Heraclitus writes:
Maybe you needed a shot of Mediterranean coffee to keep on top of
all the issues: the contested valuations; the debt projections; the
inter-creditor fights... But Jeromin Zettelmeyer shed fresh analytic
light on all these facets, and in so doing he laid
the foundations for some rather important new findings about the Greek
debt restructuring and its implications for the future.
View presentation
View presentation
First of all, private creditors exaggerated the economic losses
they had suffered, but nonetheless this really was one of the deepest
'haircuts' for bondholders in modern times, at least for claims on a
country that was not in the very low-income category.
The average loss suffered by bondholders was, according to Jeromin,
not quite as steep (per unit of debt) as in Argentina. On the other
hand, the scale of the total debt subjected to reduction was much
larger. As a result the debt relief benefit to Greece
was on the order of 50% of GDP. This was a huge scale of debt relief by
historical standards.
The approach to this restructuring was termed 'voluntary'. But as
the process went down to the wire, some ambiguity was evident. There
were positive inducements, but in the closing days of the deal,
bondholders seem to have been placed in some doubt about
their fate if the exchange did not go ahead.
Troublingly, however, the restructuring (and a subsequent debt
buyback) have not laid to rest doubts about the Greek debt outlook. The
IMF has recently been pressing the need for further financial easement -
this time affecting official claims (although
not IMF claims!) on Greece.
Today's still worrisome outlook naturally triggered questions at
the seminar about weaknesses in the process that was adopted for Greece,
and lessons for the future. Some deep reservations were expressed about
the strategy and its execution:
-- concerns about systemic risk, and then disputes among creditors,
caused a long delay between the recognition that there was a
sustainability problem and the actual execution of a debt reduction
package;
-- this long delay allowed a 'migration' of private sector claims
to public sector portfolios on an unprecedented scale, seriously
limiting the scope of (and thus the debt relief from) the restructuring,
and ultimately raising questions about the viability
of these official claims;
-- the process was designed to limit contagion, but there were
serious effects on other euro area sovereigns; and there were also -
perhaps unavoidably - very serious spillovers indeed from Greece to
Cyprus, whose exposure to Greek risks ended up contributing
to a systemic financial crisis on the island, and the imposition of
capital controls within the euro area; and
-- eventually, 'hold-out' creditors - despite some ambiguous
signals - were treated rather generously, and this made it much harder
to pursue in the future the options that were adopted in Greece.
A worrying undercurrent that emerged in the discussion was the risk
ahead of an unseemly fight for preferred creditor status among official
creditors, in which the case of Greece may set possible precedents.
Unless and until this concern is resolved, the
burden of official debt hanging over Greece (the sword of Damocles, one
might say) risks deterring future market inflows.
So the seminar began in Athens but ended with a strongly-voiced
concern about the entire debt rescheduling process at it stands today.
Ah well, Jeromin has a (joint) paper on that too. Instantly, Ngaire
Woods and Max Watson pounced to extract the promise
that Jeromin would present this general debt restructuring paper in
early 2014 to a GEG-PEFM joint roundtable on what has truly become a
global governance issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment