Editorial & Advertiser Disclosure Global Banking And Finance Review is an independent publisher which offers News, information, Analysis, Opinion, Press Releases, Reviews, Research reports covering various economies, industries, products, services and companies. The content available on globalbankingandfinance.com is sourced by a mixture of different methods which is not limited to content produced and supplied by various staff writers, journalists, freelancers, individuals, organizations, companies, PR agencies Sponsored Posts etc. The information available on this website is purely for educational and informational purposes only. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any of the information provided at globalbankingandfinance.com with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. Globalbankingandfinance.com also links to various third party websites and we cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of the information provided by third party websites. Links from various articles on our site to third party websites are a mixture of non-sponsored links and sponsored links. Only a very small fraction of the links which point to external websites are affiliate links. Some of the links which you may click on our website may link to various products and services from our partners who may compensate us if you buy a service or product or fill a form or install an app. This will not incur additional cost to you. A very few articles on our website are sponsored posts or paid advertorials. These are marked as sponsored posts at the bottom of each post. For avoidance of any doubts and to make it easier for you to differentiate sponsored or non-sponsored articles or links, you may consider all articles on our site or all links to external websites as sponsored . Please note that some of the services or products which we talk about carry a high level of risk and may not be suitable for everyone. These may be complex services or products and we request the readers to consider this purely from an educational standpoint. The information provided on this website is general in nature. Global Banking & Finance Review expressly disclaims any liability without any limitation which may arise directly or indirectly from the use of such information.

Euro area has vital risk-reducing, risk-sharing reforms within its grasp, says Scope Ratings

Ending the political impasse over reforms to further reduce and share risk in the euro area is crucial. Scope Ratings is confident policy makers can find common ground. But will it be before a future crisis or triggered by one?

For the detailed rating report, click here.

Political willingness to move closer towards a banking and capital markets union in Europe and developing a fiscal capacity for the euro area is limited for now.

Germany and France have made it clear that EU and euro area priorities are now focused on the migrant problem, defence and security, with euro area financial reform present but rather low on the list.

Progress on deepening euro area integration is proving difficult partly because member states have emerged from the last crisis in differing degrees of financial and economic health, from levels of government debt, unemployment and non-performing loans to investment. National electoral cycles also interfere with negotiations while favourable economic developments may also seed complacency.

“Even so, the broad contours of further euro area reform centred on reducing and sharing risk among member states are clear,” says Scope analyst Alvise Lennkh.

Northern European countries want crisis prevention, insisting on more “risk reduction” before any “risk sharing” can take place. This would include policies or instruments for greater fiscal oversight and possibly some framework for sovereign debt restructuring.

Southern European countries contest such an approach, given elevated government debt, on average, and higher refinancing needs were such a restructuring framework in force. They note the institutional reforms and steady declines in NPLs which make the euro area more resilient than it was a decade ago.

Better, in their view, to undertake more “risk sharing,” by completing the Banking Union, specifically by establishing the ESM as a credible common backstop for the Single Resolution Fund and introducing a European Deposit Insurance Scheme. Additional policies and instruments might include some form of euro area budget or “rainy day fund” and further enhancing the ESM.

The current impasse could be overcome through a “grand bargain” whereby Banking Union is completed, with new shock-absorbing mechanisms introduced in exchange for more fiscal surveillance and a framework for sovereign debt restructuring, says Lennkh.

When and how this might happen remains unclear. The political will may be lacking at the upcoming EU Councils. At the same time, Italy’s systemic political and economic importance, plus concerns about the fragility of the international multilateral system—in other words, the realisation that European member states need to rely on each other to address regional and global issues to safeguard their national interests on the global stage—could provide the necessary impetus for Europe’s governments to strike a deal.<