The COVID-19 pandemic has created severe disruption in the global financial system, with many emerging market and developing countries (EMDCs) facing liquidity shortages.
In the context of intensified demand for liquidity and heightened global uncertainty, staff has revisited the 2017 proposal for a new facility to provide liquidity support to the Fund’s membership.
This paper proposes the establishment of a new Short-term Liquidity Line (SLL) as a special facility in the General Resources Account (GRA), based on the key features of the 2017 blueprint.
This report responds to the February 2016 request from the G20 for the IMF, OECD, United Nations and World Bank Group to:
“…recommend mechanisms to help ensure effective implementation of technical assistance programs, and recommend how countries can contribute funding for tax projects and direct technical assistance, and report back with recommendations at our July meeting.”
The report has been prepared in the framework of the Platform for Collaboration on Tax (the “PCT”), under the responsibility of the Secretariats and Staff of the four mandated organizations. The report reflects a broad consensus among these staff, but should not be regarded as the officially endorsed views of those organizations or of their member countries.
Many Latin American economies have experienced significant reductions in growth recently, as a result of the end of the commodity super-cycle and the rebalancing of China’s growth, and a number of global banks have been leaving the region. AlthoughLatin American countries were generally less affected by the global financial crisis (GFC) than other regions, the region continues also to suffer from the protracted sluggish growth in advanced economies. In addition, there has since 2008 been a withdrawal of global banks from the region, thus potentially worsening access to credit or reducing competition in the financial sector. More broadly, the GFC demonstrated that extreme economic volatility can originate from outside the region, rather than internally, as was the experience of the 1980s and 1990s...
operational guidance to staff on reserve adequacy discussions in the IMF’s bilateral and multilateral surveillance. It is based on the views presented in the policy paper Assessing Reserve Adequacy—Specific Proposals and the related Board discussion. The note addresses key issues related to Staff’s advice on the assessment of the adequacy of reserves and related items, including answering the following questions:
What is the expected coverage of reserve issues at different stages of the bilateral surveillance process (Policy Note, mission, and Staff Report)?
Which reserve adequacy tools best fit different economies based on their financial maturity, economic flexibility, and market access?
What do possible reserve needs in mature markets relate to, and how can their adequacy be assessed?
How can reserve adequacy discussions for emerging and deepening financial markets be tailored and applied to better evaluate reserve levels in: (i) commodity-intensive economies; (ii) countries with capital flow management measures (CFMs); and (iii) partially and fully dollarized economies?
What reserve adequacy considerations hold for countries with limited access to capital markets? How can metrics for these economies be tailored to evaluate their reserve needs?
How should potential drains on reserves be covered?
What are the various measures of the cost of reserves for countries with and without market access?
The Seventh PMR includes: (i) a discussion of progress made over the last year on the actions corresponding to four Management Implementation Plans (MIPs) that were classified as still “in progress” in the previous PMR; and (ii) an assessment of the progress made in achieving the high-level objectives in three areas directly related to those MIPs. In addition, an update on substantive issues related to five older MIPs agreed since 2007 is provided at the end of the report. Three new evaluations have been completed by the IEO since March 2014. In July and August 2015, Management issued the MIPs in response to these evaluations. Given that only a short time has passed since their completion, progress in addressing the actions contemplated in those MIPs will be discussed in the next PMR.
The Managing Director’s Global Policy Agenda (GPA) presented to the IMFC in April identified a range of actions needed to bolster today’s actual and tomorrow’s potential output, diminish risks, and confront emerging global challenges. These actions included calibrating fiscal adjustment to economic conditions while establishing credible long-term fiscal frameworks and implementing growth-friendly fiscal policies, improving monetary policy effectiveness while containing excessive financial risk-taking, and accelerating structural reforms to raise growth potential and ensure inclusiveness. The GPA also outlined how the Fund would support the membership through assessments and policy advice provided in the context of multilateral and bilateral surveillance, financial support, and capacity building.
This document translates the policy priorities laid out in the GPA and the IMFC communiqué into a work agenda for the Executive Board over the next 12 months. In particular, the Board will be engaged on several issues of multilateral scope, including quota reform and resources, the SDR basket review, challenges facing the international monetary system, and the post-2015 global development agenda. The work program also includes several items from the action plan of the 2014 Triennial Surveillance Review (TSR).
The Managing Director’s Global Policy Agenda (GPA) presented to the IMFC in October identified a range of actions needed to prevent growth from settling into a “new mediocre” with unacceptably low job creation and inclusion. These actions included managing eventual monetary normalization in advanced economies and its effects on other economies, growth-friendly fiscal policies to enhance the quality of public expenditure and reduce distortions in revenue collection, policies to safeguard financial stability while strengthening credit transmission, structural reforms to buttress productivity and strengthen growth, and increasing investment in infrastructure. The GPA also outlined how the Fund would support the membership through assessments and policy advice provided in the context of multilateral and bilateral surveillance, capacity building, and financial support.