Blog Post

The Greek debt trap: missing the wrong target

IMF and European officials have publicly clashed over the date by when Greece public debt should be reduced to 120 percent of GDP. The IMF insists on the earlier target date of 2020, while the Europeans propose 2022. Both are wrong: a 120 percent target, whether it is reached in eight or ten years, will […]

By: Date: November 15, 2012

IMF and European officials have publicly clashed over the date by when Greece public debt should be reduced to 120 percent of GDP. The IMF insists on the earlier target date of 2020, while the Europeans propose 2022. Both are wrong: a 120 percent target, whether it is reached in eight or ten years, will not restore trust now and will not make investments in Greek bonds attractive to private investors a decade from now. A credible strategy should involve zero-interest official lending and indexing loans to GDP.

A major reason for Greece’s public debt misery is a negative feedback loop between high public debt and the collapse in GDP. The loop is especially strong when there are widespread expectations of a Greek euro exit. The prospect of euro exit discourages private investment and increases incentives for tax evasion and capital flight, thereby dragging growth down and worsening the fiscal situation. As the budget deficit and debt ratio increase, the official lenders are demanding additional fiscal consolation measures, which further drag down output.

A point may come when the Greek government and parliament may be unable or unwilling to pass new measures, perhaps because of social unrest. That could lead to a collapse of the government, domestic political paralysis and the stopping of external financial assistance. Without external financial assistance, the Greek state may default, which could culminate in an accelerated and possibly uncontrolled exit from the euro area, with devastating consequences both inside and outside Greece.

Therefore, restoring public debt sustainability, and thereby resisting euro-exit speculation, is a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for stopping further economic contraction. The 120 percent of GDP target by 2020 has proved to be inadequate for restoring trust and thereby limiting the probability of a Greek euro exit. A reiteration of the same target, or its extension to 2022, is unlikely to help. That would just prolong economic and social misery and the uncertainty about Greek euro membership.

A strategy leading to a credible resolution of the Greek public debt overhang would benefit both Greece and its lenders. Such a strategy should involve a maximum 100 percent of GDP debt ratio target by 2020, along with a safeguard that would minimise the probability of a similar debt overhang occurring later. The measures currently under discussion, such as a small reduction in the interest rate on bilateral loans, the exchange of European Central Bank Greek bond holdings, or buy-back of privately-held Greek debt, won’t be enough.

While these measures should be tried, the main plank of the strategy should be the reduction of the official lending rate to zero until 2020. In its effect this official sector involvement would be similar to a write-down of the debt, but could be perhaps politically more acceptable. The second plank of the strategy should be the indexing of the notional amount of all official loans to Greek GDP. This would help to avoid a repetition of the current situation should growth disappoint further. But if growth is better than expected, official creditors will also benefit.

Since the Greek financing programmes were designed by the troika of the European Commission, ECB and the IMF, and were approved by euro-area member states, responsibility for programme failure should be shared between all lenders and the Greek government. Therefore, there should be no reason for excluding any of the official lenders from the debt restructuring and hence the IMF and the ECB should also share the burden. The ECB cannot participate directly because of the strict prohibition of monetary financing by the EU Treaty, but this is not an obstacle: the ECB’s interest income from Greek bonds will be ultimately transferred to euro-area member states, which should grant this interest income to Greece.

At the same time, all efforts should be made by Greece to pay back the debt relief provided via the zero-interest lending (realistically, beyond 2030). Greece should commit to a stable primary budget surplus in the long run (say, 3.5 percent of GDP) and that commitment should be enforced, possibly by curtailing further Greece’s fiscal sovereignty. Then the debt ratio will fall further. When the debt falls below a certain threshold, such as 60 percent of GDP, then Greece should not reduce the debt ratio further, but gradually pay back the debt relief. An extended privatisation plan could also be used to pay back the debt relief, though there are major uncertainties even about the current privatisation plan.

Policymakers have to recognise the failure of their current Greek strategy and decide if they wish to keep Greece inside the euro area or push it out. If they want to keep Greece in, which I hope they do, then they need to change course and not just implement some easy measures, grant some extra money and prolong by two years the anyway inadequate debt target of 120 percent of GDP. That would backfire soon.

The author is research fellow at Bruegel and author of the report ‘The Greek debt trap: an escape plan’.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Topics

Comments

Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Silvia Merler

EU migration crisis: facts, figures and disappointments

Attempts to stem the flow of refugees to Europe have so far had little success. Two months into 2016, we take a detailed look at the numbers of the refugee crisis and the European response.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 12, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Opinion

Pia Hüttl
Schoenmaker pic

Why euro-zone ‘outs’ should join banking union

Joining the banking union could provide a stable arrangement for managing financial stability for the UK and other non-Euro countries.

By: Pia Hüttl and Dirk Schoenmaker Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 11, 2016
Read article

Blog Post

IMG_20151009_103117 (3)
Portraits Bruegel staff 2014

Can mass migration boost innovation and productivity?

The long-term impact of migration on innovation and productivity growth in host countries is a neglected issue in the current debate on refugees. Research shows that these effects can be substantial, but if Europe wants to capitalize on this potential it will need better information systems to match migrants’ skill sets with host environments.

By: Nuria Boot and Reinhilde Veugelers Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 10, 2016
Read article More by this author

Parliamentary Testimony

Inquiry of the House of Lords’ EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee on “Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union”House of Lords

Inquiry of the House of Lords' EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee

The enquiry on "Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union" took place on 27 January 2016 in Brussels.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, House of Lords, Parliamentary Testimonies Date: February 8, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Pia Hüttl
Schoenmaker pic

European banking union: should the 'outs' join in?

To address coordination failures between national institutions regulating banks, we need supranational policies. Banking union encourages further integration of banks across borders, deepening the single market, and could also benefit countries outside the euro which have a high degree of cross-border banking.

By: Pia Hüttl and Dirk Schoenmaker Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 4, 2016
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Policy Contribution

Should the ‘outs’ join the European banking union?

Should the ‘outs’ join the European banking union?

This paper analyses the banking linkages between the nine ‘outs’ and 19 ‘ins’ of the banking union. It finds that the out countries could profit from joining banking union, because it would provide a stable arrangement for managing financial stability.

By: Pia Hüttl and Dirk Schoenmaker Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 4, 2016
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

22 
Feb
2016
12:30

Economic weakness and demographic challenges: what next for Europe?

After a year of weak recovery what is next for Europe? This event will look at both the general macroeconomic situation as well as the challenges posed by changing demographics

Speakers: John Driffill, Torben M. Andersen and Pia Hüttl Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Guntram B. Wolff

The economic consequences of Schengen

The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, recently warned that “without Schengen and the free movement of workers, of citizens, the euro makes no sense.” And in fact, it is the single currency and the ability to travel freely without identity documents that most Europeans associate with the EU. So how does it really stand with Schengen and the euro?

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 2, 2016
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

23 
Feb
2016
12:30

Adjustment in the Economic and Monetary Union

This event will look at shocks and adjustment in the euro area in the light of recent crises and analyse the functioning of a key internal adjustment process in EMU

Speakers: Robert Anderton, Antoine Berthou, José Leandro and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Jérémie Cohen-Setton

Blaming the Fed for the Great Recession

What’s at stake: Following an article in the New York Times by David Beckworth and Ramesh Ponnuru, the conversation on the blogosphere was dominated this week by the question of whether the Fed actually caused the Great Recession. While not mainstream, this narrative recently received a boost as Ted Cruz, a Republican candidate for the White House, championed it.

By: Jérémie Cohen-Setton Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 1, 2016
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

25 
Feb
2016
12:30

The long-term impact of migration in Europe

Amidst the short-term drama of the refugee and Schengen crises, it is time to look at the long-term effects of migration on European societies and economies.

Speakers: Pieter Cleppe, Naika Foroutan and Reinhilde Veugelers Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Guntram B. Wolff

The fallout from the European refugee crisis

Of the 1.5 million refugees that reached the European Union last year, more than 1 million ended up in Germany, but the initially welcoming atmosphere has changed drastically.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: January 29, 2016
Load more posts