In January 2018, CEPR published a Policy Insight recommending euro area reforms which received broad support as well as some criticism. In this column, the authors argue that the problems that prompted their paper are still there, new problems are on the horizon, and the current state of the policy conversation on euro area reform is disappointing. They also identify priorities that should be at the centre of discussions on reform.

A central fiscal capacity is a recurring topic in discussions on reform of the Economic and Monetary Union, but no consensus on the usefulness and necessity of a such a capacity has been reached. This column, part of the Vox debate on euro area reform, argues that the potential stability benefits of a central fiscal capacity can be achieved through stronger financial market risk sharing and more effective use of fiscal stabilisers, without any additional fiscal risk sharing.

The agenda to fix the euro is hampered by conflicting national interests. Creditor countries demand fiscal house cleaning and debtor countries ask for risk sharing. There is currently a political deadlock about how the adjustment burden should be distributed, perpetuating a state of vulnerability that is not in the collective interest of euro area members. This column, part of the Vox debate on euro area reform, argues that overcoming this coordination failure requires reforming the political governance of the EU, rather than just its economic governance.

The idea of growth-indexed bonds has recently regained momentum in policy circles, but research has shown they are unlikely to substantially decrease the risk of a debt explosion in advanced economies if not issued through a large and coordinated mechanism. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on euro area reform, proposes such a mechanism for the euro area – a European Debt Agency issuing securitised safe and risky European bonds backed by country-specific growth-indexed bonds.

Two proposals for reforming the euro area’s fiscal framework were published on Vox yesterday. This column describes how, in essence, the proposal from the French economists is based on discretionary policy decisions while their German counterparts propose a largely rules-based approach. It also argues that with its assumption that the medium-term goals of fiscal policy cannot be determined by simple formulas, the French proposal is closer to the status quo than the German concept and has a greater likelihood of resulting in good fiscal policy.

Simplicity and transparency are essential to strengthen the effectiveness of fiscal rules and to ensure sustainable public finances; thus the German Council of Economic Experts has criticised recent reforms of the European fiscal framework for exacerbating their complexity. This column proposes a redesign of the existing fiscal framework together with a drastic reduction in exception and escape clauses. The reformed framework employs a modified expenditure benchmark as an annual operational target. In addition, it implements the structural deficit rule as its medium-term target through a multi-purpose adjustment account, and a pre-specified debt ratio as its long-term limit achieved with a debt-correction factor.

In their CEPR Policy Insight, the team of French and German economists focus on a compromise between market discipline and risk sharing. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on euro area reform, argues that their proposal fails to address legacy debt problems convincingly and that the introduction of a fiscal capacity would repeat the mistakes made at the introduction of EMU, with later steps towards European integration being attempted before the necessary first steps have been taken.

A key question in the debate on the reform of the euro area concerns the right mix between risk sharing and market discipline. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on the topic, argues that proposals to enhance market discipline in the euro area are counter-productive, because they increase the vulnerabilities of countries with high legacy debts. 

The policy discussion on euro area reform has entered a critical phase. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on euro area reform, attempts a ‘what if’ experiment based on the proposals in the recent CEPR Policy Insight. Focusing on the Greek case, it looks at the counterfactual case of such proposals having already been implemented at the outset of the crisis and examines their potential role in preventing the outbreak of the crisis or mitigating it once it was underway.

Deepening of EMU cannot wait until all countries have carried out all their domestic reforms, both risk sharing and risk reduction need to proceed simultaneously. In fact, all euro area countries are exposed to the risk of an incomplete monetary and economic union but with very asymmetric costs. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on euro area reform, argues that this risk can only be tackled with common instruments and policies at the European level, whose mere existence will reduce not only its magnitude but also its asymmetric consequences. 

In their recent Policy Insight, the team of French and German authors suggest introducing sovereign bond-backed securities to play the role of safe asset in the euro area. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on euro area reform, argues that an improved euro area architecture would, in the long run, make all euro area sovereign bonds safer, and thus make the provision of safe assets through untested and potentially disruptive sovereign bond-backed securities unnecessary.

The proposals on fiscal frameworks and rules in the recent CEPR Policy Insight on euro area reform showcase the multiple dimensions of the fundamental dilemmas we are confronted with in the governance of the euro area. This column, part of the VoxEU debate on Euro Area Reform, looks at the challenges to the central role of the Commission that have arisen as the rules-based fiscal framework has been severely compromised.

The recent proposals for euro area reform from a team of French and German economists have initiated an intensive debate. This column, part of VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate, argues that the specific insolvency risk of euro area membership is the main risk that should be covered by joint risk sharing, and that the modest proposals for public and private risk sharing are insufficient in this regard.

Recent months have seen many proposals for alternative designs for a European Deposit Insurance Scheme that would cater for concerns that such a scheme would lead to some banking sectors having to bear the costs of bank failures in other member states. This column, adding to VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate, asks whether these concerns are well founded.

The debate on deepening EMU is entering a critical stage. This column, contributing to VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate argues that while the proposals in a recent CEPR Policy Insight are both timely and attractive, the mix seems unbalanced and carries significant risks. The focus of the proposals on reducing fiscal risks could lead to financial distress, ultimately requiring more, not fewer, rescues.

One criticism of the recent CEPR Policy Insight on euro area reform is its supposed silence on the role of the ECB. In this column,  which we add to VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate, two of the authors of the Policy Insight argue that the reforms proposed in it actually have significant implications for the ECB’s role, in a way that would make it easier for the ECB to fulfill its mandate.

The smooth functioning of the EMU requires risk sharing. This column, which joins VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate, argues, however, that its best use is not in the support of fiscal expansion in recession countries, but in ensuring the liquidity of solvent sovereigns under market pressure. Giving the ESM/EMF access to central bank financing should be explored as a means to facilitate it.

A team of French and German economists recently proposed on this site a series of reforms to strengthen the euro area's institutional framework. This column, which joins VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate, argues that while the proposals  form a useful basis for discussion, they are nevertheless subject to important shortcomings.

A recent report by a group of French and German economists proposed a set of reforms to improve euro area’s financial stability, political cohesion, and potential for delivering prosperity to its citizens. This column, which joins VoxEU's Euro Area Reform debate, discusses some specific aspects of the proposals that in the author’s view deserve further clarification, and considers the overall implications of the proposals for financial stability of the euro area.