Unidentified debts increase public debts higher than projected

According to Fiscal Monitor October 2024, global public debt is expected to exceed $100 trillion, which is about 93% of global GDP, and could reach 100% of GDP by 2030. It translates into an additional 10 percentage points of since 2019. Under the “debt-at-risk” framework (the level of future debt in an extreme adverse scenario) is estimated to be nearly 20 percentage points of GDP higher three years ahead in the baseline projections. The framework shows how changes in economic, financial, and political conditions can shift the distribution of future debt-to-GDP ratios

The fiscal outlook of many countries might be worse than expected for three reasons: large spending pressures, optimism bias of debt projections, and sizable unidentified debt. Countries will need to increasingly spend more to cope with aging and healthcare; with the green transition and climate adaptation; and with defense and energy security, due to growing geopolitical tensions.

Debt will increase because of weaker growth, tighter financing conditions, fiscal slippages, and greater economic and policy uncertainty. The spillovers due to policy uncertainty in systematically important countries (such as the US) further complicate the situation. Unidentified debt when realized tends to increase public debt. Based on analysis of over 30 countries, the report states 40 percent of unidentified debt stems from contingent liabilities and fiscal risks governments face, of which most are related to losses in state-owned enterprises. 

Unidentified debts build up emerge from extra-budgetary spending, institutional changes, arrears, and materialization of contingent liabilities and fiscal risks. Unidentified debt is the change in debt not explained by interest-growth differentials, budgetary deficits, or exchange rate movements.  Historically, these tend to 1 to 1.5% of GDP on average but increase sharply during periods of financial stress.

The report recommends fiscal adjustments to contain debt risks, warning that current fiscal adjustments—on average, of 1 percent of GDP over six years by 2029—even if implemented in full, are not enough to significantly reduce or stabilize debt with a high probability. Tightening to the tune to 3.8% of GDP may be required to ensure debt stabilization. 

It recommends countries to tackle debt risks with carefully designed fiscal policies that protect growth and vulnerable households. For advanced economies, advance entitlement reforms, reprioritize expenditures, and increase revenues where taxation is low is recommended. Emerging market and developing economies have greater potential to mobilize tax revenues—by broadening tax bases and enhancing revenue administration capacity—while strengthening social safety nets and safeguarding public investment to support long-term growth.  Some countries with high risk of debt distress will need front-loaded adjustments.

Some of the recommendations include:

• Identifying the size of fiscal adjustment and designing its composition (expenditure rationalization but also protecting vulnerable households)
• Calibrating the pace of adjustment
• Building credibility by having MTFFs and modern PFM systems to anchor adjustment paths and reduce fiscal policy uncertainty. Governments need deliberate fiscal plans, framed within credible medium-term fiscal frameworks and modern public financial management systems to anchor their adjustment paths and reduce fiscal policy uncertainty. Strong independent fiscal oversight can reinforce government credibility.
• Strengthening fiscal governance by addressing contingent liabilities, including those associated with SOEs. 
• Addressing debt distress by undertaking timely and adequate restructuring (for countries facing debt distress or unsustainable debt)

Nepal: IMF Reaches Staff-level Agreement on 4th Review Under the Extended Credit Facility

The Nepali authorities and the IMF have reached a staff-level agreement on the 4th reviewa staff-level agreement on the 4th review of under the Extended Credit Facility, which was approved in 2022. 

The agreement is subject to approval by the IMF’s Executive Board. Completion would make available SDR 31.4 million (about US$41.6 million), bringing total disbursements under the ECF thus far to SDR 188.3 million (about US$249.7 million), from a total of SDR 282.42 million (about US$380.2 million).

Important achievements during the review period include:

• Domestic Revenue Mobilization Strategy by the Ministry of Finance aimed at strengthening tax collection
• Action Plan by the National Planning Commission (NPC) aimed at improving execution of budgeted capital projects. 
• Incorporating most Extra Budgetary Funds accounts in the annual financial statements published by the Financial Comptroller General Office
• Publishing audited financial statements for some key public enterprises
• Finalization and full implementation of the Supervisory Information System for all banks
• Progress on the procurement of an independent international consultant to assist NRB in the conduct of the Loan Portfolio Review (LPR) of the 10 largest banks. 

Planned reforms include:

• Launch the LPR of the banking system
• Submit to Parliament amendments of the NRB Act
• Involve the service of experts with international experience in auditing and central bank auditing for an audit of NRB’s FY23/24 financial statements. 
• Publish annual financial statements by all majority and wholly owned public enterprises
• Publish audit of the financial statements of four priority public enterprises
• Implementation of key reforms in the 2023 Financial Sector Stability Report. 
• Publish a comprehensive tax expenditure report
• Publish a fiscal risk statement
• Revise and approve the National Project Bank Operational Procedures and the Unified Directives related to project development, prioritization, and selection
• Report consolidated financial information of all extrabudgetary operational funds
• Develop a strategy to deal with issues in the SACCO sector, including to reform the supervisory framework and architecture

Macroeconomic outlook

• Economic activity is expected to pick up with growth reaching 4.9 percent in FY2024/25, supported by stronger domestic demand. The cautiously accommodative monetary policy stance, planned increase in capital expenditure in the FY2024/25 budget, additional hydropower generation, and continued increase in tourist arrivals are expected to boost domestic demand and growth. 
• Inflation is expected to remain within the NRB’s target ceiling of 5.5 percent. 
• Nepal’s external position continues to strengthen, reflecting prudent policies, buoyant remittances, and subdued imports.
• Nepal’s medium-term outlook remains favorable as strategic investments in infrastructure, especially in the energy sector, are expected to support potential growth.

India: Recent developments and economic outlook

In its 2022 Article IV consultation report on India, the IMF noted that the economy rebounded strongly from the pandemic-related downturn, supported by fiscal policy targeted at vulnerable groups and to mitigate the economic impact of commodity price increases. Front-loaded monetary policy tightening is addressing elevated inflation and a robust public digital infrastructure is facilitating innovation, productivity improvements and access to services. 

However, the India economy is facing new headwinds, including the adverse effect of climate change. These include high fiscal deficit that requires consolidation anchored on stronger revenue mobilization and spending efficiency; monetary policy tightening to rein in inflation and financial sector vulnerabilities; and financing and technology transfer to move to a carbon-neutral economy. This blog post includes key highlights from the report.

Recent developments

The economy benefited from broad-based recovery from the deep pandemic-related downturn. Real GDP grew by 8.7% in FY2022. All sectors recovered to pre-pandemic levels by end-FY2021/22 except for contact-intensive services, which remained 11% below FY2019/20 levels.

Due to growing domestic demand, commodity and food price shocks, and supply chain disruptions, inflation has been at or above the RBI’s inflation band of 4±2% since January 2022. The report notes that long-term inflation expectations remain relatively well anchored, but the risk of second-round effects from fuel and commodity price shocks remains high.  

Credit growth increased following relatively subdued growth over the past two years. Non-food bank credit growth was driven by stronger credit growth by private banks, mostly to MSMEs in the industry sector. However, credit gap (credit to GDP gap) remains negative, i.e. credit-to-GDP ratio remains below its long-term trend.

The external position in FY2022 was considered broadly in line with that implied by medium-term fundamentals and desirable policies (level of per capita income, favorable growth prospects, demographic trends, and development needs). Current account surpluses and large capital inflows boosted international reserves during the pandemic. The IMF assessed current account gap at 1% of GDP after accounting for transitory impacts of the COVID-19 shock. Current account deficit in FY2022 was 1.2% of GDP, reflecting recovering domestic demand and rising commodity prices. The widening current account deficit and portfolio investment outflows have depleted foreign exchange reserves in FY2023.  External shocks such as global financial tightening and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and recovering domestic demand have put pressure on the exchange rate. Reserves are enough to cover around 7 months of prospective imports. 

General government fiscal deficit is estimated to decrease to 9.9% of GDP in FY2023 from 10% of GDP in the previous fiscal. Central government fiscal deficit declined to 6.7% of GDP in FY2022 (in its definition of central government deficit, the IMF also includes NSSF loans to central government PSUs and fully serviced bonds). The phasing out of some pandemic-related expenditures contributed to 1% of GDP reduction in spending. Buoyant GST and income tax revenues, thanks to improvements in tax administration and additional taxes on domestic crude oil production and fuel exports, helped boost revenue. The state government’s deficit is estimated to decline close to the medium-term target of 3% of state-level GDP, but variations in fiscal performance persist.  

The pandemic-related disruptions reduced access to education and trainings, adversely impacting human capital accumulation. Most affected were vulnerable groups, including females, youth, less skilled and educated, and daily wage and migrant workers. 

Economic outlook

Growth is projected to moderate amid higher oil prices, weaker external demand, and tighter financial conditions. The IMF projected GDP growth at 6.8% in FY2023 and 6.1% in FY2024. Growth is projected at around 6% over the medium-term. 

General government fiscal deficit is projected to moderate but will remain high: 9.9% of GDP in FY2023, 9% of GDP in FY2024 and then around 7-8% of GDP over the medium-term.

Inflation is projected to moderate to 6.9% in FY2023 as core inflation remains sticky and near-term uncertainties in food prices and input costs affect prices. Inflation is projected to return to the tolerable band over the medium-term. 

Current account deficit is projected to increase to 3.5% of GDP in FY2023 owing to higher commodity prices and import demand, and will decline to about 2.5% of GDP over the medium-term. 

Foreign exchange reserves are projected to cover about 6.5 months of imports over the medium-term. Net FDI inflows are estimated to be about 1.4% of GDP.

Risks to outlook: Uncertainty about the economic outlook is considered high and risk tilted to the downside. A materialization of these risks would worsen the economic outlook (lower growth and trade). 

External risks include a sharp global growth slowdown (affects India through trade and financial channels), and intensification of spillovers from the Russian invasion of Ukraine combined with supply and demand shocks in the global food and energy markets. These can worsen inflation and de-anchor inflation expectations. Over the medium-term, broadening of conflicts and reduced international cooperation can disrupt trade, increase volatility of commodity price, and fragment technological and payments systems. 

Domestic risks include rising inflation impacting vulnerable groups, emergence of more contagious COVID-19 variants, tighter financial conditions (weaken asset quality and result in financial sector stress), high financing costs due to weakening of fiscal position, climate change. 

However, upside risks include a resolution of the war in Ukraine and de-escalation of geopolitical tensions (will boost international cooperation, moderate commodity price volatility, and promote trade and growth). Also, successful implementation of structural reforms and greater than expected dividends from ongoing digital advances could increase medium-term growth potential. 

Fiscal policy: India’s fiscal space is at risk and debt sustainability risks have increased. The government will need to improve targeting to lower public spending. For instance, the reduction in fuel excise taxes and additional fertilizer subsidies are not well targeted. Revenue have been improving due to buoyant GST and income tax revenues. High debt levels (84% of GDP in FY2022) and substantial gross financing needs (15% of GDP) due to higher effective interest rates together with monetary policy tightening have increased debt sustainability risks. These risks are somewhat mitigated as the bulk of public debt are fixed-rate instruments denominated in domestic currency and predominantly held by residents per regulatory requirements. DSA shows that debt dynamics remain favorable in the medium-term and support a sustainable debt path. 

The government has targeted 4.5% of GDP central government deficit, implying a general government deficit of 7.5% of GDP (down from 9.9% of GDP in FY2023). The IMF recommends a clearly communicated medium-term fiscal consolidation plan to enhance policy space and facilitate private sector-led growth. It will also reduce uncertainty, lower risk premia, and help to maintain price stability. 

Fiscal consolidation should be facilitated by stronger revenue mobilization and improving expenditure efficiency. General government primary consolidation of around 1% of GDP and debt of around 80% of GDP by FY2028 could be targeted. 

Expenditure efficiency is possible through better targeting of subsidies, greater utilization of the existing social support infrastructure (DBT) to reduce leakages, rationalization of central schemes, reforming electricity tariffs and improving the financial viability of electricity distribution companies. 

Revenue measures can include reversing the fuel excise tax cuts, further broadening the corporate and personal income tax bases, simplifying the goods and services tax (GST) rate structure, rationalizing the items subject to preferential GST treatment, and continued improvements in tax administration, in line with international good practice. These measures would help narrow India’s tax gap, estimated at around 5% of GDP. Asset monetization and privatization agenda could generate additional receipts. 

Fiscal transparency will improve PFM. For instance, recognizing previously off-budget expenditure at the center and state level has improved transparency. Digital solutions have helped streamline PFM processes, advancing transparency and governance, including through e-procurement, faceless income tax assessments and the recent rollout of e-bills. Integrated Government Financial Management System along with a dedicated platform for central, state, and local governments to share fiscal information will support timely production of consolidated fiscal reports and identification of fiscal risks at the subnational level.  

Sri Lanka’s economic crisis and unsustainable public debt

The IMF’s latest 2021 Article IV Consultation report on Sri Lanka sheds light on the challenging public debt position and deteriorating macroeconomic indicators. Brief highlights from the report.

Macroeconomic mismanagement

Sri Lanka’s economic outlook is constrained by debt overhang, and large fiscal, current account and balance of payments deficits. Foreign exchange shortage and macroeconomic imbalances are negatively affecting GDP growth, which is expected to be below 3% through 2026. Inflation is expected to be above the target band of 4-6%. High external debt burden mean that international reserves remain inadequate to cover near-term debt service needs (forecast to be enough to cover only 1 month of imports of goods and services till 2026).

Fiscal consolidation with improvements in expenditure rationalization, budget formulation and execution, SOE reforms, cost-recovery energy pricing, and adherence to fiscal rule; and boosting income tax and VAT rates, minimizing exemptions, and revenue administration reforms to raise revenue are recommended. Monetary tightening to control inflation, phasing out of direct financing of budget deficit by the central bank, and a gradual transition to market-determined flexible exchange rate to facilitate external adjustment and to rebuild forex reserves are also recommended.

A large drop in tourist arrivals and contraction in manufacturing and services activity contracted real GDP by 3.6% in 2020. Temporary restriction on the use and importation of chemical fertilizer (which affects agricultural output) and the adverse effect of foreign exchange shortages and import restrictions on goods used in industrial activity will mute economic recovery, leading to just 3.6% growth in 2021. 

The 2019 tax cuts, the pandemic’s impact on revenue, and rising expenditures widened fiscal deficit to 12.8% of GDP in 2020 and 11.4% of GDP in 2021. Public debt shot up to 114% of GDP in 2020Q3 owing to large fiscal deficits and new sovereign guarantees to cover losses of Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC). Public debt comprises central government debt, guaranteed debt and the CBSL’s foreign liabilities. 

The central bank (CBSL) has financed a part of large fiscal deficits. As the government’s net domestic financing requirements increased to about 12.3% of GDP in 2021, up from an average of 3.4% over 2010-19, the authorities temporarily introduced explicit interest rate caps for the primary market in mid-2020 with auction shortfalls covered by the central bank. Consequently, net credit to the government increased by 9% of GDP between March 2020 and November 2021. Banks’ claims on the government and SOEs is around 40% of total bank assets. The interest rate caps on treasury securities auctions were removed in August 2021. 

Exchange rate deprecation, supply shortages, increase in administered fuel and food prices (reflecting higher international prices), and a recovery in demand thanks to expansionary fiscal and monetary policies have overshot inflation to beyond the target band of 4-6%. Private sector wages and inflation expectations are on the rise. A rise in fuel prices and a recovery in imports demand amidst recovering tourism income and flat remittance inflows widened current account deficit, which is expected to be 3.1% of GDP in 2021. 

The CBSL fixed the official exchange rate at LKR 200-203 per US dollar since April 2021. It required surrendering of forex earnings through exports and converted remittances, and direct forex sales to cover essential imports. However, it led to sizable imbalances in spot and forward markets, forex hoarding, and severe dollar shortages for importers. Parallel market exchange rate is 20% higher than the fixed rate.

Foreign exchange reserves are critically low, reflecting pre-pandemic fiscal slippage, preexisting debt vulnerabilities, and the impact of the pandemic. Sri Lanka’s sovereign credit rating is CCC and lower, leading to loss of access to international capital markets to roll over maturing international sovereign bonds. Gross international reserves declined from $7.6 billion at end-2019 to $3.1 billion at end-2021 and then to $2.4 billion at end-January 2022. Net international reserves position is negative since November 2021.  

Note that Sri Lanka underwent an adjustment program with IMF (Extended Fund Facility) in 2016 due to unbalanced macroeconomic policies and difficult external environment. Prudent monetary policymaking, fiscal consolidation, income tax law, and an automatic fuel pricing mechanism were rolled out. However, the 2017 drought, the 2018 political crisis, and the 2019 terrorist attack created complications in EFF implementation. Fiscal consolidation was reversed in 2019, currency depreciated in 2018, and a real interest rate shock shot up public debt to GDP ratio from 84% in 2016 to 94% in 2019. Income tax and VAT rates were cut in 2019 (revenue losses exceeded 2% of GDP), automatic fuel pricing mechanism was discontinued, leading to high fiscal risks from SOE losses. 

Unsustainable public debt

The IMF considers that Sri Lanka’s public debt is unsustainable. Public debt and gross financing needs are estimated to reach 118.9% of GDP and 30.1% of GDP, respectively, in 2021. The country will have to undergo substantial adjustment for fiscal consolidation. External debt service is projected to remain around $7-8 billion over the medium-term. $1 billion international sovereign bonds are maturing in July 2022. Large debt overhang, and persistent fiscal and BOP financing shortfalls will constrain growth and jeopardize macroeconomic stability. Without permanent revenue measures and market access, the binding fiscal constraint will force the government to cut capital spending. Fiscal deficit will remain elevated above 9% of GDP, gross reserves will be critically low at around 1 month of imports over 2022-26, growth will stay below the potential (estimated in the range of 3.1-4.1% absent structural reforms) through 2026, and inflation will exceed the CBSL’s target band in 2022-24 and put pressure on exchange rates. 

The IMF concludes that Sri Lanka cannot refinance its debt in an orderly manner and its current fiscal policies are unsustainable. Public debt will increase to 125.3% of GDP in 2026 and interest payments will remain above 70% of tax revenue. Fiscal financing needs exceed the domestic financial system’s capacity. Sovereign spreads have increased the international rating agencies have downgraded its bonds to CCC or lower. The CBSL provided 3.5% of GDP in direct financing in 2020 and around 5% of GDP in the first three quarters of 2021. Meanwhile, contingent liabilities of SOEs could materialize soon. CEB and CPC’s balance sheets remain highly exposed to currency fluctuations. Their operational losses are going to increase if retail prices are not reflective of cost. Sri Lankan Airlines is already in distress. Excessive adjustment is required to take fiscal consolidation to a level that will make debt sustainable but is unlikely (primary deficit has to come down from 4.9% of GDP in 2021 to 2.8% of GDP in 2022 and then 1.8% of GDP in 2026 under the baseline scenario).

The IMF recommends implementation of a credible and coherent strategy to restore fiscal and debt sustainability and regain macroeconomic stability over the medium-term. Specifically,

1) Revenue-focused fiscal consolidation, tight monetary policy, transitioning to a market-determined exchange rate, mitigating adverse impact of macroeconomic adjustments on vulnerable groups by strengthening social safety nets, revamping fiscal rule, etc.

• Fiscal consolidation should achieve a primary balance of zero by 2024. 
• Strengthen corporate and personal income tax (CIT and PIT) by minimizing exemptions, raising rates, and reinstating mandatory withholding requirements under the Inland Revenue Act 2017. Multitude indirect taxes renders tax system unpredictable and complex, and high para-tariffs hinder competitiveness and growth. 
• Shift towards risk-based compliance management, strengthen large-taxpayer unit, and digitize revenue administration. Strengthen Customs and Excise Departments. 
• Expenditure rationalization by scaling-back of non-priority expenditure, greater spending efficiency, and an overarching strategy to manage public wage bill are also helpful, but higher revenue mobilization is more critical. 
• Cost-recovery based energy pricing is needed to mitigate fiscal risks from SOEs. Retail fuel and electricity prices are set below cost-recovery levels on discretionary basis, resulting in high debt overhang of CPC and CEB and restricting new investment. Automatic fuel and electricity pricing mechanism are recommended. An overarching strategy is needed to address high SOE debt and growing currency mismatches on energy SOEs’ balance sheets.
• Improvements in budget formulation and execution procedures are needed to support fiscal consolidation. Revenues should not be overestimated and interest payments underestimated to provide unrealistic assessment of resource availability. Expenditure arrears are high due to weak internal reporting and commitment control mechanisms. Strengthen the Macro-Fiscal Unit at MOF and adopt the GFSM 2014 fiscal reporting standards. Current fiscal rule should be revamped in line with international best practice to anchor fiscal sustainability.

2) A comprehensive strategy to restore debt sustainability. The IMF notes that fiscal consolidation and macroeconomic policy adjustments alone cannot restore Sri Lanka’s debt sustainability. 

3) Preserve hard-earned price stability and restore a market-based exchange rate.

• Monetary policy tightening is warranted in the near-term to ensure price stability. Private sector wages and inflation expectations are rising, and public sector wage increases are exerting price pressures. 
• CBSL should phase out its direct financing of budget deficits to lower inflation risks. 
• Returning to a market-determined and flexible exchange rate will facilitate external adjustment. This should be carefully sequenced and implemented as a part of a comprehensive macroeconomic adjustment package. This will help in inflation targeting as well.
• External position is weaker than the level implied by medium-term fundamentals and desirable policies. External debt vulnerabilities are high, and the level of reserves remain precariously low. A strong growth-friendly fiscal consolidation, debt sustainability, prudent monetary policy accompanied by exchange rate flexibility, boosting forex reserves to adequate level, structural reforms to boost export capacity and to encourage FDI are helpful.

4) Ensure financial sector stability. Debt overhang and persistent fiscal and BOP financing shortfalls post significant financial stability risks. 

• Sovereign-bank nexus is strong due to the banks’ large exposure to the government and SOEs. Large public borrowing needs could constrain banks’ lending to the private sector and affect growth prospect.
• Sovereign rating downgrades have constrained banks’ access to external financing and import credit.
• Unwinding pandemic related relief measures, monitoring of quality of loans, proactively identifying vulnerabilities through stress testing, and maintaining restrictions on bank profit distribution to ensure capital adequacy are helpful.

5) Strengthen social safety nets in view of needed macroeconomic adjustments. 

• Sri Lanka spends around 0.4% of GDP in social safety nets. There is scope for improving coverage and targeting, but revenue mobilization is critical for creating fiscal space needed for higher social safety net spending. 
• Growth-enhancing structural reforms are needed, especially promoting female labor force participation, creating job opportunities for youth, reducing trade barriers, and improving investment climate. 

COVID-19 related economic scarring

The IMF’s WEO April 2021 includes a chapter on the possible persistent effects of the pandemic on economic activities (scarring). It notes that the emerging markets and low-income countries are expected to face greater scarring due to their limited policy space to launch relief measures for struggling households and firms. It argues that the crisis could result in substantial and persistent damage to supply potential and extend scarring due to diminishing labor force participation, bankruptcies, and disruption of production networks. The longer the recession, the more likely the effects will be permanent, especially in countries with the prevalence of small firms and shallow capital markets. Persistent supply disruptions could result from the loss of economic ties in production and distribution networks as job destruction and firm bankruptcies increase— these tend to lower productivity growth and slowdown capital accumulation. These could dampen investment and employment, and cripple productivity growth for an extended period of time. 

The IMF states that although financial instabilities have been largely avoided this time and the spillovers of the pandemic’s initial impact on high contact-intensive service sectors are limited, the scale of the impact could still represent a large shock to the economy. It estimates that the global output in 2024 could be 3% lower than the anticipated pre-pandemic output. However, the degree of scarring varies by country. Policymakers could limit scarring by providing support to the most-affected sectors and workers while the pandemic is ongoing. To address long-term GDP losses, countries need to focus on remedial policies for the setback to human capital accumulation, boost investment, and support reallocation of workers and firms (retraining, reskilling, and insolvency procedures).

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a combination of supply and demand shocks. Pandemic-induced lockdowns reduced effective productive capacity as some firms were forced to close or operate at below capacity than usual times, and some had to reorganize production on account of physical distancing between workers, which in turn lowered productivity. The initial supply shocks spilled over to other sectors through production networks. Meanwhile, demand decreased due to reduced mobility and as precautionary savings increased amidst heightened uncertainty. The initial supply shock also led to a decline in demand as workers earned either less or were laid off outright, which decreased private savings.  

After recessions or health shocks in the past, technology adoption, employment, and capital accumulation suffered, leading to extended period of economic slowdown. For instance, unemployment continued to remain high and lowered labor force as discouraged workers exited the labor market. Extended period of unemployment affects skills deterioration, delays labor market entry for young workers, negatively affects educational achievement in the long-term (especially, parental job losses adversely affect children’s schooling and future labor market outcomes)— all affecting human capital accumulation. Similarly, recessions also dampen investment, slowing down physical capital accumulation, which affects productivity though slower technology adoption. Also, business bankruptcies permanently affect productivity due to the loss of firm-specific know-how. Decline in research and development, and increase in resource misallocation also affect productivity permanently. 

The pandemic has already caused some form of supply-side scarring from lower productive capacity and demand-side persistent preference shits. The report three particular features of the crisis on scarring:

1. Although lower than after the global financial crisis in 2008, the prospects for scarring from COVID-19 are substantial. This time there is relative financial stability following the COVID-19 shock thanks to large-scale fiscal and monetary measures. Previously, financial crisis resulted in deep recessions, which then led to persistent output losses. However, this time financial stress could easily build up as loan defaults increases after debt service moratoriums and several regulatory forbearances are phased out. These affect productivity, and efficiency of labor and capital inputs. 

Lower-skilled workers have seen a disproportionately large decline in employment and business exits of small businesses are increasing. 

2. Some sectors have not recovered after productivity shocks in the past and that the spillovers from COVID-19 shocks are still sizable (despite high-contact sectors are less central to production networks). Scars become persistent due to lower productivity growth and slower capital accumulation. 

Note that scarring in the labor market may be larger than in previous recessions because of permanent shrinkage of some high-contact sectors. For instance, some student in low-income countries may not be fully able to switch to virtual learning and this could have devastating implications on human capital accumulation. Similarly, physical capital shrinkage could also amplify scarring because of sector-specific idle capital in the case of high-contact sectors, and large corporate debt buildup that lowers investment by more leveraged firms. 

The pandemic related disruptions to upstream (from customers to focal sector of interest) and downstream (from suppliers to focal sector of interest) production networks could have knock-on effects on productivity of connected firms. Productivity could also suffer if small businesses close down in high-contact sectors but large companies strengthen their market power. The increased digitization and innovation in production and delivery processes could offset some of the adverse productivity shocks though. 

The report finds that adverse productivity shock (supply shock) in own sector results in 5% lower total gross value added for up to five years after the shock. Government spending shock is not statistically significant on total GVA. For spillover shocks, downstream effects are dominant, highlighting the importance of supply shocks arising from COVID-19. The ‘own effect’ is larger for high-contact sectors such as wholesale and retail trade, hotels and restaurants, entertainment and personal services, transportation, education, healthcare, and construction.  

3. Global losses are smaller than during the global financial crisis largely due to unprecedented policy support and contained financial stability risks. That said, medium-term output losses from the shock are still sizable, but they exhibit significant variation across economies and regions. The IMF estimates that the COVID-19 shock will lower world output by 3% in 2024 compared to the pre-pandemic projections (over the same period, output losses were 10% in the case of global financial crisis). However, emerging and developing economies will likely have deeper scars than advanced economies, thanks partly due to the larger pandemic-related fiscal responses in the latter and faster access to vaccines. Particularly, economies more dependent on travel and tourism, and those with larger service sectors, are expected to experience more persistent losses.  

Medium-term scarring is contingent on: (i) the path of the pandemic and associated containment measures, (ii) impact of the pandemic shock on high-contact sectors, (iii) adaptation capability of firms and workers to a lower-contact working environment and lower-contact transaction, and (iv) the effectiveness of policy response to limit economic damage.  

Depending on the level of fiscal space, the IMF recommends countries to 

• Reverse setbacks to human capital accumulation and encourage employment by ensuring adequate resources for healthcare, early childhood development programs, education, worker retraining and investment in digital literacy, expansion of social safety nets, and support for displace workers.
• Support productivity by allowing exit of nonviable firms, active labor market policies (help workers transition between jobs by retraining, public employment services, public work schemes, wage subsidies, and support for self-employment/micro-entrepreneurs), and facilitate resource reallocation (to improve labor mobility and reduce product market rigidities). Other measures include promotion of competition, innovation and technology adoption. 
• Boost investment in infrastructure, particularly green infrastructure to help crowd-in private investment. Repairing corporate balance sheet to reduce debt overhand will also promote investment. Improved bankruptcy and debt restructuring mechanisms help to reallocate productive capital. 

Divergent recovery and policy options

In the latest edition of World Economic Outlook (WEO, April 2021), the IMF states that without the extraordinary fiscal and monetary policies, the pandemic would have resulted in an economic contraction three times larger than the current estimates. 

GDP growth

The IMF is projecting the global economy to grow at 6% in 2021, up from an estimated contraction of 3.3% in 2020, and moderate to 4.4% in 2022. These revised projections are higher than earlier estimates owing to the favorable effect of easing of lockdowns, adapting to new ways of working, substantial fiscal support in advanced economies, and an anticipated vaccine-led recovery in the second half of 2021. The IMF projects global growth to moderate to 3.3% over the medium term as the damage to supply chains scars output capacity and aging in advanced economies slows down labor force growth.

Inflation

Inflation in advanced economies is projected to rise to 1.4% in 2021, up from 0.4% in 2020, and 1.9% in 2023. In EMDEs, inflation is projected to remain stable at around 3% from 2021-2023, up from 2.8% in 2020.

The IMF expects price volatility to be short lived and that inflation will return to its long-term average as remaining slack subsides gradually and commodity-driven base effects fade away. Commodity prices, particularly oil, are expected to firm up in the months ahead. But, overall subdued inflation outlook reflects labor market conditions as well, especially subdued wage growth and weak worker bargaining power that are compounded by high unemployment, underemployment, and lower labor force participation rates. 

The IMF notes that unless output gaps become positive and very large for an extended period of time, and monetary policy does not react to rising inflation expectations, inflation is unlikely to increase much. It also does not expect monetary policy to be used primarily to keep government borrowing costs low at the expense of price stability as most economies have independent central banks. 

External sector

On external sector, the IMF projected global trade to accelerate to 8.4% due to the rebound in merchandise goods. But, cross-border services trade (travel and tourism) is expected to remain subdued. 

Divergent effects

The output losses have been divergent. The most affected are the economies that rely on tourism and commodity exports and those with limited fiscal space to respond to the crisis. Many countries entered the crisis without much fiscal space and the ability to mount an effective healthcare policy response. The WEO states that economic situation now (and eventual recovery) is influenced by factors such as the proportion of ‘teleworkable’ jobs, share of employment in small and medium enterprises, capital market deepening, size of informal sector, and quality of and access to digital infrastructure. 

The economic recovery since the second half of 2020 has been led by strong demand for products suitable for working from home and pent-up demand for durable goods such as automobiles. Industrial output is now at pre-pandemic level, but contact-intensive services activities have remained depressed. Likewise, although merchandise trade is back to the pre-pandemic levels, cross-border trade in services remains subdued.  

Unemployment and underemployment remain at elevated level. Labor force participation rate has dropped despite wage and jobs retention programs in many countries. The report notes that youth, women, less educated workers, and informally employed are hardest hit by the pandemic. Poverty (additional 95 million people) and income inequality are likely to increase. The unequal setback to schooling could further exacerbate inequality. 

Asset markets have been surging, thanks to policy stimulus and expectations of a vaccine-driven normalization. However, the IMF notes that the divergence between valuations and broader economic prospects raise financial stability risks. 

GDP loss

The IMF projects the average annual loss in per capita GDP over 2020–24, relative to pre-pandemic forecasts, to be 5.7% in low-income countries and 4.7% in emerging markets. In advanced economies the losses are expected to be 2.3%. Unlike the global financial crisis in 2008, the substantial policy support in response to the pandemic has averted a financial crisis, and medium-term losses are expected to be lower than in 2008 (about 3% lower). However, the emerging markets and low-income countries are expected to face greater scarring owing to their limited policy space. 

Fiscal authorities provided relief to households and firms in the form of transfers, wage subsidies, liquidity support, expansion of safety net such as unemployment insurance and nutrition assistance. Financial regulators facilitated credit provision by easing classification guidelines for nonperforming loans, relaxing provisioning requirements for banks, reducing risk weights on bankruptcy proceedings, and flexibility regarding bank capital requirements. 

The IMF estimates that policy actions such as automatic stabilizers, discretionary measures, and financial sector measures contributed about six percentage points to global growth in 2020. 

Economic outlook

There is considerable uncertainty over the economic outlook though. The WEO notes that it is contingent on the path of the health crisis including vaccine effectiveness against new variants, the effectiveness of policy actions to limit persistent economic damage (scarring), the evolution of financial conditions and commodity prices, and the adjustment capacity of the economy. 

Vaccine procurement and distribution are uneven with broad vaccine availability in advanced economies and some emerging market economies. Since vaccine deployment will be staggered across regions, spread of new variants forcing occasional and localized lockdowns is possible. However, the IMF notes that these may not constrain economic activities like in the initial lockdowns because they will be more targeted and that people and firms have adapted to remote work. 

The size of fiscal package will also drive the nature of recovery. The fiscal package unveiled by the US government will boost growth in the US in 2021 and provide sizable positive spillovers to its trading partners, the WEO states. The IMF expects debt service costs to remain manageable across advanced economies because their debt profile is largely dominated by long-term and sometimes negative-yielding bonds. However, it notes that EMDEs will have limited fiscal support now, but as revenue mobilization improves with pickup in economic activities and crisis-related expenditures unwind, they will have lower fiscal deficits than now. But high debt service costs are expected in EMDEs. 

The crisis could still result in substantial and persistent damage to supply potential and extend scarring due to diminishing labor force participation, bankruptcies, and disruption of production networks. It argues that the longer the recession, the more likely that the effects will be permanent, especially in EMDEs where the prevalence of relatively small firms and shallow capital markets could dampen investment and employment for an extended period of time. These may cripple productivity growth too. 

The IMF expects monetary policy to remain accommodative and tighten only gradually as recovery takes hold. It also expects oil prices to increase as OPEC+ producers curb supply. The strong rebound in PRC will put upward pressure on metal prices. Food prices are also expected to increase in 2021. 

Policy response

Against this backdrop, the IMF recommends policymakers to prioritize policies prudently including strengthening social protection with wider eligibility for unemployment to cover the self-employed and informally employed; adequate resource for healthcare, early childhood development programs, education, and vocation training; and investment in green infrastructure to accelerate the transition to lower carbon dependence. Policy support should be flexible such as shifting lifelines, reallocations, and linked to improvements in activity, but they should safeguard social spending and avoid inefficient spending outlays. Anchoring short-term support in credible medium-term frameworks is key. Economies facing high debt burden should consider creating fiscal space through increased revenue mobilization and reduced wasteful subsidies.

It recommends policy responses to be tailored to the stage of the pandemic, strength of the recovery, and structural characteristics of the economy. As the pandemic continues, policies should focus on prioritizing the healthcare spending, providing well-targeted fiscal support, and maintaining accommodative monetary policy. As recovery progresses, policymakers should limit long-term economic scarring by broadening productive capacity and increasing incentives for an efficient allocation of productive resources. 

Fiscal and debt paradigm in India

In its report for 2021-26, the 15th Finance Commission of India states that public debt as a share of GDP should continue to serve as the medium-term anchor for fiscal policy in India despite the spending pressures created by the pandemic and investment needs during the recovery phase. Fiscal deficit should be the operational target as recommended by FRBM Act 2003 (amended in 2018). A rule-based framework is credible and transparent, but it must be flexible as well to avoid fragility, states the FC's report. 

It argues that extraordinary times like these require growth and income support measures that will unavoidably put upward pressure on public finances. The Commission expects positive interest-growth differentials and adverse debt dynamics over the next two to three years. However, it recommends fiscal consolidation and a declining trajectory for total public debt as a share of GDP over the medium-term. 

The FC forecasts fiscal deficit of the union government to be between 3.5% and 4.5% of GDP in FY2026, declining from a range of 6.0% and 6.5% of GDP in FY2022. Given the uncertainties and risks, the Commission outlined fiscal deficit under three scenarios: (i) economy recovery is slower than assessed, (ii) macro-economic assessment holds, and (iii) economic recovery is faster than assessed. In all cases, fiscal deficit is to decrease by 0.5 percentage point of GDP each successive year. It assumes a gradual return to a trend of real GDP growth of around 7% and a less severe than feared effect on workers and businesses due to the pandemic. 

For the States, the Commission recommends three options to allow for greater flexibility: (i) additional unconditional borrowing for the first two years to compensate for the loss of tax revenue; (ii) additional borrowing of 0.5 percentage of GSDP in case they meet the criteria for power sector reforms; and (iii) allowing the States to utilize any unutilized borrowing space in the subsequent years within the award period. If the States use the full borrowing space available, then the fiscal deficit, as a share of GSDP, is forecast at 4.5% for FY2022, 4% for FY2023, 3.5% for FY2024 and FY2025, and 3% for FY2026. If the States limit borrowing, on an average, to FRBM threshold, then it will be 3% of GSDP throughout. 

Overall, the Commission projects general government fiscal deficit to decline to 9.3% of GDP in FY2022 from 11.6% of GDP in FY2021 and then gradually decrease to 6.8% of GDP in FY2026. The Commission states that it is providing higher fiscal room to both the Center and States to be able to deal with the current pandemic and then the expected economic recovery. 

On outstanding general government debt, the Commission expects it to gradually decrease to 85.7% of GDP by FY2026 from a high of 89.8% of GDP in FY2021. The center’s public debt is expected to be 56.6% of GDP by FY2026. Given the prospect of increased borrowing by both the Union and State governments due to large expenditure needs (State government’s expenditure as a share of GDP is greater than that of the Union) in the short-term, there has to be a medium-term debt consolidation effort to ensure a sustainable debt to GDP ratio. Given that the Center’s outstanding public debt will be over 40% of GDP (general government debt 60% of GDP) and fiscal deficit above 3% of GDP for the foreseeable future, the FRBM Act needs to be amended again. 

It recommends additional expenditure be used not only to boost investment, but also to strengthen fundamentals to seize new opportunities such as the likely relocation of global production to India, and remote work setting in a distributed economic geography rather than continued growth of the largest cities. The commission prioritizes investment in human capital (especially health and education) and climate change and environmental risks such as air pollution. 

The Commission recommended vertical devolution of 41% of resources. For horizontal sharing/allocation of resources, it recommends 15% weight to population, 15% for area, 10% for forest & ecology cover, 45% for income distance, 2.5% for tax & fiscal efforts, and 12.5% for demographic performance. 

For revenue deficit grants, a type of grants-in-aid, the Commission recommends an allocation of 1.92% of gross revenue receipts of the Union government. Besides this, there are other performance-based grants-in-aid for sectors such as social sector (health and education sectors focusing on large and particularly vulnerable subset of the population), rural economy (agriculture and maintenance of rural roads), and governance and administrative reforms (judiciary, statistics, and aspirational districts and blocks). 

The Commission also estimated that structural ‘tax gap’ for India is over 5% of GDP. It recommends a series of operational and policy reforms to bridge the tax gap such as correcting the inverted duty structure in GST, addressing IT system deficiencies for GST, facilitating complete invoice matching, and reviewing exemptions, thresholds and concessions in income tax. 

It argues that India’s fiscal architecture needs to have three mutually reinforcing pillars: (i) fiscal rules that set institutional and budgetary framework for fiscal sustainability; (ii) consistent, reliable, and timely reporting of fiscal indicators; and (iii) ability of fiscal institution to conduct independent assessment to facilitate the first two pillars. This calls for restructuring the FRBM architecture, and constitution of a high-powered inter-governmental group to chart out a new fiscal consolidation framework.  

The Finance Commission provides recommendations to the President of India on the distribution of net proceeds of taxes between Center and the States, determination of factors and magnitude governing grants-in-aid to the States, and sound public finance, among others. They operate under a TOR that is different for every Commission and have a tenure of five years. 

Vietnam as a rising star in global supply chains

Cheap labor costs, big investment incentives, political and policy stability, and strong trade relations appeal Vietnam as an alternative investment destination to China, according to a special report published by The Economist Intelligence Unit. The country is now rated more highly than competitors such as China, Indonesia, India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. [Interestingly, Sri Lanka is rated the most favorable in South Asia in terms of business environment.]

The report focuses on labor, investment incentives, and trade relations, which are central to Vietnam’s competitiveness as a manufacturing hub.

First, the report argues that the ample supply of low-skilled labor will remain a core strength of Vietnam. Working age population is estimated at 68 million, which is about 70% of total population. It appears to be enjoying a “demographic dividend”, which refers to a share of working-age population being larger than those under 15 and over 64 years of age. Agricultural sector accounts for over one-third of the employed workforce, and workers from rural areas have been a key source of labor in manufacturing sector. There is still a stock of surplus labor in the agricultural sector, which means wages growth among low-skilled and unskilled workers in manufacturing sector will remain restrained. However, the availability of skilled labor force will still be an issue.

Second, the report states that Vietnam is offering generous concessions for high-tech manufacturers thinking to relocate labor-intensive processes. Incentives for lower-value added industries will be continue to be rolled back. Vietnam offers various incentives for FDI in industrial zones (industrial parks and export-processing zones), special economic zones, and technology parks. Most are export-oriented industries. It offers corporate and personal income tax exemption and rate reduction. High-tech sectors such as automotive, machinery, and production of advanced capital goods are offered below-market land rents, which is a major incentive amidst rising rent costs. Eligibility criteria are made flexible, especially for large firms. EPZs are not that popular these days because of reduction of import tariffs, which have made duty-free intermediate imports under EPZs largely redundant. The report notes that going forward the eligibility criteria for investment incentives will focus on higher value-added industries. 

Industrial clusters in Vietnam are concentrated in four geographical areas that were designated as priority regions for industrial development: Northern, Central, Southern and Mekong Delta Key Economic Zones. Footwear, textile and garment industries are well developed with advanced labor specialization and scaled-up manufacturing operations. Electronics exports have limited domestic value added, which the government is trying to change through vertical integration in the production of smartphones (Samsung is opening a R&D facility and a phone screen manufacturing plant).

Third, the report notes that Vietnam participates in more trade agreements and has better trading relations with major trading partners than its regional neighbors. This helps in promoting competitive export. It is a member of ASEAN Economic Community, Regional Comprehensive Partnership Framework, Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement. For instance, CPTTP opens up more access to Canada and Mexico (with whom it did not have agreements before) for Vietnamese sports footwear, telephone sets, electrical machinery, and clothing and apparel.

Fiscal policies to address COVID-19 pandemic

In its latest Fiscal Monitor (October 2020), the IMF argues for flexible fiscal measures to respond to lockdowns and tentative reopenings, and facilitation of structural transformation to a new post-pandemic economy. The report outlines a roadmap for the overall fiscal strategy to promote a strong recovery. The idea is to facilitate the transformation to a more resilient, inclusive and greener economies. The IMF recommends full transparency, good governance, and proper costing of all fiscal measures, especially given their size, exceptional nature, and speed of deployment.

Going forward, interest rates will remain low for a long time in advanced and some emerging market economies due to high levels of precautionary savings by households and limited private investment amidst the uncertainties. It means there is scope and motivation for fiscal policy (thanks to negative interest-growth differential) to remain a crucial and powerful tool for recovery. For instance, scaling up of quality public investment will boost employment and economic activities, crowd-in private investment, and absorb excess private savings without increasing borrowing costs. Some emerging market economies and low-income developing countries that face tight financing constraints may need to reprioritize expenditures, enhance efficiency of spending, and seek further official financial support and debt relief.  

On the nature of fiscal policy during and after the pandemic, the IMF recommends:

• No premature withdrawal of crucial household and business support measures
• Ensure social protection systems are targeted and able to deliver benefits to vulnerable people
• During the recovery phase, help workers find new jobs and facilitate vulnerable firms to reopen
• Support structural transformation toward the post-pandemic recovery including building resilience against future epidemics and other shocks. Policies to ensure that all people have access to basic goods (food) and services (health and education) are useful. Similarly, increasing carbon pricing and catalyzing investment in low-carbon technologies would help reduce emissions.
• When the pandemic is under control, focus on addressing the legacies of the crisis such as elevated private and public debt levels, high unemployment, and rising inequality and poverty.
• Countries with limited fiscal space should consider increasing progressive taxation and ensuring that highly profitable firms are appropriately taxed. This should be a growth-friendly and equitable adjustment.
• Develop well-resourced and better-prepared healthcare systems, expand digital transformation, and address climate change and environmental protection. 

Recovery strategy

To boost immediate-term growth, the IMF recommends transfers and public investment, which when faced with uncertainty combined with very low interest rates, weak private investment, and a gradual erosion of public capital stock over time yield a high fiscal multiplier. The fiscal response strategy depends on at what stage of the recovery a particular country is in, i.e. lockdown, partial reopening or post-pandemic phases. These generally include the following

• Lockdown phase: The objective is to save lives and livelihoods by continuing projects where safe (especially maintenance/repair).
• Start planning or reviewing portfolio of planned and active projects
• Partial reopening phase: The objective is to ensure safe reopening and to provide lifelines and targeted support. 
• Public investment could focus on job-rich projects, reassess priorities and prepare pipeline
• Maintenance works and ready for implementation projects should be the priority
• Review, reprioritize and restart feasible projects put on hold, plan for new projects or prepare pipeline of appraised projects that can be implemented in the next two years
• Post-pandemic phase: The object is to transform to a more inclusive, smart and sustainable economy. 
• Depending on fiscal space, countries could implement large, transformational projects with large long-term multiplier in healthcare, climate change adaptation and mitigation and digitization sectors.
• Strengthen project planning, budgeting, and implementation practices to improve public investment efficiency

Fiscal multiplier

The pandemic focused fiscal strategy calls for strengthened public investment management practices and governance to avoid delays, cost overruns, and disappointing project execution. Countries facing tight fiscal conditions could borrow at a low interest rates, which are expected to remain low through the medium-term. 

In advanced and emerging market economies, fiscal multiplier can be as high as 2 in two years. The IMF finds that increasing public investment by 1% of GDP in these economies would create 7 million direct jobs, and between 20 million and 33 million jobs indirectly. Similarly, GDP could grow by 2.7%, and private investment by 10%. The estimate is based on an empirical exercise covering 72 AEs and EMs with data on economic uncertainty regarding GDP forecasts (proxied by disagreements among forecasters). 

Public investment has larger short-term multipliers than public consumption, taxes or transfers. Macroeconomic conditions, institutional quality, and the quality of investment undertaken affect the size of multiplier. 

• First, higher levels of public debt could yield lower fiscal multipliers if deficit-financed investment leads to greater sovereign spreads thus higher private financing costs (essentially, crowding-out the private sector). 
• Second, if an economy faces supply constraints, then fiscal multipliers tend to be smaller (social distancing measures limit output capacity). 
• Third, uncertainty over the trajectory of the virus and the economy could affect multiplier if private spending does not react to a fiscal stimulus (due to uncertainty and precautionary savings). Alternatively, multiplier could be higher if private spending reacts positively to higher public investment amidst mounting uncertainties. 
• Fourth, weak balance sheet of firms (as they are unable to repay debt) and default risks limit their investment and hence the size of fiscal multiplier. 

Generally, multipliers tend to be larger in countries less open to trade because low propensity to import reduces leakage of the demand gains to other countries. Similarly, multipliers tend to be large in countries with fixed exchange rate regimes or where central banks are facing an effective lower bound. Also, when resources are underutilized (like in recessions), fiscal multipliers tend to be high – could be through direct public investment or through a combination of direct public investment and crowding-in of private spending through confidence boosting measures. 

Crowding-in private investment is possible in communications and transport (to respond to healthcare crisis), and construction and manufacturing (during recovery). Investment in health and education, and digital and green infrastructure can improve connectivity, economy-wide productivity, and resilience to climate change and future pandemics. Right government policies and initial investment can crowd-in private investment when faced with uncertainties.

 

Sizable fiscal support

The IMF notes that fiscal actions in response to COVID-19 amounted to $11.7 trillion (12% of global GDP) as of 11 September 2020. Half of this was additional spending or foregone revenue (such as temporary tax cuts and liquidity support including loans). In 2020, government deficits will likely surge by an average 9% and global public debt will approach 100% of GDP. Sizable discretionary support, a sharp contraction in output and an ensuing fall in revenues along with a rise in expenditure (beyond preexisitng automatic stabilizers) have increased government debt and deficits. 

Fiscal space

The ability of countries to respond to the pandemic is determined in part by their fiscal space, and by public and private debt levels. In advanced economies, massive liquidity provision and asset purchases by central banks have facilitated fiscal expansions. In some low-income countries, financing constraints have been high due to debt distress. 

Countries with limited fiscal space need to weigh in the benefits, costs and risks of additional fiscal support measures in the face of limited fiscal space. Evidence so far suggest that public health policies that quickly contain the spread of the disease also allowed for an earlier and safer reopening, restoration of confidence, and economic recovery. 

Popular fiscal support measures included the following:

• Household income support (targeted cash transfers or/and in-kind transfers, unemployment benefits/stimulus checks)
• Employment support (wage subsidies, hiring or retention subsidies)
• Tax support measures (temporary tax deferrals, social security payments, income tax cuts, progressive tax, increase in excise duty, VAT refunds, utility subsidies)
• Liquidity support (loans, guarantees, equity injections/solvency support, debt restructuring) 
• Support for innovation, green growth and digitization

Financing public spending

Some EMDEs have met increasing financing needs from borrowing internationally, drawing down buffers or extrabudgetary funds (India) or sovereign wealth funds (Chile, Russia), purchasing of government debt by central banks through quantitative easing (many AEs and some EMs), and increasing taxes (especially fuel excise tax in India and VAT rate in Saudi Arabia). Low income countries are relying on external assistance (grants or concessional loans).

Fiscal risks: Fiscal risks are high. They stem from

• A protracted economic downturn (private sector demand may remain subdued, bank balance sheets may deteriorate, high fiscal resources needed to support and retain unemployed workforce) 
• Tightening global financial conditions (rapid growth of sovereign debt and nonfinancial corporations debt expose countries to sudden change in financing conditions, especially borrowing costs, and subsequently issues with sustainability of corporate credit and sovereign debt)  
• Commodity market volatility (price fluctuations impact commodity exporters and importers differently)
• Contingent liabilities (new guarantees increase liabilities and debt vulnerabilities)