In this paper, we investigate whether a firm’s composition of foreign liabilities matters for their resilience during economic turmoil and examine which characteristics determine a firm’s foreign capital structure. Using firm-level data, we corroborate previous findings from the (international) macroeconomic literature that the composition of foreign liabilities matters for a country’s susceptibility to external shocks. We find that firms with a positive equity share in their foreign liabilities were less affected by the global financial crisis and also less likely to default in the aftermath of the crisis. In addition, we show that larger, more open, and more productive firms tend to have a higher equity share in total foreign liabilities.
Following the COVID shock, supervisors encouraged banks to use capital buffers to support the recovery. However, banks have been reluctant to do so. Provided the market expects a bank to rebuild its buffers, any draw-down will open up a capital shortfall that will weigh on its share price. Therefore, a bank will only decide to use its buffers if the value creation from a larger loan book offsets the costs associated with a capital shortfall. Using market expectations, we calibrate a framework for assessing the usability of buffers. Our results suggest that the cases in which the use of buffers make economic sense are rare in practice.
Davide Furceri, Michael Ganslmeier, and Mr. Jonathan David Ostry
Are policies designed to avert climate change (Climate Change Policies, or CCPs) politically costly? Using data on governmental popular support and the OECD’s Environmental Stringency Index, we find that CCPs are not necessarily politically costly: policy design matters. First, only market-based CCPs (such as emission taxes) generate negative effects on popular support. Second, the effects are muted in countries where non-green (dirty) energy is a relatively small input into production. Third, political costs are not significant when CCPs are implemented during periods of low oil prices, generous social insurance and low inequality.
In this paper, we estimate the aggregate and sectoral fiscal multipliers of EU Structural Investment (ESI) Funds and of public investment at the EU level. We complement these results with a specific application to the case of Slovenia. We first analyze aggregate data and find large and significant multipliers and strong crowding-in of private investment. Our main findings show that positive shocks to ESI Funds are followed by an increase in output that ranges from 1.2 percent on impact, to 1.8 percent after 1 year, and by an increase in private investment between 0.7 and 0.8 percent of GDP. We address country heterogeneity by dividing countries according to key characteristics that have been known to affect multipliers. In particular, we find higher multipliers in a group of CEE countries that are important recipients of European funds and are characterized by fixed exchange rate regimes and sound public investment governance (e.g. Croatia and Slovenia). We also complement the aggregate analysis by estimating the effect of different types of public investment and the effect of public investment on different sectors of the economy.