As the Russia/ NATO/US/OSCE talks didn’t make real progress, it’s important to look again at this possibility. Can they cut Russia from SWIFT & would this be Armageddon for Russia?
Good & difficult question.
Let’s start with basics: what’s SWIFT? It’s simply a messaging system. A chat app if you want! But it only sends special messages designed for cross-border financial transactions for banks globally, for the 11k banks that are part of the network.
Is it possible to cut Russia from it? The US tried in 2014, and the answer they got from SWIFT was “we will not make unilateral decisions to disconnect institutions from its network as a result of political pressure”. In your face.
That’s because SWIFT is not American, of course. Actually, it’s a “cooperative society” based in
Belgium under Belgian law! Seriously! So the owners are the members of the networks, with shares reallocated on a regular basis based on flows.
So, SWIFT must follow EU laws, not US ones – which doesn’t mean it can’t disconnect a country, like it did with Iran in 2018. This was driven by US sanctions, with no obligation coming from the EU, but, again, they were not forced to do it.
What about Russia? The 291 Russian members represent 1.5% of SWIFT flows (you gotta sell that oil!), ranked 13th globally on all SWIFT messages and 6th on payment messages!
That Is a LOT of messages that could be disrupted, on both ends, and a lot of money (prob ≈800bn$/y).
Would cutting SWIFT access stop all those payments? No, but it would make significantly more difficult. There are other ways to send payments messages… including very old type stuff! (no, not carrier pigeons) but it would be difficult to convince western banks to use them.
Russia is aware of the risk and has alternative routes: SFPS (a system it designed with mostly Russian & CIS banks) and domestic payment systems that were launched after Visa & Mastercard cut them off in 2014. But Western banks would need to join.
What this suggests is that, ultimately, what matters is banning Western (US+EU+Swiss+UK) banks from dealing with Russia - cutting from SWIFT is just making those deals harder + if done only by the US, we could get the same ridiculous attempts of the EU to bypass the sanctions
So ridiculous that it has almost never been used despite being announced with great fanfare! (the first deal was to send medical equipment to fight Covid.)
What’s the bottom line here: either you have coordinated US/EU sanctions which ban banks from trading with Russia, or you get into complicated stuff that makes transactions messy and difficult, but not impossible. And can you ban all transactions with US/EU banks?
Sure, but if they do it, I suggest you buy one of those quickly.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is an opportunity for a bit of bond market education😊
You’ll often read that Italy is wider than France now, or actually the opposite, with people posting various screenshots from different sources to make their point.
An old theme is coming back to haunt them: Basel 4!
Quick thread.
After almost 10y of discussion the package was finally enacted with full implementation in 2033.
Everyone felt, after many EBA reports & banks' disclosures, that impact would be mild.
But for first time banks are publishing capital ratios w/ the new rules and for DB it's ugly
How does it work? Banks are still allowed to use internal models, but the RWA (in 2030/2033) must be at least 72.5% of the standard (non internal models) RWA. ("output floors") and for DB that's a 33% increase!
CET1r would go from 13.8% to 10.35%! Ouch!
Why is the latest EC proposal on securitization a big deal for banks and how does it change the SRT market?
A slightly geeky thread - with some backround on the SRT market if you're not aware of this important market.
First what’s a SRT?
Following secular finance practice of reinventing the wheel but changing its name, the new trendy capital optimization transactions are “significant risk transfers”, but they’re just good old securitizations (invented in the 1860s 😊.)
(cash or synthetic)
The reason they’re now called SRT is a regulatory one.
The 2013 CRR (Art 244/245) allowed banks to get capital relief under some conditions, essentially that “significant risk” was transferred to someone else.
Bloomberg has some nice charts on the tariffs’ impacts.
The first one argues that tariffs on China are coming globally: too many countries will see a spike of imports from China & that's not sustainable.
The second shows GDP impacts, taking into account direct effects + indirect via trade partners (using a WTO macro model, so, you know...)
SE Asia impact is massive, -1% for EU, -1.3% Japan and -2.5% Korea. Mexico bonanza.
Some details on who’s going to stop which exports – very interesting split (especially if you try to model loan losses 😊). Overall 30% drop in US imports of goods (with retaliation modelled as 50% of US). China is -85%, Vietnam -75%, Taiwan, Japan, Korea Thailand -50%, EU -40%.