NY Times, July 15 2015
The I.M.F. Is Telling Europe the Euro Doesn’t Work
by Josh Barro

It reads like a dry, 1,184-word memorandum about fiscal projections. But 
the International Monetary Fund’s memo on Greek debt sustainability, 
explaining why the I.M.F. cannot participate in a new bailout program 
unless other European countries agree to huge debt relief for Greece, 
has provided the “Emperor Has No Clothes” moment of the Greek crisis, 
one that may finally force eurozone members to either move closer to 
fiscal union or break up.

The I.M.F. memo amounts to an admission that the eurozone cannot work in 
its current form. It lays out three options for achieving Greek debt 
sustainability, all of which are tantamount to a fiscal union, an 
arrangement through which wealthier countries would make payments to 
support the Greek economy. Not coincidentally, this is the solution many 
economists have been telling European officials is the only way to save 
the euro — and which northern European countries have been resisting 
because it is so costly.

Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras of Greece, left, with President François 
Hollande of France, center, and Prime Minister Charles Michel of Belgium 
at the start of the eurozone leaders' summit on the Greek crisis at the 
European Council headquarters in Brussels.I.M.F. Demands Greece Debt 
Relief as Condition for BailoutJULY 14, 2015
The three options laid out by the I.M.F. would have different 
operations, but they share an important feature: They involve other 
European countries giving Greece money without expecting to get it back. 
These transfers would be additional to the approximately 86 billion 
euros in new loans contemplated in Monday’s deal.

“Wait a minute,” you might say. “The I.M.F. isn’t calling for a fiscal 
union; it’s calling for debt relief.” But once a debt relief program 
becomes big enough, this becomes a distinction without a difference; 
they’re both about other eurozone countries giving Greece money.

Indeed, one of the debt relief options proposed by the I.M.F. is 
“explicit annual transfers to the Greek budget,” that is, direct 
payments from other governments to Greece, which it could use to make 
its debt payments. This, obviously, is a fiscal union.

A second option is extending the grace period, during which Greece would 
be relieved of the obligation to make interest or principal payments on 
its debt to European countries, through the year 2053. That’s not a 
typo. Under this plan, Greece would make no more debt payments until 
Justin Bieber is 59 years old. This is a fiscal union by another name, 
since those lengthy and favorable credit terms would save the Greeks 
money at the expense of Greece’s creditors, most of which now are other 
European governments or the I.M.F.

The third option floated by the I.M.F., a cancellation of a portion of 
Greece’s debts, has been fiercely resisted by the German government, 
even though this is the option that least obviously constitutes a 
continuing fiscal union. Debt cancellation is a one-time fiscal transfer 
(if I lend you $100 and then forgive the debt, that’s much like me 
simply giving you $100), but at least in theory it would be done only 
once, with Greece expected to stand on its own otherwise. The important 
exception is that Greece would still need to rely on European 
governments to lend it money at favorable rates, though not quite as 
favorable as under the Old Bieber scenario.

Unfortunately, however, this is not Greece’s first bailout rodeo. 
Previous bailouts have had to be revised and enlarged, and as the I.M.F. 
notes in the section of its memo about “considerable downside risk,” 
that could happen again. The plans for Greece to regain solvency rely on 
fast economic growth and sharp rises in labor productivity that 
outperform the rest of Europe — something that cannot be guaranteed. 
They also rely on the country’s running a large primary surplus for an 
extended period — that is, collecting much more in taxes than it spends 
on government services, which typically does not prove popular with the 
voting public.

The memo makes clear what the real cost to Europe of continued eurozone 
membership for Greece is: If European governments want to keep Greece 
in, they’re going to have to put up a lot of money in one non-loan form 
or another, money they will give Greece that they never get back.

Of course, the main alternative to a deal is a Greek exit from the euro, 
which would also be costly to European holders of existing Greek debt, 
who could expect to be repaid in devalued drachmas, if at all. That is a 
reason for European governments to be willing to pay the price 
prescribed by the I.M.F. to make a Greek deal work.

But the I.M.F. officials are saying they cannot pretend that a bailout 
deal will lead to an eventual payment in full from Greece. If Greece 
stays in the euro, it will need much more financial support from the 
rest of Europe than was admitted in Monday’s deal, and the I.M.F. is 
asking European governments to put that admission on paper.

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to