Εάν δεν υπάρξει ελάφρυνση του ελληνικού δημόσιου χρέους, τότε αυτό θα συνεχίσει να αυξάνεται, αγγίζοντας το 293,8% του ΑΕΠ έως το 2060» αναφέρει σε έκθεσή του Ταμείο.
Παράταση του χρόνου αποπληρωμής των δανείων που έχει λάβει η Ελλάδα από την Ε.Ε τουλάχιστον μέχρι το 2040 προτείνει η Έκθεση Βιωσιμότητας του Δημοσίου Χρέους που εκπόνησε το Διεθνές Νομισματικό Ταμείο.
Στην ίδια έκθεση προτείνεται η επέκταση της περίοδου χάριτος των δανείων του EFSF τουλάχιστον κατά 17 χρόνια ενώ των δανείων που έχει χορηγήσει ο ESM για 6 χρόνια. Τέλος, για τα διακρατικά δάνεια που έλαβε η Ελλάδα με το πρώτο Μνημόνιο το ΔΝΤ προτείνει την επέκταση της περιόδου χάριτος κατά 20 χρόνια.
Η λήξη όλων των ευρωπαϊκών δανείων σύμφωνα με το ΔΝΤ θα πρέπει να παραταθεί έως το 2080. Όσον αφορά στο επιτόκιο των δανείων που έχει χορηγήσει ο EFSF και o ESM η έκθεση βιωσιμότητας εκτιμά ότι θα πρέπει να παγώσει στο επίπεδο του 1,5% τουλάχιστον έως το 2045.
Το ΔΝΤ εκτιμά ότι χωρίς την υλοποίηση των προτάσεων του το xρέος της Ελλάδος θα φθάσει το 293,6% του ΑΕΠ έως το 2060, σύμφωνα με τις παραδοχές του βασικού σεναρίου. Το σενάριο αυτό προβλέπει διατήρηση του πρωτογενούς πλεονάσματος στον Προϋπολογισμό στο επίπεδο του 1,5% και έσοδα αποκρατικοποιήσεων ύψους 5 δισ. ευρώ έως το 2030.
Τέλος, το ΔΝΤ εκτιμά ότι εξαιτίας του υψηλού ποσοστού των κόκκινων δανείων και της ποιότητας του κεφαλαίου των ελληνικών τραπεζών είναι πολύ πιθανόν να απαιτηθεί και νέα κεφαλαιοποίηση. Έτσι η συνολική κεφαλαιακή τους ενίσχυση θα φθάσει τα 20 δισ. ευρω όπως είχε προβλεφθεί αρχικά στο τρίτο Μνημόνιο.
Σε άλλο σημείο της έκθεσης αναφέρει ότι δεδομένου του υψηλού επιπέδου των μη εξυπηρετούμενων δανείων και της χαμηλής ποιότητας του κεφαλαίου, αναμένεται να προκύψουν πρόσθετες κεφαλαιακές ανάγκες για τις τράπεζες, μέχρι και 20 δισ. ευρώ, τα οποία θα μπορούσαν να καλυφθούν από το μη χρησιμοποιημένο “μαξιλάρι” για τις τράπεζες, από το πρόγραμμα του ESM. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-20/imf-said-to-propose-deferral-of-greek-loan-repayments-until-2040
ΕΔΩ ΟΙ ΔΗΛΩΣΕΙΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΚΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΔΝΤ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΕΚΘΕΣΗ ΒΙΩΣΙΜΟΤΗΤΑΣ:
MR. RICE: All right. Then let me come to Greece. What I do propose, because I can see the pent-up level of demand, as we might say here at the Fund. Why don’t we just take a round of questions, and then I’ll come back, and we can take up a bit more detail. Is that okay with you? Ladies first.
QUESTIONER: Okay. What I was going to say before, is that since we haven’t heard anything from you about the last month or so, yes, that’s true actually, you know that. How do you comment on all the latest developments after the Eurogroup’s Agreement, and the Euro Working Group, where are we right now? Thank you.
QUESTIONER: I was going to say that it’s more than obviously that the IMF and Greece’s European partners are not on the same page in regards to debt relief, which is the crucial point for an agreement next week. Are you optimistic that you will find a common approach for the debt relief and the IMF will stay in the program? And also, will Madam Lagarde be at the Eurogroup on the 24th of May. Thank you. QUESTIONER: Good morning. Did you have the chance to inform the Board about the Eurogroup, they think on Greece. And do you expect the meeting of the Washington Group on the (inaudible) construction on the sidelines of the Japan Meeting of the G7, on the Finance Minister, but also could it go even to the leaders? Thank you.
QUESTIONER: I have two questions. The first one would be: Can you clarify the IMF position on the debt relief? Are you advocating for solution in which the Greeks will have to repay the Europeans until 2040? And my second question actually, in the IMF Article of Agreement, there’s a provision that allows the Fund to postpone repayments by a member state if such repayments would impose exceptional hardship to the country. Is it an option that you’re considering in Greece, since that’s the kind of effort that you are expecting from the Europeans?
QUESTIONER: Two questions. One, has the IMF made any specific debt relief proposals to the Euro area peers? And do you look at each debt instrument and propose what should be done for it to change the funding profile of Greece, or do you focus on the outcomes for Greece? And if I can just add one more to that, sorry. We’ve heard from European officials that the IMF is conducting its own DSA. If you can comment on anything about that, particularly if it’s any different than the European DSA. QUESTIONER: So are you working with the Europeans in order to present a common debt relief proposal in the next Euro Group meeting?
MR. RICE: Okay. Let me take that bunch of questions. And if I’ve missed a detail on something, I’ll come back and we can follow-up, okay. It’s been a little while since we’ve had a briefing, for various reasons, though the IMF has clearly been fairly public on many fronts. Anyway, you know, a bit of context. The discussions continue between Greece, its European partners, and the IMF. And this is in the context of the first review of Greece’s program with its European partners under the European stability mechanism. So most recently, many of you in the room know this, but I’m speaking to the broader audience, most recently there was a Euro Group meeting on May 9, last week. And there was a communication out of that. The next meeting is scheduled for May the 24th, as was mentioned. So that’s next week. So just to be clear, again for those who perhaps don’t follow it so closely, Greece is not currently under a program with the IMF, though we have been and continue to be fully engaged in the discussions. And of course, many are interested, including in this room, in the IMF. And when a decision might be made on a further program, and that decision, of course I need to emphasize, would be taken by our executive board. And I can tell you, no proposal has been submitted to the board at this stage. So that’s the broad context. Where do we stand? So the discussions are actively ongoing. So you’ll understand that I won’t be going into details, and numbers, or speculations, but let me try and help clarify the current situation from our perspective. So number one, on the recent discussions, we welcomed the recent progress made, by the Euro Group and the Greek authorities, toward agreeing on a package that could pave the way for the completion of that first review under the ESM Program. The discussions, as I said, are ongoing regarding key elements of the package, including the policies supporting the fiscal targets and debt relief. You know, as we have said many times before, it is paramount that the program walks on two legs, strong policies that underpin realistic targets and comprehensive debt relief. Both are essential to ensure that Greece can embark on a path of sustainable public finances and growth which is the shared goal, of course. On the debt relief issue, so again, the discussions are ongoing with our European partners. We very much welcome the start of these discussions on debt relief which are a critical component of the overall package for Greece. As you know, the IMF has put this issue on the table. It was almost a year ago. So we see, again, we welcome that the discussions on this have now begun on this issue. And so we see that as a positive development. On the DSA issue, we have not yet finalized our debt sustainability analysis, the DSA. I can tell you, we have exchanged preliminary views with our partners on general principles regarding debt relief objectives and modalities. As we have said in the past, we believe that it is possible to restore debt sustainability without upfront haircuts, although this would involve providing very concessional loan terms, including long grace and maturity periods, and very low interest rates. Again, there are many options possible on how to get to a debt relief package. And those discussions have now begun, and we welcome that. On the reforms, which is the other leg, right, as opposed to the debt relief, again, we have said that achieving a 3.5 percent primary surplus by 2018 is a very ambitious target. As we have previously indicated, we don’t think it is realistic to sustain that level for many decades. Very few countries in history have achieved that. We believe that this would mean too much austerity. And as we have said, again, repeatedly, and the managing director said it a few days ago in London, again, we don’t want more austerity for Greece. And we certainly don’t want more of the burden to fall on the poor and the most vulnerable. So we have stated our view clearly. And in our view what would be needed to ensure that these ambitious ESM program fiscal targets are credible, are fundamental reforms to pensions and income taxes that address the currently very generous level of pension benefits and the large exemptions from taxation that are exceptional by European standards. And both of these issues, of course, are related to the point about the burden falling on the most vulnerable. And we’ve discussed these issues before, including at this podium. So that’s kind of broadly where we are with the discussions ongoing. What about next steps? Well, we’re looking ahead now to this Euro Group meeting on May 24th that some of you have mentioned. What might be the focus of those discussions? We would expect the Euro Group to discuss the legislation, the Greek legislation related to the prior actions in the ESM program as well as debt relief. So again, both issues. I can tell you the IMF has been invited to those discussions. I expect that Poul Thomsen will lead the IMF in that meeting. And again, we look forward to providing our views on both policies and proposals on debt relief. As we have stated before, for the IMF to participate in the program with financing, both credible policies and substantial debt relief will be needed. So maybe just, you know, a final word. The staff have indicated their readiness to present a program for the board’s consideration. Once the program includes the necessary policies and the debt relief, that can make the program add up, as we’ve said before. And it has to be realistic. We see both these elements. We see both these elements as critical. Because, you know, they’re going beyond Greece. You know, these ensure the uniformity of treatment among our member states, which is, you know, of paramount importance to us. We represent 189 countries. So this notion of having credible reforms and credible financing, in this case including debt relief, is not unique to Greece. Again, for those who don’t follow it so closely, this is what the IMF does and what we do in our programs. Let me leave my — sort of step back. I think I took onboard a number of your questions. But if I missed something, we can follow-up.
QUESTIONER: I just wanted to follow-up and just ask about the discussions that are ongoing. Have there been any discussions with the European partners about European institutions such as the ESM buying out IMF debt, or Greek debt to the IMF? And secondly, have there been any discussions with the European partners about the IMF not participating financially but taking a purely monitoring or advisory role going forward in the Greek program?
MR. RICE: I am not aware of discussions on either of those issues. So let’s see what happens next week. What I can say on your first question is that broadly, you know, from a debt sustainability perspective, it would make sense to increase further the concessionality of official financing to Greece by exchanging more expansive debt for less expansive debt. I mean, just broadly speaking that would make sense. But ultimately, and again I’m not, you know, conveying here a sense of discussions, because I don’t have that sense of specific discussions. But ultimately, any decision along those lines would be up to the Eurozone member states and Greece to determine. So again, what I mean by that is discussion, decisions on replacing more expansive debt with less expansive debt.
QUESTIONER: Can I just follow-up, just quickly? More broadly, you seem to be saying today that, although the Greek authorities and the European authorities seem to have agreed on a reform program, that’s the statement that came out of the May 9th Euro Group meeting, that the IMF still doesn’t think that that is a done deal on the reform side. Is that right?
MR. RICE: We are still, you know, assessing the reforms and expressing our view on the reforms.
QUESTIONER: As a follow-up to questions, Gerry, I hear you very well. But there is this sense in Europe that you’ve been difficult with the Europeans and the Greeks because you actually want to leave the Greek program. Do you want to comment on this?
MR. RICE: You know, I would just re-emphasize what I said, which is we’ve been fully engaged. And we are fully supportive, as we have been now for some time. As I said, we stand ready to, the staff stands ready to take a program to the board. But it would need to meet those objectives and principles that I described to you. You know, I think the IMF is flexible, but we have a job to do. And the membership looks to us to do that job. So, you know, we’re objective, and we try to bring the hard-headed analysis to any program, any situation that we’re involved in. Is it all on Greece? So let me take another package. Maybe I missed a few things. So let me –- and then we’re going to move off, we’re going to move off Greece.
QUESTIONER: So may I please repeat my questions? I asked you if the board had discussed, had been informed about what went on at the Euro Group and if you think that the debt will be discussed at the G7. And one follow-up on your answer. On the same proposal, could this swap of interest rates or the IMF buying out, the IMF, change your, the SA for Greece significantly and define the same considerations for you to actually participate? And in your own DSA, are you sticking to the primary surplus target of 1.5 percent of GDP for the decades to come? Thank you.
MR. RICE: The board has been kept regularly informed of where we are. I mentioned that we had shared our preliminary analysis of views on debt. And of course that was shared with our board, for example. So, you know, our board, we keep the board informed. The board has, as I said, the ultimate decision. So that’s very important to us. On the G7, I’m not aware of any scheduled discussion of Greece. As you know Katerina, the G7 ministers are there. I’m sure that people meet and speak in the corridors and so on. But I’m not aware of any scheduled discussion at the G7. On the impact that, you know, a replacement of, some replacement of more expansive debt with less expansive debt, of course, that would have an impact on the debt sustainability analysis. But, you know, we don’t have those numbers or that analysis right now. But, you know, potentially, yes. That would have an impact on the DSA. And, you know, I’ve expressed where we are on the fiscal targets and on the primary surplus. So I won’t go beyond that.
QUESTIONER: So you mentioned the need of a very long grace period for the Greek repayments. Is 2040, does 2040 look like a reasonable debt to you, dates, not debt? And also you said in the past that the IMF would wait for the first review of the European Program to be concluded for — to decide whether or not you would participate in the program. So should we expect, in the event, I mean, if there’s an agreement next week between you and Greece, should we expect a decision from the IMF about whether or not it will participate in the bailout?
MR. RICE: Yes. I mean, I don’t know what’s going to come out of next week. So I can’t, you know, I can’t give you an expectation on that. I mean, I’ve tried to describe where the discussions are. There are clearly still a number of issues that need to be discussed and decided. So I can’t give you an outcome on that.
MR. RICE: Yes. Again, as I said, I’m not going to get into various numbers and so on. That’s a part of the discussions, but I think I’ve broadly outlined where we stand. You’re going to get the last question. QUESTIONER: So what is the feedback that you’re getting from the Europeans regarding your program analysis?
MR. RICE: I think I want to say we have a very good relationship with our European partners. We are in constant touch with them as we are with the Greek authorities. The discussions are very active and we are fully engaged. I think we are all trying to achieve the same goal which is to benefit Greece and the Greek people.