 1.54 -1.46
Cyclical Safety Margin
Minimal Benchmark
Cyclical Budget Sensitivity
The Largest Value of Output Gap
10
Ageing is a threat in NMS
2000 2050 2003EU-15 25.95 51.40 1.57
Austria 25.20 58.20 1.40Belgium 28.10 49.50 1.62Denmark 24.20 40.30 1.72Finland 25.90 50.60 1.72France 27.20 50.80 1.89Germany 26.60 53.20 1.31Greece n.a. n.a. 1.25Ireland 19.70 45.70 1.97Italy 28.80 66.80 1.26Luxembourg n.a. n.a. 1.63Netherlands 21.90 44.90 1.73Portugal 26.70 50.90 1.47Spain 27.10 65.70 1.25Sweden 29.40 46.30 1.65United Kingdom 26.60 45.30 1.64
Czech Republic 21.90 57.50 1.17Hungary 23.70 47.20 1.30Poland 20.40 55.20 1.24
Old-age Dependency Ratios (in percent)
Total Fertility Rate
11
Ageing problem calls for higher present saving
1. This may take the form of lower government deficits/higher surpluses today – which reduces explicit debt
2. Or: saving may take place outside government (accumulated in private pension funds)– Only if tax-financing: sum of explicit + implicit is
reduced. – In case of debt-financing: explicit debt rises as
implicit liabilities are reduced
• „Costs” of pension reform are the savings necessary to cope with ageing
• Pressure to deduct these costs – compromise: new SGP allows for partial debt financing for 5 years to allow budgetary adjustment to reform
12
Are fully funded pillars the solution for the ageing
problem?• How do these reforms improve
sustainability?– Increase savings today – IF transition is tax-
financed– Also reduce future deficits as introduction of
fully funded pillar partly transforms DB into DC
• Desirable features of a fully funded private pillar– Promotes intergenerational equity– Present savings for future pensions cannot be
spent elsewhere• Risks of a fully funded private pillar
13
The Hungarian example: future balances of the pension
systemThe balance of the government pension fund 2004-2105
-3.5%
-3.0%
-2.5%
-2.0%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
% of GDP
-3.5%
-3.0%
-2.5%
-2.0%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
% of GDP
Single-pillar system Multi-pillar system
14
Risks in the pension fund sector
• Unsatisfactory performance may generate implicit liabilities– Explicit legal guarantees, or– Political pressure from an interest group growing in
size to provide certain minimum replacement rates
• What is satisfactory?– A rate of return that sets multi-pillar replacement
rates equal to the replacement rate consistent with a sustainable full PAYG.
– Hungary: actual real net return is an annual 2% so far!
– Operating costs (total fees = 2.4% of total assets and 9.8% of contributions) and incentives/competition may be a problem
15
Thank you for your attention!