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
EBA published a report analyzing the impact of the unwind mechanism of the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) for a sample of European banks over a three-year period, from the end of 2016 to the first quarter of 2020.
In response to questions from a member of the European Parliament, the ECB President Christine Lagarde issued a letter clarifying the possibility of amending the AnaCredit Regulation and making targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTROs) dependent on the climate-related impact of bank loans.
IASB started the post-implementation review of the classification and measurement requirements in IFRS 9 on financial instruments and added the review as a project to its work plan.
FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions.
EBA published a report on the benchmarking of national loan enforcement frameworks across 27 EU member states, in response to the call for advice from EC.
FSB published a letter from its Chair Randal K. Quarles, along with two reports exploring various aspects of the market turmoil resulting from the COVID-19 event.
RBNZ launched a consultation on the details for implementing the final Capital Review decisions announced in December 2019.
The Trustees of the IFRS Foundation, which are responsible for the governance and oversight of IASB, have announced the appointment of Dr. Andreas Barckow as the IASB Chair, effective July 2021.
HKMA issued a letter to consult the banking industry on a full set of proposed draft amendments to the Banking (Capital) Rules for implementing the Basel standard on capital requirements for banks’ equity investments in funds in Hong Kong.
ESRB published an opinion assessing the decision of Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA) to extend the application period of a stricter measure for residential mortgage lending, in accordance with Article 458 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).