The Rise of ‘Group Solution’ in Insolvency Law and Bank Resolution

This article traces the emergence of the concept of ‘group solution’ and its manifestations in insolvency law and bank resolution as an alternative to the rigid entity-by-entity approach. The rise of this concept can be linked to the recognition of the specificity of problems related to the insolvency of multinational enterprise groups, arising from group operational and financial interconnectedness. This has not happened at once, but has resulted from the evolution of views and ideas, evident in hard and soft law instruments of the 2000s and the 2010s. In light of this important development the article explores the concept of a group solution, its rationale, scope of application and limitations. It concludes that despite the gradual acceptance of the group phenomenon, a group solution has not been formed as a coherent and well-defined legal principle. Instead, it represents a variety of approaches, tools and practices, which pursue different policy objectives underpinned by different societal values. Among them are asset value maximization, business rescue, the protection of financial stability and the preservation of banks’ critical functions. With all its flexibility, a group solution has one pervasive limitation—it cannot trump the interests of individual group members and their creditors. At the same time, in order to realize the full potential of a group solution, it is necessary to embrace the group-sensitive and forward-looking interpretation of creditors’ interest, facilitating commercially sensible and practical group solutions.

Systemic risk and interconnectedness in Gulf Cooperation Council banking systems

Nowadays, financial interconnectedness is the main driver of systemic risk. Thus, there is a constant need for tools to assess and manage systemic risk. This paper offers an alternative model framework to measure systemic risk and examine interconnectedness between direct exposures across banking systems in the emerging markets of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). To ensure consistency and efficiency of systemic risk estimates and to capture its multifaceted nature, the methodology measures systemic risk using a combination of Filtered Historical Simulation and nonparametric regression and then examines the interconnectedness using a network analysis. The results reveal that shocks originating in the banking systems in Saudi Arabia may potentially cause a cascade of failures in the banking systems of most GCC countries. The banking system in Oman, however, is robust enough to withstand any ripple effect from adverse shocks affecting GCC’s major banking systems. Such results present some policy implications for regulators and supervisors and may benefit asset managers and investors in making portfolio allocation decisions.

Staff Note for the G20 - The Role of the SDR - Initial Considerations

Following the recent diagnostic of the international monetary system (IMS), the IMF will explore whether a broader role for the SDR could contribute to its smooth functioning. The economic rationale for or against broader use of the SDR will be examined, focusing in particular on identifying any gaps and market failures the SDR could help address in light of the increasingly multi-polar nature of the global economy and growing financial interconnectedness. This note sets out some initial considerations on this matter. The note sketches some key issues bearing on the role of the SDR in each of three concepts: (i) the official SDR, or “O-SDR”, the composite reserve asset issued and administered by the IMF; (ii) SDR-denominated financial market instruments, or “M-SDRs,” which could be both issued and held by any parties; and (iii) the SDR as a unit of account. M-SDRs reduce foreign exchange and interest rate risk relative to single-currency instruments, but there are some drawbacks and challenges. The basket nature of M-SDRs would allow the volatility of returns to be lower than for a similar singlecurrency instrument. However, the SDR only represents one of many possible sets of portfolio weights, and issuers or investors could use existing instruments to replicate their preferred weights at a relatively low cost. There are also challenges to market development, including settling and clearing of M-SDR transactions, dealing with potential basket redefinition, and fostering secondary market trading in order to generate liquidity and market depth. There are potential benefits to using the SDR as a unit of account, which have to be weighed against other considerations. Publishing economic statistics and financial statements in SDR terms could help users identify valuation changes. Statistical authorities would need to invest in communicating the rationale for any change in practices. While the official SDR under its current framework is not playing a significant role in the IMS, a re-examination of its role is expected to inform whether any specific reform options should be pursued. The evolution of the IMS has given rise to an active debate on how much concern is posed by high rates of reserve accumulation, global imbalances, and rising claims on reserve issuers, and on whether the O-SDR could contribute to addressing these issues.