Assessing Financial Stability Polish Experience – Supervisory Outlook Grzegorz Bielicki Director Off-Site Supervision Department General Inspectorate of Banking Supervision National Bank of Poland International Conference on Financial Stability and Implications of Basel II Istanbul 16-18 May 2005 NBP Overview Financial system in Poland structure of the system implications for financial stability institutional framework Assessing financial stability by Polish central bank organisational framework scope of analysis leading indicators key reports Strategic issues contingency planning and crisis management IAS Basel II home-host relations Summary of current situation & main sources of risk Conclusions 2/61 NBP Financial system in Poland Financial system is small by amount of total assets (ca EUR 180 bn) and as a portion of GDP (ca 80%) On the other hand number of institutions is relatively significant (57 commercial banks, 596 cooperative banks, 83 credit unions, 68 insurance companies, 15 pension funds, 120 investments funds) Financial system is heavily bank-orientated however other types of financial institutions develop strongly since the end of the 1990s. Banks assets cover almost 75% of total assets Insurance companies are second player in the market Pension funds are growing very rapidly, stimulated by the social security system reform in 1999 Investment funds stimulated by interest rate cuts (2001-2003) and the introduction of tax on deposit interest 3/61 NBP Total assets of financial institutions in Poland (PLN billion) 600 500 400 538 429 489 467 470 300 200 100 38 1 97 19 12 2 66 58 47 3 32 23 3 78 45 33 4 63 38 0 2000 Banks Credit Unions 2001 2002 Insurance Companies 2003 Pension Funds 2004 Investment Funds 4/61 NBP The largest bank is still bigger then total assets of other financial sector components (2004, PLN billion) PKO Bank Polski 87,7 Insurance Companies 77,5 62,6 Pension Funds Investment Funds 37,7 4,2 Credit Unions 0 20 40 60 80 5/61 NBP Financial system in Poland (continued) Due to lack of local capital privatisation of financial sector dominated by foreign investors (as in other NMS of EU) Main investors: UniCredito, HypoVereinsbank, Citigroup, ING, Allied Irish Bank, Commerzbank, KBC, BCP Few significant players PKO Bank Polski (the largest bank in NMS), Pekao, Bank BPH, PZU (the largest insurance company in NMS), ING BSK 6 banks among Top 100 banks in Europe by market cap Medium concentration in banking and high in other segments 5 largest banks control 50% of total assets (CR10 - 72%) PZU controls 45% of insurance market 2 largest pension funds control 50% of total assets Satisfactory transparency of the system due to listed 9 of 10 largest banks on the Warsaw Stock Exchange 6/61 NBP Share of foreign investors in total banking sector assets in the NMS of EU (by % of controlled assets) Estonia 97 Slovakia 96 Czech 96 Lithuania 96 83 Hungary Poland 68 Malta 68 47 Latvia 36 Slovenia 12 Cyprus 0 Source: ECB 25 50 75 100 7/61 NBP Geographical distribution of foreign investors in the Polish banking sector assets (by % of controlled assets) 18,9 Germany 11,3 Italy US 8,7 7,9 Netherlands 5,1 4,9 4,0 2,4 2,1 1,2 1,2 Belgium Irleand Portugal France Austria Sweden Others 0 10 20 30 8/61 NBP Market cap of European commercial banks (PKO Bank Polski occupies 40-50 position) HSBC 140 EUR 140.5 bn PKO Bank Polski EUR 6.3 bn Pekao EUR 5.0 bn 120 100 80 60 40 Bank BPH EUR 3.3 bn UniCredito EUR 28.5 bn HVB EUR 14.3 bn Other Polish banks Commerzbank EUR 9.7 bn 20 0 Source: Bloomberg (May 12, 2005) 9/61 Germany Italy Luxembourg UK Spain Ireland Austria France Poland Hungary Sweden Latvia Czech Denmark Greece Slovenia Slovakia Portugal Finland Lithuania Malta Belgium Netherlands Cyprus Estonia NBP CR5 Index in EU 100 20 99 80 83 84 79 81 82 82 60 44 44 44 40 22 27 Source: ECB 88 67 67 67 68 63 66 52 54 50 47 32 33 0 10/61 NBP Implications for financial stability in Poland arising from the structure of financial sector Stability of banking sector is crucial for stability of the whole financial sector (key role of the banking supervision authorities) Concentration requires „close look” to key players Ownership structure requires „close look” on the activity of parent banks (special role of cooperation with home country supervisors) Relatively small financial market means that financial crisis in other emerging markets economies could affect Poland in short term (due to low liquidity of the market and treatment by foreign investors all emerging markets as „one piece”) On the other hand it could be easier to handle crisis (cost of the crisis in the mid 1990’s was ca 3.5% of GDP) 11/61 6 USA (1988-91) Poland (1989-91) Sweden (1996-2000) Spain (1982-89) Norway (1991-95) 50 Argentina (1994-97) 60 Indonesia (1981-84) 40 Chile (1981-91) Korea (1991-94) 20 Japan (1992-94) 13 19 Mexico (1988-91) 12 Brazil (1987-93) 4 11 Czech (1997-2000) 4 10 Finland (1997-2000) 3 Turkey (1981-83) 20 Hungary (1992-2000) 3 Australia (1996-97) 0 1 2 8 France (1989-92) NBP Costs of the banking crisis (as % of GDP) 55 41 27 Source: Honohan, Klingebiel “Controlling the Fiscal Costs of Banking Crises”, World Bank 12/61 NBP Financial sector - institutional framework Primary banking sector regulator Commission for Banking Supervision (CBS) Insurance and Pension Funds Commission National Bank of Poland (NBP) Monetary Policy Council (MPC) Banking Guarantee Fund Ministry of Finance Securities & Exchange Commission 13/61 NBP Organisational structure of the central bank in the context of the assessing financial stability CBS Governor of NBP Chairman of CBS, MPC and NBP MPC NBP General Inspectorate of Banking Supervision – banking sector • Financial System Department – banking sector and financial system • Payment System Department - payment and settlement system • Domestic Operations Department – money market and banking sector liquidity • Macroeconomic and Structural Analysis Department – monetary policy • Bureau of Macroeconomic Research - macroeconomic modelling 14/61 NBP General Inspectorate of Banking Supervision (GINB) executive arm of CBS (467 staff) Commission for Banking Supervision National Bank of Poland General Inspector of Banking Supervision member of CBS Licensing Division Supervisory Policy Division Macro-prudential Unit 14 analysts Banking System Off-Site Analysis Division On-site Examination Division Micro-prudential Units 41 off-site analysts Co-operative Banking Division 15/61 NBP General Inspectorate of Banking Supervision Key functions Licensing banks, monitoring ownership structure and adequacy of management Drafting prudential regulations for banking system (in compliance with EU standards) On-site examination Off-site supervision micro-analysis (individual bank) macro-analysis (trends, sources of risk, assessment the impact of monetary policy, tax policy and regulatory activity on the banking sector situation) supervision on consolidated basis 16/61 NBP Inspections run by GINB in commercial banks (270 on-site examiners) number of commercial banks full scope examination target examination 80 70 73 69 60 59 50 58 48 57 40 30 22 20 17 25 20 21 19 18 18 10 15 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Top 10 banks and banks with overall CAEL rating 4 or 5 are subject to full-scope examination every 2 yrs 17/61 NBP Financial System Department of NBP (38 staff) Deputy Governor of NBP Financial System Department Financial Stability Unit Financial Markets Development Unit Operational Analysis Unit moved recently to Domestic Operation Department Financial Market Analysis Unit 18/61 NBP Financial System Department of NBP Key functions analysing stability of the financial system analysing development of the financial system analysing financial markets from the perspective of monetary policy developing and operating the system of identification of systemic threats and developing and coordinating management of crisis situations by the central bank 19/61 NBP General Inspectorate of Banking Supervision vs. Financial System Department of NBP in the context of the assessing financial stability General Inspectorate of Banking Supervision - main focus on the banking sector - complex analysis of individual banks Financial System Banking Sector Financial System Department - main focus on the whole financial system - complex analysis of the whole system 20/61 NBP Assessment Financial Stability The scope of macro-prudential analysis Macro-economy Financial institutions special focus on banking sector Foreign parent banks monitoring Financial markets Assessment Financial Stability Institutional & legal framework Others 21/61 NBP Financial stability assessment in Poland is similar to international standards Supervision techniques inspired by international experience focus on risk approach and in-depth, comprehensive exams in banks in the 1990’s Polish supervisors were trained in the US Participation in international bodies Financial Soundness Indicators (FSI) used in Poland are similar to FSI used by IMF In 2001 IMF made Financial System Stability Assessment of Poland (FSSAP) Conclusion: ”The mission concluded that no major immediate issues in terms of systemic stability were apparent” 22/61 NBP Key Macro-economy Indicators Overall Economy Condition GDP growth and its components industrial output, construction, retail sales exports, imports, competitiveness ratios, effective exchange rates unemployment CPI, PPI monetary data current account balance/GDP, official reserve assets as months of goods and services imports FDI public finance sector deficit country rating Corporate Sector earnings, share of corporate with positive earnings liquidity ratio debt and loan burden ratio (liabilities or loans / total assets) financing structure manufacturing capacity utilisation corporate sector confidence index Household Sector real wages growth debt burden ratio financial assets structure consumer confidence index 23/61 NBP Key areas of analysis of non-banking financial institutions and financial markets Non-banking Financial Institutions structure, concentration, M&A earnings key position in balance sheet key trends Financial Markets money market interest rates currency exchange rates banking interest rates yields on treasury bills & bonds, and corporate commercial papers & bonds debt and loan burden ratio (liabilities or loans /total assets) equity market indexes investment funds Institutional & Legal Framework overall structure barriers of entry surveys on banks opinions Others payment system key trends in world economy and financial markets (special regard to EU, especially Germany) assessments of Poland by IMF and other international institutions and rating agencies 24/61 NBP Key areas of analysis of individual bank CAMELIFO Approach Evaluation of statistical models used by banks to asses market risks Capital Assets Management Earnings Liquidity Interest Rate Risk Market position & reputation Ratings – FITCH, Moody's, S&P Financial Soundness of Parent Bank FX Risk Operational Risk Supervisory Tools 1/ UBPR 2/ Supervisory Profile 3/ Executive Summary 25/61 NBP Key areas of analysis of the banking sector are similar to individual bank analysis however macro view perspective is applied Structure of the sector & distribution channels Balance sheet & off-balance sheet items (structure, key trends) Earnings (structure, key trends, efficiency) Liquidity Risk Credit Risk (FX loans, large exposures, industry risk) Market Risk (FX risk, IRR, equity price risk, property price risk) Capital position and loss-absorbing capacity Unique database covering significant exposures (65% of total loans) Uniform Bank Performance Report scenario analysis VaR techniques stress testing distance to default 26/61 NBP Key Products Issuer KNB Title Frequency Publication Evaluation of the Financial Situation of the Banking Sector quarterly no Summary Evaluation of the Financial Situation of the Banking Sector quarterly yes yearly no semi-annually yes yearly yes Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey quarterly yes Inflation Report quarterly yes yearly yes periodically yes Impact of the Monetary Policy, Tax Policy and Regulation Activity on the Banking Sector Financial System Department RPP Financial Stability Report Financial Market in Poland Report on Monetary Policy Implementation Other publications and research papers 27/61 NBP Strategic Issues Contingency planning & crisis management IAS implementation Basel II & CRD Cross border banking Outsourcing Consumer protection Home-Host issues 28/61 NBP Contingency planning & crisis management are necessary for safety of financial system Prudential supervision, risk analysis and oversight of the payment system are essential but not sufficient for financial stability Crisis management and resolutions are absolutely necessary to create safety net On country level Emergency Liquidity Assistance (ELA) is the main device of central banks to deal with banking crisis On EU level Memorandum of Understanding on high level principles of cooperation between the banking supervisors and central banks of the European Union in financial crisis situation (sign in 2003, Poland entered the MoU in July 2004) Memorandum of Understanding on co-operation between the banking supervisors, central banks and finance ministers of the European Union in financial crisis situation (to be signed in May 2005) 29/61 NBP IAS implementation (in the part adopted by the European Commission) IAS implementation majority IAS aspects already covered in the amendment of Polish Accounting Act in 2001 and 2004 banks which control 75% of total banking sector assets will report under IAS In short run IAS implementation can deteriorate data comparability and complicate on-going analysis but in longer run will have positive impact on assessment of financial stability and ensure better comparability than historic accounting First report from one of Top10 bank encouraging (differences reported are marginal) 30/61 NBP New Basel Accord & Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) Preparation in Poland – special interdepartmental project team in the banking supervision General perception of Basel II and CRD positive, however, some areas of concern: high complexity, which could be a problem for small banks (especially cooperative banks) implementation costs for supervisors and banks lower capital requirements for more advanced banks - trade-off: less capital vs. better risk management cross border issues (home-host - relations & responsibilities) 31/61 NBP New Basel Accord & Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) (continued) New challenges Pillar 1 – introducing new methods for calculation credit risk capital requirements (STA, FIRB, AIRB), and capital requirements for operational risk Pillar 2 – ICAAP, SREP, economic capital, supervisory measures, risk not covered by Pillar 1 Pillar 3 – market discipline, disclosure requirements cross border issues (home-host) Results of QIS 3 12 banks cover 80% of total banking sector assets STA approach more favourable for Polish banks then FIRB total capital requirements rose by 10%, while in FIRB by 37% CAR dropped by 1.2 in STA and 4.0 in FIRB Main reasons for differences: conservative approach in FIRB models and data from the bottom of the business cycle 32/61 NBP Results of QIS3 Comparison Polish banks with G10, EU & Others (Group 2 – Tier 1 < EUR 3 bn) Change in Capital requirements Standardised approach G10 EU Corporate -1% -1% Sovereign 0% Bank Retail SME Securitised assets Other PL G10 EU 0% 0% -4% -5% -1% 5% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 2% -1% -1% 1% 3% -10% -7% -4% -4% -17% -18% -8% 2% -2% -2% -1% -1% -4% -5% 1% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% -1% -1% 1% 0% -3% -2% -2% 0% 3% 5% 5% 8% -27% -27% -3% 25% General provisions Other portfolios Overall credit risk Operational risk Overall change IRB Foundation approach Other PL 1% -1% 3% 1% -11% -11% 2% -2% 15% 12% 11% 12% 7% 6% 7% 12% 3% 1% 12% 10% -19% -20% 4% 37% 33/61 NBP Results of QIS3 - STA vs. FIRB (no bank reported CAR below 8) Main reasons for differences: 1/ conservative approach in FIRB models 2/ data from the bottom of business cycle 40 37 30 25 20 12 10 0 -2 -10 12 10 -1,2 STA - Standardised approach Overall credit risk Overall change in capital requirements -4,0 FIRB - IRB Foundation approach Operational risk Change in CAR 34/61 NBP Pillar 2 Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP) and Supervisory Review Evaluation Process (SREP) Key objectives: create incentive for banks to develop modern risk control, risk management systems, and capital planning processes align better supervisory assessment and bank internal capital process ICAAP – internal bank process: setting up internal (economic) capital against its risks and for other purposes (e.g. better rating) Main challenges now: ICAAP in small institutions. Problem with assessment of economic capital in simple institutions Non-easily quantifiable risks – pro-cyclicality and reputation risks Comparability, level playing field in SREP Supervisors role as regards Pillar II: to challenge banks` ICAAP in context of Pillar I and II risks Corporate governance part of the Pillar II assessment 35/61 NBP Home – Host supervisory relations more important under Basle II Perhaps time to revise Basle Concordat of 1983 to reflect in more balanced way recent trends in emerging markets and information flow Home to Host Last 15 yrs – dynamic expansion of multinational banks into other countries Need to coordinate better supervisory efforts In many non-G10 countries due to privatisation of major local banks international banks control local, systemically important banks (SIB) Due to Basle II – many processes of implementation coordinated and developed at group level The more delegation of Basle II work to consolidated (Home supervisor) – the more coordination needed and more information flow from Home to Host But also input needed from Host to Host to capture local risks (local models, local data) Need to re-balance international standards of supervisory cooperation to reflect better needs of Host supervisors regarding their SIBs 36/61 NBP Crucial role of local supervisor and central bank as well as compliance and corporate governance on local level for country’s financial stability Many subsidiaries and branches of foreign banks play systemically important role on local market No clear evidence of cross-border banking group failure No international schemes for sharing of budgetary (fiscal) costs of cross-border banking group failure, especially in case of systemic bank crisis No supranational liquidity supplier No international deposit insurance No legal liability of parent for deposits of subsidiary (only “moral responsibility”) and no explicit liquidity support but Responsibility of local deposit insurance agency Only local ELA potentially available Expectation of local government intervention in case of SIB crisis 37/61 NBP Subsidiaries of foreign financial group play significant role in Polish banking sector although they are a fraction of parent balance sheet Share of foreign owned subsidiary in Polish banking sector Share of subsidiary in parent institution assets 11,2 10,0 10 6,4 5 6,3 5,6 5,5 2,8 1,0 0,8 Bank Slaski ING Handlowy Citigroup 0 Pekao Unicredito BPH - HVB 1,7 BRE Commerzbank 38/61 NBP Total assets of Polish banking sector are lower then total assets of parent institution Share of Polish banking sector in parent institution assets 50 49,6 40 30 31,0 28,2 20 15,2 10 12,1 0 Ploand vs. Unicredito Poland vs. HVB Poland vs. ING Poland vs. Poland vs. Citigroup Commerzbank 39/61 NBP Subsidiaries of foreign financial groups play systemic role in NMS and some old EU members 60 56 subsidiary 1 51 subsidiary 2 subsidiary 3 40 32 14 16 18 Austria 15 14 Portugal 20 Latvia 23 21 Malta 22 18 Denmark Lithuania Source: ECB Finland Estonia 0 20 Czech 20 24 Slovakia 28 26 40/61 NBP Overview of key trends in Polish economy & financial markets 2004 GDP grew by 5.3% driven by EU accession, exports (30.3% in PLN), individual consumption (3.2%) and investments (5.1%) Industrial output rose by 12.3% and connected with CIT reduction (from 28% to 19%) push corporate profits to record high FDI flow continue CPI rose by 4.4% (now declining) and caused tightening in monetary policy by 125 bps (in 2005 lose by 50 bps) – monetary target 2.5% (+/1%) PLN appreciation (13.5% against EUR, 20.1% against USD) Recovery on the bond market (10YTB – 5.8%) Solid returns on the equity market (WIG rose by 26.9%) Consumer confidence index improved after EU accession Expectation for upgrade to A- by S&P in the next 12-months 41/61 NBP After 2001-2002 slowdown economy recovered and get a momentum (growth rates & unemployment rate) 30 30,2 26,7 24,9 20 20,0 19,4 15,1 10 4,0 0 2000 GDP 13,0 1,0 0,6 2001 Exports PLN 19,1 12,3 8,3 7,4 6,7 20,0 1,4 1,1 2002 Industrial output 5,4 3,8 2003 Real wages 2004 Unemploment rate 42/61 NBP FDI flows continue Cumulated FDI (over 1 mn) since 1993 amounted USD 80.6 bn It is expected that in 2006 FDI should exceed USD 10 bn French 19.9% Netherlands 13.8% US 12.6% German 12.6% 10 Financial sector 23.4% 10,6 9,6 7,9 5,2 5 2,8 1,5 7,1 5,7 7,9 6,1 6,4 2,5 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 43/61 NBP Corporate, banking & insurance companies profits reached record levels 60,7 86,0 75 70,6 64,2 63,5 61,6 30 50 18,0 10 6,2 4,2 2000 -10 4,2 0,5 -2,6 2001 2,3 1,1 -2,0 2002 25 7,3 1,5 2,3 2003 3,0 2,0 2004 % of corporate with positive earnings 50 bn PLN 100 Corporate earnings Banking earnings Insurance companies earnings % of corporate with positive earnings 0 44/61 NBP Interest rates continue to drop in the long term CPI NBP reference rate 25 overall zloty deposits overall zloty loans corporate loans 20 households loans 15 10 5 0 12.99 12.00 12.01 12.02 12.03 12.04 45/61 NBP After sell-off in mid 2003 - mid 2004 period bond market rebounded and yields go to EU levels (yields 10 Treasury bonds) Poland Czech Hungary Germany US 15 10 5 0 12.99 12.00 Source: Bloomberg 12.01 12.02 12.03 12.04 46/61 NBP PLN exchange rates against major currencies are stable in the long term 5,0 EUR USD CHF 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5 2,0 12.99 12.00 12.01 12.02 12.03 12.04 47/61 NBP Equity markets in Eastern Europe outperform markets in matured economies since 2002 (banking stocks form 45% of total market cap) Return on equities % 50 44,9 37,1 30 26,4 10 -1,3 27,9 7,3 3,2 -7,5 -10 -10,1 -22,0 -13,0 9,0 -23,4 -19,8 -30 -43,9 -50 2000 2001 WIG BUX 2002 DAX 2003 FTSE100 2004 S&P500 48/61 NBP General trends in the Polish Banking Sector Ownership structure dominated by foreign financial groups, consolidation stopped (depends on foreign banks decisions) After poor period profits jump to record highs, efficiency ratios on average EU levels Retail banking main driver of banking income and main area of banking competition (especially mortgage loans), while corporate loans shrunk Credit risk remain main source of risk, FX risk and other market risks are relatively low Strong improvement in loan portfolio quality Difficulties in raising deposits from households 49/61 NBP Corporates reduce loans and increase deposits on opposite households reduce deposit and increase lending's (loans & deposits growth rates) 60 housholds loans housholds deposits 50 corporate loans corporate deposits 40 30 20 10 0 12.99 12.00 12.01 12.02 12.03 12.04 -10 50/61 NBP Credit risk remains main source of risk (allocation of capital requirements per type of risk %) 100 93,5 75 50 25 4,4 2,1 Market Risk Others 0 Credit Risk 51/61 NBP Efficiency and safety is comparable with EU however further improvement in cost control is necessary 4 100 3,3 3 NIM 75 2 1,4 C/I 25 0 0 20 17,6 15 15 ROE 10 60,4 50 1 20 66,6 9,9 CAR 12,4 10 5 5 0 0 Poland (data for 2004) 15,6 EU 15 (data for 2003) 52/61 NBP Positive outlook for the banking sector is confirmed by improvements in overall CAEL rating (share of banks with given CAEL rating in total assets) 100 80 75,0 60 54,9 52,6 44,4 40 28,1 20 0 30,5 38,5 22,8 24,0 18,7 0,6 2000 Global rating 1 80,7 1,1 2001 Global rating 2 6,2 0,4 2002 Global rating 3 18,9 0,3 0,1 2,1 0,1 2003 Global rating 4 2004 Global rating 5 53/61 NBP Main source of risks Efficiency of legal framework Economy public sector deficit and budget spending unemployment and low working activity Banking sector lending to households (FX and property loans) short term deposits vs. longer term assets non-parallel trend in convergence of Poland to EU – lowering interest rates and NIM but business volumes remain relatively low Political risk cap on interest rates (usury) consumer bankruptcy 2005 President and Parliament election 54/61 NBP Efficiency of legal framework (average debtors work-out period, days) 1000 1000 Legal system requires immediate reform 800 565 600 400 200 300 48 112 189 Netherlands Japan France Denmark Belgium Estonia Greece Lithuania Spain Germany Latvia Sweden Ireland Finland China USA UK Czech Portugal Russia Canada Hungary Austria Slovakia Poland Slovenia 0 Source: Doing Business in 2005: Removing Obstacles to Growth, World Bank 55/61 NBP Public spending is high comparing to system leaders (public spending as % of GDP) Cuts in public spending are necessary 48,4 44,6 40 35,2 35,9 31,4 29,1 20 0 Korea Ireland Source: OECD, data for 2002 USA Lithuania Hungary Poland 56/61 NBP Public sector debt could be a danger (public sector debt as % of GDP) Further fiscal reforms are necessary 60 50,1 45,1 40 39,1 40,3 36,6 48,9 39,7 20 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 57/61 NBP Working activity is dramatic low (employment as % of population between 15-64) Labour market & social spending reform is necessary 60 51 75 72 73 74 72 67 68 69 69 65 65 65 61 61 62 63 63 63 60 60 56 57 58 58 30 Poland Italy Hungary Slovakia Greece Belgium Spain Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Slovenia France Estonia Czech Germany Ireland Portugal Finland Austria Cyprus United USA Sweden Netherlands Denmark 0 Source: Employment in Europe, European Commission, 2003 58/61 NBP Fast growth of loans to households, especially mortgage FX loans pose long term risk (% structure of loan portfolio 1997-2004) Corporate loans Households loans mortgage loans to households FX mortgage loans to households 67,9 60 51,4 48,3 40 31,8 20 15,8 1,9 0 1997 8,9 0,1 2004 59/61 NBP Conclusions Positive outlook in short term, however, public finance may pose danger Contingency planning and crisis management on country and international level are necessary for safety net IAS implementation & Basel II should have positive impact on assessment of financial stability in long run Cross-border banking and Basel II/CRD warrant redefinition of international arrangements (home-host relations & responsibilities) 60/61 NBP THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION 61/61