When the pandemic crisis struck, European banks were in much better shape than at the start of the great financial crisis, boasting solid capital ratios and ample buffers. Non-performing loans (NPLs) have more than halved in the last five years.
We are entering the second
year of the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis: what shape are banks in now?
When
we entered the pandemic crisis, there was a great deal of uncertainty
but, fortunately, also a strong resiliency in the European banking
sector. And after one year, in the current situation, the capital
position is sound and buffers are available to absorb losses if needed.
This is a strength that gives room for lending to the real economy.
Banks have a very good basis to cope with continuing or new adverse
circumstances. Banks built their strong capital position after the great
financial crisis and this has enabled them to weather this unexpected
pandemic crisis so far. Banks now are absolutely part of the solution as
they continue to fund the economy.
European banks
continue to lend to households and firms, also thanks to unprecedented
measures taken by national governments, European institutions and
supervisors to support them. What is your assessment of these actions:
have you been successful?
The fiscal, monetary and
supervisory cooperation in response to COVID-19 has been extraordinary.
It has been key and it has been a success. The health crisis, which
threatens lives, the economy and businesses, has not turned into a
banking crisis. The collaboration has been across the board and not one
sector was left in isolation. At ECB Banking Supervision, we introduced
prudential flexibility to avoid a procyclical crisis. We did not want
banks to react to a temporary pandemic by strangulating the credit flow.
We wanted to make sure the economy continued to operate. And it all
worked as we hoped and better than many had expected.
Yet a
new wave of NPLs is expected this year. Maybe a huge one. And in 2021
moratoria and supervisory flexibility are ending. This could provoke a
tightening of credit conditions, if not a full-blown credit crunch,
banks might turn out to be less willing to lend to the economy this
year. What is your opinion?
Whether or not these risks
will materialise this year will depend very much on the recovery. And we
have reason to believe that the worst-case scenario, of €1.4 trillion
worth of NPLs by the end of the pandemic, is less likely to materialise.
I want to emphasise that we expect 2021 to be the year of the recovery.
Even if the recovery is delayed by COVID-19 variants or longer
lockdowns, it will not be eliminated. We know we are not out of the
woods and we need to remain prudent. So at the ECB we continuously
assess the situation as we are hopefully moving towards healthier times
with the rollout of vaccines and improving therapies to treat the virus.
To be sure, the uncertainty is still very high.
Banks and
markets fear a cliff edge effect as fiscal support and supervisory
flexibility are lifted this year. How concrete is the cliff edge risk?
It
is important to focus on the positive aspects of the fiscal and
monetary support, of the moratoria and the State guarantees. There is no
plan that I am aware of to make an abrupt withdrawal of any of these
measures, but there will be a gradual reduction, calibrated with the
evolution of the health situation and the ability of the economy to
operate. We will unwind our measures only gradually. The cliff edge risk
from withdrawal exists, but it is mitigated through an appropriately
calibrated, gradual reduction of the support to banks. This gives me
confidence to say we will continue paying meticulous attention to this
calibration. Since the beginning we have been providing flexibility and
guidance for banks to avoid a mechanistic interpretation of prudential
rules and classification of exposures which would not reflect the
temporary effects of the pandemic.
No automatisms. At the
same time, though, you are telling banks to identify in a timely and
adequate manner the deterioration of credit risk and to respond with
provisions for potential losses. And to continue to lend. Is there a
clash of messages?
When we, at ECB Banking Supervision,
introduced this extraordinary flexibility, we also emphasised that the
existing accountancy and prudential rules should be used to identify the
unfolding of credit deterioration as accurately as possible. Banks must
differentiate between a temporary and a permanent credit deterioration
induced by the pandemic. If banks ignore this, if they do not provide
adequate transparency in their balance sheets, if they start to be
opaque, if they do not take care of NPLs now, then − when the recovery
arrives, when healthier times come around, when the economy reopens − we
will face the cliff edge effect, as banks will not be there exactly
when we need them most. Delaying the management of permanent credit
deterioration and NPLs will have the unhappy outcome of ultimately
delaying the recovery, undermining everything we have put in place to
date to cushion the effects of the pandemic. This is why banks must now
pay timely and accurate attention to their balance sheet and increase
transparency in their credit book. This is vital to delivering the
conditions to allow banks to continue lending to the economy. Banks that
deliver transparency by having robust credit risk management and
reporting in place will be in a much better position when the recovery
comes. There is no reason to delay the assessment of credit quality:
this is the moment to make sure we have very robust credit processing in
place. This is what ultimately makes the markets realise the strengths
of the banking sector.
Is this what you are expecting from
Italian banks too? Italy is one of the hardest-hit countries in this
pandemic from a health, social and economic point of view. This year
Italian banks are facing an explosive mix: the Supervisory Review and
Evaluation Process, stress tests, new definition of default, calendar
provisioning, and the steep rise of NPLs.
Italian banks’
progress in NPL exposure has been very substantial: the gross NPLs ratio
came down from around 10% in 2014-15 to 3.1% in June 2020. What
tremendous progress! So Italian banks must continue to do just that,
make sure they manage NPLs in their books. This will make their balance
sheet stronger and enable them to continue lending, especially to small
and medium-sized enterprises. We know that Italian corporates entered
the pandemic crisis in better shape compared to when they entered the
great financial crisis: they had gone through much restructuring and
these efforts are paying off. Italian enterprises showed resilience and
exports reacted well to the headwinds. The stress tests will take all
this into consideration, they will help us to assess the resilience of
European banks. This is what we are going to do in the first half of
2021.
On a broader scale, what more can be done to make the banking sector and the European economy stronger after the pandemic?
It
is essential that we finish the banking union, which is an incomplete
construct. The crisis itself has emphasised the need to increase the
level of integration so that Europe can deal better with shocks. We must
have the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS): it is a safety net
for all depositors. EDIS would grant all depositors the same protection
and this would facilitate cross-border banking activity, eliminate the
need for depositors to transfer deposits – which creates instability –
and foster consolidation, which is an important tool to enhance
profitability and sustainability in the European banking sector. I
really hope this crisis will give impetus to completing the banking
union and the capital markets union: this would make European banks more
powerful, more financially stable, better funded and enable them to
give better funding terms to citizens and businesses. I cannot imagine
what would have happened in this pandemic crisis if Europe did not have
European banking supervision.
Mario
Draghi launched European banking supervision while he was president of
the ECB. And you arrived at the ECB soon after he left. Do you know
Mario Draghi?
I worked for the ECB as a consultant when
Mario Draghi was at the helm. I led the Promontory consulting team back
in 2012-13 to help set up European banking supervision. Mario Draghi
spearheaded this process. I saw Mario Draghi in action, he is an
extraordinary person, he has the requisite knowledge, courage, and
humility as well as exceptional qualities of humanity and credibility
for excellence in public service: he has a very powerful toolbox for
Italy now. I saw his ability to pull together the European project,
European banking supervision, which was needed to end the doom loop of
sovereign and bank risk. The banking union was then a dream and it
started to become a reality.
SSM
© ECB - European Central Bank
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article