2014年-FSB全球金融稳定委员会_Report_on_the_Impact_of_SIFI_Framework_on_the_Asia_Region_and_Measures_in_Response_46页_920kb

Summary of the Financial Stability Board Regional Consultative Group for Asia Report on the Impact of SIFI Framework on the Asia Region and Measures in Response

Core Content

This report by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) Regional Consultative Group for Asia (RCGfA) evaluates the impact of the G-SIB (Global Systemically Important Bank) framework on the Asian financial system and proposes policy measures to mitigate any unintended consequences. The study was conducted in the context of global financial reforms following the 2008 crisis, with the aim of understanding how the increased regulatory scrutiny of SIFIs (Systemically Important Financial Institutions) affects Asia, particularly in terms of financial stability, market operations, and policy responses.

Main Findings

Current Status of G-SIBs in Asia

• Headquarters: Four G-SIBs are headquartered in Asia (three in Japan and one in China).
• Operations: All 28 G-SIBs as of November 2012 have a presence in Asia, either through branches or subsidiaries.
• Asset Share: G-SIBs account for 27.9% of total banking sector assets in the surveyed Asian jurisdictions and 24.7% of global G-SIB assets.
• Variation by Jurisdiction: The share of G-SIB assets in the banking sector varies significantly, from less than 5% to over 40% in some jurisdictions.
• Group Classification: Jurisdictions are divided into three groups based on the share of G-SIB assets:
  • Group 1: 3 jurisdictions with G-SIBs holding over 40% of total banking sector assets.
  • Group 2: 4 jurisdictions with G-SIBs holding between 10-20% of total banking sector assets.
  • Group 3: 6 jurisdictions with G-SIBs holding less than 10% of total banking sector assets.

Impact of G-SIB Regulations

• Uncertainty: The impact of G-SIB regulations is hard to predict due to the incomplete implementation of the framework.
• Factors Influencing Impact: The extent of G-SIBs' market share and the development of the domestic financial system play a significant role in determining the impact.
• Potential Consequences:
  • Deleveraging: Concerns exist that G-SIB regulations may lead to deleveraging in Asia.
  • Funding Costs: There is a risk of increased funding costs for local banks.
  • Sectoral Effects: Trade finance, SME finance, and long-term finance may be affected, as well as derivative markets.
• Economic Impact: A 1% capital surcharge on G-SIBs could increase lending spreads by an average of 4.6 basis points (0.7–15.0 bp), with an estimated impact on GDP of up to 0.05% in some jurisdictions.

Key Policy Recommendations

Initiatives for Asian Regulatory Community

• Improve Funding Markets: Enhance access to foreign currency funding and diversify funding sources.
• Strengthen Competitiveness: Reduce barriers to entry and encourage credit substitution by domestic and non-G-SIB foreign banks.
• Promote Domestic Savings: Especially in emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs), to manage deleveraging effects.
• Channel Savings into Productive Investments: Develop corporate and equity markets to provide alternative financing avenues.
• Encourage Disintermediation: Expand securitisation and bond markets to reduce reliance on G-SIBs.
• Sector-Specific Measures: Address potential adverse impacts on trade finance, SME finance, and long-term finance.
• Develop Financial Markets and Derivatives: Ensure that domestic banks continue to provide essential services, particularly in derivative markets.
• Strengthen Prudential Frameworks: Build robust and effective domestic regulatory and supervisory systems.
• Monitor Borderline G-SIBs: Pay close attention to large global banks on the edge of G-SIB classification to prevent potential destabilization.
• Enhance Resolution and Crisis Management Arrangements: Establish effective mechanisms for financial crisis response in each jurisdiction.
• Regulatory Structures for Foreign Banks: Explore different regulatory structures for foreign bank branches and subsidiaries, as they may influence the impact of G-SIB regulations.

International Initiatives

• Strengthen Supervisory Coordination: Improve cooperation between G-SIB home and host countries through mechanisms like Supervisory Colleges and Crisis Management Groups (CMGs).
• Assess Home Bias: Investigate the extent of "home bias" in G-SIB regulations and consider policy options.
• Continuous Monitoring and Dialogue: Maintain ongoing dialogue and monitoring to assess the evolving impact of G-SIB reforms and share experiences across jurisdictions.

Conclusion

The report highlights the significant role of G-SIBs in the Asian financial system and underscores the need for both regional and international measures to address potential unintended consequences of the G-SIB framework. While the impact of these regulations may vary across jurisdictions, the study emphasizes the importance of a balanced and coordinated approach to ensure financial stability without disproportionately affecting host countries. The recommendations aim to foster a more resilient financial system and promote effective international cooperation.