Blog post

Yet another “break- or-make” summit

Publishing date
29 June 2012

European leaders met for yet another “break-or-make” summit. My sense is that we have gotten a relatively good deal but more summits will follow.  So the glass is half-full but governance by brinkmanship will continue. Here are some initial observations on the banking part of the deal.

1)      Leaders have now fully endorsed the view that the negative sovereign-banking loop needs to be stopped.  The statement is really strong on this.

2)      It is a major step forward to grant supervisory authority to the ECB or an institution at the ECB. As we have argued in a recent paper on the banking union, this is basically the necessary first step to introduce a common insurance.

3)      It is also a major step that the ESM will be given the possibility to directly capitalize banks in need once the ECB has the supervisory powers.

4)      The document says very little on bank resolution, except that capital injections into banks “… would rely on appropriate conditionality, including compliance with state aid rules, which should be institution specific, sector-specific or economy-wide and would be formalised in a Memorandum of Understanding.”

  • There will have to be much more work done on who is actually going to do bank resolution and how. The statement suggests that the Commission will play somewhat of a role but this will need to be defined clearly. Most importantly, a strong governance will have to be put in place to allow the euro area to effectively take a decision to intervene in case of problems.

5)      It appears that the Euro Summit opens the scope for a re-negotiation of the Irish deal. Equal treatment certainly played a role and the Irish must have insisted that should Spain’s banking problems be Europeanized it would be unfair to keep the Irish banking problems for the Irish taxpayer.

  • More important is, in my view, however the consideration that the euro leaders want to create a success story and make it possible that Ireland returns to the market next year. The Irish basically fulfilled their programme. To be able to regain market access, some debt relief may eventually become necessary.

6)      On Spain, it appears that we stay with the current model for the time being. However, seniority is removed. Only once ECB supervision is in place, the ESM will be able to directly inject capital. So instead of a 100bn increase in the debt level, perhaps only half of it will be on the books of the Spanish government.

7)      The removal of the preferred creditor status (PCS) will likely prove controversial. In Slovakia, PCS played a major role to get the ESM pass the ratification process. This is now somewhat being circumvented by agreeing that the EFSF would provide credits without preferred creditor status and then migrating these credits under the same conditions to the ESM.

  • I am not sure, how the Bundestag will react on the matter in the ratification process of the ESM. See on the matter.
  • It is unclear what PCS as enshrined in the ESM treaty means when the ESM gets to do equity injections into banks.

About the authors

  • Guntram B. Wolff

    Guntram Wolff is a Senior fellow at Bruegel. He is also a Professor of Economics at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB). 

    From 2022-2024, he was the Director and CEO of the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) and from 2013-22 the director of Bruegel. Over his career, he has contributed to research on European political economy, climate policy, geoeconomics, macroeconomics and foreign affairs. His work was published in academic journals such as Nature, Science, Research Policy, Energy Policy, Climate Policy, Journal of European Public Policy, Journal of Banking and Finance. His co-authored book “The macroeconomics of decarbonization” is published in Cambridge University Press.

    An experienced public adviser, he has been testifying twice a year since 2013 to the informal European finance ministers’ and central bank governors’ ECOFIN Council meeting on a large variety of topics. He also regularly testifies to the European Parliament, the Bundestag and speaks to corporate boards. In 2020,  ranked him one of the 28 most influential “power players” in Europe. From 2012-16, he was a member of the French prime minister’s Conseil d’Analyse Economique. In 2018, then IMF managing director Christine Lagarde appointed him to the external advisory group on surveillance to review the Fund’s priorities. In 2021, he was appointed member and co-director to the G20 High level independent panel on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response under the co-chairs Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Lawrence H. Summers and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. From 2013-22, he was an advisor to the Mastercard Centre for Inclusive Growth. He is a member of the Bulgarian Council of Economic Analysis, the European Council on Foreign Affairs and advisory board of Elcano. He is also a fellow at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

    Guntram joined Bruegel from the European Commission, where he worked on the macroeconomics of the euro area and the reform of euro area governance. Prior to joining the Commission, he worked in the research department at the Bundesbank, which he joined after completing his PhD in economics at the University of Bonn. He also worked as an external adviser to the International Monetary Fund. He is fluent in German, English, and French. His work is regularly published and cited in leading media. 

Related content