Fitch affirms Malta’s A+ rating
In The Times, today:
FITCH AFFIRMS MALTA’S A+ RATING
Reform of pension system deemed ‘essential’
Fitch yesterday confirmed Malta’s long-term foreign currency and local currency ratings at A+, with stable outlooks, citing the island’s economic recovery since the recession and prospects for continued growth.
Last month, another ratings agency, Moody’s, downgraded Malta’s foreign currency and local currency government bond ratings to A2 from A1 and revised the outlook to negative.
In its report yesterday, Fitch said it affirmed Malta’s short-term Issuer Default Ratings IDR at F1 and Country Ceiling at AAA, which is the common Country Ceiling for the euro area.
“Malta’s rating reflects its continuing, if unspectacular economic recovery since the 2009 recession and the expectation that this will proceed with no more than a small deterioration in the growth rate in 2012,” said Chris Pryce, director in Fitch’s Sovereign Group.
“The rating also takes account of the encouraging outlook for Malta’s public finances and the fact that the predominantly offshore financial system has emerged largely unscathed from the international financial crisis.”
Fitch said it conservatively assumes that the present indications of a general European slowdown towards the end of this year will have an effect on Malta, producing a rate of expansion for GDP in 2012 no greater than two per cent.
On past experience, a somewhat higher rate, possibly above three per cent per annum, should be attainable in the following years if European recovery takes hold and the government continues to press forward with industrial restructuring and the reduction in subsidies, it said. However, the low rate of investment in the last two to three years may hold back GDP growth, at least initially.
Fitch said government debt, which never quite met the Maastricht criterion of 60 per cent of GDP or less, and still reflects the heavy borrowing in the decade up to 2005, had fallen short of the agency’s earlier expectations of 70 per cent and looked set to stabilise at 68 per cent this year.
“A continuing if gradual fall is now expected. Unlike the fiscal deficit, which performed a little better than the current ‘A’ rated peer group medium in 2010, Malta’s government debt ratio at 68 per cent remains well above the comparable A peer group median of 40 per cent, a major rating weakness,” it said.
It noted that the domestic banks survived the international banking crisis and recession virtually unscathed and required no direct financial assistance from the government. Capital and non-performing loan ratios deteriorated marginally during the past two years but did not cause immediate alarm.
“The authorities’ conservative approach to banking and its supervision has served Malta well, as has the banks’ own business model which emphasises retail customer deposits as the main source of finance for lending. Credit expansion, which was high up until the recession, is now growing only moderately.
“Malta ranks highly in the traditional international governance indicators and is noted for its stable government, effective civil institutions and lack of corruption. Its GDP per head is above the ‘A’ rated median. Its euro area membership is a source of strength and protects it from currency crises, notwithstanding a large current account deficit which continues to be more than fully funded by foreign direct investment,” Fitch added.
The main drivers of future changes in the rating include resolute fiscal consolidation on the positive side. However, on the negative side, Malta remains a small country with a large banking system leaving it vulnerable to the ongoing financial stress in the euro zone. Over the longer term, reform of the state pension system to maintain affordability in the face of a rapidly rising population “is essential” Fitch added.
11 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
so fitch are right…but moody wrong!!!
Let’s not start with the barrage of Maltese muddled logic. Moody reports tend to be negative, even when they assign the same rating as Fitch.
Both rating agencies (and there are but three in the whole wide world) have their own analysts, their own methods, their own criteria, and need I add, their own agenda.
Sometimes, their conclusions will differ.
In any case, Fitch’s report is very similar to Moody’s. When in doubt, Moody comes down on the negative side, and Fitch on the positive.
And what does the other one do?
Baxxter, all the credit rating agencies prostituted themselves in 2007.
Better to do a little homework on one’s own.
One interesting remark in the above report:
“Malta remains a small country with a large banking system”
We all have to agree that we should give credit to George Bonello Dupuis and John Dalli for this. They were the ones who encouraged and worked to helped Malta’s financial institutions to be what they are today.
“We all have to agree that we should give credit to George Bonello Dupuis and John Dalli for this. They were the ones who encouraged and worked to helped Malta’s financial institutions to be what they are today.”
You left out the late minister Joe Fenech, the architect and the driving force behind what was originally MIBA, later MFSC, and now MFSA.
Yes you are right.
‘….Its euro area membership is a source of strength and protects it from currency crises…’
‘….resolute fiscal consolidation….’
‘…reform of the state pension system to maintain affordability in the face of a rapidly rising population is essential…’
So what does Labour have to say about all this?
What does Joseph plan to do?
Foreign direct investment has its prerogatives and considerations, answers please.
I posted this link on Facebook to try and combat all the negative ones being posted by the ‘elves’.
Moody’s have been ultra conservative after being partly viewed as misleading investors in the past
http://newsroom-magazine.com/2010/government-agencies/finance-and-banking/moodys-internal-corruption-detailed/
http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/spain-economy-debt.cz2
Where were Fitch and Moody’s before the banking collapse of 2008 or the Greek crisis two years ago and why should we take them seriously when they never manage to forsee disaster?