Policy Papers

August 9, 2016

Quotas - Data Update and Simulations

Description: The quota database has been updated by one year through 2014. Overall, the results of the update continue the broad trends observed in previous updates, but the shifts between the main country groups are generally smaller. Using the current quota formula, the calculated quota share of Emerging Market and Developing Countries (EMDCs) as a group increases by 0.6 percentage points relative to the 2015 update to 49.3 percent, which is about half the increase in the last update.

The paper takes stock of recent discussions on the quota formula, including the outcome of the Quota Formula Review in 2013 and subsequent discussions in the context of the annual quota data updates. It also updates the illustrative simulations of possible reforms of the quota formula presented previously, using the latest data. These simulations have sought to capture possible reforms that would be broadly in line with the conclusions of the Quota Formula Review and Directors’ guidance is sought on the relative merits of these reforms and the most productive areas for future work.

Download Quota Data: Updated IMF Quota Formula Variables - September 2016

July 25, 2016

The Chairman’s Summing Up - The IMF and the Crises in Greece, Ireland, and Portugal - An Evaluation by the Independent Evaluation Office - Executive Board Meeting 16/69 - July 19, 2016

Description: Executive Directors welcomed the report by the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) on the IMF and the Crises in Greece, Ireland, and Portugal, and appreciated the accompanying statement by the Managing Director. They agreed that the report’s findings provide valuable insights and lessons for handling crises in members of currency unions.

Directors underscored that the work of the IEO continues to play a vital role in enhancing the learning culture within the Fund, strengthening the Fund’s external credibility, and supporting the Executive Board’s oversight responsibilities. Directors broadly shared the general thrust of the IEO’s main findings and broadly endorsed its recommendations, with some caveats.

July 22, 2016

Staff Background Paper for the G20 Surveillance Note - Priorities for Structural Reforms in G20 Countries

Description:

Structural reforms can provide a powerful lift to growth—both in the short and the long term—if they are well aligned with individual country conditions . These include an economy’s level of development, its position in the economic cycle, and its available macroeconomic policy space to support reforms. The larger a country’s output gap, the more it should prioritize structural reforms that will support growth in the short term and the long term—such as product market deregulation and infrastructure investment.

Macroeconomic support can help make reforms more effective, by bringing forward long-term gains or alleviating their short-term costs . Where monetary policy is becoming over-burdened, domestic policy coordination can help make macroeconomic support more effective. Fiscal space, where it exists, should be used to offset short-term costs of reforms. And where fiscal constraints are binding, budget-neutral reform packages with positive demand effects should take priority.

Some structural reforms can themselves help generate fiscal space. For example, IMF research finds that by boosting output, product market deregulation can help lower the debt-to-GDP ratio over time. Formulating a medium-term plan that clarifies the long-term objectives of fiscal policy can also help increase near-term fiscal space.

With nearly all G-20 economies operating at below-potential output, the IMF is recommending measures that both boost near-term growth and raise long-term potential growth. For example:

 In advanced economies, these measures include shifting public spending toward infrastructure investment (Australia, Canada, Germany, United States (US)); promoting product market reforms (Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, Italy) and labor market reforms (Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, United Kingdom (UK), US); and fiscal structural reforms (France, UK, US). Where there is fiscal space, lowering employment protection is also recommended (Korea).

 Recommendations for emerging markets (EMs) focus on raising public investment efficiency ( India, Saudi Arabia, South Africa), labor market reforms (Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey), and product market reforms (China, Saudi Arabia, South Africa), which would boost investment and productivity within tighter budgetary constraints particularly if barriers to trade and FDI were eased (Brazil, India, Indonesia). Governance (China, South Africa) and other institutional reforms are also crucial. Where policy space is limited, adjusting the composition of fiscal policy can create space to support reforms ( Argentina, India, Mexico, Russia).

 Some commodity-exporting EMs (Brazil, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa) are facing acute challenges, with output significantly below potential and an urgent need to rebuild fiscal buffers. To bolster growth, Fund staff recommends product market and legal reforms to improve the business climate and investment; trade and FDI liberalization to facilitate diversification; and financial deepening to boost credit flows.

IMF advice also aims to promote inclusiveness and macroeconomic resilience. The Fund recommends a targeted expansion of social spending toward vulnerable groups (Mexico), social spending for the elderly poor ( Korea), and upgrading social programs for the nonworking poor (US). Recommendations to bolster macrofinancial resilience include expanding the housing supply (UK), resolving the corporate debt overhang (China, Korea), coordinating a national approach to regulating and supervising life insurers (US), and reforming monetary frameworks (Argentina, China).

July 21, 2016

FY2016 - Output Cost Estimates and Budget Outturn Paper

Description: Operating within a flat real budget envelope, the Fund delivered on the priorities and initiatives laid out in the Global Policy Agenda and Management’s Key Goals (MKGs). Resource pressures were addressed via implementation of streamlining initiatives, strategic reallocation of resources towards higher priority areas, and careful budget management.

In terms of outputs, spending in FY 16 continued the shift from crisis management to crisis prevention, in line with the MKGs. Output shifted moderately from multilateral surveillance and oversight of the global system to bilateral surveillance and capacity development. Lending activity expenditure remained broadly unchanged. Average country spending was broadly aligned with assessment of risk.

The net administrative budget outturn in FY 16 was $1,038 million against an approved budget of $1,052 million. The modest underspend reflects the preservation of the contingency reserve and lower-than-planned travel expenditure. Relative to FY 15, higher budget execution led to a small real (0.8 percent) year-on-year increase in net expenditures.

Total capital expenditures of $131 million were recorded in FY 16 out of the $435 million in available appropriations. HQ1 Renewal expenses made up 70 percent of the spending.

July 20, 2016

Enhancing the Effectiveness of External Support in Building Tax Capacity in Developing Countries

Description: This report responds to the February 2016 request from the G20 for the IMF, OECD, United Nations and World Bank Group to:
“…recommend mechanisms to help ensure effective implementation of technical assistance programs, and recommend how countries can contribute funding for tax projects and direct technical assistance, and report back with recommendations at our July meeting.”

The report has been prepared in the framework of the Platform for Collaboration on Tax (the “PCT”), under the responsibility of the Secretariats and Staff of the four mandated organizations. The report reflects a broad consensus among these staff, but should not be regarded as the officially endorsed views of those organizations or of their member countries.

July 15, 2016

Staff Note for the G20 - The Role of the SDR - Initial Considerations

Description: Following the recent diagnostic of the international monetary system (IMS), the IMF will explore whether a broader role for the SDR could contribute to its smooth functioning. The economic rationale for or against broader use of the SDR will be examined, focusing in particular on identifying any gaps and market failures the SDR could help address in light of the increasingly multi-polar nature of the global economy and growing financial interconnectedness.

This note sets out some initial considerations on this matter. The note sketches some key issues bearing on the role of the SDR in each of three concepts: (i) the official SDR, or “O-SDR”, the composite reserve asset issued and administered by the IMF; (ii) SDR-denominated financial market instruments, or “M-SDRs,” which could be both issued and held by any parties; and (iii) the SDR as a unit of account.

M-SDRs reduce foreign exchange and interest rate risk relative to single-currency instruments, but there are some drawbacks and challenges. The basket nature of M-SDRs would allow the volatility of returns to be lower than for a similar singlecurrency instrument.
However, the SDR only represents one of many possible sets of portfolio weights, and issuers or investors could use existing instruments to replicate their preferred weights at a relatively low cost. There are also challenges to market development, including settling and clearing of M-SDR transactions, dealing with potential basket redefinition, and fostering secondary market trading in order to generate liquidity and market depth.

There are potential benefits to using the SDR as a unit of account, which have to be weighed against other considerations. Publishing economic statistics and financial statements in SDR terms could help users identify valuation changes. Statistical authorities would need to invest in communicating the rationale for any change in practices.

While the official SDR under its current framework is not playing a significant role in the IMS, a re-examination of its role is expected to inform whether any specific reform options should be pursued. The evolution of the IMS has given rise to an active debate on how much concern is posed by high rates of reserve accumulation, global imbalances, and rising claims on reserve issuers, and on whether the O-SDR could contribute to addressing these issues.

July 13, 2016

Currency Amounts in the SDR Basket - Proposed Changes to the Rounding Methodology

Description: Currency amounts are used to determine the daily value of the SDR. Currency amounts are the number of units of each currency in the SDR basket. The value of the SDR (in U.S. dollars) is the sum of these amounts, valued at daily exchange rates of the currencies against the U.S. dollar. These currency amounts are determined on the last business day before the new SDR basket becomes effective (transition date) such that they correspond to the currency weights determined by the IMF Executive Board in the context of the SDR Review, and remain fixed over the SDR valuation period. To facilitate SDR users in adjusting their portfolios to the new basket, the IMF publishes illustrative currency amounts in the lead up to the transition date.

July 6, 2016

Statement by the Managing Director on the Independent Evaluation Office’s Report on the IMF and the Crises in Greece, Ireland, and Portugal - An Evaluation by the Independent Evaluation Office - Executive Board Meeting - July 19, 2016

Description: I welcome the report of the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) on the Euro Area crisis programs. Their work provides an independent and in-depth account, which I have no doubt will make an important contribution to understanding the Fund’s approach to the crisis. As I have emphasized repeatedly, the IEO plays a vital role in enhancing the learning culture within the Fund, strengthening the Fund's external credibility, and supporting the Executive Board's institutional governance and oversight responsibilities.

July 1, 2016

2016 External Sector Report - Individual Economy Assessments

Description: The external sector assessments use a wide range of methods, including the External Balance Assessment (EBA) developed by the IMF’s Research Department to estimate desired current account balances and real exchange rates (see Annex I of the 2015 External Sector Report, also IMF Working Paper WP/13/272 for a complete description of the EBA methodology).
In all cases, the overall assessment is based on the judgment of IMF staff drawing on the inputs provided by these model estimates and other analysis and the estimates are subject to uncertainty.
The assessments discuss a broad range of external indicators: the current account, the real effective exchange rate, capital and financial accounts flows and measures, FX intervention and reserves and the foreign asset or liability position. The individual economy assessments are discussed with the respective authorities as a part of bilateral surveillance.

July 1, 2016

2016 External Sector Report

Description: After narrowing in the aftermath of the global financial crisis and remaining broadly unchanged in recent years, global imbalances increased moderately in 2015, amid a reconfiguration of current accounts and exchange rates. Shifts in 2015 were driven primarily by the uneven strength of the recovery in advanced economies, the redistributive effects of the sharp fall in commodity prices, and tighter external financing conditions for emerging markets (EMs). A relatively stronger U.S. outlook led to a further appreciation of the USD and a depreciation of the yen and the euro. The sharp decline in commodity prices, reflecting both supply shocks and concerns about rebalancing and growth in China, brought about a significant redistribution of income from commodity exporters to importers, and a weakening of commodity exporters’ currencies. Meanwhile, heightened global risk aversion, contributed to softer capital inflows and depreciation pressures in many EMs.

This moderate widening of current account imbalances was largely driven by systemic economies. Surpluses in Japan, the euro area and China grew, supported by improved terms of trade and currency depreciation, while the current account deficit in the U.S. widened amid the steep appreciation of the USD. These widening imbalances were only partially offset by narrowing surpluses in large oil exporters and smaller deficits in vulnerable EMs and some euro area debtor countries.

Similarly, excess imbalances expanded in 2015. External positions in the U.S. and Japan moved from being broadly in line with fundamentals to being “moderately weaker” and “moderately stronger”, respectively. This was partly offset by a further narrowing of excess deficits in vulnerable EMs and euro area debtor countries. Meanwhile, excess surpluses persisted among the larger surplus countries, some of which remain “substantially stronger” than fundamentals (Germany, Korea).

Currency movements since end-2015 helped to partially reverse the trends observed last year, although market volatility following the result of the U.K. referendum to leave the European Union have led to a strengthening of the USD and yen along with a weakening of the sterling, euro, and EM currencies. The implications for external assessments going forward, especially for the U.K. and the euro area, remains uncertain and will likely depend on how the transition is managed and on what new arrangements are adopted.

With output below potential in most countries, and limited policy space in many, balancing internal and external objectives will require careful policy calibration. In general, a more balanced policy mix that avoids excessive reliance on policies with significant demanddiverting effects is necessary, with greater emphasis on demand-supportive measures and structural reforms. Surplus countries with fiscal space have a greater role to play in supporting global demand while reducing external imbalances. Global collective policy action, especially if downside risks materialize, would also help address global demand weakness while mitigating its effects on external imbalances.