In continuation of a series of Bulletins on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic, BIS published a brief report, or Bulletin, that examines financial resilience of households against the COVID-19 shock. The Bulletin takes stock of the policy interventions in select jurisdictions, along with their related implications. In conclusion, it outlines how the various temporary, targeted, and expansionary policy measures can strengthen financial resilience of households and businesses by transferring risks to the respective governments and banks.
This Bulletin documents, in three steps, cross-country variation in financial resilience of households. First, it looks at current levels of household debt and the corresponding debt service burdens. There is considerable variation, both between countries and within individual countries. Second, the Bulletin examines the adequacy of liquid buffers held by indebted households, given their debt service burdens. In several countries, households in the lower half of the net wealth distribution hold insufficient liquid buffers to weather a protracted spell of unemployment. In the third step, household financial resilience is compared with estimates of exposure to the COVID-19 shock, measured in terms of higher unemployment forecasts. This reveals that large exposures are not necessarily matched by buffers of commensurate size. The concluding section discusses how various policies can bolster resilience or alleviate the unemployment impact of the COVID-19 shock.
Policymakers have taken various measures to boost households’ resilience or alleviate the unemployment impact of the COVID-19 shock. Low interest rates and debt repayment moratoria bolster resilience by temporarily lowering debt burdens. In jurisdictions where debt service costs are more sensitive to interest rates (because mortgages, the bulk of household debt, are adjustable rather than fixed rate), rate cuts will pass through to debt servicing costs (for example, Australia, Korea, Spain, and the United Kingdom). Meanwhile, low interest rates will support the economic recovery, reducing the risk that income loss will be long-lasting. Most countries in the sample have loosened their monetary policy, with a few offering temporary debt relief.
An expansionary fiscal policy safeguards households against the prospect of income loss. Policymakers have implemented targeted income support schemes in several jurisdictions. They have also expanded access to unemployment benefits and social protection programs. In addition, authorities have introduced salary subsidies, which transfer (a share of) labor costs for locked-down employees from corporates to the government. Temporary moratoria on tax payments also help, by alleviating liquidity shortfalls. These interventions have (re)distributional implications. Debt repayment moratoria, for example, transfer some of the COVID-19 losses from households to banks (and other creditors). Expansionary fiscal measures entail inter-generational redistribution, with current debt burdens being transferred from the balance sheet of the current poor to that of the government and, thus, to future generations of taxpayers. The ultimate extent of interventions will, therefore, reflect political economy considerations as well as household exposure to the COVID-19 shock.
Keywords: International, Banking, COVID-19, Loan Moratorium, Loan Repayment, Credit Risk, Policy Actions, BIS
Leading economist; commercial real estate; performance forecasting, econometric infrastructure; data modeling; credit risk modeling; portfolio assessment; custom commercial real estate analysis; thought leader.
Previous ArticleECB Group Recommends Voluntary Compensation for Legacy Swaptions
HM Treasury notified that, after considering all responses, the government intends to bring forward further legislation, when the Parliamentary time allows, to address issues identified in the consultation on supporting the wind-down of critical benchmarks.
EIOPA launched the 2021 stress test for the insurance sector in EU.
UK authorities jointly published the third edition of Regulatory Initiatives Grid setting out the planned regulatory initiatives for the next 24 months.
EC is requesting feedback on the proposed Commission Delegated Regulation on the content, methodology, and presentation of information that large financial and non-financial undertakings should disclose about their environmentally sustainable economic activities under the Taxonomy Regulation.
OSFI has set out the near-term priorities for federally regulated financial institutions and federally regulated private pension plans for the coming months until March 31, 2022.
Under the Italian G20 Presidency, BIS Innovation Hub and the Italian central bank BDI launched the second edition of the G20 TechSprint on the lookout for innovative solutions to resolve operational problems in green and sustainable finance.
ACPR published Version 1.0.0 of the RUBA taxonomy, which will come into force from the decree of January 31, 2022.
EBA proposed the regulatory technical standards on a central database on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) in EU.
ECB published its response to the targeted EC consultation on the review of the bank crisis management and deposit insurance framework in EU.
BCBS, CPMI, and IOSCO (the Committees) are inviting entities that participate in market infrastructures and securities markets through an intermediary as well as non-bank intermediaries to complete voluntary surveys on the use of margin calls.