Washington, DC:
The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved
changes to the Fund’s financing assurances policy. The changes apply in
situations of exceptionally high uncertainty, involving exogenous shocks
that are beyond the control of country authorities and the reach of their
economic policies, and which generate larger than usual tail risks.
In situations of exceptionally high uncertainty, the Fund can provide
emergency financing to meet urgent Balance of Payments (BoP) needs of
members, provided certain safeguards are met. It is more challenging to
provide support through an Upper Credit Tranche (UCT) arrangement, which
requires a Fund-supported program that resolves BoP problems, restores
external viability over the medium term, and provides adequate safeguards.
The changes adopted would address key barriers to designing a Fund UCT
program in situations of exceptionally high uncertainty, in particular by
modifying the Fund’s financing assurances policies in two ways. The first
change allows official bilateral creditors to provide an upfront credible
assurance about delivering debt relief and/or financing with the delivery
of a contingent second-stage element of debt relief and/or financing once
the exceptionally high uncertainty has been resolved. This would help
establish that medium-term viability is being restored. The second change
extends the use of a capacity-to-repay assurances from official bilateral
creditors/donors from emergency financing to a UCT arrangement context.
This would help establish adequate safeguards.
These changes and their application to any specific country case in a
situation of exceptionally high uncertainty would require the Fund to weigh
enterprise risks. Therefore, along with these changes, the Board also
established a procedural safeguard for early consultation with Executive
Directors about engagement under exceptionally high uncertainty to
determine whether these circumstances are present and whether the Fund is
prepared to accept the risks that a UCT arrangement would entail.
Executive Board Assessment:
Executive Directors welcomed the opportunity to consider reforms to the
Fund’s Financing Assurances Policy that would enable the approval of upper
credit tranche Fund arrangements (UCT arrangements) in cases of
exceptionally high uncertainty. Directors stressed that emergency financing
through the Rapid Financing Instrument and/or Rapid Credit Facility would
generally be the appropriate modality for the Fund to support members with
urgent balance of payments (BOP) needs in the context of exceptionally high
uncertainty. However, stronger Fund engagement in a UCT context with a
member facing exceptionally high uncertainty might be deemed appropriate
and consistent with Fund policies in certain cases.
Directors agreed that a case of “exceptionally high uncertainty” is
characterized by all of the factors set out in paragraph 13 of the paper.
Directors stressed that the assessment of whether a case is one of
“exceptionally high uncertainty” must be made in a manner that ensures
uniformity of treatment and evenhandedness across the membership.
Directors recognized that it is extremely difficult to design a UCT-quality
arrangement in cases of exceptionally high uncertainty. They supported the
approach detailed in the paper of setting out two fully elaborated
scenarios in such cases, covering both a baseline and a downside scenario,
noting the need to demonstrate that a Fund-supported program could work in
both scenarios, and that these scenarios would need to be sufficiently
separated to generate confidence that the program could succeed and solve
the member’s BOP problem and restore the member to medium-term external
viability, notwithstanding the exceptionally high uncertainty about the
ongoing shock. Directors stressed that a member would need to have the
capacity and commitment to implement a UCT arrangement in such
circumstances and to provide the necessary data for the Fund to be able to
monitor the program, and that a Staff Monitored Program or Program
Monitoring with Board involvement might first be necessary to establish a
track record on this.
Directors stressed that proceeding with a Fund-supported program in cases
of exceptionally high uncertainty would require careful judgment about
whether such a program would be feasible and credible given its likely risk
characteristics, and be consistent with legal and policy requirements for
Fund lending. These requirements include providing adequate confidence
about the ability of the program to solve the member’s BOP problem and
restore the member to medium-term external viability, while providing
adequate safeguards for the repayment of the Fund’s financing. The Board
would need to make this judgement, based on a recommendation from
Management and staff, at the time of approval of the arrangement as well as
at subsequent reviews. Directors expected that, to the extent the
exceptionally high uncertainty dissipates, the program design would revert
to the standard Fund approach to lending built just around the baseline. In
the event that the circumstances of exceptionally high uncertainty were to
deteriorate and questions arose about whether the level of confidence had
become too low to clearly and credibly establish a program design to
resolve the member’s BOP problem and/or restore debt sustainability, then
Directors would need to determine whether further financing under the
arrangement would become infeasible.
To support the Fund’s ability to approve UCT arrangements in cases of
exceptionally high uncertainty, Directors endorsed the use of a procedural
safeguard set out in paragraph 18 of the paper for an initial engagement
with Executive Directors. Some Directors called for a broader engagement
than set out in the paper, with a few Directors calling for a formal Board
meeting.
Directors also supported two policy modifications, applying only to cases
of exceptionally high uncertainty, to allow UCT arrangements. First,
Directors supported the modified approach in cases of exceptionally high
uncertainty set out in paragraph 25 of the paper for official bilateral
creditors to deliver credible upfront assurances covering their commitments
to help restore debt sustainability where contributions from official
bilateral creditors are needed to restore debt sustainability. Directors
also endorsed the proposal set out in paragraph 26 of the paper, for
situations of exceptionally high uncertainty, to extend the existing use of
a capacity-to-repay assurance from official bilateral creditors/donors to
ensure adequate safeguards for the repayment of the Fund’s financing from
an emergency financing context to a UCT program context.
Directors welcomed the paper’s discussion of risks and noted that the
proposed policy changes involve considerable enterprise risks to the Fund
while also noting the mitigants to address these risks identified in the
paper. However, they generally agreed that when considering these
risks—including reputational and spillover risks—the benefit of having the
option of supporting members facing exceptionally high uncertainty
outweighs the additional risk of the proposed policy change.