Abstract

The central bank community has been split into those who started to employ negative interest rates (NIR) and those who do not intend to do so, irrespective of the similarity of the economic situation. Moreover, while five central banks have applied negative policy rates from 2012, the launch time, scope and motives behind differ significantly. The fact that central banks have simultaneously pursued NIR at a time when the global financial system is not in a crisis is unprecedented and is a consequence of several fundamental and mutual factors. So, the purpose of this paper is to find out the motivation behind employing negative policy rates and assess how NIR affect different economic sectors. The statistical analysis reveals that the overall outcome is highly controversial, depending on the weight assigned to each economic sector as well as to short- and long-term goals. On the one hand, NIR lead to an overall positive impact on aggregate consumption, increased well-being of net borrower, investing NFCs, indebted governments and even financial institutions in the short run. On the other hand, savers and banks with high excess reserves and less room to reduce net interest margins are the most negatively affected. The impulse-response functions of created vector autoregression model for the euro area confirms these results: an interest rate reduction shock decreased borrowing and deposit rates, net interest margins but positively affected confidence, bond and equity prices, leading to somewhat higher expectations of economic growth and inflation in the longer term. While the lower bound of NIR remains uncrossed, further rate cuts in the negative territory or keeping them for a prolonged period of time might alter negative externalities. If expectations start looming over the material policy change or materialization of financial systematic vulnerabilities, positive effects of NIR could become more muted in the longer term.

Highlights

  • Early mathematicians thought that the idea of negative numbers was absurd, five central banks from Europe and Japan have moved their policy rates into negative territory

  • Various exemptions effectively soften the burden of negative interest rates (NIR) and weaken the ultimate effect of negative policy rates

  • The literature review carried out in this paper revealed that low and even negative rates are the results of real economy developments and global factors, some of which are of a secular nature, while others relate to the business cycle

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Early mathematicians thought that the idea of negative numbers was absurd, five central banks from Europe and Japan have moved their policy rates into negative territory. An investment-to-GDP ratio in advanced economies has showed a marked decline due to a reduced investment profitability and lower growth of public investment (IMF, 2014) All these dynamics lead to the decline of investment and the increase of saving, and, as a result, to even negative rates in the regions that are mostly affected by these trends. Monetary policy makers are afraid that rates that are “too low for too long” might cause excess risk taking that often leads to the build-up of systematic vulnerabilities in financial institutions and markets in the long-term This implies that central banks do not favor having NIR for a prolonged period of time. Persisting trends of underlying factors imply that interest rates will remain negative or at least very low for quite some time, meaning that various economic sectors will feel the effects of NIR and will have to adapt both in the short- and long-term

Statistical Analysis of NIR Effects on Different Economic Sectors
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call