2015年-ECB欧洲央行_Follow-up_to_the_review_of_draft_budgetary_plans_for_2015_3页_207kb

Box 5 Summary: 2015 Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure

Core Content

The Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure (MIP), introduced in November 2011, is a key mechanism within the EU's strengthened governance framework. It aims to prevent the emergence of harmful macroeconomic imbalances and to correct them when they become excessive. The procedure applies to all EU Member States except those under a macroeconomic adjustment programme.

The MIP involves a two-stage process:

• A first screening using a set of indicators to identify potential imbalances.
• An in-depth review for selected countries to assess the severity of imbalances and determine the appropriate level of intervention.

Depending on the severity of the imbalances, countries are classified into six levels of risk, ranging from "No imbalances" (Level 1) to "Excessive imbalances requiring decisive policy action" (Level 6). The corrective arm of the MIP is triggered when imbalances are deemed excessive, requiring the country to submit a corrective action plan that must be endorsed by the EU Council. In cases of non-compliance, the Council may impose financial sanctions.

Key Findings from the 2015 In-Depth Review

• The European Commission identified five countries with excessive imbalances: Bulgaria, France, Croatia, Italy, and Portugal.
• Germany was stepped up from Level 2 to Level 3.
• France was stepped up from Level 4 to Level 5.
• Bulgaria was significantly stepped up from Level 2 to Level 5.
• Slovenia was de-escalated from Level 5 to Level 4.
• Romania and Portugal entered the procedure in 2015 following the end of their adjustment programmes.

This marks the first year that the Commission formally classified imbalances into six levels, although these levels were already implicitly used in 2014.

Concerns and Criticisms

Despite identifying excessive imbalances in five countries, the Commission did not activate the Excessive Imbalance Procedure (EIP). This decision has raised concerns about the effectiveness of the MIP's preventive arm.

• The Commission did not make full use of the corrective arm, which is designed to address excessive imbalances.
• In the cases of Croatia and France, the Commission announced consideration of activating the EIP if the respective governments did not commit to decisive structural reforms by May 2015.

Assessment of Reform Implementation

The Commission emphasizes that policy commitments are important but effective policy action is the main basis for assessing the severity of imbalances.

• No euro area country has fully addressed the 2014 country-specific recommendations (CSRs).
• Progress has been limited in most countries, not commensurate with the remaining vulnerabilities.
• Among countries expected to take "decisive policy action" (categories 4 and 5 in Table A), Spain, Ireland, and Italy made some progress, while France made limited progress.

Conclusion

The 2015 in-depth review highlights the growing severity of macroeconomic imbalances in several EU countries, particularly in the euro area. However, the lack of effective implementation of reform commitments undermines the preventive and corrective mechanisms of the MIP. There is a clear need to strengthen the reform efforts and fully utilize the MIP's instruments, including the corrective arm, to reduce vulnerabilities and ensure the stability of the European Monetary Union (EMU).