Policy Papers
2021
May 28, 2021
2021 Financial Sector Assessment Program Review—Background Paper On Quantitative Analysis
Description: This paper reviews quantitative tools of financial stability assessments under the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP). A key focus of FSAPs is on methodologies to gauge risks on a system-wide level and propose mitigating measures. Therefore, the paper concentrates on the main elements of the FSAP’s macroprudential stress testing framework:(i) the interaction among solvency, liquidity, and contagion risks in the banking sector, (ii) the assessment of the health of nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs), their interactions with banks and their impact on financial markets, (iii) the assessment of the health of nonfinancial sectors and their links to the financial sector, and (iv) macroprudential policy analysis. The paper also reviews recent improvements in microprudential bank solvency stress testing—an important foundation for the macroprudential stress testing framework—and discusses new tools for emerging risks (climate change, fintech, and cyber).
May 28, 2021
Review of The Fund’s Income Position for FY 2021 and FY 2022
Description: This paper updates the projections of the Fund’s income position for FY 2021 and FY 2022 and proposes decisions for the current and next financial year. The Fund’s overall net income for FY 2021 is projected at about SDR 4.1 billion, higher than both the interim estimate of SDR 3.2 billion and the April 2020 estimate.
May 27, 2021
FY 2022 - FY 2024 Medium-Term Budget
Description: Amidst the unfolding COVID-19 crisis, the Fund faces twin challenges. Signs of early crisis recovery are uneven across countries, and many face daunting crisis legacies. At the same time, longer term challenges from climate change, digitalization and increasing divergence within and between countries demand stepped up effort by the Fund within its areas of expertise and in partnership with others. FY 22-24 budget framework. Considering these challenges and following a decade of flat real budgets, staff will propose a structural augmentation for consideration by fall 2021 to be implemented over two to three years beginning in FY 23. Recognizing the importance of ongoing fiscal prudence, the budget would remain stable thereafter on a real basis at a new, higher level. FY 22 administrative budget. The proposed FY 22 budget sustains crisis response and provides incremental resources for long-term priorities within the flat real budget envelope. The budget is built on extensive reprioritization; savings, including from modernization; and a proposed temporary increase in the carry forward ceiling to address crisis needs during the FY 22 to FY 24 period. Capital budget. Large-scale business modernization programs continue to be rolled out, strengthening the agility and efficiency of the Fund’s operations. In response to the shift towards cloud-based IT solutions, staff propose a change in the budgetary treatment of these expenses. Investment in facilities will focus on timely updates, repairs, and modernization, preparing for the post-crisis Fund where virtual engagement and a new hybrid office environment play a larger role. Budget sustainability. The FY 22–24 medium-term budget framework, including assumptions for a material augmentation, is consistent with a projected surplus in the Fund’s medium-term income position and with continued progress towards the precautionary balance target for coming years. Budget risks. In the midst of a global crisis, risks to the budget remain elevated and above risk acceptance levels, including from uncertainty around the level of demand for Fund programs and ensuing staffing needs, as well as future donor funding for CD. Enterprise risk management continues to be strengthened with this budget.
May 25, 2021
Guidance Note On Implementing The Debt Limits Policy In Fund Supported Programs
Description: The Debt Limits Policy (DLP) establishes the framework for using quantitative conditionality to address debt vulnerabilities in IMF-supported programs. In October 2020, the Executive Board approved reforms to the DLP which will enter into effect on June 30, 2021. The risk-based approach to setting debt conditionality informed by Debt Sustainability Analyses under the previous DLP approved in 2014 is maintained. The reforms aim to provide countries with more financing flexibility in practice while still adequately containing debt vulnerabilities through appropriate safeguards. This note provides operational and technical guidance related to the implementation of the DLP, including the operationalization of the approved reforms. In particular, it outlines the core principles underpinning the DLP, including when debt conditionality in IMF-supported programs is warranted and how to account for country-specific circumstances in the design of debt limits. The note also describes the process of setting and implementing debt conditionality, including: (i) identifying debt vulnerabilities to inform the focus of debt conditionality; (ii) designing debt conditionality; and (iii) implementing debt conditionality through the review cycle. The Guidance Note is intended for use by both IMF staff and country officials. In this regard, in addition to the guidance presented in the main body, the note also contains several annexes that cover definitional, technical, and operational issues arising in the determination and implementation of public debt limits.
May 19, 2021
Post Program Monitoring During The Pandemic: Proposal For Temporary Streamlining Of Procedures And Renaming Of The Policy
Description: The increase in Fund lending in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, including emergency financing, has led to a record number of requests for financing last year, and to an unprecedented amount of credit outstanding. This underscores the need for appropriate safeguards to the Fund’s balance sheet. Post Program Monitoring (PPM) is one such safeguard, which provides a framework for deeper and closer engagement with members that have substantial outstanding Fund credit but are not in a program relationship.
May 19, 2021
Policy Coordination Instrument—Operational Guidance Note
Description: This note—issued in May 2021 and since superseded by an updated note—provided general guidance on the use of the Policy Coordination Instrument (PCI) through March 2024 (and is being maintained here for archival purposes). Please refer to the updated note for current guidance, which refines operational practices based on recent experience and reflects the policy changes approved by the Board in October 2023.
May 18, 2021
2021 Comprehensive Surveillance Review— Background Paper on The Surveillance Priority Confronting Risks and Uncertainties
Description: The coverage of risks has become more systematic since the Global Financial Crisis (GFC): staff reports now regularly identify major risks and provide an assessment of their likelihood and economic impact, summarized in Risk Assessment Matrices (RAM). But still limited attention is paid to the range of possible outcomes. Also, risk identification is useful only so much as to inform policy design to preemptively respond to relevant risks and/or better prepare for them. In this regard, policy recommendations in surveillance could be richer in considering various risk management approaches. To this end, progress is needed on two dimensions: • Increasing emphasis on the range of potential outcomes to improve policy design. • Encouraging more proactive policy advice on how to manage risks. Efforts should continue to leverage internal and external resources to support risk analysis and advice in surveillance.
May 18, 2021
2021 Comprehensive Surveillance Review— Modalities for Modernizing Surveillance
Description: Modern Fund surveillance needs to be more targeted, topical and timely, better interconnected and better informed. Modernizing surveillance will likely require additional resources, although estimates are highly uncertain at this stage. The paper offers a tentative costing of new proposals with significant budgetary implications. Other proposals could rely on optimizing processes, while others are underway and funded separately; the resource implications of yet others are being picked up in context of other workstreams. Estimates do not include short-term transition costs or pressures on support services and are subject to a significant degree of uncertainty. A flexible approach to implementing the new modalities, characterized by experimentation and learning-by- doing—a “sandbox” for new modalities—is proposed.
May 18, 2021
2021 Comprehensive Surveillance Review— Background Paper on The Surveillance Priority Ensuring Economic Sustainability
Description: Ensuring economic sustainability is key to achieving the IMF’s surveillance mandate of maintaining present and prospective balance of payments and domestic stability, assuring orderly exchange arrangements, and promoting a stable system of exchange rates. A good understanding of issues related to economic sustainability is thus essential for the IMF to provide effective surveillance and policy advice, while it requires a broad perspective and a long time horizon. With respect to the IMF’s surveillance mandate, the principle of macro-criticality, which guides the IMF’s engagement with its members, is sufficiently flexible and broad, allowing the IMF to cover issues related to economic sustainability. At the same time, given the wide range of issues that are related to economic sustainability, IMF surveillance needs to be selective and focused, with the choice of issues made on a case-by-case basis, considering country circumstances. It also needs to leverage the expertise of other institutions when necessary. The IMF and other institutions have advanced work to enhance analytical frameworks and indicators related to economic sustainability, and this should continue.
May 18, 2021
2021 Comprehensive Surveillance Review— Background Paper on Systemic Risk and Macroprudential Policy Advice in Article IV Consultations
Description: This paper assesses progress made in deepening and integrating systemic risk analysis and macroprudential policy advice in Article IV consultations following up on the findings of the IEO evaluation. The assessment informs the Comprehensive Surveillance Review and the FSAP Review in their recommendations to strengthen these areas in Article IV consultations. The findings point to notable improvements made since the launch of the macrofinancial mainstreaming initiative, particularly in staff reports for advanced economies and in covering bank and credit-related risks.