12.07.2015 Views

US Government Debt Different - Finance Department - University of ...

US Government Debt Different - Finance Department - University of ...

US Government Debt Different - Finance Department - University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

36 A Macro View <strong>of</strong> Shadow Banking: Do T-Bill Shortages Pose a New Triffin Dilemma?<strong>of</strong> 2007-09 was a crisis <strong>of</strong> the dollar-based international monetarysystem. The crisis brought to the fore fundamental questions aboutthe ultimate reserve asset and the meaning <strong>of</strong> “cash” for institutionalinvestors.The answers to these questions underscore that U.S. sovereign debtis indeed different.Banks’ funding base is <strong>of</strong>ten assumed to consist mainly <strong>of</strong> retail cashinvestors, or depositors, and interbank loans. This was the case decadesago, but no longer. In recent decades, banks have been increasinglyrelying on institutional cash investors for funding. The rise <strong>of</strong>institutional cash investors as funding providers explains the rise <strong>of</strong>what is referred to as wholesale funding.The aggregate volume <strong>of</strong> dollar-denominated institutional cash balancespeaked at roughly $3.5 trillion prior to the financial crisis,compared to the volume <strong>of</strong> about $6 trillion in insured householddeposits. In 1990, these figures were $100 billion and $3 trillion,respectively. Thus, at a macro level, the U.S. financial system’s fundingbase has gone from nearly 100% government-insured and hencestable deposits to one where the sources <strong>of</strong> funding were roughly2/3rd insured and stable and 1/3rd uninsured and instable. And thelarger wholesale funding got as a share <strong>of</strong> the banking system’s totalfunding base, the less effective the traditional banks’ safety net wasas a source <strong>of</strong> stability during systemic crises and during runs. Institutionalcash investors effectively lived under 1907-like conditionsprior to the crisis, without a safety net.Institutional cash investors fall into three categories: (1) foreign <strong>of</strong>ficialreserve managers; (2) global nonfinancial corporations; and (3)the asset management complex. Since the 1990s, all three categorieshave seen a dramatic increase in their volume <strong>of</strong> cash under management.First, foreign <strong>of</strong>ficial reserves have grown as Chinese and other Asianreserve managers pegged their currencies to the dollar as a part <strong>of</strong>their export-oriented, mercantilist policies. Second, global corpora-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!