Europe > Iceland

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 17 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Financial risk management x
Clear All Modify Search
This Global Financial Stability Note examines the growth of the pension fund sector and the potential financial stability implications. Historically, pension funds have been seen as a contributor to financial stability because of their long-term and well-diversified liabilities. However, the sector has undergone significant structural shifts accelerated by a prolonged period of low interest rates, increasing its exposure to traditional risks while introducing emerging risks; this is reflected in growing intra-financial sector interconnectedness and exposure to long-term sovereign bonds. The recent transition to higher interest rates should be positive for the pension sector, albeit its pace and abruptness has been associated with liquidity stress and contagion risks in some countries.
International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This technical note on Iceland presents analyses management and supervision of climate-related financial risks in the banking sector. The Icelandic authorities are committed to addressing climate change issues and reaching ambitious objectives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Domestic coordination with the Central Bank of Iceland (CBI) should be enhanced to support adequate consideration of climate-related financial risks within the financial sector. CBI should as soon as possible address the data quality and availability issues on climate-related financial risks. CBI has started to incorporate climate-related financial risks within the macroprudential surveillance and supervisory processes. The intensity and thoroughness of systematic supervision of climate-related financial risks within the banking sector should be gradually increased. In addition, banks should fully incorporate climate-related financial risks into their risk management frameworks in addition to their commendable efforts toward transparency. Finally, CBI should determine whether banks’ capital and liquidity buffers are adequate to cover climate-related financial risks.
International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This paper for Iceland presents Detailed Assessment on Basel Core Principles (BCP) for Effective Banking Supervision. The Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs/parliamentary budgetary processes that is a legacy funding structure from the prior Fjármálaeftirlit hamper Central Bank of Iceland’s (CBI) ability to access funding for banking regulation and supervision. Key legislative amendments have been enacted in the banking laws to ensure Iceland’s compliance with the European Union’s regulatory framework for banking supervision. CBI implements a conservative approach to both capital and liquidity requirements, resulting in highly capitalized and adequate liquidity levels for banks. CBI/ Financial Supervisory Authority’s current complement of banking supervisors, including risk specialists is strong, however a few risk areas need augmentation. CBI’s banking supervisory and regulatory framework pertaining to Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) requirements is considered adequate. CBI has made great efforts to build up the area of expertise in AML/CFT to implement a risk based supervisory assessment model for banks and has carried out deep on-site inspections to assure itself of the effectiveness of bank’s risk management practices regarding compliance with applicable AML/CFT legislative and supervisory requirements.
International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This technical note focuses on cyber and operational resilience, supervision and oversight in Iceland. The Icelandic financial sector has not experienced seriously disruptive cyber-attacks or operational issues in recent years, but threats are growing. Iceland’s dependence on international connectivity for both debit and credit card systems introduces a significant vulnerability into the payment system. There is no dedicated cyber security strategy for the finance sector. Operational risk experts in the Central Bank of Iceland (CBI) are experienced and well regarded by financial institutions, but more resources are needed to provide adequate coverage of this increasingly important area. The supervision of financial institutions’ cybersecurity is highly dependent on self-assessments by the regulated entities themselves and independent reviews carried out by third parties. CBI should regularly revise the list of critical operations and critical service providers for internal use and for presentation to the Financial Stability Committee and Financial Stability Council. CBI is encouraged to enhance its incident dashboard by summarizing cyber incidents and examining trends.
International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This technical note highlights macroprudential policy in Iceland. Macroprudential policy in Iceland recently has centered on the property market, given the importance of this market for households’ balance sheets, banks’ loan portfolios, and the potential systemic risks. The Central Bank of Iceland (CBI) has a strong institutional framework for macroprudential policy, assuring the willingness to act. The macroprudential framework also promotes the ability to act promptly. As the financial supervisor, the CBI has control over prudential tools; it may exercise its power as necessary to ensure financial stability. The institutional arrangements encourage effective cooperation and coordination with other institutions. CBI surveillance and systemic risk assessment rely on comprehensive quantitative information and constructive dialogue with the industry as well as on various models and stress tests. The strong analytical capacity for systemic risk monitoring can be further enhanced by filling data gaps and enriching models. While recent measures go in the right direction, the authorities should stand ready to take further actions if vulnerabilities persist.
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. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This paper presents Iceland’s Financial System Stability Assessment. Iceland has made solid progress since the 2008 crisis and the last Financial Sector Assessment Program update in restructuring banks and implementing important financial sector reforms. It has transposed many EU Directives and Regulations into national law, improving the regulatory, supervisory, and crisis management frameworks. Banks are resilient to solvency stress under the adverse scenario but are sensitive to interest rate changes. Liquidity stress can generally be handled but there are vulnerabilities. The value of pension funds’ assets declines substantially in the adverse scenario, reducing future pension values materially. Iceland’s robust financial system has weathered the impact of the coronavirus disease pandemic well, owing to substantially improved macro-financial frameworks since the global financial crisis.
International Monetary Fund
As use of macroprudential policy tools is growing, the IMF has initiated an annual survey on macroprudential policy with its membership. The resulting new database provides information on policy measures taken by IMF member countries as well as on the institutional arrangements in place to support macroprudential policy. This paper provides detail on the design of the survey and a description of the results from the first edition of the survey, based on responses received from 141 jurisdictions. It reviews institutional arrangements in place across the membership, provides an initial description of the types of measures reported across regions, and describes recent changes in macroprudential policy settings reported by member countries.
International Monetary Fund
Capital flows can deliver substantial benefits for countries, but also have the potential to contribute to a buildup of systemic financial risk. Benefits, such as enhanced investment and consumption smoothing, tend to be greater for countries whose financial and institutional development enables them to intermediate capital flows safely. Post-crisis reforms, including the development of macroprudential policies (MPPs), are helping to strengthen the resilience of financial systems including to shocks from capital flows. The Basel III process has improved the quality and level of capital, reduced leverage, and increased liquid asset holdings in financial systems. Drawing on and complementing such international reforms at the national level, robust macroprudential policy frameworks focused on mitigating systemic risk can improve the capacity of a financial system to safely intermediate cross-border flows. Macroprudential frameworks can play an important role over the capital flow cycle, and help members harness the benefits of capital flows. Introducing macroprudential measures (MPMs) preemptively can increase the resilience of the financial system to aggregate shocks, including those arising from capital inflows, and can contain the build-up of systemic vulnerabilities over time, even when such measures are not designed to limit capital flows. While the risks from capital outflows should be handled primarily by macroeconomic policies, a relaxation of MPMs may assist, as long as buffers are in place, in countering financial stresses from outflows. Capital flow liberalization should be supported by broad efforts to strengthen prudential regulation and supervision, including macroprudential policy frameworks. The Fund has two frameworks to help ensure that its advice on MPPs and policies related to capital flows is consistent and tailored to country circumstances. The frameworks (the Macroprudential framework and the Institutional View on capital flows) are consistent in terms of key principles, including avoiding using MPMs and capital flow management measures (CFMs) as a substitute for necessary macroeconomic adjustment. The appropriate classification of measures is important to ensure targeted advice consistent with the two frameworks. The conceptual framework for the assessment of measures laid out in this paper will assist staff in properly identifying MPMs and measures that are designed to limit capital flows and to reduce systemic financial risk stemming from such flows (CFM/MPMs), and thereby ensure the appropriate application of the Fund’s frameworks, so that staff policy advice is consistent and well targeted. The Fund will continue to develop and share expertise in using MPMs, and integrate these findings into its surveillance and technical assistance, which should contribute to building international understanding and experience on these issues.
International Monetary Fund
Scope and strategy: This paper reviews access limits and surcharge policies in the Fund’s General Resources Account (GRA). It builds on the preliminary Executive Board discussion that took place in May 2014, against the backdrop of the 14th Review quotas expected to become effective early in 2016, which will on average double individual members’ quotas. At the meeting in 2014, most Directors considered that a moderate increase in normal access limits in SDR terms would broadly restore the normal Fund access to levels considered acceptable in 2009, and saw merit in adjusting the surcharge threshold to allow for a moderate increase in the SDR value of credit not subject to the charge.