Category: Russian Finance

Source: IMF – News in Russian

June 6, 2025

Washington, DC – June 6, 2025: Lithuania has proved resilient to multiple shocks in recent years. However, new challenges are emerging—including further increases in defense expenditure adding to the existing long-term spending pressures—while long-standing structural issues still require attention. Lithuania needs to reignite its reform momentum to boost productivity while addressing these challenges. A comprehensive strategy is needed to preserve fiscal space through revenue mobilization, enhanced spending efficiency, and limiting further spending pressures by strengthening the multi-pillar pension system. Structural reforms should focus on facilitating investments and accelerating the adoption of new technologies to boost productivity growth, supplemented by labor market policies, including reducing skills mismatches. Financial sector policies should continue to safeguard financial stability and integrity.

Recent Developments, Outlook, and Risks

The economy grew strongly in 2024. Growth accelerated to 2.7 percent—well above peers—driven by private consumption supported by significant real income gains. The recovery was broad-based across sectors, including manufacturing and high value-added services, despite sluggish productivity growth. While inflation remained low for the most part of the year, it has risen since late 2024, driven by higher energy prices and excise duties.

While fiscal performance exceeded expectations, the deficit widened, and the debt ratio is increasing. The deficit almost doubled from 0.7 percent of GDP in 2023 to 1.3 percent of GDP in 2024, reflecting increased public wages and pensions. Higher revenues supported by robust aggregate wage growth and lower-than-anticipated expenditure, mainly from the accrual correction in defense spending, prevented the deficit from increasing further. However, pre-payments for additional orders of defense equipment and the continued buildup of the general government cash buffer contributed to an increase in the debt-to-GDP ratio from 37.3 percent in 2023 to 38.2 percent in 2024, for the first time since 2020.

The banking sector remains financially sound, with high capitalization, ample liquidity buffers, and low non-performing loan (NPL) ratios. Banks continue to be highly profitable, although profitability eased in 2024 compared to the record high levels seen in the previous year, against lower interest rates driven by ECB monetary policy easing.

There are signs of gradual financial expansion. Reflecting decreasing lending rates and recovering credit demand, loan growth to both non-financial corporations and households recovered in 2024 and early 2025, and credit-to-GDP ratios have increased moderately. House price growth stabilized in 2024, down from the 2022 peak. Nevertheless, house prices are likely not significantly above levels justified by fundamentals, given the recent robust demand while housing supply is increasing, and affordability has improved.

The economy is expected to grow at 2.8 percent in 2025 while inflation will increase to 3.1 percent. Growth will be supported by private consumption and rising investment related to EU funds. External demand will remain subdued reflecting uncertainty regarding trade policies, despite the positive outlook of information and communication technologies (ICT) and professional activities. Increased excise duties and persistently high wage growth will keep headline and core inflation above pre-pandemic averages in the coming years. The labor market will tighten reflecting negative labor force dynamics affected by the normalization of migration flows.

Risks to the outlook are tilted to the downside. As a small open economy, Lithuania is exposed to high uncertainty around trade policies and geopolitical risks. A severe downturn in its main trade partners would worsen the external performance and domestic activity. In the medium term, weaker demographics pose risks to labor supply which could add pressures on wages and competitiveness if productivity growth fails to accelerate. In the absence of sufficient measures, the fiscal position is subject to considerable medium-term risk with higher defense spending needs adding to the already high existing long-term pressures.

Fiscal Policy

A moderately less expansionary fiscal stance than currently expected would be helpful in 2025, and the strategy should shift to preserving fiscal space. The deficit is projected to rise to 2.8 percent of GDP in 2025, due to significant increases in pension spending and higher public sector wages. However, with a small and decreasing negative output gap under staff projections and considering mounting spending pressures in the medium term, going forward, a moderately tighter fiscal stance to reduce deficits and stabilize the debt-to-GDP ratio would be appropriate. With a view to safeguarding fiscal buffers and minimize the need for larger adjustments in later years, any unused spending or revenue overperformance this year should be saved to limit the deficit increase.

A stronger fiscal adjustment will be required if defense spending rises notably from current levels. The envisaged increase in defense spending to 5-6 percent of GDP in 2026-30 from the current level of 3 percent would raise financing needs significantly. In the absence of additional fiscal measures, debt could reach 60 percent of GDP by 2030. The proposed tax policy changes to accommodate these spending needs are welcome, but the revenue yield is estimated to be modest. Greater efforts will therefore be needed to maintain debt dynamics on a sustainable path in the medium term to preserve fiscal space to absorb possible future shocks. An average annual adjustment of about 0.5 percentage points of GDP in the general government balance over 2026-30, with the majority of additional defense spending financed by front-loaded increases in tax revenues, would help stabilize debt at around 50 percent of GDP by 2030.

Financing options for additional defense spending should be anchored by revenue mobilization. While temporary measures and productivity-enhancing capital expenditure could be deficit-financed, a sizable part of the additional defense spending is likely to be permanent, warranting higher revenues or lower spending in other areas. The tax policy change proposal appropriately targets a mix of taxes, but there is further scope to raise additional revenues while improving the system, including increasing progressivity and efficiency. This could include raising revenues through making the personal income tax (PIT) system more progressive and streamlining the tax schedules to prevent higher marginal tax rates for lower income earners, limiting exemptions in corporate income taxes (CIT) and property taxes, and reducing the value added tax (VAT) compliance gap while improving VAT efficiency.

Revenue mobilization should be complemented by spending measures. Fiscal savings could be generated by improving spending efficiency, including in healthcare and education. Hospital network rationalization could enhance the quality of service while reducing costs. The teacher-student ratio is relatively high for secondary education and there is room to rationalize the school network while improving quality.

Strengthening the multi-pillar pension system will limit some of the additional spending pressures in the medium-term. The current pension system implies significant increases in public pension expenditure over the next two decades, driven by adverse demographics, while replacement ratios will remain low. The Pillar II reform proposal under discussion, entailing participation to become voluntary and increased options to opt out and suspend participation, is likely to further reduce the replacement rate. These changes could have a material impact on the entire pension system and the public finances. Staff urges the authorities to allow sufficient time to carefully consider all potential ramifications, including through further thorough analysis of the social and fiscal sustainability of the broader pension system.

Financial Sector Policies

Financial sector policies should continue to focus on safeguarding financial stability. Bank profitability is expected to moderate further but to remain high in 2025. Financial conditions are likely to ease in 2025 due to declining ECB policy rates and increased competition in financial sector, such as from the increasing footprint of fintech companies. Solvency and liquidity stress tests conducted by the Bank of Lithuania suggest that banks can withstand adverse macroeconomic scenarios and unexpected liquidity shocks. While some smaller banks require enhancing capitalization and closer oversight, all in all, financial stability risks arising from the banking system are broadly contained. With an increased frequency of cyberattacks on banks in recent years, cyber resilience should continue to be strengthened, including the full implementation of the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) regulation.

The current macroprudential stance is broadly appropriate, but continued vigilance is warranted. Financial cycles including residential real estate and private sector credit so far have exhibited no major signs of overheating, but the sustained pace of expansion requires close monitoring and readiness to act in case early signs of an excessive financial expansion emerge. Despite the low exposure of banks, the commercial real estate market continues to require attention as risks of price corrections remain due to the persistent imbalance between supply and demand. In the event of a significant adverse financial shock with the potential to trigger widespread losses in the banking sector, the relaxation of capital-based measures would be appropriate to minimize credit supply disruptions and support lending to the economy.

The AML/CFT framework has been strengthened significantly, but continued effective implementation is essential. The third national risk assessment identified virtual asset service providers (VASPs), and electronic money institutions (EMI), and payment institutions (PI) as posing significant ML/TF risks. The authorities should continue AML/CFT efforts to mitigate cross-border risks, including Bank of Lithuania’s oversight and market controls for newly licensed VASPs under MiCAR regime, supervision of payment service institutions, and AML/CFT measures for CENTROlink members.

Structural Reforms

Lithuania faces structural headwinds limiting productivity and long-term growth. The recent recovery has been largely driven by higher labor accumulation enabled by temporary net migration, while the contributions from capital and total factor productivity (TFP) growth remained smaller than those observed during earlier periods of faster income convergence. Given expected population declines in the coming years, structural reforms to facilitate greater capital deepening and higher productivity growth are essential.

Higher investment is needed to support potential growth. Low capital intensity remains a key barrier to productivity growth and the transition towards a higher value-added oriented economy. Development of risk capital, co-financing and mechanisms for risk sharing tailored to enhance the flow of credit to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), targeted credit guarantee schemes and integrating digital solutions can help alleviate constraints related to the lack of access to finance experienced by some firms. In this context, the expanded role of the state-owned institution ILTE—previously INVEGA—can play a role, complementing the private banking sector in supporting investment in areas such as high value-added sectors, innovation, energy efficiency, and strategic infrastructures. To consolidate the institution’s role as a national development bank, it is essential to ensure effective monitoring and transparency of ILTE operations. More fundamentally, deepening the EU’s single market—combined with stronger incentives to develop domestic capital markets—would help support access to finance of corporates and further productive investments in the country.

Inefficiencies in the education system contribute significantly to the persistent skills mismatches in Lithuania’s labor market. As one of the countries with the highest skills mismatches in Europe, Lithuania faces ongoing challenges despite measures including the government’ active labor market policies and their evaluation and the smart specialization multi-year program aimed at enhancing workforce skills. Critical shortages persist in essential sectors, including nursing, engineering, and scientific fields, highlighting the urgent need for strategic reforms in education and training to better align with market demands.

Ensuring effective integration of migrants into the labor market is crucial to sustain the labor force. Recent immigrants have been successfully absorbed into the Lithuanian labor market and legislative amendments have enabled easier migration for high-skilled workers despite the reduction of the non-EU workers quota in 2025. Policies should focus on integrating migrants in the most productivity-enhancing way possible while facilitating the participation of foreign professionals in those sectors with the largest shortages.

Further investment in digitalization and AI preparedness has the potential to boost productivity growth. Lithuania has invested significantly in digitalizing its economy in recent years, becoming one of the main fintech hubs in Europe. However, despite progress in digitalization and in AI preparedness, its digital infrastructure remains close to the EU average. To unlock possibly substantial productivity gains, policies should aim to facilitate technological diffusion, job transition and AI adoption among firms, while introducing measures to mitigate associated risks in terms of possible job replacements and inequality deepening. In this respect, the recent initiatives included in the START plan aimed at promoting digitalization and the deployment of AI both in the private sector and in public administration will support these efforts.

Energy security has been reinforced in the last years. The Baltic countries joined the European electricity grid in 2025, completely disconnecting from the Russian electricity system. Moreover, Lithuania has diversified its energy sources and import dependency has been lowered through the intensification of domestic electricity production from renewable sources in the recent years. Still, being susceptible to risks associated with climate change, Lithuania needs to accelerate the green transition, particularly for adaptation. In this respect, future investment in new technologies and defense initiatives should not thwart efforts to reduce economy-wide emissions, such as the recently adopted policies in the context of the updated National Energy and Climate Action Plan (NECP) for the period 2021–2030.

The IMF team is grateful for the warm hospitality of the Lithuanian authorities and would like to thank all its interlocutors in government, the Bank of Lithuania, the European Central Bank, the private sector, unions, and business associations for constructive and fruitful discussions.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/06/mcs662025-lithuania-staff-concluding-statement-2025-article-iv-mission

MIL OSI

Source: IMF – News in Russian

June 5, 2025

Washington, DC: On June 3, the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) discussed the staff paper on the contribution of the IMF to the international financing for development agenda, prepared in view of the 4^th Financing for Development Conference (FfD4) to be held in Sevilla, Spain from June 30 to July 3, 2025. The paper outlines the challenging context for development, updates staff’s assessment on the achievability of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and proposes actions to accelerate development progress.

The series of shocks since 2020 has added to longstanding structural challenges, with low-income and fragile countries affected the most. Debt vulnerabilities deserve attention, particularly for low-income countries. While debt appears sustainable for most countries, many are facing high interest costs and elevated refinancing needs that constrain their ability to finance critical spending necessary to progress on their development path. Against this background, achieving the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 appears increasingly unlikely.

Accelerating development progress will require a major collective effort, including advancing a strong domestic reform agenda, providing adequate international support to complement and facilitate domestic reforms, and proactively addressing debt vulnerabilities. Importantly, while developing countries share many characteristics, increasing heterogeneity across countries calls for appropriate differentiation in countries’ policy and reform agenda, as well as in the support from the international community.

The IMF has a strong role to play in supporting countries maintain or restore macroeconomic and financial stability, which is a key condition to enable sustainable growth and development. Through its surveillance, capacity development, and financial support to countries faced with balance of payment needs, the IMF helps countries advance this agenda, including through continuous adjustments in its policies to ensure they remain fit for purpose and aligned with evolving needs of the membership. It also plays a leading role on debt and the global debt architecture, through its monitoring of debt vulnerabilities and debt sustainability assessments and further enhancing its work to tackle debt challenges and improve debt restructuring processes, including through the Common Framework and progress at the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable. In all these activities, the IMF collaborates closely with partners, particularly the World Bank.

Executive Board Assessment^[1]

Executive Directors welcomed the opportunity to discuss the contribution of the IMF to the international financing for development agenda, as well as the review of recent experiences in the IMF’s collaboration with the World Bank, ahead of the 4th Financing for Development Conference. Directors concurred with staff’s analysis of the challenging context for development, as the series of shocks since 2020 has added to longstanding structural challenges weighing on economic and social progress in developing countries, with low‑income and fragile countries affected the most.

Directors agreed that debt vulnerabilities deserve specific attention, in particular for low‑income countries. They noted that, while debt appears sustainable for most countries under baseline assumptions, uncertainties and risks to the baseline have increased significantly. In addition, many countries face high interest costs and elevated refinancing needs that constrain their ability to finance critical spending necessary to progress on their development path.

Directors noted with regret that achieving the sustainable developments goals (SDGs) by 2030 appears increasingly unlikely, as it would require financing that exceeds credible assumptions and surpasses what countries could absorb without creating additional macroeconomic imbalances.

Directors agreed that accelerating development progress requires a major collective effort comprising strong domestic reforms, significant international support, and proactively addressing debt vulnerabilities. They noted that, while developing countries share many characteristics, increasing heterogeneity across countries calls for appropriate differentiation in countries’ policy and reform agenda, as well as in the support from the international community.

Directors emphasized the importance of advancing a strong domestic reform agenda to maintain or promote a stable and sound macroeconomic and financial environment and boost private‑sector led growth and job creation. This includes increasing the efficiency of public spending and optimizing the use of available resources, mobilizing domestic resources, strengthening debt management, and improving governance. These reforms are also key to increase resilience against external shocks.

Directors also agreed that international support, through well‑coordinated and sequenced capacity development (CD), and additional public and private financing, will be critical to complement and facilitate domestic reforms. They underlined the importance of proactively addressing debt challenges and supported the proposed approach to: (i) improve further debt restructuring processes to ensure countries with unsustainable debt have access to timely and sufficiently deep debt relief, building on progress already made in particular under the Common Framework and through the work at the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable (GSDR); and (ii) accelerate the implementation of the “3‑pillar approach” to help countries with sustainable debt and a robust reform agenda, where productive spending is crowded out by high debt service. They welcomed the recent publication of the GSDR “Restructuring Playbook” and supported further strengthening the IMF’s contribution to help address debt vulnerabilities, consistent with its role and policies and respecting its duty of neutrality. They also underlined the importance of further enhancing debt transparency and the accuracy of debt data.

Directors agreed that, while the IMF is not a development institution, it has a strong role to play to help member countries maintain or restore macroeconomic and financial stability, which is a key condition to enable sustainable growth and development. They underlined the importance of IMF surveillance, CD, and financial support to members faced with balance of payment needs, to achieve this objective, and looked forward to the upcoming comprehensive surveillance review and review of program design and conditionality. Directors highlighted the recent reforms to ensure that the lending framework remains fit for purpose, including the finalization in October 2024 of the review of the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT) facilities and financing and the review of the Charges and the Surcharge Policy, and the significant expansion of CD delivery over time, with a strong emphasis on supporting low‑income countries and fragile and conflict‑affected states. In this context, some Directors saw room to further scale up the IMF’s concessional facilities and CD support. Some others cautioned against placing greater emphasis in IMF‑supported programs on development spending needs and higher financing volumes. Directors supported the continued active role of the IMF on debt issues and its sustained engagement in international efforts to address debt vulnerabilities. Some Directors noted that a greater emphasis in the paper on the IMF’s existing work on climate would have better illustrated that the Fund is already actively contributing to help address these challenges, in line with its mandate. A few Directors also highlighted the macro‑critical nature of inequality and its impact on long‑term stability and development, and supported a deeper analytical and operational engagement on these fronts within the Fund’s existing mandate.

Directors underlined the importance of IMF collaboration with partners, in particular the World Bank and relevant UN agencies, building on comparative advantages and consistent with each institution’s mandate. They welcomed the review of recent experiences in the IMF’s collaboration with the World Bank and underscored the critical importance of maintaining or further deepening this efficient collaboration, leveraging the respective expertise of both institutions for an optimal division of work and avoiding duplication.

Directors underscored the importance of clear communication to promote a better public understanding of the institution’s unique role, mandate, and activities in fostering macroeconomic and financial stability, which is a prerequisite for sustainable growth and development.

[1] An explanation of any qualifiers used in summing up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/05/pr25184-imf-discusses-4th-financing-dev-conference-contribution-imf-intl-financing-for-dev-agenda

MIL OSI

Source: IMF – News in Russian

June 5, 2025

Cairo: Following two days of high-level dialogue and expert analysis, the inaugural IMF MENA Economic Annual Research Conference co-organized by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the American University in Cairo, concluded with a strong call for coordinated, evidence-based policy responses to the region’s old and new pressing economic challenges. Held on May 18–19, 2025, the conference served as a critical platform for advancing rigorous research tailored to the realities of the Middle East and North Africa. It brought together global policymakers, academics, government officials and thought leaders to bridge the discussion on global economic issues with regional realities. The event marked a first-of-its-kind collaboration between the IMF and a leading university in the region, reflecting a shared commitment to deepening the link between academic research and policy development.

Jihad Azour, Director of the IMF’s Middle East and Central Asia Department, noted that trade tensions and increasing uncertainty affecting the global economy, alongside ongoing regional conflicts and climate risks, are creating new layers of complexities for MENA policymakers. Azour called for building a regional platform for dialogue and exchange of ideas that connects MENA to world-class research centers to provide reliable analysis and develop workable and innovative policy responses to old and new economic issues facing the region. “We are deeply grateful to President Ahmad Dallal and AUC for their commitment to fostering dialogue, research, and policy innovation in the region.”

AUC President Ahmad Dallal highlighted the event’s role as a vital platform in fostering collaboration between governments, academia and the private sector. “This is about generating ideas that are globally informed but deeply rooted in the realities of our region,” he noted. Dallal affirmed that this type of multi‑stakeholder engagement is at the heart of AUC’s mission and reflects the University’s commitment to research, education, and open dialogue as drivers of stability, resilience, and inclusive growth.

Under the theme “Steering Macroeconomic and Structural Policies in a Shifting Global Economic Landscape,” discussions centered on four pivotal issues shaping the future of the MENA region and the global economy:

• Fiscal Policy: With public debt at historic highs, experts stressed the importance of rebuilding fiscal buffers while tackling social inequalities, aging populations, and climate pressures. Proposals included reforms in fiscal frameworks and measures to mobilize revenues including through multinational taxation and more progressive tax systems.
• Monetary Policy: Participants reflected on the lessons of recent inflationary shocks, emphasizing the need for more preemptive and well communicated policy responses to global shocks and sector-specific disruptions—particularly for emerging markets.
• Industrial Policy: Speakers examined the renewed interest in industrial policy as a tool to drive inclusive growth, innovation, and climate resilience. The discussion highlighted the need to balance vertical strategies with horizontal reforms that promote private investment, trade integration, and productivity.
• Green Transition and AI: The intersection of climate action and digital transformation sparked debate about their potential to reshape labor markets. Recommendations included investing in human capital, developing targeted safety nets, and aligning policy tools to support job creation in low-emission sectors.

Throughout the sessions, there was a clear consensus that the MENA region’s economic resilience depends on institutional reforms, cross-border cooperation, and investment in skills and innovation. Participants also underscored the importance of embedding policy in local realities—an approach that both the IMF and AUC pledged to champion moving forward.

In addition to prominent global and regional academics, as well as economists and government officials from across the region, and representatives of international and regional organizations, the conference brought together policymakers, including Rania El Mashat, minister of planning, economic development and international cooperation, Egypt; Youssef Boutros-Ghali, member of the Specialized Council for Economic Development, Egypt; Mahmoud Mohieldin, United Nations special envoy on financing the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda; and Martin Galstyan, governor of the Central Bank of Armenia.

As Nigel Clarke, IMF Deputy Managing Director concluded, “This conference is a milestone demonstrating the IMF’s commitment to deepening engagement with the research and academic community, as we strive to ensure that the IMF support is not only responsive to the needs of member countries, but also built on rigorous tested analytics and importantly, it’s aligned with local realities. Through this kind of multi-stakeholder dialogue, we aim to better understand how all our expertise and resources can be directed towards the most pressing challenges of the region.”

Visit the conference website for more details and to rewatch Day 1 and Day 2 of the discussions.

Founded in 1919, The American University in Cairo (AUC) is a leading English-language, American-accredited institution of higher education and center of the intellectual, social, and cultural life of the Arab world. It is a vital bridge between East and West, linking Egypt and the region to the world through scholarly research, partnerships with academic and research institutions and study abroad programs.

The University offers 39 undergraduate, 52 master’s and two PhD programs rooted in a liberal arts education that encourages students to think critically and find creative solutions to conflicts and challenges facing both the region and the world.

An independent, nonprofit, politically non-partisan, non-sectarian and equal opportunity institution, AUC is fully accredited in Egypt and the United States.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/04/pr25180-imf-auc-wrap-up-1st-mena-conf-macroecon-structural-policies-shifting-global-econ-landscape

MIL OSI

Source: IMF – News in Russian

June 5, 2025

• Luxembourg’s fundamentals remain strong and economic recovery is projected to slowly gain pace amidst external headwinds. Downside risks prevail in the short term.
• Surprising on the upside, the fiscal balance improved to a surplus of 1 percent of GDP in 2024, boosted by one-off revenues. Given structurally high revenue volatility, prudent fiscal policy should be based on a more efficient use of fiscal space.
• The financial sector is resilient, with well-capitalized and liquid banks. While the risks are manageable, the housing market, and other pockets of vulnerabilities should continue to be closely monitored.

Washington, DC: On May 30, 2025, the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the 2025 Article IV Consultation^[1] with Luxembourg, and considered and endorsed the staff appraisal without a meeting on a lapse-of-time basis.^[2]

Luxembourg’s fundamentals remain strong, but its economic performance has been lackluster. Public debt is low and the 2024 FSAP found the financial sector sound and well-diversified. After contracting by 0.7 percent in 2023, GDP growth turned positive at 1 percent in 2024, mainly driven by public consumption. Private domestic demand though remained lackluster amidst tight financial conditions and a lack of confidence in the real estate sector. The labor market is cooling, following a sizeable increase in labor costs in past years. While the headline fiscal deficit showed a large improvement from one-off revenues, the underlying structural deficit has widened, reflecting a shift from temporary to permanent support. Financial conditions remain tight, and the financial cycle has not yet decisively turned. Despite some deterioration in asset quality, the financial sector remains resilient overall.

An economic recovery is projected to slowly gain pace amidst external headwinds. Growth is projected to increase to 1.6 percent in 2025 and accelerate in 2026–27 supported by improved confidence and a gradual recovery in external demand. The unwinding of labor hoarding and lingering uncertainty would weigh on job creation and unemployment is likely to rise in the near term, before slowly declining to its historical average. Inflation is projected to decline to about 2 percent in 2025 and stay at that level over the medium term. Downside risks prevail in the short term, with headwinds from weaker external demand and tighter and/or more volatile financial conditions triggered by trade policy uncertainty, geopolitical tensions, and possibly higher interest rates for longer. Risks to growth are more balanced over the medium term, but fiscal risks are assessed to be high.

Executive Board Assessment[3]

Luxembourg’s recent economic performance has been lackluster and a projected recovery faces headwinds. Anchored in strong economic fundamentals, the economy is expected to gradually recover from a protracted slowdown. Yet, the global situation is fluid, and there are risks of setbacks stemming from weaker external demand and higher financial market volatility, alongside domestic challenges in the real estate sector and the labor market. Moreover, productivity has been declining, and Luxembourg faces fiscal pressures and risks. While Luxembourg’s current external position is assessed to be substantially stronger than the level implied by medium-term fundamentals, the assessment is subject to several limitations. The country’s specific economic features—a small open economy with a global financial center and a large share of cross-border workers —make the external position subject to significant volatility. This, together with the long-term challenges due to aging costs, call for more prudent policies while incentivizing private sector investment.

Prudent fiscal policy calls for a more efficient use of fiscal space. For 2025, a less expansionary fiscal stance would have been welcome, given low fiscal multipliers and the need to make room for more private sector-led growth. There is scope for reviewing the effectiveness and targeting of current measures, while preserving possible savings from revenue overperformance or budget execution. The authorities’ medium-term expenditure path is broadly appropriate to accommodate future spending pressures, but should be underpinned by measures, which will require containing the growth of the wage bill, enhancing spending efficiency, and avoiding any further erosion of the tax base.

There is scope for increasing revenue resilience. Luxembourg’s revenue performance depends to a large extent on a concentrated and volatile revenue base. Tax reforms should thus aim at diversifying revenue sources. This will help reduce volatility and uncertainty of fiscal receipts.

Fiscal policies should be better anchored in a medium-term perspective. The public consultations on pension reform are welcome, as there is a need for early reforms, including reducing the generosity of benefits—the highest in Europe, increasing both the effective and statutory retirement ages, and a well-calibrated increase in contributions to minimize the negative impact on the labor market. Strengthening the medium-term fiscal framework would enhance policy predictability. The planned implementation of a national fiscal rule is welcome and should combine a debt anchor with a net spending ceiling that consider revenue uncertainty and allow appropriate flexibility. Additional reforms of the budgeting framework and strengthening of the fiscal council are necessary to make the new framework more effective.

Risks in the financial sector, while manageable, should continue to be closely monitored. The financial sector appears broadly resilient. However, persistent solvency and liquidity risks in the corporate sector—especially in real estate—and the potential impact of rising financial market volatility warrant close monitoring. The authorities should continue ensuring adequate provisioning, collateral valuation, and loss absorption capacity. At the same time, continued oversight of the large nonbank financial sector—notably pockets of liquidity mismatches and leverage—and a better understanding of the intermediation role of the OFI sector should be prioritized.

Macroprudential policy should remain agile. The current CCyB level is appropriate. Should the recovery firm up, the authorities should strengthen releasable capital buffers and address still elevated household indebtedness by introducing income-based measures in line with FSAP recommendations. In the event of continued credit pressure, some loosening of the CCyB could be envisaged. Capitalizing on the commendable progress in implementing the 2024 FSAP recommendations in the supervision of banks and investment funds, the authorities should strengthen the macroprudential policy framework.

Structural reforms are needed to boost private sector-led growth and sustain living standards. Wage indexation has become a key constraint on competitiveness, and more labor market flexibility is called for. The authorities should also aim at boosting productivity and containing the cost of living by streamlining the regulatory and administrative burden, removing barriers to entry in some sectors, and addressing housing and infrastructure supply bottlenecks. Efforts should continue to capitalize on the country’s comparative advantages in AI adoption and financial sector development while minimizing potential costs of the transition. Recent measures to enhance technology diffusion and ongoing upskilling programs are welcome.   

Table 1. Luxembourg: Selected Economic Indicators, 2023–26
			Est.	Proj.
		2023	2024	2025	2026
Real Economy (percent change)
Gross domestic product		-0.7	1.0	1.6	2.2
Total domestic demand		1.1	0.1	1.7	2.6
Foreign balance 1/		-1.4	1.1	0.0	0.4
Labor Market (thousands, unless indicated)
Unemployed (average)		16.2	18.0	19.5	20.1
(Percent of total labor force)		5.2	5.7	6.1	6.2
Total employment		512.0	517.8	524.8	533.9
(Percent change)		2.1	1.1	1.4	1.7
Prices and costs (percent change)
GDP deflator		6.3	5.2	2.6	1.2
CPI (harmonized), p.a.		2.9	2.3	2.2	2.1
CPI core (harmonized), p.a.		3.9	2.5	2.1	2.1
CPI (national definition), p.a.		3.7	2.1	2.1	2.0
Public finances (percent of GDP)
General government revenues		46.2	47.9	47.4	47.6
General government expenditures		47.0	46.9	48.3	49.0
General government balance		-0.8	1.0	-0.8	-1.3
General government cyclically-adjusted balance		0.0	0.8	-1.0	-1.3
General government structural balance		1.8	0.8	-0.7	-1.3
General government gross debt		25.0	26.3	26.7	27.6
Balance of Payments (percent of GDP)
Current account		11.2	13.8	8.8	7.8
Balance on goods		0.4	1.7	1.8	1.6
Balance on services		43.5	43.6	42.9	42.0
Net factor income		-31.5	-31.1	-35.5	-35.4
Balance on current transfers		-1.1	-0.4	-0.4	-0.4
Exchange rates, period averages
U.S. dollar per euro		1.08	1.08	…	…
Nominal effective rate (2010=100)		105.3	106.3	…	…
Real effective rate (CPI based; 2010=100)		98.7	98.5	…	…
Credit growth and interest rates
Nonfinancial private sector credit (eop, percent change) 2/		-2.9	-4.7	1.6	3.8
Government bond yield, annual average (percent)		3.1	2.7	…	…
Potential output and output gap
Output gap (percent deviation from potential)		-1.4	-2.0	-2.1	-1.6
Potential output growth		1.6	1.7	1.7	1.7
Sources: Luxembourg authorities; IMF staff estimates and projections.
1/ Contribution to GDP growth.
2/ Including a reclassification of investment companies from financial to non-financial institutions in 2015.

[1] Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country’s economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepare a report, which forms the basis for discussion by the Executive Board.

[2] Under the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, publication of documents that pertain to member countries is voluntary and requires the member consent. The staff report will be shortly published on the www.imf.org/luxembourg page.

[3] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chairman of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country’s authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summings up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/04/pr-25177-luxembourg-imf-concludes-2025-art-iv-consultation

MIL OSI

Source: IMF – News in Russian

June 5, 2025

End-of-Mission press releases include statements of IMF staff teams that convey preliminary findings after a visit to a country. The views expressed in this statement are those of the IMF staff and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF’s Executive Board. This mission will not result in a Board discussion.

• The IMF mission held productive discussions with the Lebanese authorities on a comprehensive economic reform program. Discussions are expected to continue, both from IMF headquarters and through follow-up missions.
• Bank restructuring remains a critical priority to restore the health of the banking sector, move away from the cash-based economy, restart credit to the private-sector, and protect depositors to the maximum extent possible.
• Given Lebanon’s substantial reconstruction needs, limited fiscal space, and lack of capacity to borrow, the country will require significant support from external partners on highly concessional terms.

BEIRUT, Lebanon: At the authorities’ request, an International Monetary Fund (IMF) mission led by Ernesto Ramirez Rigo visited Lebanon from May 28 to June 5, 2025, to initiate discussions on policies and a reform program that could be supported by an IMF arrangement.

At the conclusion of the mission, Mr. Ramirez Rigo issued the following statement:

“The IMF mission held productive discussions with the Lebanese authorities on a comprehensive economic reform program aimed at restoring macroeconomic sustainability and supporting financing for reconstruction. These initial discussions covered several reform areas, including (i) restoring the viability of the banking sector and protecting depositors to the maximum extent possible, (ii) achieving fiscal and debt sustainability, while enhancing social safety nets and rebuilding institutional capacity, (iii) establishing credible monetary and exchange rate policy frameworks, (iv) strengthening governance and transparency, (v) enhancing the Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) regime, and (vi) reforming state-owned enterprises.

It was agreed that the rehabilitation of the banking system remains a critical priority to rebuild confidence in banks, move away from the current cash-based economy, and restart credit to the private-sector, which is necessary for growth. The authorities have made some progress recently, including the amendment of the Bank Secrecy Law and submission of a new bank resolution law to Parliament. The next step is for Parliament to approve this legislation, which will establish powers to underpin the recovery of orderly banking intermediation, while safeguarding the public interest. The mission also engaged with the authorities on their emerging bank restructuring and deposit recovery strategy. More work in close cooperation with the authorities will be needed to ensure this strategy is aligned with international standards and debt sustainability requirements.

“The mission also discussed the 2026 Budget and the development of a medium-term fiscal framework. For the 2026 Budget, given the limited fiscal space and available financing, it is critical that any additional expenditures be fully offset by corresponding revenue efforts, including by strengthening enforcement and compliance in tax and customs administration. An ambitious medium-term revenue mobilization and expenditure rationalization strategy along with improved fiscal transparency and public financial management is needed to strengthen public finances and create space for increased social protection and capital expenditures. The medium-term fiscal framework should also support the restructuring of Eurobonds to restore debt sustainability. Given Lebanon’s substantial reconstruction needs, the authorities’ reform efforts will require significant support from external partners, preferably on highly concessional terms. Enhanced support to Lebanon is also needed to help the country shoulder the continued burden of hosting a large refugee population.

“Building on these key reform pillars, discussions on formulating a comprehensive reform program are expected to continue, both from IMF headquarters and through follow-up missions. The mission reaffirmed the Fund’s commitment to supporting Lebanon during this challenging period, consistent with its mandate and policies.

“The mission thanks the Lebanese authorities and all stakeholders for their cooperation and constructive engagement.”

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/05/pr-25182-lebanon-imf-staff-concludes-mission-to-lebanon

MIL OSI

Source: IMF – News in Russian

June 4, 2025

Washington, DC: Following the successful conclusion of Stand-by (SBA) and Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF) arrangements on May 24, 2025, the Kosovo authorities have made use of SDR 80.122 million (€96.22 million) available under the SBA, approved on May 25, 2023.

The authorities will use the drawing to build buffers against potential shortfalls in external financing in a context of heightened uncertainty, as foreshadowed in their Letter of Intent of April 30, 2025 (see IMF Country Report No. 2025/112).

Kosovo’s SBA and RSF arrangements provided access to SDR 80.122 million (€96.22 million, 97 percent of quota) and to SDR 61.95 million (€74.39 million, 75 percent of quota) respectively, to support Kosovo’s economic policies. Together with the SBA drawdown and already disbursed RSF resources, Kosovo will have outstanding IMF credit of SDR 142.07 million (€170.61 million).

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/04/pr25181-kosovo-draws-sdr-80-million-under-the-stand-by-arrangement

MIL OSI