display

Crises shouldn't be left unused, they say - and Italy's new Prime Minister Mario Draghi doesn't waste any time.

Immediately after taking office, the former President of the European Central Bank made it clear that he wanted to shape at EU level and rebuild Europe's financial architecture.

He has a strong ally: French President Emmanuel Macron.

Both are in unison calling for more money for investments to help Europe's economies out of the Corona crisis.

They still remain nebulous when it comes to how the additional investments are to be financed, but it is becoming apparent that they will push for a loosening of the debt rules in the euro zone in order to allow higher indebtedness in the long term.

There are influential supporters of this position in Brussels, such as Economic Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni.

Economists also advocate more debt-financed investments: The extremely low interest rates ensure that states pay far less money for debt servicing than in previous years;

as a result, much higher liabilities can be financed than before.

display

The timing for the move is well chosen: the debt rules of the Stability and Growth Pact have been suspended since last spring due to the Corona crisis.

This makes sense because in the current situation no state can keep the debt limits anyway: economic output collapsed during the crisis, governments suffered tax shortfalls and have to spend billions to fight the pandemic, protect workers and support companies.

The main Maastricht guidelines - a government deficit of three percent per year and a debt burden that corresponds to a maximum of 60 percent of economic output - cannot be met by the majority of EU member states in this situation.

The deficit is higher everywhere, and in five euro countries the debt burden already exceeds 100 percent of economic output.

This will not change anytime soon: The European Commission wants the rules to remain suspended not only this year but also next year.

They could not apply again until 2023;

It is more likely, however, that it will no longer exist in its current form.

A reform of the debt rules is necessary

display

A reform of the debt rules would be absolutely necessary.

The Stability and Growth Pact is a disappointment.

Not only did Member States break the rules from the start;

especially Germany and France.

Since the outbreak of the euro crisis at the latest, the set of rules has become unmanageable and complex.

The handbook for interpreting the rules is now almost 100 pages long.

In order to make the pact smarter and to prevent strict austerity targets from worsening recessions, as at the height of the euro crisis, the member states have continuously developed new additional criteria by which the soundness of public finances is to be checked.

The result is that the national capitals and the EU Commission, which monitors the treaty, can pick out the key figures that fit in the respective case.

That has reduced the economic idea of ​​the euro to absurdity.

The idea that the Economic and Monetary Union will become a competitive union in which everyone must make an effort to remain just as competitive as the economically strongest countries in the group has not been fulfilled.

Quite the opposite: Politicians are currently getting maximum backing from the monetary policy of the European Central Bank, the money from the EU reconstruction fund - and soon perhaps also from relaxed fiscal rules that will make higher deficits possible.

display

There are many reform proposals: for example, that there should only be one central rule, according to which state spending must not grow faster than state income in the future.

Or that there should be exceptions for investments and other future expenses.

Or that instead of the EU Commission, another independent body could in future watch over compliance with the rules, completely shielded from political considerations.

"Europe is forged in crises"

These are sensible suggestions.

But the corona crisis is an extremely bad time for such reforms.

For the formulation of more effective rules, quieter times are necessary than the deepest recession in the history of the EU.

If the debate goes on anyway, the chances are good that Draghi and Macron will prevail, and with it all those states that are in favor of laxer debt rules.

“Europe will be forged in crises”, this prediction by EU founding father Jean Monnet has come true, at least in the past decade.

During the euro crisis, Europe got its own monetary fund, the ESM, which has since taken on more and more tasks.

The Frontex border agency was massively increased during the refugee crisis, and immediately after the outbreak of the Corona crisis, the member states agreed on the € 750 billion reconstruction plan, for which the EU is allowed to take out large debts for the first time in history.

Chancellor Angela Merkel insists that the joint debts will remain a one-off emergency measure, but nobody really wants to believe in it.

In fact, Germany's stance will determine how far Europe's debt pact easing will go.

And if the past is a benchmark, resistance could soon crumble.

Since the outbreak of the euro crisis in 2009, Chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly crossed self-drawn red lines in European economic policy.

At first she didn't want to help Greece, then the European rescue package shouldn't exist, then it shouldn't become a permanent institution, common European debts anyway not - and then it turned out exactly like that.

The recovery plan should be a warning

The reconstruction plan in the Corona crisis, for which the EU is owing 750 million euros, should, however, be a warning against excessive relaxation of fiscal rules.

The plan was created to appease the eurosceptics in Italy and because last year there was no fear that the corona crisis could lead to a flare-up of the still unresolved euro crisis.

The financing costs for Italy and Spain, which had been hit particularly hard at the beginning of the crisis, had already risen significantly by then.

In this situation, the EU should help to borrow money in the financial markets and distribute it to the Member States, both as cheap loans and as injections of money that do not have to be paid back.

The largest sums go to Italy and Spain.

The reasoning at the time: The EU borrows money and passes it on to member states that themselves have too high debts to finance themselves cheaply on the markets.

In this way Italy and other member states can get money that otherwise would not have received money at acceptable interest rates because of their high debt burden.

The situation at that time shows how much high debt limits the ability of states to act, even in times of extremely low interest rates.

This is a taste of what could happen if interest rates rise again.