Managing interest rate and liquidity risk

| 06-09-2016 | Rob Söentken |

skyscrapertxl

 

Funding is one of the key focus areas of a treasurer. There are numerous dimensions to funding:
1. Assessing amount and timing of cashflows
2. Arranging access to funding
3. Developing and implementing hedging policy
4. Optimizing funding cost and risk

Assessing amount and timing of cashflows

Assessing the amount and timing of cashflows is a continuous process. Because needs can change both in short and long term.

Arranging access to funding

Matching funding needs with supply from financial institutions is also a continuous process. The typical approach would be to match tenors, but immediate access to cash is critical for the survival of any entity. It could be considered to arrange longer term financing, even for short term (revolving) funding needs. The downside is that long term access is more expensive than short term access. This may be acceptable, but if the spread between borrowing and lending excess cash is too wide, it will become very unattractive to borrow for long tenors.

Developing and implementing hedging policy

To ensure the treasurer works within the boundaries of his mandate, he has to develop a hedging policy which must be documented (‘on paper’) and approved by his management. The document should describe the whole area of funding, to ensure both the creation and hedging of risks are described.

Optimizing funding cost and risk

The main focus drifts towards reducing funding cost. The funding market typically has a steep cost curve, meaning that rates are higher for longer tenors. This results from a steep ‘risk free’ curve and / or from a steep ‘credit spread’ curve. Which often brings entities to borrow for the cheapest tenor possible, being monthly, weekly or even overnight funding. Funding for very short tenors creates the considerable risk that can cause a company to run into a liquidity crisis, in case access to funding disappears. How to deal with this dilemma?

The best approach is to define a number of scenarios to assess the impact of combinations of financing and hedging on funding and risk. A base scenario could be to finance all funding needs using overnight loans. In case of liquidity problems, what would be the impact on the funding rates? Another scenario would be using quarterly funding or yearly rollover funding, potentially combined with:

  • money market futures
  • interest rate swaps
  • caps / floors
  • bond futures or even
  • credit derivatives

What are the incremental funding cost? What are incremental operational expenses of running various products? Can the entity deal with managing margin requirements? Is the entity aware of the basis risks involved when using credit derivatives, which are fairly complex products?

Rob Soentken

 

 

Rob Söentken

Ex-derivatives trader

 

Blockchain: Some remarkable announcements part II

| 05-09-2016 | Carlo de Meijer |

blockchainWhile Blockchain is seen by many as a network phenomenon that needs large market participation, collaboration and interoperability to succeed, both R3CEV and a group of four large global banks came with announcements that are at least a bit remarkable. The bank-backed consortium had filed for a patent of Corda (which is contradictory to the need for open standards and protocols), and at the same time a small group of R3 consortium members have expressed their wish to create their own digital currency (while large collaboration is needed). 

Utility Settlement Coin

A second remarkable announcement was that of a number of large global banks to create their own digital currency. This plan could be seen as another example of  going alone, or at least with just a limited number of players, while large scale collaboration is required for more massive adoption of this technology.

Separately, a group of four R3 consortium members, including BNY Mellon, Deutsche Bank, Icap and Santander have joined with UBS and Clearmatics to a blockchain based transaction settlement project called the Utility Settlement Coin (USC), and plan tests in  a real-world environment.

What is USC?

USC is an asset backed digital cash instrument implemented on distributed ledger technology. The USC is focused on facilitating a new model for digital central bank cash. (By the way, there are several digital cash models being explored). USC is aimed at facilitating payments and settlement for use within global institutional financial markets. Using this technology could contribute to more efficient transactions in terms of speed and lower costs.

USC is aimed as a service of cash assets, with a version for each of the major currencies and USC is convertible at par with a bank deposit in the correspondent currency. USC is fulltime backed by current assets held at a central bank. Sending a USC will be sending its paired real world currency.

Going forward

The group will collectively build of on earlier experiments by UBS and blockchain software company Clearmatics. They launched the concept in September 2015 to validate the potential benefits of USC for capital efficiency, settlement and systemic risk reduction and as a forerunner for central bank backed digital cash issuance. The virtual coin will act as a proxy for physical currency assets held in deposit at the central bank.

“The focus of the work will consist of financial structuring of the USC and wider market structure implications, as well as market integration points for a fully operational utility settlement coin for future use by institutions” according to the group.

The USC concept will be developed through a series of short repetitive phases and platform developments. At each stage the aim is to increase the number of market participants, broadening engagement, connectivity and network effects.  That virtual currency, USC, should go live in 2018.

Active dialogue

Active dialogue  with central banks and regulators will continue to ensure  a regulation compliant, robust and efficient structure within which the USC can be deployed. Recent discussion of digital currencies by central banks and regulators has confirmed their potential significance.

Read more remarkable Blockchain announcements in the first part of this article.

 

carlodemeijer

 

Carlo de Meijer

Economist and researcher

 

Che Guevara, Musk and 0%. Whose story do you listen to?

| 02-09-2016 | Pieter de Kiewit |

cheguevaraIn 2015 the Dutch writer Joris Luyendijk published his book “Dit kan niet waar zijn” about the workings of financial markets. An interesting read for all treasuryXL followers and by now, quite well-known. In my perception one of his earlier works is even better. “Het zijn net mensen” describes the public opinion about the situation in the Middle East and how we are all influenced by governments, media and our cultural backgrounds. For me this was a true eye-opener.

I remembered the book during my recent vacation in Ireland. Apparently Che Guevara has Irish roots, his forefathers are from Galway. Locally he is portrayed as a revolutionary hero. During this vacation I saw an US television series in which he was described as a terrorist….

Recently our Dutch media describe the negative interest and quantitative easing as disastrous. I do not read Italian, Greek or Spanish newspapers but can imagine they write different stories. And today Elon Musk is in the news. Tesla, the company he founded, is buying one of his other companies Solarcity, where two of his cousins are in the board. He did not mention this transaction when, a few months ago, Tesla sold stock worth $1.4 billion. One has to play by the rules… Companies that are making the world a better place by developing environmentally technology should be stimulated in their actions and Musk is creating advancement. Should this part be included in the articles?

The media do not offer a balanced story, the media consumers (read: we) do not have the time or patience to listen to nuance. Should they/we?

Pieter de Kiewit

PS Without broadcasting an opinion, how can it be that almost 100% of the Dutch think Trump is unacceptable as a president of the US and a substantial portion of US citizens consider him their next president? What media do we listen to?

 

Pieter de Kiewit

 

 

Pieter de Kiewit
Owner Treasurer Search

 

Managing cash across borders

| 01-09-2016 | Olivier Werlingshoff |

virtualcash

ING has launched a tool for managing cash across borders. Dubbed Virtual Cash Management (VCM), the solution, announced on the 24th of August, provides an array of digital solutions for corporate treasurers, including internal transfers, reconciliation and invoice matching. It also supports payment-on-behalf-of subsidiaries transactions, as well as collection-on-behalf-of subsidiaries transactions. (pymnts.com)

ING about this new tool:

 

 

“Virtual Cash Management (VCM) is a next-generation digital cash management solution centred around treasurers’ current and future needs. Designed to help treasury functions reach the next level of optimisation, VCM facilitates centralised cash management, visibility and control – without the significant cost or complexity that is traditionally associated with such goals.

The Virtual Cash Management solution combines a cross-border Virtual Bank Account (VBA) structure with Virtual Ledger Accounts (VLA) displayed in an advanced multi-bank cash management dashboard, offering a group-wide view of all payments, collections and cash – as well as enhanced reporting functionalities.” (ingwb.com)

What do our experts think about this tool? Will this help treasury functions reach the next level of optimisation?

Olivier WerlingshoffOlivier Werlingshoff:

Banks are looking for alternatives for the notional pooling. Companies use notional pools to compensate the positive balances from one account with the negative balance from another without moving any balance. Another positive aspect of notional pools is that intercompany transactions are avoided.

By using virtual accounts companies can still keep all transactions related to one bank account. For banks, on the other hand, virtual account are only virtual and uses one and the same real bank account for all transactions.

This is one option to avoid notional pools.

How to: Opstellen van een Cash Flow overzicht

| 31-08-2016 | Maarten Verheul |

cashflowprognoseCash is king, en met een goede liquiditeitsprognose kunnen financials inzichtelijk maken hoe een bedrijf er nu en in de toekomst voor staat. Dat deze liquiditeitsprognose veel vragen oproept, blijkt uit het feit, dat slecht 10% van de bedrijven zo ’n overzicht maakt. Daarom 10 tips voor financials die zich met de liquiditeitsprognose willen bezighouden.

Een betrouwbare liquiditeitsprognose – ofwel planning van ontvangsten en betalingen – is van groot belang om tijdige maatregelen te nemen als er liquiditeitskrapte dreigt te ontstaan. Maakt men wel of geen gebruik van Excel? Begint men top down of bottom up? Hoe groot is de betrouwbaarheid van zo’n forecast eigenlijk? Volgens mijn poll op LinkedIn besteedt slechts tien procent van de bedrijven aandacht aan een liquiditeitsprognose. Dit komt onder meer omdat bedrijven de waarde ervan onderschatten en omdat er geen kennis in huis is om dit te doen. Hieronder tien tips die de financial kunnen helpen bij het opstellen van een liquiditeitsprognose.

1. Begin op tijd

Als leidraad kan worden aangehouden dat in oktober het eerste concept budget klaar moet zijn. Dan kan tegelijk de eerste concept liquiditeitsprognose gemaakt worden. Realiseer, dat als uit de prognose blijkt dat er extra krediet bij de bank nodig is, dat dit tegenwoordig lang duurt( 2 á 3 maanden).

2. De basis is een goed budget

Voorspellen doe je meestal op basis van oude gegevens en de bestaande budgetten. Als de gegevens waarmee de liquiditeitsprognose wordt gemaakt niet juist zijn, is de gehele forecast verkeerd. Een liquiditeitsprognose start altijd vanuit de jaarrekening; die dient dus te kloppen.

3. Zorg voor aansluiting met de balans van het afgelopen boekjaar.

Naadloze aansluiting met de (eind-)balans van het afgelopen boekjaar is voor de prognose essentieel. Door met historie te werken worden er immers ook bepaalde seizoenspatronen meegenomen.

4. Verhouding met gebudgetteerde balans

De liquiditeit moet aansluiten op de gebudgetteerde balans; de balans oud boekjaar en daar in verwerkt budget P &L. Met andere woorden: het beginsaldo bank is het eindsaldo bank aan het einde van het oude boekjaar, en het eindsaldo bank liquiditeit prognose is het banksaldo geprognotiseerde balans. Dit moet aansluiten; anders is de liquiditeitsprognose onjuist.

5. Houd het simpel

Een forecast blijft een forecast; daarom doe je er goed aan om niet volledig accuraat in de details te zijn en niet teveel aandacht te besteden aan relatief kleine verschillen. Houd de liquiditeitsprognose zo simpel mogelijk. Een kolom ‘Real’ naast de forecast kan helpen om te signaleren of het krediet de komende maanden voldoende is. Zo niet, dan kan er actie worden ondernomen richting de bank. De liquiditeitsprognose staat en valt met een betrouwbare verwachting van de omzet. Als die verwachting niet voldoende betrouwbaar is, is het maken van een uitgewerkte liquiditeitsprognose in feite zonde van de tijd.

6. Maak de prognose zelf

Een liquiditeitsprognose is zo sterk afhankelijk van onder andere de aard van het bedrijf, de wijze van rapporteren en hoe men bepaalde cijfers interpreteert, dat een standaard prognose in feite niet bestaat. Daarom is het aan te bevelen het opstellen van zo’n prognose altijd in huis te doen. Natuurlijk zijn er externe partijen die dit goed kunnen maar kennis van de business en branche is essentieel voor een juiste forecast.

7. Garbage in, garbage out

Het opstellen van een liquiditeitsprognose is een zeer intensief karwei waarbij regelmatig de grootboekrekeningen geraadpleegd dienen te worden. Dat leidt vaak tot nieuwe inzichten en correcties. De kwaliteit van de liquiditeitsbegroting hangt volledig af van de kwaliteit van de maker. Aan de controllers is het vervolgens de taak om zowel begroting, realisatie als forecast goed te verwerken. Dit geldt ook bij Excel: de gemiddelde kennis van de mogelijkheden van dat programma ligt onder de 30%. Fouten zijn snel gemaakt en garbage in? Garbage out.

8. Excel is gevoelig voor fouten.

Een Excelsheet met een liquiditeitsprognose bestaat grofweg uit de volgende drie componenten: Cash In, Cash Out en Banksaldo. De meningen lopen uiteen over het al dan niet inzetten van Excel voor de liquiditeitsprognose. Mocht Excel de voorkeur hebben, let dan goed op de juistheid van gegevens. Die kunnen namelijk door één verkeerd getal of formule compleet verkeerd uitkomen.

9. Wel of geen specifieke software hangt af van de financial

Met software die specifiek voor een liquiditeitsprognose is ontwikkeld kunt u de gehele financiële situatie van een bedrijf in kaart brengen; het wordt dan bijna onmogelijk om posten te vergeten en de liquiditeitsprognose rolt dan bijna als vanzelf uit het programma. Hoewel veel financials zich graag vasthouden aan het werken in Excel kunnen programma’s als Diamond FMS, Ten Solutions, Vision Planner, Liemar, Prophix, Tagetik of Professional Planner helpen om de liquiditeitsbegroting te automatiseren. Bedenk wel; software is een tool, geen doel.

10. Voorspellen kan top down en bottom up

Een liquiditeitsbegroting kan top down vanuit de verlies- en winstprognose opgebouwd worden, met een verfijning door de balansfluctuaties mee te nemen. Bottom up is echter ook een optie. Let bij bottom up op specifieke BTW-aspecten en stromen die net voorbij maandeinde gebeuren; die kunnen een afwijking genereren ten opzichte van de top down benadering. Een combinatie tussen top down en bottom up is ook mogelijk, door eerst de winst / verlies te berekenen en daarna de maandmutaties en eindstanden binnen de balans. Op die manier krijgt u een exact overzicht van de begrote liquiditeit, gedurende het jaar.

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]

maartenverheultxlMaarten Verheul – Treasury Consultant
[button url=”http://www.treasuryxl.com/community/experts/maarten-verheul/” text=”View expert profile” size=”” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

Payment fraud – Leoni case

| 30-08-2016 | Udo Rademakers |

wolkenkrabberAt the 5th of August I wrote an article regarding payment fraud. Not even two weeks later, Leoni, an automotive company in Germany with EUR 4.5b turnover, has been the victim of massive fraud where USD 40m has been wired … to a crime organization. “Leoni realized it had become the victim of fraudulent activity with the help of falsified documents and identities and the use of electronic communication channels,” the firm said. (source: dw.com)

Most probably, this has been done via the so called “Fake President Fraud”: an employee receives a top secret message from the “CEO” with the instruction not to discuss this request with anyone else and to make a high value wire (to an account abroad). Obviously, the money flows into a crime organization.

Currently I am working in Germany where one sees (including myself) an increase in these kinds of attempts. I suspect that most of the cases don’t make it into the paper however.

I refer to my article what measurements could be taken to avoid payment fraud, but would advise corporates as well to make a “quick scan”, as a lack of transparency and decentralization of payments increases the opportunity for fraud and cybercrime:

1. Do you centrally manage and control payment workflows?

2. Are payment workflows consistent within the group?

3. How many payment initiation systems do you run within your group and are limits and processes aligned?

4. Do you link your payments to your Cash flow forecast?

If all of the above questions can be answered with “yes” and the payment systems are limited, some risks are reduced and therewith “Leoni-cases” will hopefully be avoided.

Udo Rademakers

 

Udo Rademakers

Independent Treasury Consultant & Interim Manager

Blockchain: Some remarkable announcements part I

| 29-08-2016 | Carlo de Meijer |

blockchainWhile Blockchain is seen by many as a network phenomenon that needs large market participation, collaboration and interoperability to succeed, both R3CEV and a group of four large global banks came with announcements that are at least a bit remarkable. The bank-backed consortium had filed for a patent of Corda (which is contradictory to the need for open standards and protocols), and at the same time a small group of R3 consortium members have expressed their wish to create their own digital currency (while large collaboration is needed).

R3 and Corda patent

R3CEV, the bank-backed consortium this week announced that it had filed for a patent of Corda, the distributed ledger software that underlies its new project ‘Concord’.

Some critics have argued that blockchain-based solutions should not have patents attached. That could not only hinder innovation in the field of distributed ledgers technology over the coming years. But it could also stand in the way of a more massive adoption of this technology.

R3, however sees it different and says that “although Concord will resemble other platforms working on blockchain technology the underlying software Corda has/offers  enough unique features to justify a patent”. “Corda is just one element of the wider Condor platform”.

Corda White Paper

In the meantime R3 also released its first Whitepaper on Corda. It gives an introductory, non-technical overview that explain its vision, some design choices and outlines the key concepts underpinning the Condor platform.

The Corda project that was announced in April this year, aims to create the software that would be central to its wider blockchain-inspired  shared ledger development project, called Condor.

In this Whitepaper it is explained how R3 set themselves the challenge of starting with the various pain points in the financial industry’s: duplicated, inconsistent data and business logic and redundant business processes – and asked themselves “if they could apply breakthroughs in distributed ledger and blockchain technology to solve them”.

Corda is in fact the outcome of the analysis R3 and the participating banks made on how to achieve as many of the benefits of distributed ledger and blockchain technology as possible “but in a way that is sympathic to and addresses the needs of regulated financial institutions”.

What is Concord?

Concord is aimed to become a distributed ledger platform that has been in development for over a year now. Thereby various challenges are assessed such as governance, internal record keeping and regulatory reporting across the financial services marketplace.

R3 describes Concord as a ‘shared-services model’ that still maintains privacy for banks. Concord aims to become a universal software platform connecting bank operations, allowing companies to run high-scale financial applications on permissioned networks across organisations and internally.

This platform that will be designed to record and manage important, financial agreements (read: smart contracts) between regulated financial institutions, aims to digitalise so-called back and mid-office functions, including trade clearing and settling securities trades, asset registry, reconciliation, and even the recording of cash balances.

By moving these middle and back office functions to a secure cloud-based ledger, R3 en its members hope that Concord will significantly streamline present cumbersome operations, and lower the costs of maintain them. By doing that huge cost savings could be realised (billions of dollars).

Traject

A version of Concord is expected to be launched in the next several months. A small number of member banks will begin testing the system early 2017, with an so-called “alpha” version planned to appear by the middle of next year. “We need to make this real to business users in 2017”, according to R3.

It however will be up to consortium members to decide whether to use it or not. Current bank members of the consortium haven’t (yet) committed to using the new Concord platform and aren’t bound to use it. Nevertheless they have invested money and resources helping build it and also have input into Concord’s specifications.

Concord versus Ethereum

Concord resembles Ethereum, another distributed ledger platform, in a number of ways. Just like Ethereum Concord is viewed as a platform that will allow developers to build any variety of applications. But Concord is tailored expressly for financial institutions, and so has different features and functions.

Perhaps the most important difference between Concord and Ethereum is the way transactions will be recorded. With Ethereum every transactions is recorded, verified and disclosed immediately in their respective public, distributed ledgers.

With Concord, while the transaction is verified via a distributed ledger, it is not publicly disclosed, maintaining the confidentiality that was a key concern of R3’s member banks. The details are shared only by the parties involved, or parties to whom they give access.

 

carlodemeijer

 

Carlo de Meijer

Economist and researcher

 

Why companies still use Excel

| 25-08-2016 | Lionel Pavey |

spreadsheet2
Do you still rely on spreadsheets in your daily treasury operations? We have read multiple articles on this subject lately and we decided to ask our community: Why do treasurers still rely on spreadsheets? Yesterday Jan Meulendijks gave us his opinion on the topic. Today expert Lionel Pavey talks about the benefits of using Excel in your company.

Why do companies use Excel?

Cost – it is part of the Microsoft Office Package; low maintenance costs

Use – everyone has some level of proficiency with Excel

Versatile – data can be customized to your own requirements

Simplicity – comes preloaded with over 400 different formulae, though far less than 100 are truly needed for Treasury purposes

Training – most people learn on the job, no need for expensive courses to help people use the software

Flexible – give the same data to different people and see how they uniquely extract the data they need to answer their queries

Compatibility – all relevant data that is present on standalone accounting software etc. can be exported into Excel and adjusted for individual purposes to achieve the desired results

Problems with Excel?

Ignorance – getting staff to comprehend the route from input to output

Errors – not incorporating checks and balances that can highlight discrepancies

Individualism – is the output only for your consumption or is it passed on down through the chain, enhanced and then passed on again?

Disarray – everyone applies different fonts, layouts, conditional formatting. Should be a company policy in place to determine how data is collated and presented

Uncertainty – why do people insist on hiding columns and rows?

Duplication – the same spreadsheet data is present on many PC’s at the same time with subtle but significant differences. Someone has to own the original document

Solutions?

Dedicated BI software – expensive, no value outside of the present company normally, requires regular maintenance, multiple departments have to sign off before it can even be implemented, constant reviews of whether the correct modules are present, system updates

Design Structure – implement a company policy clearly dictating how “shared” spreadsheets are to be designed.

Input Structure – agree who delivers what, to whom, when and in the agreed format

Share results – allow other people to see how their data has been incorporated into the final reports so they can appreciate the significance of their contribution

Ownership – define who owns what part of the process (their level of responsibility) and who owns the spreadsheet

Reports – ensure that the end users clearly define what they require at the start. 10 versions of a spreadsheet before they get what they wanted means they did not know what they wanted or did not communicate clearly

Conclusion

Excel is well known, robust, versatile and understood. For cash flow forecasting 4 or 5 secure “master” spreadsheets can allow for most situations – daily cash flow recording, future cash flow forecasting, agreed budget, capital expenditure plans, funding commitments. These have to be well protected and isolated on the hard drive. Everything is a trade off – nothing will give you 100 per cent accuracy. However, if you can relatively simply design the required spreadsheets then data is always up to date and available when needed. This covers the 80 per cent of the time maxim– the other 20 per cent you will have to work harder to achieve. Excel is not going away – every new versions even more functionality that allows us to achieve the required level of input more easily whilst ensuring that the output can be better analysed and interpreted.

 

Lionel Pavey

 

Lionel Pavey

Cash Management and Treasury Specialist

 

Do you still rely on spreadsheets in your daily treasury operations?

| 24-08-2016 | Jan Meulendijks |

spreadsheet2Spreadsheets, every treasurer knows how to work them. Spreadsheets are deeply embedded in treasury operations and they seem hard to eliminate. We have read multiple articles on this subject lately and we decided to ask our community: Why do treasurers still rely on spreadsheets? (source: gtnews.com)

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]

Jan MeulendijksJan Meulendijks
In many cases the treasurers of companies have started their area of expertise with smaller (SME) companies, where the available ERP-system did not offer treasury features and/or no separate treasury system was in use. So… you build it yourself in a spreadsheet. The big advantage of this is that such a spreadsheet only features what you really need, and can be kept quite simple but effective.

When the treasurer moves up to a larger company, the basic spreadsheet can be expanded with any new features required. Again, simple but effective. The big disadvantage of course, is lack of system documentation and dependance on the original designer to transfer knowledge to others.
I would like to classify this phenomenon under the “80/20”-rule: with a few basic spreadsheet functionalities you can achieve 80% of your treasury requirements, to achieve the remaining 20% you have to undertake large operations and investments. Is that all worth it???

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]

Do you still rely on spreadsheets in your daily treasury operations?

Uitgelicht: Banken overwegen cash op te slaan in kluizen om ECB te ontwijken

| 22-08-2016 | Olivier Werlingshoff, Udo Rademakers, Douwe Dijkstra, Roger Boxman |

 

Afgelopen week verscheen het bericht dat onder andere de ING bank serieus heeft overwogen om geld in cash op te slaan in kluizen om zo de maatregelen van de ECB te ontwijken. De ECB vraagt een ‘boete’ wanneer banken hun geld willen opstallen. De gedachte hierachter is dat financiële instellingen meer geld uitlenen en de economie zo gestimuleerd wordt. Niet alle banken beschouwen het opslaan van cash geld in kluizen als een serieus alternatief. (bron: rtlz.nl) Wat vinden onze experts?

 

Olivier WerlingshoffOlivier Werlingshoff
“Ik denk niet dat het opslaan in kluizen een optie is. Dit is ook in strijd met het doel van de negatieve rente die de ECB heeft ingevoerd. Als banken het geld in cash gaan opslaan, heeft dit stimuleringsmiddel van de ECB geen zin. Ik begrijp echter wel dat banken naar deze optiemogelijkheid kijken. Zij zitten klem tussen aan de ene kant de interne regels van risico’s en rendementen bij het uitgeven van leningen en aan de andere kant de druk van de ECB om meer te gaan uitgeven.”

 

 

udorondUdo Rademakers
“Er zijn momenteel partijen die geld zelf opslaan om in worst-case-scenario geld achter de hand te hebben. Het omzeilen van de negatieve (en wellicht nog verder dalende) rente helpt een handje om met de gespaarde kosten de opslag te financieren. Indien veel partijen voor zo´n type oplossing zouden opteren, kan dit druk opleveren bij de ECB. Echter, de ECB zou hierop kunnen reageren door nieuwe, versnelde regelgeving tot inperking van cash opslag in te voeren (lees: een verbod). Dit lijkt ondenkbaar, maar de centrale banken hebben vaker voor verrassingen gezorgd in het verre en recente verleden…

Ik zie de rentepolitiek van de ECB momenteel meer als een “belasting op vermogen” (wat in zeer veel jaren is opgebouwd) dat zal leiden tot een stimulering van de economie. Tot nu toe heeft de trukendoos van de ECB tot een uitstel van executie geleid en weinig langdurige effecten gesorteerd.

Overigens heeft de ECB besloten om de productie van EUR 500 biljetten einde 2018 te beëindigen (onder het mom dat deze biljetten voor criminele doeleinden worden gebruikt).
Zou dat een andere mogelijke reden zijn om geld opslaan lastiger te maken? In deze tijden van onzekerheid is diversifiëring mijn devies.”

 

 

douwedijkstrarondDouwe Dijkstra
“Persoonlijk vind ik het cash in kluizen opslaan een nauwelijks serieus te nemen optie. Banken maken nog zoveel marge op wel verstrekt krediet dat de aan de ECB te betalen negatieve rente eerder peanuts is dan dat het “vreet aan de winst van de banken”. Beter kunnen banken hun kredietverlenende taak serieus nemen in plaats van aanhoudend aanvullende KYC (Know Your Client) uit te vinden om daar hun klanten mee lastig te vallen.”

 

 

Roger Boxman
rogerrondEen goedkopere manier om van overtollig kasgeld af te komen is om leveranciers of werknemers eerder te betalen. Geld in kluizen opslaan kan uiteraard wel maar is kostbaar. Zeker nu de biljetten van € 500 zijn afgeschaft.