European Parliament published two papers that discuss non-performing loan (NPL) resolution after the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the papers assesses the impact of COVID-19 on the European corporate and banking sectors and the extent to which lessons learned from the global financial crisis are applicable to the policies that should be put in place for NPL resolution after the pandemic. The paper assesses the potential consequences for NPL resolution on bank balance sheets after pandemic, analyzes the number of zombie firms that banks may still be lending to in EU, and raises some important policy considerations for how to manage the volume of NPLs that may accrue. The other paper examines policy implications of a potential surge in NPLs due to the COVID-19 pandemic; the paper provides an empirical assessment of potential scenarios and outlines lessons from previous crises for effective NPL treatment.
The paper on policy implications highlights the importance of early and realistic assessment of loan losses to avoid adverse incentives for banks. Secondary loan markets would help in this process and further facilitate bank resolution as laid down in the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD), which should be uphold even in extreme scenarios. In the empirical analysis, the authors of the paper find that aggregated bank capital seems to be large enough to absorb potential NPL losses, even in an adverse scenario. However, relevant buffers above and beyond the minimum required capital may not always be sufficiently high. To find an effective and efficient strategy dealing with potentially high NPL levels in the future, the paper examined previous crises and established certain key lessons on NPL identification, recognition, and resolution that are all also likely to be of importance during the COVID-19 pandemic:
- If NPLs are not identified and recognized efficiently, both in terms of speed and scope, NPL resolution effectiveness is undermined.
- Regulators and supervisors should ensure that banks assess current loan values realistically, which can be achieved by effective Asset Quality Reviews, stress tests, adequate accounting rules (such as the new IFRS 9 standard), and inspections that impede banks masking their risk. Realistic loan value assessment will incentivize banks to recognize NPLs early and to handle NPLs efficiently, either by internal workouts or by selling them on secondary markets.
- Forbearance or public bank recapitalization (and other state aid) are not well-suited to solve the NPL resolution problem efficiently, as they provide adverse incentives to banks.
- European secondary market for NPLs has the potential to be an important component of a successful NPL resolution. Policy makers are well-advised to overcome existing obstacles hindering the development of these markets, such as information asymmetries between the seller and buyer and the banks’ lack of incentives to sell loans at market prices.
Regarding the EC Action Plan, the authors of the paper agree that a vitalization of the secondary loan market may be a promising step toward more resilient banking system. A liquid and transparent secondary loan market would allow banks to achieve higher prices when forced to sell NPLs, thus lowering their loss of capital even in critical times. A strong and well-developed secondary loan market, therefore, can contribute to the stability of the banking sector in an economy. Moreover, it can improve the loan-quality information that is available for investors and originators alike. Thus, the report notes that any plan to deal with NPLs should consider bank restructuring and resolution as the alternative, probably the preferred alternative, to recapitalization or any other rescue measure.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, COVID-19, NPLs, Resolution Framework, BRRD, Systemic Risk, Credit Risk, Recovery and Resolution, Regulatory Capital, European Parliament
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 Updates Annexes to AnaCredit Reporting Manual in March 2021
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the final policy statement PS21/21 on the leverage ratio framework in the UK. PS21/21, which sets out the final policy of both the Financial Policy Committee (FPC) and PRA
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) proposed to amend Regulation B to implement changes to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) under Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) decided to maintain, at the 2019 levels, the buffer rates for the Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) for another year, with no new rates to be set until December 2023.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a progress report on implementation of its high-level recommendations for the regulation, supervision, and oversight of global stablecoin arrangements.
In a letter to the authorized deposit taking institutions, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) announced an increase in the minimum interest rate buffer it expects banks to use when assessing the serviceability of home loan applications.
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) are consulting on the preliminary guidance that clarifies that stablecoin arrangements should observe international standards for payment, clearing, and settlement systems.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) have set out their respective work priorities for 2022.
The Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) updated the guidelines on supervisory reporting requirements under the reporting framework 3.0, in addition to the reporting module on leverage under the common reporting (COREP) framework.
The European Commission (EC) published the Implementing Decision 2021/1753 on the equivalence of supervisory and regulatory requirements of certain third countries and territories for the purposes of the treatment of exposures, in accordance with the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR (575/2013).
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2021/1751, which lays down implementing technical standards on uniform formats and templates for notification of determination of the impracticability of including contractual recognition of write-down and conversion powers.