Europe > Iceland

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 49 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Foreign Exchange x
Clear All Modify Search
International Monetary Fund. European Dept.
This Selected Issues paper presents a pilot study on integrated policy framework (IPF) in Iceland. The IPF helps assess the appropriate policy responses to shocks for economies vulnerable to capital flow volatility, allowing for some market frictions. Iceland is an advanced economy pilot under the IPF with some of the frictions identified under the IPF framework. The Central Bank of Iceland implements an inflation targeting regime with the possibility of currency intervention within its mandate. The foreign exchange (FX) market in Iceland is assessed to be shallower than in other advanced economies, especially around episodes of global economic and financial stress. Foreign currency assets are mainly due to portfolio allocation of the large pension sector. The authorities should explore options to deepen the foreign currency derivatives market in a manner consistent with continued foreign exchange market stability. Iceland has a history of disruptive speculative foreign currency trading, which points to the need for moving cautiously with reforms to deepening the FX derivatives market. Reforms that could be explored include reassessing the limits on commercial banks’ derivative transactions. This would encourage greater participation of foreign investors in the domestic bond market and facilitate hedging of FX risk, thereby reducing the likelihood of disruptive exchange rate movements.
International Monetary Fund. European Dept.
The 2024 Article IV Consultation with Iceland highlights that following an impressive recovery from shocks in recent years, tight monetary and fiscal policies have slowed domestic demand growth, strengthened the current account, and started to lower inflationary pressures. A coordinated tightening of macroeconomic policies has successfully narrowed domestic and external imbalances built up during the post-pandemic period. Appropriately tight macroeconomic policies are expected to dampen economic growth in the near term, while medium-term growth prospects are favorable. Reactivation of the fiscal rules in 2026 presents an opportunity to revisit their design to ensure fiscal policy is both sustainable and contributes to macroeconomic stability. An application of the IMF’s Integrated Policy Framework to Iceland suggests some benefits of foreign exchange interventions during times of stress. Structural policies should focus on gradually reducing state involvement in collective wage bargaining, accelerating the green transition, and further diversifying the economy.
International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This technical note on Iceland focuses on Stress Testing and Systemic Risk Analysis. The Financial Sector Assessment Program took place against the background of a strengthened financial sector in Iceland amid heightened uncertainty in the global economy. The Icelandic financial landscape has undergone significant structural transformation since the global financial crisis with a contracted banking sector. The banking sector is sound, but foreign exchange (FX) funding remains a vulnerability. The scenario-based bank solvency stress test confirmed the sector’s resilience to severe but plausible macro-financial shocks, with gross domestic product influence similar to the Global Financial Crisis. The adverse scenario confirms banks’ resilience to severe yet plausible adverse shocks. Although the adverse scenario produced a significant impact on bank capital ratios, no bank saw its capital ratios falling below the hurdle rates, owing to the high initial capital positions and adequate pre-provision income. The Liquidity Coverage Ratio-based stress test suggests that although the banking system on aggregate is broadly resilient to adverse liquidity conditions, it is not immune to additional liquidity outflows from pension and nonresident FX funding.
International Monetary Fund. European Dept.
This Selected Issues paper on Switzerland focuses on assessing Swiss National Bank (SNB) balance sheet changes in 2022. This paper clarifies the main underlying drivers, discusses potential implications, or lack thereof, on monetary and fiscal policies, and assesses the SNB’s financial performance. Central banks’ financial results are not directly comparable with each other, given their non-profit nature, the differences in their mandates and, importantly, their different accounting policies. In particular, many other central banks would have recorded much larger financial losses in 2022 if mark-to-market accounting were applied. The SNB’s financial loss in 2022 is not expected to have an impact on monetary policy operations. The SNB has appropriately warned about risks to its balance sheet, including during periods of high profitability. In addition, the SNB put in place sound safeguards against such risks, and provided transparent communications on its investment strategy. Nevertheless, large balance sheets are subject to risks, highlighting communication challenges during periods of both large profits and losses. In this context, the SNB should continue to regularly review its investment strategy and maintain adequate safeguards.
Mr. Jiaqian Chen
,
Mr. Raphael A Espinoza
,
Carlos Goncalves
,
Tryggvi Gudmundsson
,
Martina Hengge
,
Zoltan Jakab
, and
Jesper Lindé
The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent need for policy support have called the traditional separation between fiscal and monetary policies into question. Based on simulations of an open economy DSGE model calibrated to emerging and advance economies and case study evidence, the analysis shows when constraints are binding a more integrated approach of looking at policies can lead to a better policy mix and ultimately better macroeconomic outcomes under certain circumstances. Nonetheless, such an approach entails risks, necessitating a clear assessment of each country’s circumstances as well as safeguards to protect the credibility of the existing institutional framework.
Ms. Dora Benedek
,
Mr. Edward R Gemayel
,
Mr. Abdelhak S Senhadji
, and
Alexander F. Tieman
The COVID-19 pandemic hit countries’ development agendas hard. The ensuing recession has pushed millions into extreme poverty and has shrunk government resources available for spending on achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This Staff Discussion Note assesses the current state of play on funding SDGs in five key development areas: education, health, roads, electricity, and water and sanitation, using a newly developed dynamic macroeconomic framework.
International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department

Abstract

The Annual Report on Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions has been published by the IMF since 1950. It draws on information available to the IMF from a number of sources, including that provided in the course of official staff visits to member countries, and has been prepared in close consultation with national authorities.

International Monetary Fund. European Dept.
This 2017 Article IV Consultation highlights Iceland’s continued real GDP growth, driven by tourism. Growth reached 7.2 percent in 2016 and is projected at almost 6 percent in 2017 before tapering to about 2.5 percent over the medium term. Bank credit to the nonfinancial private sector remains muted, growing only 4.3 percent in 2016, but it is expected to pick up. Thus far, growth has been driven not by leverage but by exports, private consumption, and investment. Iceland’s current account surplus is projected to shrink modestly over time, with some export sectors suffering while others thrive.
Mr. Anton Korinek
and
Mr. Damiano Sandri
International capital flows can create significant financial instability in emerging economies because of pecuniary externalities associated with exchange rate movements. Does this make it optimal to impose capital controls or should policymakers rely on domestic macroprudential regulation? This paper presents a tractable model to show that it is desirable to employ both types of instruments: Macroprudential regulation reduces overborrowing, while capital controls increase the aggregate net worth of the economy as a whole by also stimulating savings. The two policy measures should be set higher the greater an economy's debt burden and the higher domestic inequality. In our baseline calibration based on the East Asian crisis countries, we find optimal capital controls and macroprudential regulation in the magnitude of 2 percent. In advanced countries where the risk of sharp exchange rate depreciations is more limited, the role for capital controls subsides. However, macroprudential regulation remains essential to mitigate booms and busts in asset prices.