The Eurozone Debt Crisis and the European Banking Union:A Cautionary Tale of Failure and Reform

The 2008 global financial crisis spread to most of the developed economies, including those of the European Union. Unfortunately, despite decades of effort to build a Single Financial Market, almost all EU jurisdictions lacked proper crisis resolution mechanisms, especially with respect to the cross-border dimensions of a global crisis. This led to a threat of widespread bank failures in EU countries and near collapse of their financial systems. Today, in the context of the Eurozone financial crisis, the EU is at a critical crossroads. It has to decide whether the road to recovery runs through closer integration of financial policies and of bank supervision and resolution, or whether to take the path of fragmentation with a gradual return to controlled forms of protectionism in the pursuit of narrow national interest, although the latter is bound to endanger the single market. Therefore, the policy dilemmas facing the EU and contemporary institution building within the Eurozone provide a key window into the future of both global and regional financial integration

Global Financial Regulatory Reforms:Implications for Developing Asia

The objective of global regulatory reform is to build a resilient global financial system that can withstand shocks and dampen, rather than amplify, their effects on the real economy. Lessons drawn from the recent crisis have led to specific reform proposals with concrete implementation plans at the international level. Yet, these proposals have raised concerns of relevance to Asia’s developing economies and hence require further attention at the regional level. We argue that global financial reform should allow for the enormous development challenges faced by developing countries—while ensuring that domestic financial regulatory systems keep abreast of global standards. This implies global reforms should be complemented and augmented by national and regional reforms, taking into account the very different characteristics of emerging economies’ financial systems from advanced economies. Key areas of development focus should be (i) balancing regulation and innovation, (ii) establishing national and cross-border crisis management and resolution mechanisms, (iii) preparing a comprehensive framework and contingency plan for financial institution failure, including consumer protection measures such as deposit insurance, (iv) supporting growth and development with particular attention to the region’s financial needs for infrastructure and for SMEs, and (v) reforming the international and regional financial architecture.financial regulatory reform; global financial architecture; G-20; Asia; national and regional reform

COVID-19, macroeconomic and sustainability shocks, moral hazard and resolution of systemic banking crises:Designing Appropriate Systems of Public Support

Banks have so far weathered well the financial turbulence caused by COVID-19 while at the same time being central in the economic and financial response. As the crisis moves from its initial phase as a short-term liquidity shock, the financial sector is facing increasing volumes of non-performing loans, raising the spectre of a banking solvency crisis. In economies already burdened with low-quality assets, the COVID-19 fallout is intensifying existing problems with legacy loans heightening the risk of a banking crisis. These issues are now being worsened by the impact of inflation and the invasion of Ukraine. Thus, addressing increasing volumes of bad loans, while supporting the proper functioning of the financial system, is a major challenge with systemic repercussions for a range of economies. This paper identifies a great paradox: since the bank rescues of the 2008–9 Global Financial Crisis there has been a disproportionate focus on the liability side of bank balance sheets through resolution measures such as bail-in and the accumulation of bail-inable debt. Post-crisis bank resolution regimes have overlooked solutions lying within the asset side of bank balance sheets. This paper analyses historical evidence to argue that concentrating on a liability-focused approach to the exclusion of asset-side solutions is ill-conceived. An excessive accumulation of non-performing loans on the asset side of bank balance sheets inevitably renders resolution interventions on the liability/equity side ineffective or at the very least insufficient to maintain banking system viability and financial stability. Bank asset restructuring involving the use of asset management companies, asset protection schemes and even capital injections can play a critical role in achieving an expeditious restoration of banking systems’ health following a major macroeconomic, sustainability or financial crisis

Financial Data Governance

Finance is one of the most digitalized, globalized, and regulated sectors of the global economy. Traditionally technology intensive, the financial industry has been at the forefront of digital transformation, starting with the dematerialization of financial assets in the 1960s and culminating in the post–2008 global financial crisis era with the fintech movement. Now, finance is data: financial transactions are transfers of data; financial infrastructures, such as stock exchanges and payment systems, are data networks; financial institutions are data processors, gathering, analyzing, and trading the data generated by their customers. Financial regulation has adapted to this fast-paced evolution both by implementing new regimes and by adapting existing ones. Concomitantly, general data governance frameworks to protect a broad spectrum of interests, from individual privacy to national security, have emerged. Though these areas of law intersect, their relationship often remains unclear. This Article sheds new light in this critical area, focusing on key challenges and providing viable solutions to address them. First, we define financial data governance as a heterogenous system of rules and principles concerned with financial data, digital finance, and related digital infrastructure. To explain how legal and regulatory regimes interact with the digitalization of finance, we consider the key emerging financial data governance styles in the European Union, People’s Republic of China, India, and the United States. Second, we examine the challenges affecting financial data governance. While finance is inextricably linked to data governance, the coalescence of financial regulation, new regulatory frameworks for digital finance, and general data governance regimes is not always harmonious. Conflicts arising from the intersection of different uncoordinated regimes threaten to frustrate core policy objectives of stability, integrity, and security, as well as the functioning of the global financial system. Addressing this requires a reconceptualization of the financial data centralization paradigm, both by regulators and by the financial industry