Can a New York state law solve an emerging markets debt crisis?
Send a link to a friend
[June 01, 2023] By
Rodrigo Campos and Jorgelina do Rosario
NEW YORK/LONDON (Reuters) - A bill backed by debt justice campaigners
and civil society groups advocating on behalf of economically distressed
countries could alter past and future sovereign debt restructurings
covered by New York state law - and Wall Street is watching.
These are some key points about the bill.
WHAT DOES THE BILL PROPOSE?
Senate Bill S4747, the NY Taxpayer and International Debt Crises
Protection Act, "relates to New York state's support of international
debt relief initiatives for certain developing countries."
The bill includes limits to state investments into foreign entities and
would include private creditors in "burden-sharing standards" in which
they would take the same losses - or "haircuts" - that the United States
government would as a sovereign creditor when a low-income country in
distress qualifies for debt relief.
The limit of this definition is a point of contention between the
advocates of the bill and its detractors.
WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS FOR THE BILL?
In the Assembly, the bill passed 14 to 5 in the Judiciary committee and
is now awaiting vote in the Ways and Means committee. Alexander Flood,
director of communications for Patricia Fahy, the bill sponsor in that
chamber, said they are "hopeful" it will be out of committee and up for
a full vote next week. At the Senate, it remains at the Judiciary
committee.
Time is tight, as the 2023 legislative session ends on June 8. It could
get a floor vote as late as June 7, and if same versions are approved it
goes to Governor Kathy Hochul who, in the off-session, would call the
bill up at her own time. She could sign, veto or amend it - in which
case it needs to go back to the sponsors.
WHY IS THE ISSUE SO PRESSING?
A toxic mix of ballooning inflation, escalating borrowing costs and a
strong dollar in the wake of COVID-19 and Russia's war in Ukraine has
made repaying loans and raising money significantly more expensive for
dozens of developing nations. Some, such as Sri Lanka and Zambia have
tipped into default.
Emerging markets total debt climbed to over $100 trillion by end-March,
a nominal record, according to data from the Institute of International
Finance (IIF).
The Group of 20 pledged to streamline debt treatments through its Common
Framework platform and seeks comparable relief from bilateral creditors
such as the Paris Club and China. The initiative has so far failed to
accelerate debt relief talks, while private creditors are not even
formally included in this initiative.
[to top of second column] |
U.S. dollar banknotes are seen in this
illustration taken March 10, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File
Photo
WHO ARE THE BILL'S BACKERS?
The bill is supported by major state and national unions and
churches, as well as economic development organizations. It would
"bring badly needed improvements to the framework for resolving
unsustainable sovereign debt burdens," according to Nobel
Prize-winning U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz.
"The bill helps to add enforcement capabilities - something that the
G20 Common Framework lacks even though as a matter of principle it
recognizes the need for private sector participation," said
Rishikesh Ram Bhandary, Assistant Director of the Global Economic
Governance Initiative at Boston University's Global Development
Policy Center.
"A speedy and orderly economic recovery is in the interest of all
creditors," he said. "Moreover, through this legislation creditors
would also have the clarity on what the terms are for everyone else,
so this helps inter-creditor equity as well."
WHY ARE PRIVATE CREDITORS AGAINST THE BILL?
The argument from banking trade group IIF and others is that the
bill won't work as written, with investors concerned their capital
would potentially "become hostage to a protracted legal process to
define appropriate recovery values." Additionally, issuers could
face higher costs as the legal uncertainty raises risk premiums.
"The bill’s proponents hope to change international debt markets,
but the much more likely outcome would be capital flight from New
York, ultimately leading to lost income tax and other revenue to the
state," a group of capital markets trade groups, including the IIF
and insurers said in a recent statement.
If this bill passes, "I would recommend issuers not go through New
York law, (but) through London or any other jurisdiction," said
Rodrigo Olivares-Caminal, professor of banking and finance law at
Queen Mary University of London.
The law as written is "way more far-reaching" than covering just the
debt of poor and distressed countries and, for example, a Paris Club
agreement with U.S. participation and dealing with Brazil, Argentina
or other non-low-income country could fall under this if few private
creditors are somehow involved, he said.
(Reporting by Rodrigo Campos and Jorgelina do Rosario; editing by
Karin Strohecker and Aurora Ellis)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |