TsMAKP raised the risk of a banking crisis in the country to "high". Such conclusions were reached for several reasons: the high debt burden of companies, created due to initially incorrect expectations regarding the duration of the high rates period, as well as due to the strong ruble, which will require long and difficult work on restructuring businesses and transferring debt-ridden companies to new owners. Is there a reason to interpret such risks as "high"? If so, does the banking system have enough reserves to deal with such problems? Answers from experts in the polls section.
Co-founder, CEO of BusinessDrom, Chairman of the Russian Support Committee for Financial Markets Pavel Samaev:
Indeed, there is reason to interpret the risk as "high": according to the formal criteria of the Center for International Relations, a hidden banking crisis in Russia has already begun. The share of problematic assets in the system exceeded the 10% threshold, in small and medium-sized companies - below 19%. At the same time, the official portfolio of "bad" debts is underestimated: the volume of restructuring of risky corporate loans reached 4.8 trillion rubles - 1.5 times the amount actually overdue, and the real level of problematic business loans may be closer to 14-16% instead of 11.8%.
According to estimates, problem loans that are not covered by reserves amount to about 7.2 trillion rubles, that is, about 70% of the capital that banks have above the regulatory minimum. TsMAKP's arguments about the "strong ruble" and the debt burden also make sense: the debts of large companies grew faster than the entire sector, which forced the central bank to increase macroprudential buffers.
The capital reserves of the banks up to the standards are estimated at 8.5 trillion rubles, the capital adequacy has increased to 13.9%, in addition a prudent macro buffer of 1.3 trillion has been accumulated. The sector earns record profits, and the central bank actually manages the crisis: it recommends restructuring without increasing reserves, allows problems to gradually "ripen" at the expense of future profits, and the state banks provide an administrative buffer.