Strengthening the Romanian Banking System Effects of Joining the Banking Union,

Mariana PAJA

Mariana PAJA, Ph.D., lecturer, Ecological University of Bucharest - Faculty of Economics

Abstract Romanian banking system has demonstrated its structural stability by optimizing loan portfolios through an extensive cleaning of balance sheets and to grant credits. The dynamics of the Romanian banking sector proves its strength in the post-crisis, in the various external and internal shocks, some with significant magnitude. Having on the background the pro-active measures taken by the National Bank of , the soundness of the banking systemhas strengthened, concretizedin additional capital contributions, a rigorous provisioning of loans in difficulty solvency; the ratein the banking system has strengthened. Currently the main problem of the banking system covers the deleveraging amid a downward trend of resources attracted from parent banks. All developments in the banking system occur in the context in which at international and European level, is a reconfiguration of regulation and supervision mode, and at the principles underlying them - all as also a result of the international financial crisis. Mugur Isarescu, the BNR governor, presented at The Economist Conference "The EU-Southeast Europe Summit - On the road to stability and growth" organized in Bucharest, six arguments for a country like Romania to join the Union Banking: the prevalence capital in the - is above 70% of the net assets of the banking system and of the Romanian capital - Eurozone banks; the participation from the inside at the mechanism construction - first-hand knowledge; removing an incentive for disintermediation from foreign banks - reduction of around 35% external funding from parent banks (2013 - half the reduction); the elimination of jurisdictional arbitrage; considerable costs generated from non-participation; vulnerability to contagion effects.

Key concepts: banking system, banking supervision, financial intermediation, banking union JEL Classification: E58, F36, G01, G21

1. Strengthening the Romanian Banking System

Romanian banking system has demonstrated stability during2014 by optimizing loan portfolios through an extensive cleaning of balance sheets and by granting credits. In the post-crisis, the dynamics of the Romanian banking sector proves its resilience to external shocks and domestic different, some of them with significant magnitude (ex.: change in the EUR / USD, Swiss franc appreciation) on the background of pro-active measures taken by .

57

The degree of resilience of the banking system at the shock liquidity remains high

In the same period in the Romanian banking system, they were reported two phenomena:  the redemption of loan portfolios good baseline and outsourcing, which led to: - improving the quality of bank portfolios ; - supplement the income of banks ; - adjustment limiting the number of employees in this sector.  the banks must withstand challenges generated by the crisis - increasing non-performing loans ; - increase their provisioning costs ; - weaker financial results in the short term. Amid pro-active NBRmeasures :  have adopted a set of measures that have proved effective for cleaning the balance sheets of commercial banks by removing off-balance all exposures accounting for non- performing loans fully provided, which placed the non-performing on a stable trend downward, it goes to 13.9% in December 2014 (from a value, as was noted above, of 22.3 % in March 2014.

Non-performed loans and their coverage by provisions IFRS have evolved in tandem

 creation of adjustments for impairment (IFRS provisions) for all exposures that recorded a debt service exceeding 360 days and for which no legal proceedings were

58

initiated , followed by removal of off-balance sheet exposures covered by provisions which will lead to further decline in the rate of non-performed loans (NPL).

 establishment of adjustments for impairment (IFRS provisions) of the exposures to corporate borrowers insolvent and off the balance sheet exposures covered by provisions , which will also reduce the level of NPL.

The quality of loan portfolios of some EU countries (non-performing loans as a share of total loans)

 establish an external audit adjustments for depreciation ( IFRS ) of stock of loans outstanding at 06/30/2014 and valuation of collateral.

 solvency ratios in the banking system has strengthened , reaching 17.3 % at the end of 2014 (compared to 14.7 % in 2009 and between 15 and 15.5 % in 2010-2013).

 has strengthened the soundness of the banking system, concretized in additional capital contributions totaling in the same period 2009-2014, 1.8 bln. .

The deleveraging process is the main problem of the Romanian banking system amid a downward trend of resources attracted from parent banks (reduction from 22.1 bln. Euro at the end of 2008 to 11.9 bln.Euro at the end of 2014 - respectively a decrease of 46%, which corresponds to a less resource of 10.2 bn. euro).

The advance, but recoil intermediation they were driven mainly by developments in currency leading

59

The process is orderly and determines the credit squeeze of local banks which resulted in reducing the share of private sector credit to GDP from 39.5 % of GDP in 2011 to 31.7 % estimated for 2014. External resources have been gradually replaced by domestic resources - amid a larger domestic savings (up 26% and plus 12.2 bln. Euro in December 2014 compared to end of 2008). For parent banks, the deleveraging actually meant balancing the consolidated balance sheet structure for compliance with the new capital requirements by reducing risk exposure and for local branches - credit squeeze.

Financing from parent banks duringDecember 2008 - June 2014

Financing from parent banks was restricted to 9.1 billion between December 2008 and June 2014 from about 22.1 billion Euros to about 13 billion, the fastest decrease was recorded in 2013. The deleveraging process led to balance the rate between loans and deposits but must not accelerate the short and medium term. Internal liabilities gradually replaced liabilities incurred by the parent bank

The advance internal savings has offset reduced funding from parent banks. According to NBR, the exposure of parent banks to their subsidiaries in Romania decreased by about 16% in 2014. We are seeing an orderly deleveraging process. The investments must be profitable; otherwise the funding goes where it finds a better fructification.

60

Management and reputational risks in particular, occupy the top two places on the agenda of banks (Source: Banking Barometer ARB & EY)

Regulatory constraints on lending at European level, propensity to save reluctance in contracting new loans due to a lack of confidence in economic change and restructuring that crossed crisis caused banks' portfolios as loans/deposits rate of the banking system to be sub unitary. The ratio loan/deposit strengthens its position around the level of 100 %

The ratio loans/deposits is placed at 91.33% at the end of 2014. Banks will increasingly be involved in lending to offset the loss of balance sheet. Liquidity exists in the market and this is evidenced by the low level of interest rates in the money market (ROBOR 3M is 1.70%). As an effect of the international financial crisis, there is a reconfiguration of both regulation and supervision mode, and also of the principles underlying them, at international and European level. In this context are analyzed developments in the Romanian banking system.

2. Effects of Joining the Banking Union

The current crisis has highlighted at European level, imperfections represented by Economic and Monetary Union - and from the possible alternatives - that of a fiscal union and a banking union – it has been chosen the version less controversial and easier to implement into a predictable timeframe, namely the banking union. Making operable Banking Union requires achieving several objectives:  First, an effective response to the financial crisis by increasing banks' resilience to risk factors and ensuring adequate flow of funds to the economy. This goal is achievable through prudent banking policies which make banks to put capital aside for “rainy days“and

61 also contribute to a common fund to finance the orderly market exit of unviable credit institutions.

 then a sound financial system and effectively is a necessary but not sufficient to achieve the actual goal, represented by smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, generating jobs and competitiveness, as argued in 2014 the former Internal Market and services Commissioner , Michel Barnier.

From the viewpoint Banking Union legislation requires: - a single regulatory framework at European level ( "Single rulebook" - which includes legislation regarding capital requirements "CRD IV"); - the legislation governing bank recovery and resolution; - the legislation regarding deposit guarantee schemes.

At the same time, the Union Banking assumes on this legislative background, the creation of the institutional point of view: - a single supervisory mechanism (MUS); - a single resolution mechanism (MUR); - a deposit guarantee system.

Banking Union necessity means:

- improving the functionality of the single financial market by reducing its fragmentation; - ensure the stability of financial; - strengthen its confidence in its banking system and its European common currency; - reduce their risk of contagion in the event of financial turbulence; - breaking the vicious circle between governments and troubled banks; - prevent massive withdrawals of deposits ( "bank run"); - EU: 53 % of global banking assets = > responsibility in correcting the shortcomings of the past and in ensuring global financial stability.

The implications on the Romanian banking sector:

►a strong argument is the prevalence capital structure of the euro area in the banking sector - over 70% of its net assets and in the capital. In the context of such increased integration in the European financial market, maintaining the prerogatives of national banking supervision is merely suboptimal results due to limited access to information on parent banks and lack of overall perspective. ► another argument in favor of a rapid accession to the Union Banking belongs to the sphere of political economy. It is preferable to participate from the inside to build a mechanism which will have anyway to join him at the latest with the entry into the Eurozone. ► the existence of Banking Union will affect the financial system in Romania regardless of membership or none of it. So it is better to have a say in the adoption of decisions that generate those effects, given that they will still be felt.

62

► the entry into Banking Union provides an incentive for the disintermediation and removal from foreign banks. As shown by the experience later onset of the global economic crisis, to protect the national banking communities, some supervisors may impose prudential measures on capital controls, the transfers and lending intra-group and limiting of branches or prohibiting the repatriation of profits, causing some banks to reduce activity their subsidiaries in host countries. ►the participation in the single supervisory mechanism would also eliminate the possibility of judicial review of arbitration (for example by preventing potential transformation of subsidiaries into branches of foreign banks), would improve information flow on banking supervision and would avoid possible distortions in competition plan. ► by remaining outside the Bank may incur considerable costs for countries outside the euro area that are vulnerable to the effects where foreign banks have a significant presence in their banking system. In case of contagion, responsiveness of these countries would be severely limited, and the mechanisms and resources of its own it could prove insufficient or inadequate. For euro area countries Banking Union membership is automatic. Romania aims, target date for joining the euro area in 2019, so accession Banking means the time at which we become part of this mechanism. Banking accession before adopting the euro is an option. MUS level decisions will be reflected anyway in the Romanian banking system, given the presence of high capital structure of euro area credit institutions, Romanian legal persons. Romania has evaluated the option of joining the banking union in terms of taking into account the realities of the present and the prospects of as a whole. Entry into Banking Union is a natural choice suggested and supported by the banking system in Romania, where Eurozone banks hold a substantial majority (70%) and net assets of the banking system capital. Joining the Banking can help accelerate the adoption of the single currency as it enhances financial stability and confidence in the national banking system, including by reducing the risk of regional contagion.

Conclusions

Given the current situation of the Romanian banking system and milestones of its evolution future, we cannot fail to notice that the efforts of the central bank and banking environment, leading to preserve the stability of our financial system, strengthen resilience to shocks and create favorable outlook on the relaunch are sound lending. "Romania's accession to the Union Banking will be conducive to strengthening financial stability, strengthen confidence in the banking sector and support a sustainable loan growth and economic activity", Academician MugurIsarescu, Governor of the National Bank of Romania.

References

Barnier, M., "A new financial system for Europe - Financial reform at the service of growth", , 2014; Dumitrescu, A. L., The Banking Union: “The Solution to reduce the European Banking System Risks”, Global Economic Observer, No. 2, Vol. 2,2014; Georgescu, F. “Romania's accession to the banking union and banking sector adjustments “, Constanta, September 4, 2014; Georgescu, F.Speech at the conference ““: recent developments and implications on the Romanian banking sector', October 15th,.2014.

63

Jacques de Larosiere, “The high level group on financial supervisión in the EU”, Raportul de Larosiere, 2009; Isarescu, M., "Banking Union: Principles, Challenges and Prospects", dissertation, 2013; Isarescu, M., "The Future of the international banking system" speech and presentation, 2012; Isarescu, M., "Romania and the euro area", presentation at the international conference ESPERA, 2013; Isarescu, M., "Banking Union: from project to reality," Dissertation, 2014; Isarescu, M., "Romania, euro adoption and Banking Union", dissertation, 2014; Ionescu, A. “The European Banking System. Track Record and Achievment“.Global Economic Observer, No. 2, Vol. 2.2014; Lagarde, C., “Riscurileglobalesuntîncreştere, darexistă o cale de recuperare",discurs Jackson Hole, 2011; Noon, L.,“Data Dumps and Pig Farms; Inside Europe’s Stress Tests“, Reuters, January 23.The Oxford Analytica. (2014). Daily Brief, February 11.,2014; * * * National Bank of Romania (BNR). (2014). Financial Stability Report, available at: http://www.bnr.ro/PublicationDocuments.aspx?icid=6711. * * * (ECB). (2014). Regulation no. 468/2014 laying down the framework of cooperation within the Single Supervisory Mechanism between the ECB and national competent authorities and the relevant national authorities (Regulation Framework MUS) April 16. * * * Council of the European Union. (2013). Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank Concerning Policies Relating to the prudential supervision of credit Institutions, Official Journal of the European Union, 29. 10.2013. * * * EU / INT. (2014). Financial regulation has delayed talks, January 8. and the Council of the European Union. (2014). Directive 2014/49/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on deposit Guarantee Schemes, EUR-Lex, Access to . * * * European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. (2014b). Directive 2014/59 /EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit Institutions and Investment Firms, EUR-Lex, Access to European Union Law. * * * European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. (2014c). Regulation (EU) no. 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of Credit Institutions and Investment Firms in the Un Certain framework of the Single Resolution Mechanism and the Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) no. 1093/2010, EUR-Lex, Access to European Union Law. * * * The European Parliament and the EU Council. (2013), Directive 2013/36 / EU on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Directive 2002/87 / EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC, OJ L 176, 27.6.2013. * * * The European Parliament and the EU Council. (2010), Directive 1093/2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), OJ L 331

64