Selected Decisions (12th Ed)
Chapter

Article V, Section 12(f). Special Disbursement Account1

Author(s):
International Monetary Fund
Published Date:
April 1986
Share
  • ShareShare
Show Summary Details

Special Disbursement Account: Investment

Pending their use, the Managing Director shall place in investments, denominated in SDRs, with the Bank for International Settlements, the currencies received by the Special Disbursement Account as a result of the termination of the Trust Fund, unless the Managing Director considers that the terms offered by the BIS on an intended deposit denominated in SDRs are not sufficiently attractive. In that event the Managing Director shall inform the Executive Board promptly and make other proposals to it for investment in SDR-denominated obligations in accordance with Article V, Section 12(b).

Decision No. 7990-(85/81)

May 28, 1985

Special Disbursement Account: Transitional Investment of Balances with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Pending placement in SDR-denominated investments with the Bank for International Settlements in accordance with Executive Board Decision No. 7990-(85/81), adopted May 28, 1985, the Managing Director is hereby authorized to invest with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York the U.S. dollars held by the Special Disbursement Account.

Decision No. 8029-(85/105)

July 11, 1985

Special Disbursement Account: Structural Adjustment Facility

I. Income from Investment and Loans—Availability for Use

Pursuant to Article V, Section 12(f), the income from investment of resources available for the Structural Adjustment Facility within the Special Disbursement Account, and the interest on loans disbursed under the Facility, accruing to the Special Disbursement Account for the period December 17, 1980 to June 30, 1991, shall be available, as they accrue, for use under the Facility.

Decision No. 8237-(86/56) SAF

March 26, 1986

II. Regulations for Administration

Pursuant to Article V, Section 12(j), the Fund adopts the Regulations set forth in the Annex to this decision for the administration of the Structural Adjustment Facility within the Special Disbursement Account.

Decision No. 8238-(86/56) SAF

March 26, 1986

Annex to Decision II

Structural Adjustment Facility Within Special Disbursement Account

Paragraph 1. Purposes

The Structural Adjustment Facility within the Special Disbursement Account shall provide balance of payments assistance on concessional terms, on a uniform basis, to low-income developing members of the Fund in need of such assistance, in accordance with these Regulations.

Paragraph 2. Resources

The resources of the Special Disbursement Account available for the Structural Adjustment Facility (“the Facility”) shall consist of the assets that have been made, or will be, available for the Facility pursuant to Executive Board Decision No. 6704-(80/185) TR and Decision No. 8237-(86/56) SAF.

Paragraph 3. Conditions for Assistance

Balance of payments assistance shall be provided in the form of loans on the terms specified in paragraph 7 to eligible members that qualify for assistance under paragraph 5.

Paragraph 4. Amount of Assistance

(1) The potential access of all eligible members to the resources of the Facility shall be expressed as a uniform proportion of their quotas in the Fund. It shall be determined from time to time, at least annually, by the Fund.

(2) Whenever a member has notified the Fund that it does not intend to make use of the resources available under the Facility, the member shall not be included in the calculations under subparagraph (1) above.

(3) If, after resources have been committed to a member under paragraph 5(2), the member’s potential access is increased or decreased pursuant to subparagraph (1) or (2) above, the total amount available to the member under the three-year commitment will be proportionately modified and subsequent disbursements will be modified accordingly.

(4) Access to the Fund’s resources under other policies of the Fund will remain available in accordance with the terms of those policies.

Paragraph 5. Qualification for Assistance

(1) An eligible member shall consult the Managing Director before making an initial request for a commitment of resources for a three-year period.

(2) Resources shall be committed to a qualifying member, subject to these Regulations, for a three-year period upon approval by the Fund of an arrangement in support of a three-year macroeconomic and structural adjustment program presented by the member. The arrangement will prescribe the total amount, and the annual amounts within the total, available in accordance with the original or any modified terms of the arrangement, subject to these Regulations.

(3) Before approving a three-year arrangement, the Fund shall be satisfied that the member has a protracted balance of payments problem and is making a reasonable effort to strengthen its balance of payments position.

(4) A member shall be deemed to be making a reasonable effort within the meaning of subparagraph (3) of this paragraph if the member has presented to the Fund (i) a three-year adjustment program which seeks to correct macroeconomic and structural problems that have impeded balance of payments adjustment and economic growth, and (ii) the first of three annual programs setting forth the objectives for the year and the policies to be followed during the year to meet those objectives.

(5) Resources under three-year commitments shall be made available annually in the form of loans under three successive, but not necessarily contiguous, annual arrangements approved by the Fund. The approval of an annual arrangement under a three-year commitment must precede the expiration of the commitment period.

(6) An annual arrangement shall be approved only for a member that has submitted a satisfactory program for the corresponding year and has a need for balance of payments assistance.

(7) If, during a three-year commitment period, a member ceases to be eligible for assistance under the Facility, a commitment of resources under the Facility, made to the member for that period, shall remain in effect, subject to these Regulations.

Paragraph 6. Disbursements

(1) One disbursement shall be made for each annual arrangement upon approval of the arrangement.

(2) Disbursements to a member under the Facility shall be suspended while the member has an overdue financial obligation to the Fund in the General Resources Account, the Special Disbursement Account, or the SDR Department, or to the Fund as Trustee under the Trust Instrument. The disbursements shall be made when the overdue financial obligation has been discharged.

(3) No disbursement under a three-year commitment shall be made after the expiration of the commitment period.

Paragraph 7. Terms of Loans

(1) Interest shall be charged at the rate of one-half of one percent per annum on the outstanding balance of a loan and shall be paid on June 30 and December 31 of each year, or the next day if the day when payment is due is not a business day.

(2) A member shall repay each loan in ten equal semiannual installments, which shall begin not later than the end of the first six months of the sixth year, and be completed at the end of the tenth year, after the date of the disbursement.

(3) On the request of a member when repayment of an installment is due under a loan, the Fund may reschedule the repayment to a date not later than two years after the due date if the Fund finds that repayment on the due date would result in serious hardship for the member and that such rescheduling would not impair the ability of the Special Disbursement Account to meet the liabilities of the Facility.

Paragraph 8. Unit of Account

The SDR shall be the unit of account for commitments, loans, and all other operations under the Facility.

Paragraph 9. Media of Payment

Loans shall be disbursed and repaid, and interest paid, in U.S. dollars. The Managing Director is authorized to make arrangements under which, at the request of a member, SDRs may be used for disbursements to the member or payment of interest or repayments of loans by it to the Fund.

Paragraph 10. Reimbursement of Expenses

The General Resources Account of the Fund shall be reimbursed annually by the Special Disbursement Account in respect of the expenses of administration of the Facility that are paid from the General Resources Account. Reimbursement shall be made on the basis of a reasonable estimate of these expenses by the Fund.

Paragraph 11. Reserves

The Fund may establish, in the Special Disbursement Account, such reserves for the purposes of the Facility as it deems appropriate.

Paragraph 12. Modifications

Any modification of these Regulations will affect only loans made after the effective date of the modification, provided that a modification of the interest rate shall apply to interest accruing after the effective date of the modification.

Paragraph 13. Identification of Decisions

Decisions and other actions taken by the Fund in the administration of the Facility shall be identified as such.

III. Use of SDRs in Operations*

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IV. List of Eligible Members and Amounts of Assistance

1. The members on the list annexed to this decision are eligible to receive balance of payments assistance under the Structural Adjustment Facility within the Special Disbursement Account (“the Facility”).

2. The potential access of each eligible member to the resources of the Facility as of March 26, 1986 shall be 47 percent of quota; no more than 20 percent of quota shall be disbursed under the first annual arrangement.

Decision No. 8240-(86/56) SAF

March 26, 1986

Annex to Decision IV

Low-Income Developing Members Eligible for Assistance Under Structural Adjustment Facility Within Special Disbursement Account

MemberQuota

(In SDR millions)
China, People’s Republic of12,390.9
India12,207.7
Subtotal4,598.6
Afghanistan86.7
Bangladesh287.5
Benin31.3
Bhutan2.5
Bolivia90.7
Burkina Faso31.6
Burma137.0
Burundi42.7
Cape Verde4.5
Central African Republic30.4
Chad30.6
Comoros4.5
Djibouti8.0
Dominica4.0
Equatorial Guinea18.4
Ethiopia70.6
Gambia, The17.1
Ghana204.5
Grenada6.0
Guinea57.9
Guinea-Bissau7.5
Guyana49.2
Haiti44.1
Kampuchea, Democratic25.0
Kenya142.0
Lao People’s Democratic Republic29.3
Lesotho15.1
Liberia71.3
Madagascar66.4
Malawi37.2
Maldives2.0
Mali50.8
Mauritania33.9
Mozambique61.0
Nepal37.3
Niger33.7
Pakistan546.3
Rwanda43.8
St. Christopher and Nevis4.5
St. Lucia7.5
St. Vincent4.0
Sâo Tomé and Principe4.0
Senegal85.1
Sierra Leone57.9
Solomon Islands5.0
Somalia44.2
Sri Lanka223.1
Sudan169.7
Tanzania107.0
Togo38.4
Uganda99.6
Vanuatu9.0
Viet Nam176.8
Western Samoa6.0
Yemen Arab Republic43.3
Yemen, People’s Democratic Republic77.2
Zaïre291.0
Zambia270.3
Subtotal4,186.0
Total8,784.6

V. Review of Operation of Facility

The Fund shall review the operation of the Structural Adjustment Facility within the Special Disbursement Account not later than May 31, 1988.

Decision No. 8241-(86/56) SAF

March 26, 1986

The Chairman’s Summing Up at the Conclusion of the Discussion on Special Disbursement Account Executive Board Meeting 86/56—March 26, 1986

Most Directors wished the new facility to be called the Structural Adjustment Facility and found the general thrust of the staff paper to be acceptable, the staff having on the whole fairly reflected in its paper the spirit of the Board’s February discussion.

1. Eligibility

Members eligible to use the facility will be the low-income countries that are currently eligible to receive IDA loans. Later changes in the list of IDA countries will not have an automatic effect on their eligibility, but will be a matter for decision by the Board. Commitments made will be honored, even if a particular member were to cease to be eligible in the course of a three-year arrangement.

2. Qualification

The resources shall be made available to eligible countries that are facing protracted balance of payments problems and that enter into annual arrangements with the Fund in support of a medium-term program of structural adjustment. In the assessment of a protracted balance of payments problem, the member’s situation will be reviewed against a wide range of indicators, including, as a number of Directors suggested, the recent and the prospective behavior of the current account, reserves, indebtedness, arrears, and growth performance. The assessment should be made on a case-by-case basis, and avoid the mechanical application of statistical indicators. In addition, there will be the assessment of balance of payments need at the time of approval of annual arrangements.

3. Policy framework paper and collaboration with the World Bank

It was agreed, although with a certain reluctance by some Directors, that it would be useful to prepare a policy framework paper which will describe the major economic problems and challenges facing a country; the objectives of a three-year medium-term program; the priorities and the broad thrust of macroeconomic and structural adjustment policies; and references to the likely external financing requirements and, as far as possible, the available sources of such financing.

The framework paper is to be developed in close collaboration with the authorities—who are after all responsible for policy formulation—and the staffs of the Fund and the World Bank, who will work closely on these matters, including through joint missions. It is the expectation of the Fund that these framework papers will be reviewed by the Boards of the two institutions at an early stage before commitments are made on use of the resources of the structural adjustment facility by eligible countries.

The policy framework paper will have to be updated as the program is implemented and normally reviewed by the two Boards, at the time of presentation of the second and the third annual programs, as far as the Fund is concerned.

The suggestions by . . . [an Executive Director] would go a long way toward making the procedures as practical and as flexible as possible. I will take two illustrative cases. When discussions on the formulation of medium-term structural policies with a member country are well advanced, as they are in a number of cases, it may well be possible to present a medium-term framework paper and the program for the first year of an arrangement to the Board at the same time. In such cases the Board of the Bank would be expected to take up the policy framework paper first which would be followed by appropriate agreements on structural adjustment or sectoral loans. Quite often, when the two institutions are already collaborating deeply on medium-term structural policies in some countries, the joint mission could be extremely short; the essence of the work could even perhaps be conducted at headquarters. The modalities must be kept flexible, not with the intention of bringing the jointness of the operation into question, but to avoid unnecessary delays and to reduce costs and travel.

In the second case . . ., of a country that was less advanced in the formulation of medium-term structural policies, a separate set of talks would probably have to be conducted with the country by the two staffs in order to arrive at a common understanding that would lead to a framework paper for review by the two Boards. Later on, the Fund would take up the specific program according to its own schedule and procedures, as hopefully would the World Bank.

These procedures will have to be introduced at the outset . . . in an experimental fashion with considerable pragmatism and with a view to avoiding rigidities, complications, and undue delays. Of course, each institution will have to be very vigilant to help the other. For instance, to take again the case of a country that has had a series of Fund-supported programs, so that the Fund is well acquainted with its medium-term structural programs and is ready to move quickly forward with a framework paper and a first program. The jointness of the operation . . . would necessitate prior review by the World Bank of the framework paper; the Board of the Bank must be able to have an input based on its review of the country’s framework paper. In such a case, the Fund would hope that the World Bank Board would act in a way that would not delay action by the Fund. The deeper and closer the collaboration, the more each institution will have to be receptive to the schedule, procedures, and constraints of the other, and in particular of the one that happens to be the most advanced in its work.

While closer Fund/Bank collaboration is of the essence, it is fair to say that Directors have stressed that the competence, mandate, and expertise of each of the two institutions must be respected. The Fund would pay particular attention to what it was most well equipped to look at: macroeconomic developments and policies, fiscal policies, monetary policies, exchange rates, exchange systems, tax reforms, and price realignments, but in conjunction with the World Bank, which has particular expertise and competence in development and sectoral policies, investment priorities, microeconomic reforms, and the like.

Cooperation is of the essence, but it will be conducted in a manner that will not give rise to cross conditionality. I also want to stress that these framework paper procedures will apply only in the case of the structural adjustment facility. There is no intention to set a precedent and extend them to other facilities and arrangements or to countries not using the structural adjustment facility . . . .

4. Conditionality

The first annual program will have to be described in a written document from the authorities to the management, which will contain a request for a commitment of resources from the structural adjustment facility for a three-year period.

The document will describe in general terms the policies to be followed over the medium term, making reference to the policy framework paper, and will delineate more precisely the objectives of the authorities and the policies they will implement during the first year. Subsequent documents will review and update the medium-term policy plans and describe, also in specific terms, the policies to be implemented during the subsequent one-year periods.

We have no intention of overloading this conditionality with prior measures, but it needs to be understood that, especially in some cases where there is much to be done and where performance has been somewhat unsatisfactory, an annual program can be credible and can work only if the country is ready to take some measures that will be consistent with the unfolding of the program.

The question takes on added importance beyond the first year. As there will be no performance criteria governing disbursements and no phasing within a year, it will be necessary to make sure, after the first year, to capture correctly the progress that has been made under the structural program. The whole exercise is designed precisely to help a country to move toward that progress.

If after the first year, the Fund believes that the program has not worked and that corrective policies are necessary to make the second year consistent, at least with the general architecture of the medium-term framework, stock will have to be taken of those observations in the negotiation with the member country of the second program year.

Benchmarks or indicators will have to be constructed in a flexible way; they will not necessarily all be quantified and will essentially be devised to help monitor progress in policy implementation and in reaching the objectives of the program that have been described in the authorities’ document. I want to make it very clear that these benchmarks or indicators will not be associated with disbursements.

Deviations from benchmarks will of course be noted, and an effort will be made to understand why they have happened. If the reasons are such that they could derail the direction of a program, policy adjustments may well be necessary, and they will be taken up in discussions leading to the arrangement in support of the next annual program.

5. Disbursements

Upon endorsement of the overall policy framework and approval of the program for the first year, the Fund will disburse to the member an amount of resources equivalent to 20 percent of the member’s quota in the Fund and will make a commitment to the member to disburse additional resources in two additional tranches on approval of subsequent programs. Given the flexibility inherent in the procedure, an initial calculation has been made of each of the two additional tranches, at the equivalent of 13½ percent of the member’s quota. These amounts will be recalculated as the program unfolds; in light of the resources available to the facility, the amounts may be enlarged under the procedures described in EBS/86/53. Because of the uncertainties associated with Trust Fund reflows, commitments will have to be made contingent on the availability of resources. . . .

See also Decisions Nos. 6704-(80/185) TR, December 17, 1980, and 7989-(85/81) SBS, May 28, 1985, on pages 360, 369.

See Decision No. 8239-(86/56) SAF, March 26, 1986, page 328.

    Other Resources Citing This Publication