Lebanon's public finances have worsened in 2018 and risks to the medium-term sustainability of government debt have risen. We forecast that the 2018 budget deficit has widened significantly to 10.6% of GDP, from an average of 8.2% of GDP in 2012-2017, because of hikes in public sector salaries, higher electricity subsidies and interest payments and a pick-up in capital spending. We forecast that the budget deficit will remain above 10% of GDP in 2019-2020, on the back of higher interest rates, weak economic growth and a lack of material fiscal reform. Lower oil prices and the higher corporate tax rate introduced in 2018 will help marginally. We project that government debt/GDP will reach 158% in 2020 and will continue rising, to 169% in 2023.
The salary scale adjustment in September 2017 has been the primary driver of the larger deficit. In 1H18, personnel costs (which include wages, end of service and pension payments) were 26% higher than a year earlier. The cost of the adjustment has outweighed revenue-raising measures introduced in 2018 to offset the salary scale. Other spending lines have also pressured the budget in 2018, notably transfers to Electricite du Liban (EDL), the loss-making state-owned electricity company, which rose 33% yoy in 1H, in line with global oil prices.
Government interest payments grew by around 8% yoy in January-September, held in check by the fact that Banque du Liban (BdL, the central bank) agreed in May to buy the equivalent of USD5.5 billion in Lebanese pound T-bonds at a rate of just 1%. In 2019, higher interest rates will feed through more strongly into domestic debt auctions and add further upward pressure to government interest payments, which we expect will equate to 49% of government revenue.
Lebanese and international stakeholders agree that the budget deficit needs to narrow, but a credible, actionable plan for achieving this is still lacking and it remains unclear if political dynamics will allow for a concerted fiscal adjustment. At the CEDRE conference in April, Lebanon gained USD11 billion in pledges for concessional financing, which is loosely conditional on Lebanon reducing the budget deficit by 5% of GDP over five years, by reforming subsidies to EDL and improving tax compliance. However, these are long-standing aims in Lebanon and reform of EDL is unlikely to yield savings in the near term. Agreement on the 2019 budget is stuck until a new government is formed (following the election on 6 May).
Higher government borrowing requirements and rising international interest rates are placing extra pressure on Lebanon's financing model and risk undermining confidence in its sustainability. Deposit inflows are a key element of the Lebanese financing model, traditionally supported by confidence in the currency peg against the US dollar due to high BdL reserves, free movement of capital and attractive spreads on US dollar-deposits over US interest rates and on Lebanese pound-deposits over local US dollar-deposits. Deposit growth is used for government financing by domestic banks and FX deposits also support foreign reserves.
However, private sector deposit growth in commercial banks has slowed, despite rising interest rates, with the total stock up by USD3.7 billion in January-October, compared with a rise of USD5.9 billion in 2017 and an annual average increase of USD8.7 billion in 2011-2017. Deposit dollarisation has also inched up, to 69%, although it remains lower than during previous periods of stress, notably in 2005-2008.
BdL's gross FX reserves remain high, despite persistently large current account deficits (23% of GDP in 2017), but face downward pressure. They were USD34.6 billion at end-October and likely dropped to USD33.1 billion at end-November following repayment of maturing Eurobonds. BdL had gold reserves of USD11.2 billion and other foreign assets of USD8.5 billion (including USD4.5 billion of Lebanese Eurobonds). FX reserves have fallen from USD35.8 billion at end-2017, but in October still were equivalent to 66% of Lebanese pound deposits. BdL does not report a figure for net FX reserves. We estimate that BdL's US dollar liabilities to Lebanese commercial banks (USD56 billion-USD68 billion assuming 50%-60% dollarisation) are larger than its foreign assets, although these liabilities (banks' US dollar deposits at BdL) are locked into long maturities. Nevertheless, the customer deposits used to fund them have much shorter maturities.
BdL has increasingly supported the economy and financial system since 2011, including via unorthodox financial operations and stimulus programmes. The extent of financial operations in 2016-2018 by the BDL reflects the pressure the Lebanese economy has been under, with weak growth, political headwinds, persistent twin deficits and lack of fiscal consolidation.
Lebanon's 'B-' IDRs reflect the very weak public finances, difficult political environment and anaemic economic performance. The ratings also reflect the unblemished track record of public debt repayment and the depth of the financial system (deposits in commercial banks are around 300% of GDP)
Public debt is predominantly held by the country's large banking sector and monetary authority and non-resident depositors are mostly diaspora Lebanese. This close-knit nature of the financial sector has helped the government manage its large burden of debt over an extended period of time. Lebanon has had very few episodes of deposit outflows in the last 15 years. Average maturities of deposits at commercial banks and of commercial bank deposits at BdL have lengthened, as has the maturity profile of government debt.
Growth prospects remain modest without improvements in the external environment, a stronger reform programme or a boost to investment through the implementation of CEDRE projects. Growth averaged 1.5% in 2011-17, since the outbreak of the Syrian war, an extremely weak performance relative to the historical trend. In 2000-2010 real GDP growth averaged 5.3%. GDP per capita and broader human development indicators are well above 'B' category peers and more in line with the 'BBB' median, although governance indicators are weaker than 'B' category peers.
Domestic and international politics weigh on the ratings. The factional nature of domestic politics renders the country vulnerable to periods of political vacuum and policy inertia. Most recently, Lebanon has been struggling to form a government for more than six months since the 6 May election. Spillovers from regional instability continue to weigh on the economy and geopolitical risks persist, for example, related to enmity between Hizbollah and Israel, US policy against Iran and the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
SOVEREIGN RATING MODEL (SRM) and QUALITATIVE OVERLAY (QO)
Fitch's proprietary SRM assigns Lebanon a score equivalent to a rating of 'B' on the Long-Term Foreign-Currency (LT FC) IDR scale.
Fitch's sovereign rating committee adjusted the output from the SRM to arrive at the final LT FC IDR by applying its QO, relative to rated peers, as follows:
- Structural features: -1 notch, to reflect governance issues and political and security risks not fully captured in the SRM, related to the delicate sectarian balance in Lebanese society and politics, spillovers from regional instability and other geopolitical risks.
Fitch's SRM is the agency's proprietary multiple regression rating model that employs 18 variables based on three-year centred averages, including one year of forecasts, to produce a score equivalent to a LT FC IDR. Fitch's QO is a forward-looking qualitative framework designed to allow for adjustment to the SRM output to assign the final rating, reflecting factors within our criteria that are not fully quantifiable and/or not fully reflected in the SRM.
The main factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action are:
-Inability of the domestic banking sector to continue to attract sufficient deposits to keep funding the government and greater reliance on unorthodox central bank policy to help fund the government
-Inability of BdL to maintain sufficient gross FX reserves to retain confidence in the currency peg.
The main factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action are:
-An improvement in public debt dynamics, whether through fiscal tightening or improved economic performance.
-Improved outlook for non-resident deposit inflows into the banking system
-Greater confidence in the sustainability of the domestic political environment and greater regional stability reducing risks of spillover into Lebanon.
Fitch assumes that international oil prices will average USD65/b in 2019 and USD62.5/b in 2020.
The full list of rating actions is as follows:
Long-Term Foreign-Currency IDR affirmed at 'B-'; Outlook revised to Negative from Stable
Long-Term Local-Currency IDR affirmed at 'B-'; Outlook revised to Negative from Stable
Short-Term Foreign-Currency IDR affirmed at 'B'
Short-Term Local-Currency IDR affirmed at 'B'
Country Ceiling affirmed at 'B-'
Issue ratings on long-term senior unsecured foreign-currency bonds affirmed at 'B-'
+852 2263 9832
Fitch (Hong Kong) Limited
68 Des Voeux Road Central
+852 2263 9831
+852 2263 9910
Media Relations: Peter Fitzpatrick, London, Tel: +44 20 3530 1103, Email: email@example.com; Wai-Lun Wan, Hong Kong, Tel: +852 2263 9935, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Additional information is available on
Country Ceilings Criteria (pub. 19 Jul 2018)
Sovereign Rating Criteria (pub. 19 Jul 2018)
Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form
Copyright © 2018 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed.
The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers.
For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001
Fitch Ratings, Inc. is registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (the "NRSRO"). While certain of the NRSRO's credit rating subsidiaries are listed on Item 3 of Form NRSRO and as such are authorized to issue credit ratings on behalf of the NRSRO (see ), other credit rating subsidiaries are not listed on Form NRSRO (the "non-NRSROs") and therefore credit ratings issued by those subsidiaries are not issued on behalf of the NRSRO. However, non-NRSRO personnel may participate in determining credit ratings issued by or on behalf of the NRSRO.