## _wp1507

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [_wp1507](https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/_wp1507.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/_wp1507.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/_wp1507.pdf.json)

---

### Introduction and scope
- Examines the role of financial repression (FR) and inflation in reducing high public debt stocks in the decades following World War II, focusing on domestic (currency) debt.
- Financial repression characterized by controlled nominal interest rates, capital controls, directed credit, nonmarketable debt, and regulatory measures that keep real interest rates low and create a “financial repression tax.”
- Develops a detailed database on characteristics and composition of domestic government debt for 12 countries over 1945–1980.

### Countries, sample period, and data construction
- Country sample: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, France, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
- Sample period for detailed domestic debt portfolio data: 1945–1980 (detailed composition by maturity, coupon rate, and outstanding amounts).
- CIR (Contractual Interest Rate) construction:
  - Synthetic debt portfolio year by year; CIR = face-value weighted composite coupon rate.
  - Real CIR = nominal CIR adjusted by consumer price inflation.
  - Uses official consumer price inflation series.

### Channels for postwar debt reduction
- Economic growth.
- Substantive fiscal adjustment/austerity plans.
- Explicit default or restructuring of private and/or public debt.
- A surprise burst in inflation (applicable only to domestic currency debt).
- A steady dosage of financial repression accompanied by inflation (applicable only to domestic currency debt).
- Historical episodes typically combine more than one of these channels.

### Box 1 — Financial Repression: pillars and instruments
- Main features:
  - (i) Explicit or indirect caps or ceilings on interest rates via regulation, ceilings on lending rates, fixed coupon nonmarketable debt, central bank interest rate targets.
  - (ii) Creation of a captive domestic audience via capital account restrictions, high reserve requirements, prudential regulations requiring domestic institutions to hold government debt, transaction taxes on equities, prohibitions on gold transactions.
  - (iii) Other measures: direct ownership/management of banks, restricting entry into the financial industry and directing credit.
- U.S. historical examples:
  - Treasury set returns: "3/8 Percent on 90-day T-Bills, 7/8 Percent on 12-month certificates, up to a maximum of 2.5 Percent on the longest-term taxable bond."
  - 1951 exchange example: marketable bonds coupon 2.5 Percent (16–21 years) exchanged for nonmarketable at 2.75 Percent with 29.5 years to maturity.
  - Regulation Q extensions and effective deregulation dates: Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act passed in 1980 with effective date in 1986.
  - Margin requirement history: January 1946 set to 100 Percent; fluctuated between 50–90 Percent between 1947 and 1974.
  - 1933 prohibition on private holdings of gold; restriction lifted at end of 1974.

### Real interest rates, liquidation, and measurement framework
- Objectives and definitions:
  - Financial repression aims to keep nominal rates below market to reduce government interest expenses; combined with inflation can produce negative real interest rates that liquidate existing debt.
  - Distinguish “unanticipated inflation effect” and “financial repression effect” in government consolidated budget constraint.
  - Liquidation case = real interest rates negative; real value of government debt reduced.
- Measurement approach to interest savings:
  - Compare ex-post real CIR to three feasible constant real market-rate scenarios: 1 percent, 2 percent, and 3 percent to estimate interest savings.
  - Supplementary exercise estimates inflation expectations to approximate unanticipated inflation portion.

### Key empirical findings and magnitudes (preserving numeric values)
- Frequency of negative real rates:
  - For advanced economies, real ex-post interest rates were negative in about half of the years of the financial repression era (1945–1980) compared to less than 10 percent of the time since the early 1980s.
  - Argentina recorded negative real rates in all years but two from 1945 to 1980 (Argentina recorded liquidation years in almost all years (94.4) during 1945–1980; Argentine real ex-post interest rates were negative in every single year during 1945–1980 except for 1954).
- Average annual interest expense savings (FR tax) for 12-country sample, 1945–1980:
  - Range from about 1 to 5 percent of GDP.
- Average annual liquidation effect (debt reduction during years of negative interest rates) for the full sample:
  - Ranges from 0.3 to 4 percent of GDP.
- Country examples and recorded extrema:
  - United States estimated average annual savings range from 1 to 2.1 percent of GDP; over a 36-year period, cumulative savings without compounding can be as high as 76 percent of GDP.
  - Italy maximum saving in 1946 recorded at 31.6 percent of GDP (figure axis truncated at 20 percent).
  - Figure panel example ranges described: Australia 1.2–2.2 percent; Italy 1.9–2.4 percent; UK 2.9–5.3 percent; US 1.0–2.1 percent; Argentina 3.1–3.5 percent; South Africa 0.7–1.6 percent.
- Incidence and magnitudes of liquidation years (Table 2 country values, 1945–1980 or specified periods):
  - Australia (1945-1980): Share of liquidation years 44.4; Average CIR -1.2; Minimum Year -14.1 in 1952.
  - Belgium (1945-1974): Share 28.0; Average CIR 0.5; Minimum -7.4 in 1974.
  - France (1945-1980): Share 65.4; Average CIR -6.6; Minimum -34.5 in 1948.
  - Italy (1945-1980): Share 55.6; Average CIR -4.6; Minimum -56.8 in 1945.
  - Japan (1945-1980): Share 50.0; Average CIR -2.7; Minimum -65.6 in 1946.
  - United Kingdom (1945-1980): Share 66.7; Average CIR -1.7; Minimum -11.2 in 1975.
  - United States (1945-1980): Share 50.0; Average CIR -0.3; Minimum -13.6 in 1946.
  - Argentina (1945-1980): Share 94.4; Average CIR -21.5; Minimum -73.5 in 1976.
  - India (1949-1980): Share 50.0; Average CIR -0.9; Minimum -17.9 in 1974.
  - Ireland (1960-1983): Share 58.3; Average CIR -1.1; Minimum -8.4 in 1981.
  - South Africa (1945-1980): Share 38.9; Average CIR -0.4; Minimum -5.3 in 1976.
  - Sweden (1945-1980): Share 55.6; Average CIR -0.4; Minimum -7.9 in 1952.
- Aggregate and subperiod patterns:
  - Two patterns across subperiods (Full period; 1945–1956; 1957–1968; 1969–1980):
    1. U-shaped: high incidence after WWII, lower 1957–1968, higher in 1970s. Applies to Australia, Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Sweden, the UK, and the US.
    2. Flat persistent: reasonably constant incidence across subperiods. Applies to Argentina, India, and Ireland.
  - Revenues from the FR tax averaged about 8 percent of GDP across the twelve countries during the early stages (1945–1956) of the FR era.
  - In 3/4 of the countries the liquidation tax was between 10 and 40 percent of tax revenues during peak years.
  - For the United States and the United Kingdom the annual liquidation per liquidation year averaged 2 to 3 1/2 percent of GDP.
  - Argentina’s domestic public debt share shrank to less than 1/2 of total public debt by the early 1980s; Argentina defaulted on external obligations in 1982.

### Financial repression versus unanticipated inflation
- Empirical strategy to estimate inflation expectations follows Fama (1975) and Mishkin (1981); details in Appendix Note on inflation expectations.
- Table 4 summary on inflation surprises:
  - Average share of inflation surprises per country: 10 percent using upper bound standard errors; 25 percent using lower bound standard errors.
  - Frequency of inflation surprise years overlapping with liquidation years: 17 to 42 percent depending on standard error estimate.
- Robustness checks:
  - Relaxing surprise definition (two standard deviations to one) and alternative assumption that inflation forecasts follow a random walk yielded similar conclusions.
- Conclusion:
  - Inflation surprises concentrated immediately after WWII and during the 1970s.
  - Debt liquidation had more to do with financial repression than with inflation surprises except during the 1970s.
  - Controlled interest rates can yield negative ex post real rates even with perfect foresight.

### Post-2007/2008 re-emergence: regulation, captive audiences, and examples
- Post-2007 environment shows re-emergence of features of financial repression: controlled interest rates, regulatory changes, nominal interest rate ceilings, capital controls, moral suasion, and measures to induce domestic institutions to hold more government debt.
- Selected measures and examples (2009–2013):
  - Cyprus, March 2013: Severe capital controls limiting credit card transactions, daily withdrawals, money transfers abroad and cashing of checks.
  - EU, July 2013: New bank capital and liquidity rules (phased January 2014 to January 2019); government securities in domestic currency deemed zero-risk.
  - France, December 2010: Liquidation of Fonds de Reserve Pour Les Retraites (FFR): €37bn FFR repurposed to pay €2.1bn annually to CADES from 2011 to 2024.
  - Iceland, October 2010: Strict controls on inflows and outflows.
  - Ireland, 2010–2014: Use of National Pension Reserve Fund to recapitalize banks (up to €17.5bn); levy on pension funds of 0.6 percent (2011-2013), 0.75 percent in 2014, and 0.15 percent in 2015.
  - Japan, March 2010: Reversal of Japan Post privatization and doubling of deposit cap to ¥20mn; life insurance coverage limit raised to ¥25mn; Japan Post historically held roughly 75 percent in JGBs.
  - Portugal, 2010: Transfer of privatized Portugal Telecom pension scheme back to government booked €2.8bn (1.6 Percent of GDP) in extra revenues.
  - Spain, April 2010 and April 2013: Interest rate ceilings on deposits; social security pension reserve fund increased domestic government bond allocation from 90 Percent to 97.5 Percent in 2012 (50 Percent in 2007).
  - UK, October 2009: FSA proposal requiring UK banks to hold around ₤110 billion more high-quality government securities and cut reliance on short-term funding by 20 percent in the first year.
  - US, October 2013: Federal Reserve Board proposal for standardized minimum liquidity requirement requiring minimum amounts of high-quality liquid assets such as government and corporate debt.
- Comparable recent estimates:
  - Dobbs et.al. (2013) estimate cumulative savings to the United States and United Kingdom governments from the low rate environment since 2007 are around 7 percent of GDP (roughly about 1 1/2 percent saving per annum), comparable to FR tax magnitudes for the US over 1945–1980.

### Interpretation, policy implications, and open questions
- Financial repression and inflation together played a quantitatively important role in limiting interest payments and reducing public debts in the postwar decades.
- For the sample as a whole, financial repression was relatively more important than unanticipated inflation in generating the FR tax, although unanticipated inflation became more prominent in the 1970s.
- Financial repression’s effectiveness depends on the size and composition of the domestic debt stock and on the existence of “captive domestic audiences” (limited alternatives, capital controls, moral suasion, regulatory constraints).
- Historical comparison:
  - UK peak debt/GDP 260.6 in 1819 reduced to about 100 percent over 40 years; following WWII UK public debt ratio reduced by a comparable amount in 20 years.
- Quantitative policy takeaway:
  - Fiscal savings of 1–2 percent a year via lower interest rates (or modest debt reduction when rates are negative) can be significant alternatives to restructuring or perpetual austerity.
- Contemporary relevance and cautions:
  - Similar policies have re-emerged as prudential regulation rather than labeled financial repression.
  - Markets for government bonds increasingly populated by nonmarket players (central banks, large official sector holdings), decoupling interest rates from risk and reducing information content of bond prices.
  - Financial repression is a gradual approach to debt reduction; it may be necessary but not sufficient — best viewed as complement to restructuring, not a substitute.
- Open research questions:
  - Growth and redistributive implications of milder forms of financial repression remain not well understood.
  - Relationship between financial liberalization, credit and capital flow cycles, and financial crises continues to be important.

*Source: _wp1507 - References*

### References .............................................................................................................

### _wp1507 - References

### Introduction and scope
- The paper examines the role of financial repression (FR) and inflation in reducing high public debt stocks in the decades following World War II, focusing on domestic (currency) debt.
- Financial repression is characterized by controlled nominal interest rates, capital controls, directed credit, nonmarketable debt instruments, and other regulatory measures that keep real interest rates low and create a “financial repression tax.”
- The analysis develops a detailed database on the characteristics and composition of domestic government debt for 12 countries over 1945–1980.

### Countries and sample period
- Country sample: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, France, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
- Sample period for the detailed domestic debt portfolio data: 1945–1980.

### Channels for debt reduction (as described)
- Economic growth.
- Substantive fiscal adjustment/austerity plans.
- Explicit default or restructuring of private and/or public debt.
- A surprise burst in inflation (applicable only to domestic currency debt).
- A steady dosage of financial repression accompanied by inflation (applicable only to domestic currency debt).
- Historical episodes typically combine more than one of these channels.

### Key empirical findings (preserved numeric values)
- For the advanced economies, real ex-post interest rates were negative in about half of the years of the financial repression era (1945–1980) compared to less than 10 percent of the time since the early 1980s.
- Argentina recorded negative real rates in all years but two from 1945 to 1980.
- Average annual interest expense savings for the 12-country sample range from about 1 to 5 percent of GDP for the full 1945–1980 period.
- The average annual liquidation effect (debt reduction during years of negative interest rates) ranges from 0.3 to 4 percent of GDP for the full sample.
- The most significant savings materialize in the decade after WWII and in the 1970s when inflation accelerated.

### Data and measurement approach
- New database documents actual shares of debts across maturities and the shares of marketable versus nonmarketable debt (including securitized debt and direct bank loans).
- The framework distinguishes the liquidation effect (debt reduction when controlled nominal rates and inflation produce negative real interest rates) from interest savings when real rates are positive but kept lower than otherwise.
- A supplementary exercise estimates inflation expectations to approximate the portion of the ex-post FR tax attributable to unanticipated inflation versus regulated real-rate suppression.

### Interpretation and decomposition
- Financial repression and inflation together played a quantitatively important role in limiting interest payments and reducing public debts in the postwar decades.
- For the sample as a whole, the authors suggest financial repression was relatively more important than unanticipated inflation in generating the FR tax, although unanticipated inflation became more prominent in the 1970s.
- Financial repression’s effectiveness depends on the size and composition of the domestic debt stock and on the existence of “captive domestic audiences” (limited alternatives, capital controls, moral suasion, and regulatory constraints).

### Historical and policy implications
- The post-2007 environment has seen a re-emergence of some features of financial repression—controlled interest rates, regulatory changes, implicit or explicit nominal interest rate ceilings, capital controls, and moral suasion—to induce domestic institutions to hold more government debt.
- The paper emphasizes what FR policies achieve for government debt servicing costs and debt reduction, rather than implications for private investors’ portfolios.
- The authors highlight the need for further research on the political-economy drivers of FR and on the decomposition of debt reduction across channels over different historical episodes.

*Source: _wp1507 - References*

### Box 1: Financial Repression Defined

### Box 1: Financial Repression Defined

### The pillars of “Financial repression”
- Origin: term introduced by Edward Shaw (1973) and Ronald McKinnon (1973).
- Main features:
  - (i) Explicit or indirect caps or ceilings on interest rates, particularly on government debt, implemented via:
    - (a) explicit government regulation (example: Regulation Q in the United States prohibited banks from paying interest on demand deposits and capped interest rates on saving deposits);
    - (b) ceilings on banks’ lending rates, a direct subsidy to the government when it borrowed from banks via loans;
    - (c) interest rate caps in the context of fixed coupon rate nonmarketable debt; and
    - (d) maintained through central bank interest rate targets (often at the directive of the Treasury or Ministry of Finance when central bank independence was limited or nonexistent).
  - (ii) Creation and maintenance of a captive domestic audience that facilitated directed credit to the government via:
    - (a) capital account restrictions and exchange controls producing a “forced home bias” under Bretton Woods;
    - (b) high reserve requirements (usually non-remunerated) as a tax levy on banks;
    - (c) “prudential” regulatory measures requiring domestic institutions to hold government debt in portfolios (pension funds historically a primary target);
    - (d) transaction taxes on equities directing investors toward government debt; and
    - (e) prohibitions on gold transactions.
  - (iii) Other measures: (a) direct ownership or extensive management of banks (examples: China, India, Japan) and (b) restricting entry into the financial industry and directing credit to certain industries.

### United States, selected historical regulations and examples
- Government Securities Price Support (WWII era):
  - Treasury set returns: 3/8 Percent on 90-day T-Bills, 7/8 Percent on 12-month certificates, up to a maximum of 2.5 Percent on the longest-term taxable bond.
  - Federal Reserve announced it would buy and sell securities to maintain bond prices at par; policy persisted after the war until the 1951 “accord.”
- Exchange of marketable for nonmarketable debt:
  - Example 1951: marketable bonds with coupon of 2.5 Percent and 16–21 years to maturity exchanged for nonmarketable bonds at 2.75 Percent with 29.5 years to maturity.
  - Note: non-marketable securities have no secondary market; coupon rate is the nominal return.
- Interest rate ceilings and Regulation Q:
  - After the Great Depression, interest payments on time and saving deposits were prohibited.
  - In 1966, Regulation Q was extended to non-thrift institutions.
  - Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act passed in 1980 with effective date in 1986.
- Margin requirements (Regulation T):
  - January 1946 margin requirement set to 100 Percent.
  - Fluctuated between 50–90 Percent between 1947 and 1974.
- Gold restrictions:
  - 1933 prohibition on private holdings of gold coins, bullion, and certificates; restriction lifted at the end of 1974.
- Moral suasion:
  - Central Bank persuasion to commercial banks; example: September 1966 Federal Reserve Board letter urging restraint in granting business loans and implying consequences for non-cooperation.

### Role in debt reduction after major wars and crises
- Historical mechanisms for resolving public debt surges include default, restructuring, conversion, financial repression, inflation, and hyperinflation.
- World War II debt overhang was importantly liquidated via a combination of financial repression and inflation; debts were predominantly domestic and denominated in domestic currencies.
- Post-WWII policy discourse acknowledged inflation as a deliberate instrument of debt reduction (example cited: Keynes’ How to Pay for the War).
- Financial globalization was scaled back between the 1930s and 1940s; capital controls and pervasive domestic funding meant external debt nearly disappeared until the 1970s and most new borrowing was domestic.

### Real interest rates: trends and political-economy
- Objective of financial repression: keep nominal interest rates lower than market levels to reduce government interest expenses; when combined with inflation, produce negative real interest rates that liquidate existing debt (transfer from creditors to borrowers).
- Political-economy: the “financial repression tax” is opaque to voters, potentially more politically palatable than visible tax hikes or expenditure cuts.
- General trends:
  - 1945–1980: real interest rates in both advanced and emerging economies were on average negative; real ex-post deposit rates were negative in about 60 percent of observations and below one percent about 83 percent of the time.
  - Post-2007 crisis: real ex-post interest rates in advanced economies turned increasingly negative; real rates negative for more than half of observations and below one percent for about 87 percent of observations.
- Contributing factor post-crisis: aggressively expansive monetary policy and official central bank interventions — a hallmark of non-market forces in interest rate determination, a key feature of financial repression.

### The Contractual Interest Rate (CIR) and measurement
- CIR definition and construction:
  - Construct a “synthetic debt portfolio” year by year: the aggregate nominal interest rate is the coupon rate on each debt instrument weighted by that instrument’s share in the total stock of debt (weights = amount outstanding of each security relative to total outstanding).
  - The face-value weighted composite coupon rate is the CIR (the coupon rate at which the bond was issued); the real CIR is the nominal CIR adjusted by consumer price inflation.
  - CIR represents the annual interest cost of each security from the government’s perspective; it is consistent with government accounting.
- Data and sample for CIR calculations:
  - Debt profiles constructed for 12 countries: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, France, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
  - Period: largely 1942–2008 where possible; detailed composition by maturity, coupon rate, and outstanding amounts by instrument required.
  - Example composition changes: U.S. Treasury Bills were 6.5 percent of total domestic debt in 1946 and 25.1 percent in 1976; U.S. non-marketable securities: 22.7 percent in 1946, 16.7 percent in 1966, and 35.4 percent in 1976. India: marketable rupee loans share went from 59 percent in 1950 to 39 percent in 1970.
  - Notes: official consumer price inflation series used; such series may understate true inflation at times (price controls during WWII and after).

### Conceptual framework: decomposition of debt relief effects
- Government consolidated budget constraint links fiscal and monetary policy and identifies two relevant sources of savings in interest payments:
  - Unanticipated inflation effect: (realized inflation minus expected inflation) times real stock of previous-period debt; when positive, government saves on interest payments.
  - Financial repression effect: difference between free-market and actual nominal interest rates times the real stock of previous-period debt; when actual nominal rates are below free-market rates, government saves on interest payments.
- Distinction:
  - When observed interest rates are below market rates, this is a “saving” to the government.
  - A special case is when real interest rates are negative — the “liquidation case” — where real value of government debt is reduced (a tax on bondholders).
- Interaction: financial repression lowers ex-ante real interest rates relative to a no-frictions benchmark, which can reduce the gains from unanticipated inflation for a given inflation surprise.
- Measurement challenges:
  - Inflation expectations and free-market interest rates are generally not directly observable, especially in the highly regulated, closed capital account era 1945–1980.
  - Empirical approach used: compare ex-post real contractual interest rate to three feasible constant real market-rate scenarios — 1 percent, 2 percent, and 3 percent — to estimate interest savings; express estimated savings as percent of nominal GDP and total receipts.

### Empirical estimates: interest savings and liquidation
- Savings on interest payments (financial repression tax):
  - For the 12-country sample, average annual interest expense savings (FR tax) for 1945–1980 range from about 1 to 5 percent of GDP.
  - United States example: estimated average annual savings range from 1 to 2.1 percent of GDP; over a 36-year period, cumulative savings without compounding can be as high as 76 percent of GDP.
  - Several advanced economies (Australia, France, Italy, the UK) show higher savings than the US.
  - Simulation scenarios used: ex-post real market rates assumed at 1 Percent (lower bound) and 3 Percent (upper bound).
- Incidence and magnitude of the “liquidation tax”:
  - Liquidation years: years when real interest payments are negative; in those years the liquidation effect (negative real interest rate times stock of domestic government debt) is a revenue to government and represents a lower bound for the financial repression tax.
  - Country extreme example: Argentina recorded liquidation years in almost all years (94 percent) during 1945–1980; Argentine real ex-post interest rates were negative in every single year during 1945–1980 except for 1954.
- Additional empirical notes:
  - Figure 7 (described) shows country-specific annual average ranges (1.2–2.2% for Australia panel example; 1.9–2.4% Italy; 2.9–5.3% UK; 1.0–2.1% US; Argentina annual average range 3.1–3.5%; South Africa 0.7–1.6%).
  - Maximum saving for Italy in 1946 recorded at 31.6 percent of GDP (axis in figure truncated at 20 percent).

*Source: Box 1, “Financial Repression Defined,” working paper content provided in the source PDF.*

### 1969. For India, the comparable share was 50 percent.  Before concluding that debt

### _wp1507 - 1969. For India, the comparable share was 50 percent.  Before concluding that debt

### Incidence and magnitude of liquidation via negative real interest rates (1945–1980)
- Share of liquidation years is defined as the number of years during which the real interest rate on the portfolio is negative divided by the total number of years as noted in column (2).
- Table 2 key country values (1945–1980 or specified periods):
  - Australia (1945-1980): Share of liquidation years 44.4; Average real contractual interest rate (CIR) -1.2; Minimum Year -14.1 in 1952.
  - Belgium (1945-1974): Share 28.0; Average CIR 0.5; Minimum -7.4 in 1974. (No data on composition for 1964-1968.)
  - France (1945-1980): Share 65.4; Average CIR -6.6; Minimum -34.5 in 1948. (No data on composition for 1953-1958, 1960-1963.)
  - Italy (1945-1980): Share 55.6; Average CIR -4.6; Minimum -56.8 in 1945. (Calculations based on 1946-1980 to exclude war years.)
  - Japan (1945-1980): Share 50.0; Average CIR -2.7; Minimum -65.6 in 1946.
  - United Kingdom (1945-1980): Share 66.7; Average CIR -1.7; Minimum -11.2 in 1975.
  - United States (1945-1980): Share 50.0; Average CIR -0.3; Minimum -13.6 in 1946.
  - Argentina (1945-1980): Share 94.4; Average CIR -21.5; Minimum -73.5 in 1976.
  - India (1949-1980): Share 50.0; Average CIR -0.9; Minimum -17.9 in 1974.
  - Ireland (1960-1983): Share 58.3; Average CIR -1.1; Minimum -8.4 in 1981.
  - South Africa (1945-1980): Share 38.9; Average CIR -0.4; Minimum -5.3 in 1976.
  - Sweden (1945-1980): Share 55.6; Average CIR -0.4; Minimum -7.9 in 1952.
- Observations on magnitudes:
  - Real interest rates were most negative for Argentina by a wide margin; Argentine domestic public debt share (domestic plus external) was substantial during 1900–1950s.
  - Italian real interest rates reached -40 percent in 1947.
  - United States real rates reached -16 percent in 1946.
  - Belgium, Ireland, and the UK recorded most negative readings in the mid-1970s.
  - For all twelve countries the average effective interest rate on government debt was negative over the 1945–1980 sample.

### Incidence by subperiods and patterns (Table 3)
- Table 3 shows share of liquidation years across subperiods (Full period; 1945–1956; 1957–1968; 1969–1980).
- Two identifiable patterns:
  1. U-shaped pattern: high incidence immediately after WWII, lower incidence 1957–1968, higher incidence again in the 1970s. Applies to: Australia, Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Sweden, the UK, and the US. In these, incidence during 1969–1980 is higher than during 1945–1956.
  2. Flat persistent pattern: reasonably constant incidence across subperiods. Applies to: Argentina, India, and Ireland.
- Incidence diminished after 1980 for countries with available data, coinciding with lifting of controls and financial liberalization.

### Estimates of the liquidation effect (financial repression tax)
- Method: multiply the negative real interest rate ("tax rate") by the stock of debt ("tax base").
- Two country groups illustrated in Figure 8:
  - Countries with WWII debt surge: Australia, Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, UK, US — show a slight U-shaped profile (negative real rates coinciding with peak debt after WWII, re-emergence post-1974–1975).
  - Countries without WWII debt surge: Argentina, India, Ireland, Sweden, South Africa — show a flatter profile with persistent reliance on financial repression.
- Findings on magnitudes:
  - In 3/4 of the countries the liquidation tax was between 10 and 40 percent of tax revenues during peak years.
  - For the United States and the United Kingdom the annual liquidation per liquidation year averaged 2 to 3 1/2 percent of GDP.
  - Average annual magnitude: Argentina’s average annual magnitude is about the same as the UK, despite average real interest rates of about -2 percent for the UK and -21 percent for Argentina during 1945–1980.
  - Argentina’s domestic public debt share shrank to less than 1/2 of total public debt by the early 1980s; Argentina defaulted on external obligations in 1982.
  - Countries without WWII debt build-up (Ireland, India, South Africa) recorded more modest annual savings, but still substantive.
- Aggregate summary:
  - Revenues from the FR tax averaged about 8 percent of GDP across the twelve countries during the early stages (1945–1956) of the FR era.
  - The larger tax base (size of domestic debt) right after the war explains the relatively high early revenue.

### Financial repression versus unanticipated inflation (inflation surprises)
- Empirical strategy: estimate inflation expectations following Fama (1975) and Mishkin (1981); results and methodology detailed in Appendix Note on inflation expectations.
- Table 4 (summary):
  - Average share of inflation surprises per country:
    - 10 percent using upper bound standard errors.
    - 25 percent using lower bound standard errors.
  - Frequency of inflation surprise years overlapping with liquidation years: 17 to 42 percent depending on standard error estimate.
- Robustness checks:
  - Relaxing definition of inflation surprise (two standard deviations to one) and alternative assumption that inflation forecasts follow a random walk yielded similar conclusions.
- Conclusion:
  - Inflation surprises are concentrated immediately after WWII and during the 1970s (oil shocks and commodity price surge).
  - Debt liquidation had more to do with financial repression than with inflation surprises except during the 1970s.
  - Controlled interest rates can yield negative ex post real rates even with perfect foresight.

### Regulation, captive audiences, and re-emergence of financial repression (post-2008)
- Regulatory and macroprudential measures increase home bias and create captive demand for domestic government debt.
- Examples and measures (selected, 2009–2013):
  - Cyprus, March 2013: Severe capital controls limiting credit card transactions, daily withdrawals, money transfers abroad and cashing of checks.
  - EU, July 2013: New bank capital and liquidity rules (phased January 2014 to January 2019); government securities in domestic currency deemed zero-risk, supporting demand for sovereign bonds.
  - France, December 2010: Liquidation of Fonds de Reserve Pour Les Retraites (FFR): €37bn FFR repurposed to pay €2.1bn annually to CADES from 2011 to 2024, shifting asset allocation toward short-term French government bonds.
  - Iceland, October 2010: Strict controls on inflows and outflows to stem capital flight.
  - Ireland, 2010–2014: Use of National Pension Reserve Fund to recapitalize banks (up to €17.5bn); levy on pension funds of 0.6 percent (2011-2013), 0.75 percent in 2014, and 0.15 percent in 2015.
  - Japan, March 2010: Reversal of Japan Post privatization and doubling of deposit cap to ¥20mn; life insurance coverage limit raised to ¥25mn; Japan Post historically held roughly 75 percent in JGBs.
  - Portugal, 2010: Transfer of privatized Portugal Telecom pension scheme back to government booked €2.8bn (1.6 Percent of GDP) in extra revenues.
  - Spain, April 2010 and April 2013: Interest rate ceilings on deposits; social security pension reserve fund increased domestic government bond allocation from 90 Percent to 97.5 Percent in 2012 (50 Percent in 2007).
  - UK, October 2009: FSA proposal requiring UK banks to hold around ₤110 billion more high-quality government securities and cut reliance on short-term funding by 20 percent in the first year.
  - US, October 2013: Federal Reserve Board proposal for standardized minimum liquidity requirement requiring minimum amounts of high-quality liquid assets such as government and corporate debt.
- Comparable recent estimates:
  - Dobbs et.al. (2013) estimate cumulative savings to the United States and United Kingdom governments from the low rate environment since 2007 are around 7 percent of GDP (roughly about 1 1/2 percent saving per annum), comparable to FR tax magnitudes for the US over 1945–1980.

### Concluding remarks and policy implications
- Financial repression (1945–1980) imposed a substantial tax on financial savings and was a major factor in relatively rapid public debt reduction in several advanced economies.
- Historical comparison: UK peak debt/GDP 260.6 in 1819 reduced to about 100 percent over 40 years; following WWII UK public debt ratio reduced by a comparable amount in 20 years.
- Financial repression is facilitated by initial conditions (postwar legacy of domestic and financial restrictions) and can be packaged as prudential regulation when regulations create captive audiences for government debt.
- Contemporary relevance:
  - Similar policies have re-emerged as prudential regulation rather than labeled financial repression.
  - Markets for government bonds increasingly populated by nonmarket players (central banks, large official sector holdings), decoupling interest rates from risk and reducing information content of bond prices.
  - Financial repression is a gradual approach to debt reduction; it may be necessary but not sufficient — best viewed as complement to restructuring, not a substitute.
- Quantitative policy takeaway:
  - Fiscal savings of 1–2 percent a year via lower interest rates (or modest debt reduction when rates are negative) can be significant alternatives to restructuring or perpetual austerity.
- Open research questions:
  - Growth and redistributive implications of milder forms of financial repression remain not well understood; further research advised.
  - Relationship between financial liberalization, credit and capital flow cycles, and financial crises continues to be important (financial liberalization usually preceded systemic banking crises in historical evidence).

*Source: Excerpt from the provided IMF working paper content (1945–1980 financial repression analysis).*

### References

### References

### Bibliographic entries (alphabetical)

- Agénor, Pierre-Richard, and Peter J. Montiel, 2008. Development Macroeconomics, Third edition, Princeton: Princeton University Press.  
- Aizenman, Joshua, and Pablo Guidotti. 1994. Capital Controls, Collection Costs, and Domestic Public Debt, Journal of International Money and Finance, February, 41–54.  
- Aizenman, Joshua and Nancy Marion. 2010. Using Inflation to Erode the U.S. Public Debt, SCIIE Department Working Paper, December.  
- Alesina, Alberto, Vittorio Grilli and Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti. 1993. The Political Economy of Capital Controls, in L. Leiderman and A. Razin, eds., Capital Mobility: New Perspectives, Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.  
- Aloy, Marcel, Gilles Dufrénota, and Anne Péguin-Feissolle. 2013. Is Financial Repression a Solution to Reduce Fiscal Vulnerability? The Example of France Since the end of World War II. Forthcoming in Applied Economics.  
- Bai, Chong-En, David D. Li, Yingyi Qian, and Yijang Wang. 2001. Financial Repression and Optimal Taxation. Economic Letters, Vol. 70, No. 2, February, 245–51.  
- Barro, Robert. 1978. Unanticipated Money, Output, and the Price Level in the United States. The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 86, No. 4, 549–580.  
- Baldursson, Friðrik Már and Richard Portes. 2013. Capital controls and the resolution of failed cross-border banks: The case of Iceland, Vox EU, November 12.  
- Battilossi, S., 2003. Capital mobility and financial repression in Italy, 1960-1990: a public finance perspective. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Working Paper, No. 03–06.  
- Battilossi, Stefano. 2005. The Second Reversal: The Ebb and Flow of Financial Development in Western Europe, 1950–1991, Department of Economic History and Institutions, Universidad Carlos III Madrid.  
- Beim, David O., and Charles W. Calomiris. 2001. Emerging Financial Markets. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.  
- Brock, Philip.1989. Reserve Requirements and the Inflation Tax, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Vol 21, No. 1, February, 106–121.  
- Burmeister, Kent D. Wall and James D. Hamilton. 1986. Estimation of Unobserved Expected Monthly Inflation Using Kalman Filtering. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics Vol. 4, No. 2, 147–160.  
- Campbell, John Y. and Kenneth A. Froot, 1994. “International Experiences with Securities Transactions Taxes,” in The Internationalization of Equity Markets, Jeffrey Frankel ed., (Chicago: University of Chicago Press for NBER), 277–308.  
- Chandler, Lester. 1949. Federal Reserve Policy and the Federal Debt, American Economic Review, Vol. 39, No. 2, 405–429.  
- Cukierman, Alex. 1992. Central Bank Strategy, Credibility, and Independence: Theory and Evidence, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.  
- Darrat, Ali F. 1985. Unanticipated Inflation and Real Output: The Canadian Evidence. The Canadian Journal of Economics, Vol. 18. No.1, 146–155.  
- Deacon, Mark and Andrew Derry. 1994. Estimating the Term Structure of Interest Rates. Bank of England Working Paper No. 24.  
- DeVries, Margaret, 1969. The International Monetary Fund, 1945–1965: Twenty Years of International Monetary Cooperation. Volume II, Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.  
- Dobbs, Richard, Susan Lund, Tim Koller, Ari Shwayder. 2013. QE and ultra-low interest rates: Distributional effects and risks, McKinsey Global Institute Discussion Paper, November.  
- Easterly, William R. 1989. Fiscal Adjustment and Deficit Financing During the Debt Crisis. In I. Husain and I. Diwan, eds., Dealing with the Debt Crisis. Washington DC: The World Bank: 91–113.  
- Eichengreen, Barry, Ricardo Hausmann and Ugo Panizza, 2003. Currency Mismatches, Debt Intolerance and Original Sin: Why They Are Not the Same and Why it Matters, NBER Working Papers 10036, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.  
- Elmendorf, Douglas and Gregory Mankiw, “Government Debt,” Handbook of Macroeconomics, Vol. 1, Taylor, J.B. and M. Woodford, eds., Elsevier Science, B.V., 1999, 1615–1699.  
- Fama, Eugene. 1975. Short-Term Interest Rates as Predictors of Inflation. American Economic Review Vol. 65, 269–282.  
- Fisher, Irving. 1933. The Debt-Deflation Theory of Great Depressions. Econometrica, Vol. 1, no. 4 (October): 337–57.  
- Friedman, Milton and Anna Schwartz. 1982. Monetary Trends in the United States and United Kingdom: Their Relation to Income, Prices, and Interest Rates, 1867–1975. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.  
- Giannitssarou, Chryssi and Andrew Scott. 2006. “Inflation Implications of Rising Government Debt.” Centre for Economic Policy Research. Discussion Paper No. 5961.  
- Giovannini, Alberto and Martha de Melo. 1993. "Government Revenue from Financial Repression." American Economic Review, vol. 83, No. 4: 953–963.  
- Green, Christopher, Eric Pentecost, and Tom Weyman-Jones. (2011). Financial Crisis and the Regulation of Finance. Edward Elgar Publisher.  
- Homer, Sydney, and Richard Sylla. 2005. A History of Interest Rates, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  
- Horsefield, J. Keith, 1969. The International Monetary Fund, 1945–1965: Twenty Years of International Monetary Cooperation. Volume I, Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.  
- Horvitz, Paul M. and Richard A. Ward. 1987. Monetary Policy and the Financial SystemEnglewoods Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc. (6th edition)  
- Kaminsky, Graciela and Carmen M. Reinhart. 1999. The Twin Crises: The Causes of Banking and Balance-of-Payments Problems. American Economic Review, vol. 89(3), p. 473–500.  
- Keynes, John Maynard, 1940. How to Pay for the War, (London: Macmillan and Co.)  
- Lane, Philip R. 2012. The European Sovereign Debt Crisis, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 26, No. 3, Summer 2012, 46–68.  
- Lane, Philip R., and Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti. 2010. "The External Wealth of Nations Mark II: Revised Extended Estimates of Foreign Assets and Liabilities, 1970–2004" Journal of International Economics 73, 223–250.  
- Lardy, Nicolas. 2008. “Financial Repression in China” Peterson Institute Policy Brief Number PB08-08, Washington DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.  
- Laubach, Thomas and John C. Williams. 2003. “Measuring the Real Interest Rate” Review of Economics and Statistics 85(4), 2003, 1063–1070.  
- Lorenzen, H., 2012. Heading for the Great Repression? Citigroup Global Markets, 20 March.  
- Magud, Nicolas, Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. 2011. “Capital Controls: Myth and Reality: A Portfolio Balance Approach.” NBER Working Paper 16805.  
- McConnell, Margaret. and Gabriel Perez-Quiros. 2000, “Output Fluctuations in the United States: What has Changed Since the Early 1980’s?” American Economic Review, Vol. 90, 5:1464-1476.  
- McKinnon, Ronald I. 1973. Money and Capital in Economic Development. Washington DC: Brookings Institute.  
- McKinnon, Ronald I. and Pill, H. 1997. Credible Economic Liberalizations and Overborrowing. American Economic Review, 87(2), pp. 189–193.  
- Meltzer, Allan. 2003. A History of the Federal Reserve, Volume 1: 1913-1951. Chicago: Chicago University Press.  
- Mishkin, Frederic S. 1981. The Real Interest Rate: an Empirical Investigation. NBER Working Paper No. 622.  
- Obstfeld, Maurice and Alan Taylor, 1998. “The Great Depression as a Watershed: International Capital Mobility over the Long Run” in Michael D. Bordo & Claudia Goldin & Eugene N. White, 1998. The Defining Moment: The Great Depression and the American Economy in the Twentieth Century, NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, September.  
- Obstfeld, Maurice, and Alan M. Taylor. 2004. Global Capital Markets: Integration, Crisis, and Growth. Japan-U.S. Center Sanwa Monographs on International Financial Markets (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).  
- Obstfeld, Maurice and Kenneth Rogoff. 2001. The Six Major Puzzles in International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause? NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2000, Volume 15, MIT Press.  
- Persson, Torsten, and Lars Svensson. 1996. Debt, Cash Flow and Inflation Incentives: A Swedish Example. NBER Working Paper No. 5772.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. 2012. “The Return of Financial Repression,” Banque de France Financial Stability Review, No. 16, April, 37–48.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. and Vincent R. Reinhart, 1999. On the Use of Reserve Requirements in Dealing with the Capital-Flow Problem, International Journal of Finance and Economics, Vol. 4, No.1, January, 27–54.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. Vincent R. Reinhart, and Kenneth Rogoff. 2012. Public Debt Overhangs: Advanced-Economy Episodes since 1800,” Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol. 26, No. 3, Summer 2012, 69–86.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. and Kenneth Rogoff. 2002. The Modern History of Exchange Rate Arrangements: A Reinterpretation, Quarterly Journal of Economics, CXIX No. 1, February 2004, 1–48.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. and Kenneth Rogoff. 2009. This Time is Different: Eight Hundred Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton: Princeton University Press.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. and Kenneth Rogoff. 2011. The Forgotten History of Domestic Debt. Economic Journal, Vol. 121, Issue 552, May 2011, 319–350.  
- Reinhart, Carmen M. and M. Belen Sbrancia “The Liquidation of Government Debt,” NBER Working Paper 16893, March 2011.  
- Schularick, Moritz and Alan Taylor. 2012. Credit Booms Gone Bust: Monetary Policy, Leverage Cycles and Financial Crises, 1870–2008, American Economic Review, Vol. 102 (April): 1029–6.  
- Shaw, Edward S. 1973. Financial Deepening in Economic Development. New York: Oxford University Press.  
- Studenski, Paul and Herman E. Krooss. 1963. Financial History of the United States. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.  
- Sturzenegger, Federico and Jeromin Zettelmeyer. 2006. Debt Defaults and Lessons from a Decade of Crises. Cambridge: MIT Press.  
- Taggart, Robert A. 1981. Deregulation of Deposit Rate Ceilings in the United States: Prospects and Consequences. In Competition and Regulation in Financial Markets, ed. Albert Verheirstraeten. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press, Inc.  
- van Riet, Ad. 2013. “Financial Repression to Ease Fiscal Stress: Turning Back the Clock in Eurozone?” European Central Bank, mimeograph, November.  
- World Economic Outlook. 2012. “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: 100 Years of Dealing with Public Debt Overhangs”. International Monetary Fund, October 2012.  
- Wiles, P. J. D.1952. Pre-War and War-Time Controls in the British Economy 1945–1950, London: Oxford University Press.

*Source: _wp1507 - References*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/_wp1507.pdf_