2008年-ECB欧洲央行_A_comparison_of_MFI_loans_as_a_source_of_household_financing_in_the_euro_area_the_United_Kingdom_and_the_United_States_4页_174kb

MFI Loans as a Source of Household Financing in the Euro Area, the United Kingdom and the United States

Core Content

This document provides a comparative analysis of the role of microfinance institutions (MFIs) in household financing across the euro area, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The focus is on how differences in financial systems and accounting frameworks affect the interpretation of MFI loan data and their relative importance in total household financing.

Key Findings

1. Relative Importance of MFI Loans

• United Kingdom has the highest ratio of MFI loans to household disposable income, with MFI loans accounting for over 75% of total household financing (excluding securitisation effects) on average between 2000 and 2007.
• Euro Area follows closely, with MFI loans and loans from non-MFIs combined accounting for approximately 90% of total household financing during the same period.
• United States has a more modest share, with MFI loans representing about 26% and 31% of total household financing in the euro area and the UK, respectively.

2. Accounting and Statistical Differences

• Definition of MFI Sector: In the US, the MFI sector is not officially defined, and it is approximated by commercial banks, savings institutions, and credit unions.
• Securitisation Treatment: The way securitised loans are reported varies significantly across the three regions:
  • In the euro area, securitised loans are still reported as MFI loans, as MFIs are generally not allowed to remove them from their balance sheets.
  • In the UK and US, securitised loans are often removed from MFI balance sheets, classified under "loans from non-MFIs" or "loans from (private or GSE) ABS issuers".
• Impact on Data Comparability: These differences mean that the relative importance of MFI loans may not be directly comparable across countries, as the accounting treatment affects how loans are recorded.

3. Role of Securitisation

• In the US, securitisation has played a significant role in household financing, with private ABS issuers becoming an important source from 2004 onwards.
• However, by mid-2006, GSEs (such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) regained prominence, and by the second half of 2007, they became the dominant source of financing.
• In the euro area, securitisation activity continued, but the character of the process changed in late 2007, with MFIs purchasing the asset-backed securities instead of selling them to the market.

4. Trends in Household Financing

• Since mid-2006, the overall dynamics of household financing have been similar across the three regions.
• However, the UK and euro area show a decline in MFI loans retained, while the US has seen a sharp decline in loans held by private non-bank institutions.
• The UK has a more stable volume of "loans by non-banks" compared to the euro area and US.

Main Viewpoints

• The relative importance of MFI loans in household financing is influenced by structural differences in financial systems.
• Accounting standards play a crucial role in how MFI loans are reported, which affects the interpretation of risk exposure.
• Securitisation has significantly altered the composition of household financing, particularly in the US, where it has been a major source of funds.
• Despite apparent similarities in financing dynamics, underlying fundamentals such as economic activity, interest rates, house prices, and indebtedness differ substantially across the three regions.

Conclusion

A comparative analysis of MFI loans in household financing requires careful consideration of accounting practices, financial system structures, and the role of securitisation. The document emphasizes that MFI balance sheet statistics may not always reflect the true risk exposure of banks, particularly in the US and UK, where securitisation leads to a decrease in reported MFI loans. The euro area shows a different pattern, with securitisation still largely reflected in MFI loans. The analysis concludes that while the overall trends in household financing are similar, the underlying structural and regulatory differences continue to shape the dynamics of credit provision and risk distribution.