Opinion

Japanese banks and US$ liquidity: Squeezed between expensive deposits and the BoJ

For the last few years, Japanese banks have aggressively expanded their assets overseas, which has helped increased their stubbornly low profitability even after the introduction of negative interest rates by BoJ. Such a successful overseas strategy, profitability-wise, may be at risk due to US$ liquidity developments at a global level.

By: Date: November 28, 2016 Global Economics & Governance Tags & Topics

This op-ed was originally published in Asian Banking & Finance.

asian-banking-finance

In fact, US$ liquidity has been ebbing towards tightness, partially because of the reform of the US money market fund and more is to come as the FED hikes rates.

The major source of US$ funding for Japanese banks used to be the US money market funds (MMF), but with its reform last year, the liquidity has dried up massive so that Japanese banks have turned to other sources of US$ liquidity. The reason for the increase in the cost of funding is not only that the LIBOR is already discounting incoming FED hikes but also that the cost of Yen-US$ cross-currency swaps has surged.

The most important source of US$ liquidity for Japanese banks now is wholesale US$ deposits but the cost of funding has also gone quite rapidly. Against such background, the Bank of Japan has been offering limited amounts of US$ liquidity through different facilities.

The first one is the BoJ’s Growth Program, which is designed to offer US$ liquidity to Japanese banks to expand their overseas operations but within a limit and only for growth-enhancing lending. The demand has been so large that the BoJ has had to double the ceiling of US$ to be granted since July 2016.

The second program is the US$ Funds Supplying Operations, under which Japanese banks can borrow US$ up to three months, which is funded through a US$-JP¥ swap agreement between the BoJ and the Fed. In July 2016, the BoJ even introduced a new securities lending facility so that banks can borrow JGBs from the BoJ to use them as collateral for the US$ Funds Operations.

Although the outstanding amount is clearly lower than the peak of the European debt crisis in 2011, banks have actively borrowed US$ from the BoJ before the US MMF reform took place.

The outlook is certainly not brighter for Japanese banks, not only because of the expected tightening by the FED but their liquidity requirements will become tighter with the introduction of the Net Stable Funding Ratio by 2018. Beyond the liquidity issues, there are two additional risks related to their overseas asset growth strategy, namely maturity and interest rate risks.

In conclusion, the combination of tighter liquidity regulations together with higher US$ funding costs, Japanese banks might be forced to review what has so far been quite a successful business model to push a stubbornly low profitability, namely that of expanding their US$ assets.

 


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to communication@bruegel.org.

View comments
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Mar
7
12:30

Trump’s energy policy: America first, climate last?

This event seeks to discuss the potential way forward for the US energy and climate policy, and its implications for both global energy markets and global climate change mitigation efforts.

Speakers: Kristine Berzina, Tim Boersma, Connie Hedegaard, Simone Tagliapietra and Zhang Xumin Topic: Energy & Climate Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article Download PDF

Policy Brief

Screen Shot 2017-02-17 at 16.42.38

Europe in a new world order

In this paper the authors explore what the EU’s strategic reaction should be to US diminishing giant policies, and the EU’s role in a world of declining hegemony and shifting balances

By: Maria Demertzis, André Sapir and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: February 17, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Marek Dabrowski

The EU should not retaliate against Trump’s protectionism

If the US moves ahead with Republican plans to introduce a border adjustment tax, the EU will need to decide on its response. Marek Dabrowski argues that the EU would be unwise to retaliate with its own anti-import policies: the border adjustment tax would be difficult to implement and damaging to the global trade order. Instead the EU should build a broad coalition of allies to defend free trade.

By: Marek Dabrowski Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 9, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

photo2016

The border adjustment tax: a dangerous proposal

Reflecting the fact that the United States imports more than it exports, border adjustment tax is considered by its proponents as an essential part of the Trump tax reform package.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 9, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Scott Marcus

How good a shield is Privacy Shield?

Privacy Shield was put in place in 2016 to ensure that transfers of personal data from the EU to the US would be in compliance with European Union privacy law, and thus permissible. The institutional framework of Privacy Shield was weak, and depended on the good will of the US administration. Recent actions by the new administration, including the famous executive order forbidding residents from 7 predominantly Muslim countries to enter the US, may have (presumably unintended) effects on Privacy Shield. To preserve the validity of Privacy Shield in European Courts, strong EU-US cooperation and potentially additional agreements may become necessary.

By: J. Scott Marcus Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 7, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol

The EU must stand ready to confront US leadership

This is not the first time that the United States has antagonised Europe. And Europe can provide an effective response to such external challenges when it stands united.

By: Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 3, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Mark Hallerberg

Border adjustment tax could help Europe find common voice on Trump

The Trump administration seems more than willing to break with liberal orthodoxy on trade. Could this lead them to introduce a "destination tax", essentially penalising imports? If the USA moves ahead with this idea, Mark Hallerberg argues that the EU should seriously consider doing the same. Not only would it balance out some of the trade effects of the US move, it might also have positive political implications for Europe.

By: Mark Hallerberg Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 1, 2017
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

dsc_0809
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Trade flows between the US, UK and EU27: what goes where?

As US President Trump and UK Prime Minister Theresa May meet in Washington, Bruegel researchers look at bilateral trade flows between the US, UK and EU27.

By: Filippo Biondi and Robert Kalcik Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 27, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Guntram B. Wolff

Europe needs to react to Trump’s trade agenda – four urgent questions

It seems increasingly likely that President Trump will govern according to the values of his campaign. On trade, this might lead to major disturbances in the global rules-based order. The EU needs to decide how it will react, and it needs to decide fast.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 26, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Silvia Merler

Tariffs and the American poor

What’s at stake: much has been said and debated — during the US election and beyond — about the distributional impact of free trade on the disadvantaged. But what would be the distributional impact of a new protectionism instead?

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 23, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Implications of the new US trade policy by the incoming president Trump

An event about the implications of Donald Trump's emerging trade agenda on global trade.

Speakers: Adam Posen, André Sapir, Guntram B. Wolff and Xiang Yu Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: January 19, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Guntram B. Wolff

Manufacturing in the US: Will Trump’s strategy repatriate highly-paid jobs?

Trump has set out a plan to repatriate highly-paid manufacturing jobs to the US. But the idea that manufacturing jobs are better paid than service roles is a myth. Moreover, labour markets are slow to shift between sectors. An aggressive trade policy may create some jobs in manufacturing but will not be a benefit to US citizens in general.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 6, 2017
Load more posts