The debate on how to tackle the SME credit crunch should not deflect EU
focus from resolving structural imbalances and weaknesses within the Eurozone
banking system. The calm EU debate over how to
improve the economies in the Eurozone does not reflect a sense of urgency, an
urgency which dire economic conditions throughout Europe would otherwise
suggest.
The relative tranquility in
European markets seems to have provided solace to European leaders, to the
point of hiding the scent of burning with a strong whiff of complacency. A recent statement from French President François Hollande regarding the end of the Euro crisis is emblematic in that
respect.
Regardless of the Euro-leaders’
lack of meaningful resolve to tackle the dismal Eurozone economy (six
consecutive quarters of economic contraction), a generally shared view is that
Small & Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) seem to be suffering the most from
the current conditions.
Growth is still elusive, not only
because of widespread austerity measures put in place by European governments,
but also because of insufficient credit available to SMEs.
A dearth of bank lending,
noticeable even in countries outside the EU such as the UK, seems in strident
contrast with the loose monetary policies adopted by central banks, precisely
to facilitate the transmission of credit into the economic system.
ECB Chairman Mario Draghi, over the
course of the last year, has issued statements in support of lending, with an
emphasis on SMEs. In his view, special
attention to SMEs is required, due to the fact that they account for about 75%
of employment and some 60% of economic output. Not only that, access to
wholesale markets (for example via bond issuance) is hardly an easy option for
them.
Recent research from J.P. Morgan,
nonetheless, argues that evidence about SME problems and their underlying
causes are not self-evident. Their conclusion seems to suggest that SMEs
probably don’t deserve preferential treatment vis-à-vis large corporations or
households.
According to the Markit PMI data, a
number of economic indicators on the biggest economies, indicates that SMEs in
Spain and Italy are not obviously under-performing larger firms. In fact,
employment and output indices do not show much difference between those two
groups. Rather surprisingly, in these two countries small firms are not faring
relatively worse than their peers in Germany or France.
On the financing side, the most
recent ECB lending survey does not show stricter tightening of lending
standards towards SMEs rather than households or large corporations. In terms
of funding costs, MFI interest rate statistics highlight that banks in the
Eurozone periphery countries charge higher rates than core countries on all
loans. However, the spread between small loans and large loans is very high,
only in Spain. Access to finance varies across different countries, with strong
evidence that in Spain, SMEs are more penalized than large corporations, if
compared to the rest of the Eurozone, while in Italy this applies as well, but
to a lesser extent.
This study does raise an
interesting point with regards to why the ECB should focus on SMEs rather than
other categories. On the other hand, I
think drawing the conclusion that SMEs might not deserve more attention than
other economic sectors, purely on the basis of a relatively limited statistical
data may miss the scope of Draghi’s point of view.
SMEs are inherently riskier
borrowers and credit access is
structurally more difficult for them to obtain than for larger corporations,
who may have access to alternative funding, other than traditional banks loans.
Furthermore, SMEs tend to have a
very strong connection with the local territory, probably more so than large
corporations. In the last 20 years, the consolidation of the banking industry
may have reduced the role of local banks when it comes to the financing of
SMEs.
Given current economic conditions,
large national banks have to look after their P&L and (especially in the
Eurozone periphery) carefully manage their balance sheets, while new EU banking
regulations are curbing leverage.
Therefore, given the deleveraging
at large banks, without a more coordinated set of policies in favour of SMEs,
it could be difficult to mitigate the double wham of weak demand and difficult
access to credit.
Draghi’s approach also makes sense
when we consider that SMEs are usually more labour intensive than large
corporations. Given the size of small ones, supporting them will go a long way
towards helping households too, improving overall employment and private
consumption.
Nonetheless, having identified a
target such as SMEs to focus on does not necessarily provide a straightforward
solution to the problem of growth and employment in the Eurozone.
The recent gathering held in Rome
last Friday with high ranked Labour and Finance ministers discussing such
issues, seems at least to have identified a shared view on several measures to
adopt.
While no concrete measures have yet
been finalized, discussions revolved around how to improve long-term credit to SMEs,
together with the European Investment Bank (EIB) and national state development
agencies, such as Italy's Cassa Depositi e Prestiti, France's Caisse des Depots
and Germany's KfW.
The 10 billion euros capital
increase which took place at the EIB last year could be leveraged to as much as
60 billion euros using its balance sheet as a lending facility. With that in
the background, European governments are evaluating several proposals,
including issuing special "mini bonds" and securitized loans backed
by state members or the EIB.
Other measures are already
available to help SMEs, such as loan guarantee programs, but their efficacy could be further
enhanced if AECMs (European Association of Mutual Guarantee Societies) were
more localised and were provided with additional financial firepower, going
forward.
Eurozone state members face a
daunting task of promoting alternative access to funding, increasing liquidity
and reducing SMEs dependence on traditional bank loans, while at the same time
sticking to Germany-led austerity (albeit more relaxed than in previous years).
State members should focus their
activity in several directions, in cooperation with all economic entities.
For a start, there should be a
coordinated effort between banks and mutual guarantee societies to provide
long-term credit facilities to SMEs. Easing funding charges for banks, who
provide increased lending to SMEs at cheaper rates would go a long way towards
re-connecting the banking system with its customers.
The private sector could benefit
from new regulations, which enable the issuance of new capital and incentivise
inter-company borrowing. Wholesalers and
large traders could leverage their funding by lending to their own customers.
The new rules could also include promotion of Venture Capital and the issuance
of corporate debentures.
Public administrations in Europe
should also tackle the delay of payments to the private sector (Italy’s abysmal
record of about 63 bn euros stock of trade credits and advances payable, springs
to mind), improving liquidity for many SMEs in a meaningful way.
Clearly, these are only a few
examples of specific measures for SMEs, but by no means, the only ones. While
they are obviously important, they cannot replace the fundamental role of banks
to kick-start economic growth.
I cannot stress enough the importance
of the EU delivering sooner rather than later on broader issues regarding the
banking industry.
Reforms aimed at restoring trust in
the banking system, improving risk evaluation, recapitalizing banks in
difficulty and introducing a regulatory framework for supervision of large
institutions at the ECB are still lagging.
The timeline for these reforms is
still somewhat hazy, due to the difficulty of overcoming political resistance,
mainly from Germany, to undertake more courageous measures.
Recent statements from Germany and
France seem to hint at delaying direct bank aid from the ESM (European
Stability Mechanism). The Finnish Finance minister Urpilainen has also been on
record saying that the second phase in banking union will not be easy,
highlighting also that the joint EU deposit guarantee is a not a timely issue.
Such inaction speaks volumes on how
difficult it is to further advance political integration inside the EU.
‘Virtuous’ countries seem to be pushing harder
on each state member to adopt pro-growth initiatives and reforms, shunning any
increase in the financial burden for the ECB (or its supranational agencies for
that matter) necessary to support such policies.
Without a more
substantial coordinated effort at the EU level to resolve some of the critical
issues which plague the credit system, it is unlikely that small doses of
several different medicines will be sufficient to cure the Eurozone credit
crunch.
No comments:
Post a Comment