International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
This technical note analyses the key aspects of the regulatory and supervisory regime for pension funds in Iceland. Pension funds in Iceland play a vital role in the domestic financial sector, acting as investors and lenders. This Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) reviews recent developments and the structure of the Icelandic pension fund sector. This technical note provides context on the Icelandic pension system, focusing in particular on the compulsory occupational scheme in Pillar II, the most important pillar of the system. The pension fund sector is large, well developed, and highly interconnected with the domestic financial system, mainly through exposures toward banks and domestic investment funds. A separate technical note summarizes the results of the risk analysis carried out for the pension fund sector and elaborates more on current market risk sensitivities. The governance and internal controls framework for pension funds is not aligned with the systemic role of the sector, and the underlying rules in the Pension Fund Act pre-date the corresponding provisions for other financial sectors. The Financial Supervisory Authority has adopted a risk-based and forward-looking supervisory model, however there is no minimum frequency set for on-site inspections. The FSAP recommends a strengthening of the legislative framework, especially regarding governance, internal controls and outsourcing.
Iceland is experiencing an economic slowdown that has reduced overheating concerns. Tourism growth has decelerated and the krĂ³na has stopped appreciating. Demand management has become easier, allowing the authorities to focus on medium-term priorities, including infrastructure, healthcare, education, and the environment. Risks, however, have become more evident. High fuel prices and other factors are challenging the airline business; world trade tensions are escalating; and the United Kingdom—a vital trading partner—is not yet assured of a smooth EU exit. Icelandic policies thus need to focus on further increasing resilience to shocks.
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.
This paper provides an assessment of the economic conditions, outlook, and crises in Iceland. There is a mounting sense that capital controls hurt growth prospects, repressing local financial markets, scaring foreign investors, and impeding savings diversification, and that it is time for them to go. Recent settlements with the bank estates are a huge step forward, improving already favorable macroeconomic conditions. At 4 percent in 2015 and gaining pace, real GDP expansion is among the fastest growing in Europe, opening up a positive output gap. However, the biggest risk for Iceland is overheating. Large wage awards on top of already hot economic readings speak to Iceland’s boom-bust history.