Download Free Review Of The Financial Sector Assessment Program Further Adaptation To The Post Crisis Era Background Studies Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Review Of The Financial Sector Assessment Program Further Adaptation To The Post Crisis Era Background Studies and write the review.

The past five years have seen an expansion of the scope of FSAPs to assess countries' macroprudential policy (MaPP) frameworks. This note documents this increase and offers some suggestions on how the treatment of MaPP issues in FSAPs can be further strengthened and better integrated into the overall financial stability assessment.
The Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP), established in 1999, is an in-depth assessment of a country’s financial sector. It is an important element of the Fund’s surveillance and provides input to the Article IV consultations. In developing and emerging market countries, FSAP assessments are usually conducted jointly with the World Bank and include two components: a financial stability assessment (the main responsibility of the Fund) and a financial development assessment (the main responsibility of the World Bank). Each FSAP concludes with the preparation of a Financial System Stability Assessment (FSSA), which focuses on issues of relevance to IMF surveillance and is discussed by the IMF Executive Board normally together with the country’s Article IV staff report. Since the program’s inception, 144 member countries have requested and undergone FSAPs, most of them more than once. In recent years, the Fund has been conducting 14–16 FSAPs per year at an annual cost of US$13–15 million. The last review of the FSAP in 2009, in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, introduced a number of far-reaching reforms that have clarified the responsibilities of the Fund and the Bank in developing and emerging market countries, where assessments usually take place jointly, established institutional accountability, strengthened the analytical focus and coverage of FSAPs, and introduced the option of modular assessments that has afforded the Fund and national authorities greater flexibility on the scope and timing of assessments. In 2010, the financial stability assessment under the FSAP in 25 jurisdictions with financial sectors deemed by the Fund to be systemically important became a mandatory part of Article IV surveillance, expected to take place every five years. The list was expanded to 29 jurisdictions in 2013. For all other jurisdictions, FSAP participation continues to be voluntary.In 2010, the financial stability assessment under the FSAP in 25 jurisdictions with financial sectors deemed by the Fund to be systemically important became a mandatory part of Article IV surveillance, expected to take place every five years. The list was expanded to 29 jurisdictions in 2013. For all other jurisdictions, FSAP participation continues to be voluntary.
In response to the Global Financial Crisis, the IMF launched many initiatives to strengthen financial surveillance and better advise member countries of vulnerabilities and risks. While these initiatives have not yet been tested by a major crisis, the efforts have delivered a substantial upgrade of the Fund’s financial surveillance, including giving the IMF clearer responsibilities over financial sector stability and cross-country spillovers; making periodic financial stability assessments mandatory for jurisdictions with systemically important financial sectors; invigorating efforts to integrate financial and macroeconomic analysis in bilateral and multilateral surveillance; enhancing cooperation with the Financial Stability Board and standard setting bodies to promote reforms and monitor agreed standards; and taking steps to recruit and train greater financial expertise. While recognizing these achievements, this evaluation finds that the quality and impact of the IMF’s financial surveillance has been uneven. The expansion of products and activities has presented the Fund with difficult trade-offs between bilateral and multilateral surveillance; between countries with systemically important financial sectors and other member countries; and between financial surveillance and other activities. Moreover, resource constraints have slowed the needed build-up of financial and macrofinancial expertise. These are critical issues, given the IMF’s position as the only international financial institution with the mandate and ability to conduct financial and macrofinancial surveillance over the full range of countries as well as the global economy, and given that these issues are at the core of the IMF’s responsibilities. Thus, to further strengthen financial surveillance, the evaluation recommends devoting greater resources to financial surveillance overall; further strengthening financial and macrofinancial analysis in Article IV surveillance; refining resource allocation for FSAPs; enhancing rigor and transparency in multilateral surveillance; intensifying efforts to be a global center of excellence on financial and macrofinancial research; and extending efforts to develop financial expertise among IMF staff.
This evaluation assesses the IMF’s response to the global financial and economic crisis, focusing on the period September 2008 through 2013. It assesses the IMF’s actions to help contain the crisis and navigate a global recovery, assist individual economies to cope with the impact of the crisis, and identify and warn about future risks.
This paper evaluates the IMF’s exchange rate analysis since the 2008 TSR. It focuses on the evolution of methods, the quality of the IMF‘s multilateral and bilateral exchange rate analysis, the evenhandedness and transparency of this analysis, and the need to improve the coverage and integration of external stability assessments.

Ireland

International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department

Published: 2022-07-07

Total Pages: 66


Get eBook

Ireland has considerably strengthened financial sector regulation and supervision since the 2016 FSAP, aided by the ECB/SSM, and is working with European and international regulators to strengthen oversight of the large market-based finance (MBF) sector. This strengthening is evidenced by a successful navigation through the challenges of Brexit and the pandemic. Despite global headwinds, Ireland is exiting the pandemic with strong economic growth and a highly capitalized and liquid banking system. The financial system has grown rapidly and in complexity, especially after Brexit, and Ireland has become a European base for large financial groups. The MBF sector has grown to the second largest in Europe, with global interlinkages.

Germany

International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department

Published: 2016-06-29

Total Pages: 118


Get eBook

This paper evaluates the risks and vulnerabilities of the German financial system and reviews both the German regulatory and supervisory framework and implementation of the common European framework insofar as it is relevant for Germany. The country is home to two global systemically important financial institutions, Deutsche Bank AG and Allianz SE. The system is also very heterogeneous, with a range of business models and a large number of smaller banks and insurers. The regulatory landscape has changed profoundly with strengthened solvency and liquidity regulations for banks (the EU Capital Requirements Regulation and Directive IV), and the introduction of macroprudential tools.
This report summarizes the findings of the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) Update for Spain. Although there is a core of strong banks that are well managed and appear resilient to further shocks, vulnerabilities remain. Substantial progress has been made in reforming the former savings banks, and the most vulnerable institutions have either been resolved or are being restructured. Recent measures address the most problematic part of banks’ portfolios. Moving ahead, a further restructuring and recapitalization of some of the remaining weaker banks may be needed as a result of deteriorating economic conditions.
This paper reviews the literature on financial crises focusing on three specific aspects. First, what are the main factors explaining financial crises? Since many theories on the sources of financial crises highlight the importance of sharp fluctuations in asset and credit markets, the paper briefly reviews theoretical and empirical studies on developments in these markets around financial crises. Second, what are the major types of financial crises? The paper focuses on the main theoretical and empirical explanations of four types of financial crises—currency crises, sudden stops, debt crises, and banking crises—and presents a survey of the literature that attempts to identify these episodes. Third, what are the real and financial sector implications of crises? The paper briefly reviews the short- and medium-run implications of crises for the real economy and financial sector. It concludes with a summary of the main lessons from the literature and future research directions.
This paper explains specifics of stress testing at the IMF. After a brief section on the evolution of stress tests at the IMF, the paper presents the key steps of an IMF staff stress test. They are followed by a discussion on how IMF staff uses stress tests results for policy advice. The paper concludes by identifying remaining challenges to make stress tests more useful for the monitoring of financial stability and an overview of IMF staff work program in that direction. Stress tests help assess the resilience of financial systems in IMF member countries and underpin policy advice to preserve or restore financial stability. This assessment and advice are mainly provided through the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP). IMF staff also provide technical assistance in stress testing to many its member countries. An IMF macroprudential stress test is a methodology to assess financial vulnerabilities that can trigger systemic risk and the need of systemwide mitigating measures. The definition of systemic risk as used by the IMF is relevant to understanding the role of its stress tests as tools for financial surveillance and the IMF’s current work program. IMF stress tests primarily apply to depository intermediaries, and, systemically important banks.