Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Syndicated loan wikipedia , lookup
History of the Federal Reserve System wikipedia , lookup
Land banking wikipedia , lookup
Balance of payments wikipedia , lookup
Shadow banking system wikipedia , lookup
Global financial system wikipedia , lookup
Financialization wikipedia , lookup
Global saving glut wikipedia , lookup
Interbank lending market wikipedia , lookup
History of investment banking in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Thailand’s Economic Crisis in 1997 1 References • Peter Warr (ed.) (2005), Thailand Beyond the Crisis – Ch.1: Boom, Bust and Beyond, by Peter Warr – Ch.2: Anatomy of the Thai Economic Crisis, by Ammar Siamwalla 2 Background • High economic growth during 1986 – 1995 in Thailand as part of the “East Asian Miracle” • Large influx of FDI and shortterm capital inflows 3 High economic growth in 1990s Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Economic Growth 8.6% 8.0% 8.4% 9.0% 8.8% 5.9% 4 • High growth of exports of manufactured products • Trade and current account deficits, but BOP surpluses accumulated reserves 5 Thailand's Current Account and GDP Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Current Account (Mill. Baht) -186,184 -193,263 -160,074 -161,129 -203,153 -338,346 -372,159 Nominal GDP (Bill. Baht) 2,183.5 2,506.6 2,830.9 3,165.2 3,629.3 4,186.2 4,611.0 Current Account as % of GDP -8.53% -7.71% -5.65% -5.09% -5.60% -8.08% -8.07% 6 Thailand's International Reserves Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Reserves end December (Bill. USD) 14.27 18.42 21.18 25.44 30.28 37.03 38.72 7 The Crisis • Bank of Thailand (BOT) in early 1990s liberalized the financial system: (to be regional financial center) relaxed interest ceilings reduced exchange control open the Bangkok International Banking Facility (BIBF or offshore banking) Non-resident baht account 8 • Foreign money at lower interest rates and fixed exchange rate, leading to heavy borrowing by private sector (both banks and non-bank), mainly short-term debts • Investment boom, and speculation in real estate and stock market • BOT failed to implement strict prudential regulation, and credit control on financial institutions 9 • Stagnant exports in 1996 – 20% growth in previous years, down to no growth – slowdown of manufactured laborintensive exports – shook confidence among investors and creditors and “triggered” the crisis 10 • Stock prices started declining in second half of 1996, affecting finance companies revenue: first sign of “bubble burst” • In November 1996, first waves of attack on the baht by foreign speculators, hoping for baht devaluation • BOT defended the baht, losing some foreign reserves • BOT took some measures to discourage short-term capital inflow 11 • Second wave of attacks on the baht in February 1997 • BOT raised interest rates to make it more costly for speculators, but this adversely affected finance companies • Third wave of baht attacks in May 1997 prompted BOT to control baht borrowing by foreigners 12 • BOT “swap” by buying $ spot and selling it forward, showing no loss in gross reserves • Last attack on the baht in June 1997 left BOT with almost no net reserves • BOT was forced to float the baht on July 2; its value sharply depreciated from 27 immediately to 30 baht/USD and to almost 60 baht/USD in January 1998 (managed float system) 13 • The cheaper baht made foreign debts more expensive in baht terms for both banks and nonbanks with $ debts, badly affected their balance sheets, and leading to lending reduction and financial chaos 14 • Many finance companies were “suspended”, causing panic of deposit withdrawals • BOT used the “Financial Institution Development Fund” (FIDF) to solve the problem, but failed and most finance companies were finally closed • Five banks were taken over by FIDF/BOT 15 • 91 finance companies (FCs) before 1997, lending at higher interest rates than banks and borrow by issuing promissory notes (IUOs) • March 1997: BOT asked 10 FCs to increase capital or merge a run on them and other FCs more loans from FIDF • June 1997: BOT suspended 16 FCs; deposits (promissory notes) replaced with extended maturity huge run on both FCs and banks 16 • August 1997: BOT suspended 42 more FCs (2 July baht float hurt their balance sheets heavy borrowing from FIDF) • December 1997: 56 FCs (out of the suspended 58) were closed permanently; their assets acquired by FIDF were transferred to the Financial Sector Restructuring, and eventually sold for much less than their face value 17 • For commercial banks (CBs), more serious and difficult problem due to larger size and bigger impact: one bank closed, 4 banks taken over by FIDF • Banks’ balance sheets affected by collapse in real estate + credit risks from baht depreciation (bank clients with $ debts) Non-performing loans (NPLs) peaked at > 40% of total loans 18 • Banks’ balance sheets affected by collapse in real estate + credit risks from baht depreciation (bank borrowers with $ debts) Non-performing loans (NPLs) peaked at > 40% of total loans banks unwilling to lend more, firms unable to borrow “strategic NPLs” by firms in need of cash 19 • NPLs created a need for banks to increase their capital (equity): most banks had to rely on government funding • Solving the NPL problem: Very high NPLs in the crisis because: Thai banks lend on collateral (land, buildings) and personal trust (connection), hence risks could be high 20 • Solving the NPL problem: Very high NPLs in the crisis because: Thai banks lend on collateral (land, buildings) and personal trust (connection), hence risks could be high Most Thai firms are highly leveraged, relying on short-term loans from banks In 1990s firms owed large debts in $ Threfore, both banks and firms are vulnerable to the crisis 21 • Solving the NPL problem: Problem solving was difficult and slow Outdated bankruptcy laws were amended to facilitate debt settlement: rehabilitation plan and rapid foreclosure Shareholders and managers are same persons ejecting owners = ejecting managers 22 • Solving the NPL problem: Problem solving was difficult and slow Thai banks prefer debt restructuring rather than debt writeoffs to avoid high burden in recapitalization debtors recovered too slowly Many firms had a large number of creditors (TPI had 140 creditors!) 23 • Solving the NPL problem: Corporate Debt Restructuring Advisory Committee (CDRAC): public-private agreement to facilitate voluntary debt negotiations; more flexible than the Bankruptcy Court, and had some success 24 • Solving the NPL problem: Thai Asset Management Corporation (TAMC), set up in 2001 to buy multicreditor NPLs from state-owned banks, using government bonds, to facilitate debt repayment and improve banks’ financial position 25 • Several banks ended up with more foreign and/or government ownership; some were merged to become bigger banks 26 • Private investment down from 33% of GDP to 10% during 1996 - 98 • Sharp drops of production in most sectors, particularly finance, construction, manufacturing and some services; not much decline in agriculture • Big declines of GDP and employment • Unemployment and excess capacities 27 Year 1997 1998 1999 Economic Growth -1.4% -10.5% 4.4% 28 Contribution to Growth of Real GDP 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Private consumption 3.2 -0.7 -6.3 2.3 2.7 Government consumption 1.0 -0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 Investment 3.0 -8.7 -15.2 -0.7 1.1 Private 0.0 -9.8 -11.8 -0.4 1.9 Public 0.0 1.1 -3.3 -0.3 -0.8 Exports -2.6 3.0 3.8 5.0 10.1 Imports 0.3 5.6 9.6 -4.1 -11.2 -0.7 -0.7 -2.2 2.3 1.1 5.9 -1.4 -10.5 4.4 4.8 Expenditure Side: Change in inventories GDP 29 Contribution to Growth of Real GDP 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Agriculture 0.4 -0.1 -0.1 0.2 0.7 Manufacturing 2.1 0.5 -3.7 4.0 2.2 Construction 0.4 -1.6 -1.8 -0.2 -0.3 Wholesale/Retail trade 0.3 -0.5 -2.2 0.6 0.6 Transportation 1.0 0.4 -0.8 0.6 0.7 Hotels & restaurants 0.1 -0.1 -0.2 0.2 0.2 Financial service 0.3 -0.8 -1.9 -1.7 -0.3 Other 1.2 0.8 0.2 0.8 0.8 GDP 5.9 -1.4 -10.5 4.4 4.8 Production Side: 30 31 • Loans from IMF and friendly countries ($17 bill.) in late 1997 • IMF’s loan condition: strict fiscal and monetary policies worsened the situation, but later relaxed • “Contagion” effect: crisis spread to Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and South Korea • Political repercussion: PM Chawalit gave way to Chuan 32 33 Causes of the Crisis Two groups: • External factors (3) • Domestic factors (4) 34 External factor no. 1 Increasing trend of capital flow into emerging markets in Asia and Latin America in the 1990s • Financial liberalization by Thailand: no interest rate ceilings, Bangkok International Banking Facility (BIBF), non-resident baht account 35 External factor no. 1 Increasing trend of capital flow into emerging markets in Asia and Latin America in the 1990s • More direct borrowing from abroad by large businesses (not through banks) • Speculative investment in stock market and real estate 36 External factor no. 1 Increasing trend of capital flow into emerging markets in Asia and Latin America in the 1990s • Increase in international reserves, but more rapid increase in short-term debts • “Herd behavior” by international investors, and big impact on small countries 37 External Factor no. 2 Continuous deficits in the current account, exceeding 5% of GDP before the crisis, affecting the confidence in repayment ability 38 External factor no. 3 Stagnant exports in 1996 because: • The baht was overvalued: “real appreciation” of baht (higher price of nontraded goods to traded goods) • Slowdown in export markets for electronics • Competition from China • The era of “cheap labor” is over 39 Domestic factor no. 1 Weakness in business fund raising • Borrowing from banks using land and buildings as collateral, heavy reliance on bank short-term loans • Banks gave credit without proper risk assessment (no analysis of feasibility and cash flow of investment projects) • “Crony capitalism”: loans to friends and people with good connection 40 Domestic factor no. 1 Weakness in business fund raising • Firms borrowed too much relative to equity (highly leveraged) • Borrowing for speculation in stock and real estate markets • Later when land prices fell, causing problems for both creditors and debtors 41 Domestic factor no. 2 Inappropriate macroeconomic policies • Tried to do the impossible: – fixed exchange rate – free capital movement – effective monetary policy (+sterilization = neutralizing the effect of capital inflow on money supply) 42 Domestic factor no. 2 Inappropriate macroeconomic policies • Why not devalue the baht before the crisis? high import content of exports high foreign debts (by private sector) increase import prices and inflation 43 Domestic factor no. 2 Inappropriate macroeconomic policies • Insist on fixing the baht value, leading to speculative attacks on the baht (with low risk of losing money) eventual floating of the baht • Why not control capital flows, like Malaysia? 44 Domestic Factor no. 3 Failure in bank supervision and regulation • bank loans were main source for businesses to raise funds • banks gave loans without enough care for risks • banks were exposed to currency and maturity mismatching 45 Domestic Factor no. 3 Failure in bank supervision and regulation • BOT policy of “no new banks, no bank failure” ===> the “moral hazard” problem where banks felt that their survival was guaranteed by government 46 Domestic Factor no. 3 Failure in bank supervision and regulation • Poor standards in loan classification, loan loss provision, and data dissemination • Widespread problem in nonperforming loans (NPLs) and BOT’s weak supervision • Disunity and rivalry among BOT top management (read Nukul Commission) 47 Domestic Factor no. 4 Weaknesses in political and social systems • politics in transition period of “democracy” with instability: within 6 years, Thailand had 4 governments, 10 finance ministers, and 4 BOT governors 48 Domestic Factor no. 4 Weaknesses in political and social systems • Complacency in society: ignored risks in short-term financial gains, with no regard for long run sustainable economic development 49 Situation after the crisis • From 2000, the economy started to slowly recover 2000: 4.8% 2001: 2.2% 2002: 5.3% 2003: 7.0% 2004: 6.2% • NPLs declined and financial institutions improved 50 Situation after the crisis • Baht depreciation boosted exports, Imports declined as investment was low, and surpluses in trade and current accounts since 1998 (up to 2005) • Export-led recovery of aggregate demand in 1999-2000 51 Situation after the crisis • Debt repayments continued, causing deficits in the capital account • Balance of payments gained surpluses, and international reserves kept rising 52 Thailand’s Balance of Payments 1997-2006, (bill. Baht) Exports Imports Trade balance Net services Current A/C Capital A/C BOP 1997 1,790 -1,875 -85 45 -40 -162 -299 1998 2,181 -1,678 503 89 592 -413 58 1999 2,150 -1,800 350 120 470 -298 173 2000 2,731 -2,514 217 154 372 -405 -58 2001 2,808 -2,696 112 164 276 -213 58 2002 2,838 -2,719 118 184 302 -182 181 53 Thailand’s Balance of Payments 1997-2006, (bill. Baht) Exports Imports Trade balance Net services Current A/C Capital A/C BOP 2003 3,233 -3,078 156 174 2004 3,823 -3,764 59 51 2005 4,400 -4,738 -338 27 2006 4,849 -4,769 80 38 329 110 -311 118 -334 2 149 230 507 221 302 478 54