again failed to solve the Greek problem …
Not at all. The disease was healed, but the patient recovered completely. The question is, when you start to get sick again and that hard.
Is that the crisis – at least for a time – managed to stave off means that the euro area has shown strength?
Well, yes and no. We managed to maintain the unity of the zone, which can be considered a success. But on the other hand, solution reached through far-reaching compromise.
Are maintain the unity of the zones is indeed a sign of the efficiency of the eurozone? Or rather, the result of fear of the consequences of the disintegration?
From a political point of view, maintaining unity, the zone has shown its strength. From an economic perspective it can be said that much easier Greece would emerge from the crisis if it had its own currency. Without reforms and cuts probably would be, there were some Greek society would have to bear the costs, but this solution would occur faster.
What is the source of today’s problems of Greece: carelessness of the government in Athens the failure of the euro area?
Not all the assumptions we adopted when creating the euro zone, have been implemented. Now we suffer the consequences. Today we know that, in adopting the euro, Greece did not fulfill the convergence criteria. For a long time tolerated as Greek public finance management style has witnessed tensions that have accumulated over the years. In addition, the euro zone is really only common currency – not in her case, we can talk about a uniform economic organism. It is difficult to lead such. Effective monetary policy when it concerns the countries with very different economic situation. The euro zone still faces a choice whether to continue to function in the current structure – which probably will cause problems – is going to go in the direction of closer cooperation. For now slowly coming towards closer integration.
Why is this structural flaw in the euro area? Is it the effect that at the beginning it was primarily a political project rather than economical?
This is still a political project. However, we must remember that without economic foundation zone can not function.
What about the convergence criteria? Do they fit into the reality of today?
The Maastricht criteria are arbitrary. Today we know that much of their fulfillment does not mean anything and does not guarantee that the country will cope in the euro area. In addition, the criteria were established many years ago, and since then the economy has changed a lot. A lot of experimenting in many areas, fall theories that have been the cornerstone of central banking. Even this, according to which the printing of money ends hyperinflation.
Is it that the euro area is becoming increasingly consolidated, not present a risk to push us out to the margins of the Union? Because I think it may mean rise two-speed Europe.
The euro zone is also not uniform. Within it we have a group of countries of different speeds. But staying out of the zone means having its own monetary policy instruments and a greater impact on the economy. The question of whether being outside the euro zone, we will have the same impact on what is happening across the Union, as if we had been a member of the eurozone. According to me before we go to the zone, we should strive to ensure that our state was strong and had a competitive economy.
How much time do we have?
At the moment, nobody in Poland speaks about membership in the zone. Most importantly, in addition to the discussion on the adoption of the euro do everything that can strengthen the competitiveness of the economy. Then you can handle, regardless of whether we will be a member of the eurozone or not.
But what does this really mean? What can we compete – let’s say in the next decade? Because we have our advantage is the low price resulting from low labor costs.
We compete a low price, but at the same time also of good quality. But you have to answer the question of whether we will still be able to maintain low prices and wages. This question is really the level of affluence of Poles.
When can I say: now we are ready to adopt the euro. Will it be eg. A certain level of average economic growth?
It will be a political decision. I hope that with her making will be considered as economic considerations.
The euro zone has already dropped permanently from the list of priorities? Because certainly in the public debate shifted it on the back burner.
The euro zone all the time a lot is being said, recently even in the context of Greece. But it is also shown as a place full of problems. Therefore, most probably a big reluctance of Poles to adopt the euro. That’s not a propitious moment to persuade the public to adopt the euro. For example, today, some a massive promotional campaign would be throwing money down the drain.
I think it’s bad, because earlier vision of our membership in the euro zone justified the reform of public finances and the fight against inflation. Now it looks like we broke the anchor. Would not that be a starting point for political acquiescence, eg. For a radical increase in spending in the budget?
Not only in Poland but also in other countries of society want change. They are already tired of the crisis, no one wants to hear about austerity.
But whether the modification, which proposes a large increase in pro-social spending financed by new taxes – eg. Bank – a good change?
Subject bank tax is not new, came as a reaction to the recent financial crisis and originally was to apply in all EU countries. It did not work because they do not find a compromise on this issue at EU level, and beyond the European banking lobby played a role. The result is that in individual countries this tax is introduced. And today in most EU countries already exists.
Are everywhere he has such a feature that would be in Poland – the fiscal?
It has different functions. Or is the source of income of the state budget, or is to stabilize the financial system. In Germany, Sweden and Belgium bank tax is intended to provide system stability – with such money collected funds are being created that can be used when a crisis in the banking sector. But in Britain, France or Hungary main goal is to provide banking tax budget revenues.
What is taxed? All assets?
Basically, it can be assets or their selected items. But the tax base can also be liabilities of the bank, as a rule excluding deposits and equity. Thus, the bank pays the tax on the value of funds obtained from the financial market. In Europe, the predominant model in which taxes just liabilities. For a unique solution has decided to France, in which the bank pays tax on the funds that must be protected in relation to risk taking. The greater the risk, the higher capital requirements – and the higher the tax.
Representatives of our banks argue that the tax was introduced in countries where there has been excess in the banking sector. And that in Poland we do not have to deal with this situation.
The idea of introducing a bank tax was to raise funds to cover the costs of bank restructuring. Where to rescue banks taxpayers’ money was spent, the new tax was supposed to compensate. Saying, half jokingly, half seriously, the Polish banking sector itself asks for such a tax. We always hear that our banks are so fraught with levies that until barely spin, and year to year result the sector is getting better and better. These profits do not come from nowhere.
And the fear that the introduction of a tax, banks will cease to lend?
Easy, does not fall into extremes. I do not believe that banks no longer lend. Because what would they earned? But really, you can not consider this question, looking at the sector as a whole, you have to lean over the individual banks. Because their situation is varied, both in terms of the structure of assets, as well as its profits. The idea is not to plunge some trouble, which can then require support from institutions such as. Bank Guarantee Fund.
In addition, the introduction of a bank levy should be synchronized with other activities, eg. on foreign currency loan portfolio. It would be good to work out a solution that will take into account, because it is a sector stability.
No comments:
Post a Comment