InvestSMART

Would eurobonds end the EU crisis?

Germany lies at the centre of euro zone risk and recovery, writes Daniel Gros in Brussels.
By · 19 Sep 2011
By ·
19 Sep 2011
comments Comments
Germany lies at the centre of euro zone risk and recovery, writes Daniel Gros in Brussels.

INTEREST rates are now close to zero throughout the developed world (the US, Europe, and Japan). But the global economy is slowing down and financial markets went into a tailspin during the northern summer. This suggests the problem is more profound than one of insufficient monetary stimulus.

The heart of any economy is the mechanism by which funds are channelled from savers to investors. In normal times, capital markets perform this function smoothly but these markets break down from time to time, owing to sudden large changes in perceptions about the riskiness of important asset classes.

In the US, this happened when investors discovered that even AAA-rated asset-backed securities were in reality risky. China experienced a similar surprise when the US government lost its AAA rating. But nowhere is the problem as acute as it is in Europe, or, rather, the euro zone, where German savers are suddenly discovering risk across the European periphery.

What is true of Germany is also true of most of the countries of northern Europe, many of which now run current-account surpluses that are even larger as a proportion of GDP. These countries' households continue to save, accumulating deposits at their local banks and buying bonds from their local wealth managers. But they feel that the euro zone has become such a dangerous place that they no longer dare to invest abroad.

Greece, Ireland, and Portugal are off-limits because their bonds no longer rate as investment-grade, which means that banks are not allowed to sell them to individual savers.

But even investment-grade Spain and Italy have now suddenly been classified as precarious, implying risk managers everywhere are telling investors to cut their exposure. The fundamental problem is simple: the market cannot be brought back into equilibrium when savers do not want to lend to those who would be willing to take these savings.

Lower interest rates are not a solution to this dilemma. In the US, demand has not recovered, despite almost three years of near-zero interest rates. In Europe, lower rates risk aggravating the problem by lowering the returns for savers. When the yield on German government bonds falls to 2 per cent, which is negative in real terms, German savers must redouble their efforts to achieve a certain target for retirement income.

This is why the spiral of ever-lower interest rates in Germany (and northern Europe) and higher risk premiums for most of the rest of the euro zone are so destructive. Lower interest rates can thus lead to lower consumption in surplus countries, thereby increasing the supply of loanable funds. But higher risk premia elsewhere force the rest of the euro zone to cut spending, thus reducing their demand for these funds.

Indeed, stock markets are tanking precisely because investors fear that ever-increasing risk premia in the euro zone's peripheral countries will force them to stop consuming and investing, leading to lower German rates and thus inducing German households to reduce their consumption as well. But a weaker German economy makes adjustment in the periphery even more difficult.

The most radical way to break this vicious circle would be to introduce eurobonds. National risk premia would then disappear, and German savers would have no problem investing their savings in the euro zone's periphery, knowing that the German government would ultimately underwrite these countries' government bonds. The euro zone economy could then recover quickly.

This is why market participants like to repeat that only eurobonds will end the crisis. But eurobonds would also create huge incentive problems, because debtors in the euro zone periphery would no longer have to fear any punishment by the markets and might thus be induced to consume and invest too much.

What Europe needs is a mechanism that lets the capital market work most of the time, but that enables intervention when it ceases to function. In other words, the euro zone needs a European Monetary Fund that prevents this vicious circle from tightening by providing bridging finance when capital markets break down. Europe now has such an institution in the form of the European Financial Stability Facility but the EFSF needs to be much better financed to allow it to fulfil this function.

But even the creation of a European Monetary Fund cannot save the world economy if confidence between China and the US breaks down. The US government's loss of its AAA rating is a first sign that the most important outlet for excess Chinese savings might be losing its lustre.

The general lesson from the euro crisis and the US rating downgrade is simple: given that so many countries have chronic excess savings (Germany, Japan, China, oil exporters), the world economy cannot recover without finding ways to channel these excess savings to economies that are both creditworthy and willing to borrow. Both sides will have to make an effort: creditors must accept some risk, and debtors must enhance their creditworthiness through structural fiscal adjustment and reforms that improve their growth prospects.

Google News
Follow us on Google News
Go to Google News, then click "Follow" button to add us.
Share this article and show your support
Free Membership
Free Membership
InvestSMART
InvestSMART
Keep on reading more articles from InvestSMART. See more articles
Join the conversation
Join the conversation...
There are comments posted so far. Join the conversation, please login or Sign up.

Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…

Eurobonds are joint debt issued for the whole euro zone rather than by individual countries. The article explains that eurobonds would remove national risk premia so savers in Germany and other surplus countries would be willing to invest across the periphery, which could restart lending, spending and growth and so quickly ease the crisis.

Germany and many northern European countries run large current-account surpluses and their households keep saving. The piece says these savers now see the euro zone periphery as risky and are reluctant to lend abroad, so their unwillingness to invest is preventing capital flowing to countries that need it for recovery.

The article points out that near-zero interest rates alone don’t fix a breakdown in capital markets. Lower rates reduce savers’ returns (negative in real terms for German bonds), which can cut consumption in surplus countries, while risk premia rise elsewhere and force deficit countries to cut spending — creating a destructive spiral instead of recovery.

Risk premia are the extra yield investors demand to hold a country’s bonds. According to the article, rising risk premia have made even investment-grade Spain and Italy look precarious, prompting investors and banks to cut exposure, which forces those countries to reduce spending and investment and deepens the economic slump.

The EFSF is an existing euro zone rescue vehicle designed to provide financial support when markets fail. The article argues the EFSF concept is right but needs to be much better financed so it can act as a bridge when capital markets break down; without much larger resources it can’t fully prevent the vicious funding cycle.

A European Monetary Fund, as described in the article, would be a mechanism that normally lets markets allocate capital but can step in with bridging finance when markets seize up. For everyday investors this could limit sharp spikes in country risk premia and help stabilise markets, making cross-border investment less risky during crises.

Yes. The article stresses that eurobonds would remove market discipline on peripheral governments because they wouldn’t fear punishment from investors, which could encourage excessive consumption or borrowing. That moral hazard is a major reason policymakers are wary of eurobonds despite their stabilising potential.

The article says the world economy needs ways to channel excess savings from creditor countries to borrowers that are creditworthy and willing to use them. For investors this means recovery depends on both creditors accepting some risk and debtors improving creditworthiness through reforms — otherwise savings remain parked and global growth stalls.