IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bre/polcon/12814.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The European Central Bank’s quantitative easing programme: limits and risks

Author

Listed:
  • Grégory Claeys
  • Alvaro Leandro

Abstract

Highlights The European Central Bank (ECB) has made a number of significant changes to the original guidelines of its quantitative easing (QE) programme since the programme started in January 2015. These changes are welcome because the original guidelines would have rapidly constrained the programme’s implementation. The changes announced expand the universe of purchasable assets and give some flexibility to the ECB in the execution of its programme. However, this might not be enough to sustain QE throughout 2017, or if the ECB wishes to increase the monthly amount of purchases in order to provide the necessary monetary stimulus to the euro area to bring inflation back to 2 percent. To increase the programme’s flexibility, the ECB could further alter the composition of its purchases. The extension of the QE programme also raises some legitimate questions about its potential adverse consequences. However, the benefits of this policy still outweigh its possible negative implications for financial stability or for inequality. The fear that the ECB’s credibility will be undermined because of its QE programme also seems to be largely unfounded. On the contrary, the primary risk to the ECB’s credibility is the risk of not reaching its 2 percent inflation target, which could lead to expectations becoming disanchored. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The European Central Bank (ECB) has made a number of significant changes to the original design of its quantitative easing (QE) programme since the programme started in January 2015. The bank has expanded the list of national agencies whose securities are eligible for the Public Sector Purchase Programme (PSPP); it has changed the issue share limit (ensuring that the Eurosystem will not breach the prohibition on monetary financing), which was originally set at 25 percent, to 33 percent (at least for securities without collective action clauses); it has added regional and local government bonds to the list of eligible assets; it has announced that the programme would continue past September 2016, the previously-announced minimum end-date, to March 2017 “or beyond, if necessary”; and it has declared its intention to reinvest the principal payments on the securities purchased under the programme as they mature. As explained in Claeys et al (2015b), the programme’s original guidelines would have constrained the size and duration of the programme, especially if it was sustained throughout 2017. The changes to the design of the programme announced during 2015 greatly expand the universe of purchasable assets and should therefore delay the point at which limits will be reached. However, the decision to reinvest the principal payments as bonds mature, by increasing the monthly monetary purchase after March 2017, would also lead to the limits being reached sooner. In the same way, a decision by the ECB to increase the amount of PSPP purchases each month, for instance from €44 billion to €64 billion, would also frontload the purchases. In the end, because of the issue share limit, for a given set of securities there will always be a trade-off between larger monthly purchases and a prolonged programme. Further changes to the design of the programme will have to be implemented in order to increase the duration of the programme if the limit is binding in a major country before inflation is on the path towards 2 percent. These could include waiving the issue limit for AAA-rated bonds, or purchasing senior uncovered bank bonds as well corporate bonds. A more radical change could be to move away from an allocation of asset purchases between countries based on the ECB capital keys to an allocation based on the actual size of their outstanding debt. We also discuss the possible financial stability risks of a prolonged and large-scale QE programme, and conclude that the benefits of large-scale asset purchases outweigh their potential risks in terms of financial stability. However, micro- and macro-prudential policies should be used forcefully to prevent such risks from materialising. We also consider the potential effects that a prolonged asset-purchase programme could have on inequality. The increase in inequality observed in many advanced countries in recent decades is a long-term trend and primarily the result of deep structural changes. Our view is that the primary mandate of the ECB is to maintain price stability, and considerations of inequality are not within its purview, unless inequality prevents the transmission of monetary policy in some way. The ECB should therefore focus on fulfilling its price stability mandate by supporting the fragile recovery now taking place in the euro area. This is the best way for monetary policy to contribute to the avoidance of an increase in inequality. The fear that the ECB will lose its credibility solely because it is currently buying a large amount of sovereign bonds appears to be largely unfounded. The primary risk to the ECB’s credibility is the risk of not reaching its inflation target.

Suggested Citation

  • Grégory Claeys & Alvaro Leandro, 2016. "The European Central Bank’s quantitative easing programme: limits and risks," Policy Contributions 12814, Bruegel.
  • Handle: RePEc:bre:polcon:12814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://bruegel.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/pc_2016_04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Afonso, António & Arghyrou, Michael G. & Gadea, María Dolores & Kontonikas, Alexandros, 2018. "“Whatever it takes” to resolve the European sovereign debt crisis? Bond pricing regime switches and monetary policy effects," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-30.
    2. HOHBERGER, Stefan; PRIFTIS, Romanos; VOGEL, Lukas, 2017. "The macroeconomic effects of quantitative easing in the Euro area : evidence from an estimated DSGE model," Economics Working Papers ECO2017/04, European University Institute.
    3. Jan Philipp Fritsche & Lea Steininger, 2019. "Handlungsspielraum der EZB - von Zinspolitik bis Helikoptergeld," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 134, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. repec:eee:jimfin:v:85:y:2018:i:c:p:236-250 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Romanos Priftis & Lukas Vogel, 2016. "The Portfolio Balance Mechanism and QE in the Euro Area," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 84(S1), pages 84-105, September.
    6. Diermeier, Matthias & Goecke, Henry, 2016. "Money supply and inflation in Europe: Is there still a connection?," IW policy papers 17/2016E, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft (IW) / German Economic Institute.
    7. Afonso, António & Arghyrou, Michael G. & Gadea, María Dolores & Kontonikas, Alexandros, 2018. "“Whatever it takes” to resolve the European sovereign debt crisis? Bond pricing regime switches and monetary policy effects," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-30.
    8. Diermeier, Matthias & Goecke, Henry, 2016. "Geldmenge und Inflation in Europa: Ist der Zusammenhang verloren?," IW policy papers 17/2016, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft (IW) / German Economic Institute.
    9. Anne-Marie Rieu-Foucault, 2018. "Les interventions de crise de la FED et de la BCE diffèrent-elles ?," EconomiX Working Papers 2018-31, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    10. Florian Urbschat & Sebastian Watzka, 2017. "Quantitative Easing in the Euro Area - An Event Study Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 6709, CESifo Group Munich.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bre:polcon:12814. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bruegel). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/bruegbe.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.