Completing the Banking Union with a European Deposit Insurance Scheme: Who is Afraid of Cross-Subsidisation?

57 Pages Posted: 18 Apr 2018

See all articles by Jacopo Carmassi

Jacopo Carmassi

European Central Bank

Sonja Dobkowitz

Bonn University

Johanne Evrard

European Central Bank (ECB)

Laura Parisi

European Central Bank (ECB)

André F. Silva

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Michael Wedow

European Central Bank (ECB) - Directorate Financial Stability and Supervision

Date Written: April 11, 2018

Abstract

On 24 November 2015, the European Commission published a proposal to establish a European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS). The proposal provides for the creation of a Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) with a target size of 0.8% of covered deposits in the euro area and the progressive mutualisation of its resources until a fully-fledged scheme is introduced by 2024. This paper investigates the potential impact and appropriateness of several features of EDIS in the steady state. The main findings are the following: first, a fully-funded DIF would be sufficient to cover payouts even in a severe banking crisis. Second, risk-based contributions can and should internalise specificities of banks and banking systems. This would tackle moral hazard and facilitate moving forward with risk sharing measures towards the completion of the Banking Union in parallel with risk reduction measures; this approach would also be preferable to lowering the target level of the DIF to take into account banking system specificities. Third, smaller and larger banks would not excessively contribute to EDIS relative to the amount of covered deposits in their balance sheet. Fourth, there would be no unwarranted systematic cross-subsidisation within EDIS in the sense of some banking systems systematically contributing less than they would benefit from the DIF. This result holds also when country-specific shocks are simulated. Fifth, under a mixed deposit insurance scheme composed of national deposit insurance funds bearing the first burden and a European deposit insurance fund intervening only afterwards, cross-subsidisation would increase relative to a fully-fledged EDIS. The key drivers behind these results are: i) a significant risk-reduction in the banking system and increase in banks' loss-absorbing capacity in the aftermath of the global financial crisis; ii) a super priority for covered deposits, further contributing to protect EDIS; iii) an appropriate design of risk-based contributions, benchmarked at the euro area level, following a "polluter-pays" approach.

Keywords: European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS), risk-based contributions, cross-subsidisation

JEL Classification: G21, G28

Suggested Citation

Carmassi, Jacopo and Dobkowitz, Sonja and Evrard, Johanne and Parisi, Laura and Silva, André F. and Wedow, Michael, Completing the Banking Union with a European Deposit Insurance Scheme: Who is Afraid of Cross-Subsidisation? (April 11, 2018). ECB Occasional Paper No. 208, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3161390 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3161390

Jacopo Carmassi (Contact Author)

European Central Bank ( email )

Sonnemannstrasse 22
Frankfurt am Main, 60314
Germany

Sonja Dobkowitz

Bonn University ( email )

Bonn
Germany

Johanne Evrard

European Central Bank (ECB) ( email )

Sonnemannstrasse 22
Frankfurt am Main, 60314
Germany

Laura Parisi

European Central Bank (ECB) ( email )

Sonnemannstrasse 22
Frankfurt am Main, 60314
Germany

André F. Silva

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System ( email )

20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20551
United States

Michael Wedow

European Central Bank (ECB) - Directorate Financial Stability and Supervision ( email )

Frankfurt a.M.
Germany

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
184
Abstract Views
1,214
Rank
298,409
PlumX Metrics