IMPLEMENTATION OF

CERTAIN LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

RELATING TO THE

INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND

A Report to Congress

in accordance with

Section 1503 of the

International Financial Institutions Act,

Section 801(c)(1)(B) of the

Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs

Appropriations Act, 2001, as required by Section 1705(a) of the International Financial 

Institutions Act

and

Section 605(d) of the 

Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act, 1999

United States Department of the Treasury

December 2010
Table of Contents 

Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1

International Financial Institutions Act, Section 1503(a) Provisions, by Subsection

1. Exchange Rate Stability................................................................................................ 3

2. Independent Monetary Authority, Internal Competition, Privatization, 

Deregulation, Social Safety Nets, Trade Liberalization ................................................4

3. Strengthened Financial Systems....................................................................................8

4. Bankruptcy Laws and Regulations ..............................................................................10

5. Private Sector Involvement..........................................................................................10

6. Good Governance ........................................................................................................15

7. Channeling Public Funds Toward Productive Purposes..............................................16

8. Individual Economic Prescriptions..............................................................................17

9. Core Labor Standards ..................................................................................................17

10. Discouraging Ethnic and Social Strife.........................................................................18

11. Environmental Protection ............................................................................................18

12. Greater Transparency...................................................................................................18

13. Evaluation ....................................................................................................................19

14. Microenterprise Lending..............................................................................................19

15. Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism.........................20

Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2001, Section 

801(c)(1)(B) Provisions, by Subsection

I. Suspension of Financing for Diversion of Funds ........................................................21 

II. IMF Financing as Catalyst for Private Sector Financing.............................................22

III. Conditions for Disbursement .......................................................................................22

IV. Trade Liberalization.....................................................................................................22

V. Focus on Short-Term Balance of Payments Financing................................................23

VI. Progress toward Graduation from Concessionary Financing ......................................23

Text of Legislative Provisions

Annex 1: New IMF lending arrangements, per section 605(d) of the Foreign Operations, Export 

Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1999 
1

Introduction

This report is prepared in accordance with Sections 1503(a) of the International 

Financial Institutions Act (“IFI Act”), 22 U.S.C. § 262o-2(a).

1

 This report also covers 

progress on the policies set forth in Section 801(c)(1)(B) of the Foreign Operations, Export 

Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2001,2 as required by Section 

1705(a) of the IFI Act, 22 U.S.C. § 262r-4(a). The report reviews actions taken by the 

United States to promote these legislative provisions in International Monetary Fund 

(“IMF” or the “Fund”) country programs. Annex 1 also covers new IMF lending 

arrangements per section 605(d) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related 

Programs Appropriations Act, 1999.3

www.treas.gov/press/reports.html

 Earlier reports pursuant to these provisions are 

available on the Department of the Treasury’s website ( ). 

Treasury and the Office of the United States Executive Director (“USED”) at the IMF 

consistently endeavor to build support in the IMF’s Executive Board for the objectives set 

out in this legislation. These endeavors include meetings with IMF staff and other Board 

members on country programs and IMF policies, formal statements by the USED in the 

IMF Board, and USED votes in the Board. Treasury’s objective is to support strengthened 

commitments in IMF programs, policy actions by program countries, and policy decisions 

at the IMF itself. Treasury’s IMF task force is charged with increasing awareness among 

Treasury staff about legislative mandates and identifying opportunities to influence IMF 

decisions in line with broader U.S. international economic policy objectives. 

This report is submitted in the context of responding to the global financial and 

economic crisis that began in 2007, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. 

The United States has been a leader throughout this period through its own economic 

policies, as well as collaborating closely with the Group of 20 countries (“G-20”) and the 

international financial institutions, including the IMF. In late 2008, G-20 leaders called 

upon the IMF to continue to act swiftly to play a key role in crisis response. The IMF’s 

response – including new and more flexible lending programs to ensure members’ needs 

are met, enhanced surveillance to help strengthen individual countries’ economic policies 

and the international system, and greater resources for the poorest to mitigate the impacts 

of the crisis – has contributed to a much more stable system and to much improved global 

economic and financial conditions. Stresses in financial markets have declined, investor 

and consumer confidence has improved, international trade is recovering, and economic 

growth has resumed in many countries and globally. The IMF continues to address 

remaining vulnerabilities in the global economy – for instance, by providing co-financing,

with the European Union, for distressed eurozone members this year. At the most recent 

 1 This provision was enacted in section 610(a) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related 

Programs Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law 105-277, division A, § 101(d), title VI, § 610(a). This 

provision subsequently was amended by Section 7703(a) of the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 

2004, contained in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458, title 

VII, § 7703(a)). 2 Section 801(c)(1)(B) was enacted in Public Law 106-429, title VIII, § 801(c)(1)(B). Section 1705(a) was 

amended by Section 803(c) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-429, title VIII, § 803(c)). 3 Public Law 105-277, title VI, § 605(d).
2

G-20 leaders’ summit in Seoul, South Korea, in November 2010, members agreed to an 

historic reform of IMF governance. The United States also joined its G-20 partners in 

calling for the IMF to take a more proactive role in addressing global economic 

imbalances.
3

Report on specific provisions

I. Section 1503(a)

(1) Exchange rate stability

Article I of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement states that one of the purposes of the IMF 

is “to promote exchange stability, to maintain orderly exchange arrangements among 

members, and to avoid competitive exchange depreciation.” In June 2007, the IMF 

Executive Board adopted a new Decision on Bilateral Surveillance over Members’ Policies

(“Decision”), replacing the 1977 Decision on Surveillance over Exchange Rate Policies as 

the guiding document on surveillance. The new decision was strongly backed by the U.S. 

Department of the Treasury in an effort to refocus the Fund on its core mandate.

Since the Decision, IMF surveillance of exchange rates has improved in both breadth 

and quality. The IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office found that only 63 percent of 

Article IV reports from 1995-2005 included a clear assessment of the exchange rate’s value 

in relation to economic fundamentals.4

 In contrast, the 2008 Triennial Surveillance Review 

found that 92 percent had done so after the Decision.5 Selected Issues papers 

accompanying Article IV staff reports have been increasingly devoted to exchange rate 

issues, and the sophistication of exchange rate assessments has improved as econometric 

assessments of the exchange rate’s equilibrium value have become more common. Despite 

these improvements, the IMF’s bilateral exchange rate surveillance still needs improvement 

in its candor, consistency, and transparency. Treasury continues to advocate for these

further improvements, most recently at the G-20 Summit in Seoul, South Korea, in 

November 2010, where Leaders jointly called for enhanced surveillance of exchange rate 

policies. 

In light of the global economic crisis, the IMF’s multilateral surveillance mission has 

taken on increasing importance. Enhanced multilateral surveillance by the IMF is crucial 

both for recovery from this crisis and prevention of future economic instability. The

Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth agreed to at the Pittsburgh G-20 

Summit calls on the IMF to play a key advisory role in the G-20 mutual assessment 

mechanism. The IMF has been asked to develop a forward-looking analysis of whether 

policies pursued by individual G-20 countries, including exchange rate policies, are 

collectively consistent with more sustainable and balanced trajectories for the global 

economy, and report regularly to both G-20 Finance Ministers and the International 

Monetary and Financial Committee (“IMFC”). Leaders at the G-20 Summit in South 

Korea reiterated the need for the IMF to deepen its work in this area. The first such 

assessment is to be conducted in 2011.

Examples of United States’s activities with regard to these issues include: 

 4 Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund, “An IEO Evaluation of IMF Exchange 

Rate Policy Advice, 1999-2005,” 2007. 5 International Monetary Fund, “2008 Triennial Surveillance Report – Overview Paper,” September 2, 2008.
4

• In the March 2010 Article IV review for Mexico, the USED commended the 

authorities’ commitment to a flexible exchange rate and transparent, rules-based 

intervention, highlighting the importance of these policies in absorbing shocks during 

the crisis and buttressing the credibility of the inflation-targeting regime.

• In a January 25, 2010, Board Statement on India’s Article IV review, the USED 

strongly supported India’s recent policy of maintaining a flexible market-determined 

exchange rate. The USED emphasized that surveillance of exchange rates remains at 

the core of the Fund’s responsibilities in the international monetary system and that 

bilateral surveillance should include candid and transparent exchange rate assessments. 

• In a February 24, 2010, statement, the USED emphasized that Burma’s dual exchange 

rate system distorts economic activity, benefits few at the expense of many and clouds 

economic analysis. The USED noted the positive step that Burma had taken by 

committing under the ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint to accept Article VIII 

by 2011, and urged the authorities to provide a clear timetable for the elimination of 

existing exchange restrictions and multiple currency practices.

• In an August 2010 statement, the USED noted that the IMF’s Article IV review of 

South Korea fell short in the discussion of Korea’s exchange rate policy and the 

adequacy of Korea’s foreign exchange reserves. The USED criticized Fund staff for 

not including analysis of Korea’s exchange rate policy over the past year, noting that 

Korea had gone through a period involving substantial use of reserves to slow 

depreciation, followed by a period of intervention in which reserves have been rebuilt. 

(2) Policies to increase the effectiveness of the IMF in promoting market-oriented 

reform, trade liberalization, economic growth, democratic governance, and social 

stability through:

(A) Establishment of an independent monetary authority

With the support of the United States, the IMF has been a consistent advocate of greater 

independence of monetary authorities across a range of countries. IMF conditionality 

frequently includes measures to strengthen central bank autonomy and accountability. The 

IMF also provides technical assistance to help countries achieve these goals. In addition, 

the Fund promotes these objectives through assessments of compliance with 

internationally-agreed upon standards and codes, as well as rules for safeguarding the use 

of IMF resources. Examples of United States activities with regard to these issues include 

the following:

• In the third and fourth reviews of Costa Rica’s Stand-By Arrangement in May 2010, the 

USED encouraged authorities to take measures to strengthen the independence of the 

central bank, which in concert with greater moves towards exchange rate flexibility 

would enable the central bank to focus more effectively and credibly on its inflation 

target, and free more space for discretionary monetary policy.
5

• In the November 2009 Article IV Review of Uruguay, the USED supported the staff’s 

recommendation to the central bank to subordinate the exchange rate objectives to its 

inflation objectives, noting that tensions between these goals were likely contributors to 

persistent inflationary pressure and that enhancing the central bank’s autonomy could 

be important in addressing this issue.

• In the July 2010 Board Statement on South Africa’s Article IV Review, the USED 

urged authorities to develop appropriate metrics for assessing reserve adequacy and to 

focus monetary policy on the inflation target given that persistently high inflation 

expectations highlight the need to further strengthen central bank credibility.

(B) Fair and open internal competition among domestic enterprises

Although the World Bank has the lead mandate on these issues, the IMF, with United 

States support, encourages member countries to pursue policies that improve internal 

economic efficiency. These measures may include ending directed lending (or other 

relationships between government and businesses based on favoritism), improving antitrust enforcement, and establishing a sound and transparent legal system. For example,

• In an August 25 Board Statement on Korea’s Article IV review, the USED encouraged 

authorities to expedite restructuring of troubled small- and medium-sized enterprises 

(“SMEs”) and to scale back SME loan guarantees, which would help to increase 

competition and dynamism in the non-tradables sector that is largely dominated by 

SMEs.

(C) Privatization

The IMF has made privatization a component of country programs where significant 

distortions and government ownership of business enterprises have created substantial 

inefficiencies in the allocation of resources and the production of goods. Collaborating 

with the World Bank, the Fund has supported the use of competitive and transparent means 

of privatization so that borrowing countries might achieve gains in economic efficiency and 

improve their fiscal positions. Examples of IMF programs and surveillance discussions in 

which the USED has advocated privatization include the following:

• In a January 2010 Board Statement on Afghanistan’s achieving of HIPC completion 

point, the USED noted our disappointment with progress in restructuring and 

privatizing public enterprises and urged the authorities to reform state-owned 

enterprises and reinvigorate the country’s stalled privatization agenda.

• In its February 2010 statement for Suriname’s 2009 Article IV Review, the USED 

expressed concern over IMF staff’s encouragement of greater public sector 

involvement in the extractive industry sector, noting that such recommendations do not 

fall within the IMF’s core mandate and are at odds with recommendations for greater 

private sector involvement in other developing countries with extractive industries.
6

• In addition to abstaining on the Board review of Belarus’s March 2010 review of its 

Stand By Arrangement due to policy concerns with the program and consistent with 

legislative mandates that require the United States to oppose (abstain or vote No on) 

any financial assistance to the Government of Belarus except for loans or assistance 

that serve humanitarian needs, the USED highlighted that the government’s continued 

commitment to directed credit and its aversion to privatizing the two largest banks 

raised questions about the depth of commitment to real financial sector reform.

(D)Economic deregulation and strong legal frameworks

Markets are distorted and entrepreneurship is stifled without strong property rights, 

enforcement of contracts, and fair and open competition. While these issues are often 

addressed as part of the World Bank’s mandate, the IMF periodically includes such policy 

advice in its programs or surveillance on measures considered critical to the member 

country’s macroeconomic performance. Examples of United States’ efforts to encourage 

these reforms include the following:

• In the August 2010 Article IV review for Indonesia, the USED urged the authorities to 

focus on crucial aspects of the business environment that need to be improved – anticorruption, infrastructure, labor law/regulation, judicial reform, and contract 

enforcement – to sustain direct investment momentum. 

• In the March 2010 Article IV review for Egypt, the USED highlighted the need to 

continue strengthening Egypt’s regulatory framework, including competition-enhancing 

reforms such as enabling additional foreign participation in the banking sector to 

expand the availability of finance. 

• In a January 2010 Board statement for the Marshall Islands’ Article IV review, the 

USED noted that structural reforms to strengthen private sector development should be 

a high priority.

(E) Social safety nets

While growth is an essential ingredient for poverty reduction, investment in human 

development and basic social services is also critical. Cost effective social safety nets can 

play an important role in building domestic support for economic reform, and in alleviating 

the direct impact of poverty. 

The IMF does not lend directly for budget support to build social safety nets. The 

Fund’s policy advice and its focus on macroeconomic stability, however, encourage 

domestic policymakers to develop fiscal strategies that address the needs of the poor within 

a fiscal framework that is sustainable over the long-term. Reducing generalized subsidies 

while protecting pro-poor spending, for example, is a common theme. In the poorest 

countries, IMF advice is developed within a country-specific poverty reduction strategy 

that encourages accountability between donors and recipients. 
7

In addition, debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (“HIPC”) Initiative is 

part of a larger effort to address low-income countries’ development needs. Before the 

HIPC Initiative, eligible countries were spending slightly more, on average, on debt service 

than on health and education combined. They have since markedly increased their 

expenditures on health, education, and other social services. As of July 2010, such 

spending, on average, is about five times the amount of debt-service payments. For HIPCs, 

pursuant to a legislative mandate, Treasury carefully evaluates whether the IMF program 

allows for an increase in health and education expenditures. Also, the USED’s board 

statements in discussions of HIPC country programs stress the importance of protecting 

health and education expenditures, as well as other poverty reduction and social safety net 

spending.

• As part of the July 2010 Extended Credit Facility request from Yemen, the USED 

urged Yemeni authorities to clearly communicate the connection between additional 

resources for enhanced social spending and fiscal adjustment measures to increase 

government revenue and reduce fuel subsidies.

• In the January 2010 Board Statement on the Republic of Congo’s Article IV Review,

the USED called for authorities to place a high priority on further increasing the 

proportion of expenditures for priority areas, such as basic education, health, and 

agriculture.

• In the May 2010 Board Statement on Angola’s Article IV Review, the USED urged 

authorities to strengthen expenditure administration, including performance vis-à-vis 

the indicative floor on social spending.

(F) Opening of markets for agricultural goods through reductions in trade barriers

The IMF encourages a multilateral, rules-based approach to trade liberalization across 

all sectors of the global economy, including, but not limited to, the agricultural sector. The 

IMF has played a supportive role in promoting trade liberalization, particularly in the 

context of the WTO trade negotiations under the Doha Development Agenda (“DDA”). 

The IMF is prepared, along with the World Bank, to provide transitional assistance to 

member countries experiencing payment imbalances arising from the passage of trade 

reform. In recent years, the IMF has stepped up its in-depth trade policy work in 

consultations with currency unions, such as the Monetary and Economic Community of 

Central Africa (“CEMAC”), the European Monetary Union (“EMU”), and West African 

Economic and Monetary Union (“WAEMU”), as well as for some other African and 

Western Hemisphere groupings.6

 6 IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues: IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office, June 16, 

2009. 
8

(3) Strengthened financial systems and adoption of sound banking principles and 

practices

The joint IMF-World Bank Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) has emerged 

as a critical instrument for financial sector surveillance and advice. FSAPs are used to 

generate assessments of compliance with key financial sector standards such as the Basel 

Committee’s Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision, the International 

Organization of Securities Commission’s Objectives and Principles of Securities 

Regulation, and the IMF’s own Code of Good Practices on Transparency in Monetary and 

Financial Policies. The FSAP assessment results are summarized in Financial System 

Stability Assessments (“FSSA”) which are often provided to the public.

The U.S. agreed to conduct an FSAP with the IMF in 2006. After allowing for some 

time for U.S. regulators to continue their work on implementation of Basel II capital 

standards, the IMF’s FSAP mission team began its work on the U.S. FSAP in 2009 and 

issued its report on July 30, 2010. In the IMF’s Financial System Stability Assessment 

(FSSA), the IMF staff provided the key findings of their assessment of the U.S. Treasury 

requested that the IMF publish all documents related to the U.S. FSAP that can be 

published under the IMF’s rules. Accordingly, in addition to the FSSA, the IMF published 

seven Reports on Standards and Codes (ROSCs); seven Detailed Assessment Reports 

(DARs) on banking, securities, insurance, and clearing and settlement systems; and eight 

technical notes on stress testing, consolidated supervision, OTC derivatives, crisis 

management, liquidity risk management, oversight of payments, Basel II implementation, 

and anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism.

FSAPs and ROSCs also play an important role in the Financial Stability Board’s (FSB) 

newly-established peer review surveillance process to assess countries’ progress in 

strengthening their financial systems. The FSB, which was formed in 2009, uses FSAPs 

and ROSCs as the basis for its assessments. 

In September 2010, the USED supported the adoption of IMF management’s proposal 

to make financial stability assessments under the FSAP a regular and mandatory part of 

bilateral surveillance under Article IV of the Fund’s Articles of Agreement for 25 

jurisdictions with systemically important financial sectors, including the United States. 

This decision will increase the coverage of financial stability issues in the Fund’s bilateral 

surveillance of its members with the largest and most interconnected financial sectors, 

while also preserving access to the FSAP on a voluntary basis for the rest of the 

membership. These financial stability assessments will take place on a five-year cycle.

In the context of a December 2009 Review of the Fund’s Transparency Policy, the 

USED noted the importance of enhanced transparency for improving the effectiveness of

Fund advice, the quality of surveillance, and the Fund’s legitimacy. The USED expressed 

strong support for a proposal to shift to the publication of ROSCs on a non-objection basis, 

and urged members not presently publishing their staff reports to consider the benefits of 

greater transparency. The United States strongly supports this increased transparency and, 
9

as a demonstration of our commitment, became the first country to request the early 

publication of its DARS well before the Board discussion.

The IMF also conducts financial sector surveillance through a semi-annual Early 

Warning Exercise (EWE) and Global Financial Stability Report (GFSR). The EWE is 

prepared jointly by the IMF and the FSB and the GFSR is produced by the IMF’s Monetary 

and Capital Markets Division. In November 2008, G-20 Leaders called on the IMF and 

FSB to undertake EWEs. The EWE is intended to draw on consultations with 

policymakers and outside experts and Article IV and FSAP findings. It also reflects the 

output of the Fund’s Vulnerability Exercise for Emerging Markets and a new Vulnerability 

Exercise for Advanced Countries. 

An EWE pilot was completed in April 2009 for the IMF/World Bank Spring meetings 

and was officially launched at the IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings in Istanbul in 

October 2009. As the crisis recedes, the EWE is becoming more forward-looking and 

increasingly highlighting possible costs of failures to address identified vulnerabilities as 

well as areas for policy coordination.

The Standards and Codes Initiative, which was launched in 1999 to strengthen the 

international financial architecture, is currently undergoing a regular five-year review by 

the IMF and World Bank. The current review is paying particular attention to the need to 

adapt the Initiative in light of the recent crisis. The USED has welcomed the IMF’s active 

participation in the FSB process to reassess the existing set of standards and has expressed 

support for the proposals put forth by the Standing Committee on Standards 

Implementation (SCSI) Working Group to the FSB Plenary regarding the key standards. 

The review is expected to be completed in early 2011.

Following the G-20 Finance Ministerial in April of 2009, the FSB and the IMF formed 

a working group to explore information gaps and provide appropriate proposals for 

strengthening data collection, and report back to the Finance Ministers and Central Bank 

Governors. In October 2009, the Working Group submitted this report to the Finance Ministers 

and Central Bank Governors, which included a list of recommendations to fill existing 

information gaps. The Working Group continues to provide regular progress updates. 

Some key examples of where the USED has supported the strengthening of financial 

systems are:

• As a part of the July 2010 Article IV review of Turkey, the USED highlighted the 

importance of phasing out previously relaxed provisioning and loan classification 

standards and encouraged the Turkish authorities to consider an FSAP update.

• In the July 2010 Article IV Review of Brazil, the USED noted that the rapid growth in 

some Brazilian credit markets called for careful monitoring of credit risks, and 

encouraged authorities to enhance coordination between bank and financial fund 

supervisory authorities to monitor carefully and limit potential balance sheet 

vulnerabilities associated with strong capital inflows.
10

• In a July 2 Board Statement on Japan’s Article IV review, the USED noted the 

importance of moving toward higher and better quality capital requirements for 

Japanese banks, considering the vulnerability of bank capital to equity prices.

• In a July 2010 Board Statement on Saudi Arabia’s Article IV, the USED noted the 

importance of disclosure and credit review processes among Saudi banks and 

conglomerates, as well as the risks to allowing the overexposure of Saudi banks to 

opaque family conglomerates. 

• In a November 18, 2009 statement, the USED commended the Cambodian authorities 

for acting on several recommendations for improved banking sector regulation and 

supervision, including prioritizing onsite inspections and introducing new loan 

classification and provisioning standards.

(4) Internationally acceptable domestic bankruptcy laws and regulations

While the World Bank normally leads reviews of domestic insolvency laws, the IMF 

actively supports this agenda. The UN Commission on International Trade Law 

(“UNCITRAL”) and the World Bank have worked to compile recommendations in this 

area covering, respectively, insolvency law and sound insolvency/creditor rights regimes. 

At the urging of the United States, staff from the World Bank, IMF, and UNCITRAL 

worked together to develop a standardized, unified assessment methodology to assess 

implementation of those recommendations. 

 The international financial institutions (“IFIs”) provide technical assistance to help 

emerging market economies develop efficient insolvency regimes. The IMF and the World 

Bank have supported adoption of the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency developed 

by the UN to facilitate the resolution of increasingly complex cases of insolvency where 

companies have assets in several jurisdictions. With the support of the United States, the 

IMF has worked with the World Bank to promote improved insolvency regimes in a 

number of countries. 

• In a July 2010 Board Statement on Saudi Arabia’s Article IV, the USED emphasized 

that recent defaults should be handled transparently and equitably.

(5) Private sector involvement

The United States continues to work to ensure that the private sector plays an 

appropriate role in the resolution of financial crises. Over the past several years, the IMF, 

with the support of the United States, has taken important steps towards strengthening 

crisis prevention and resolution. The IMF has strengthened its surveillance of member 

countries and instilled more discipline in the use of official sector financing, especially 

through the establishment of rules and procedures governing exceptional access to Fund 

resources. Additionally, the use of collective action clauses, supported by the IMF as an 

accepted contractual, market-based approach to sovereign debt restructurings, should help a 

sovereign restructure its debt when under financial distress. 
11

The IMF recognizes the need to preserve the fundamental principles that (a) creditors 

should bear the consequences of the risks they assume, and (b) debtors should honor their

obligations. Furthermore, the IMF has coordinated closely with other international 

financial institutions and relevant country regulatory authorities. In 2009, for example, in

the context of Fund lending programs, the IMF secured voluntary commitments from major 

foreign banks to maintain their overall exposure levels in Hungary, Romania, Serbia, 

Latvia, and Bosnia. In each case, the banks issued a public statement of their 

commitments, which are essential to maintaining financial stability in the affected 

countries. Local regulators will monitor the banks’ exposures. In particular, the United 

States has advocated policies that include:

(A)Increased crisis prevention through improved surveillance and debt and reserve 

management

The United States has urged the IMF to strengthen further its surveillance function and 

crisis prevention capabilities. The United States, along with other G-20 members, 

reaffirmed the central role of the IMF as a critical forum for multilateral consultation and 

cooperation on monetary and financial issues as well as in promoting international financial 

and monetary stability. In November 2008, G-20 Leaders called on the IMF, in 

collaboration with the expanded FSF and other bodies, to work to better identify 

vulnerabilities, anticipate potential stresses, and act swiftly to play a key role in crisis 

response. They also called on the IMF, given its universal membership and core macrofinancial expertise, to take a leading role in drawing lessons from the current crisis, 

consistent with its mandate and in close coordination with the FSB and others. G-20 

Leaders agreed that the IMF should conduct vigorous and even-handed surveillance 

reviews of all countries, as well as give greater attention to their financial sectors and better 

integrate the reviews with the joint IMF/World Bank financial sector assessment programs. 

As such, the IMF recently decided to make financial stability assessment under the FSAP a 

regular and mandatory part of Article IV consultations for members with systemically 

important financial sectors. In November 2010, the United States, along with other G-20 

Leaders, called for further progress modernizing the IMF’s surveillance mandate.

The United States has joined with other G-20 members in calling on the IMF to play a 

key role in the mutual assessment mechanism under the recently agreed Framework for 

Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth. The IMF has been asked to develop a forwardlooking analysis of whether policies pursued by G-20 countries are collectively consistent 

with sustainable and balanced trajectories for the global economy, to be undertaken in 

2011. In addition, the United States has worked consistently to promote global 

rebalancing, and the IMF has increased its attention to this issue. For economies running 

large current account surpluses, the USED has called for stronger and sustainable domestic 

demand. 

As part of its overhaul of its non-concessional lending framework in early 2009, the 

IMF created the Flexible Credit Line (“FCL”), which raises access limits, streamlines 

conditionality, and simplifies cost and maturity structures, thereby making it easier for the 
12

strongest-performing member countries to access resources. In spring 2009, the IMF board 

approved FCLs for Mexico, Poland, and Colombia. In August 2010, the FCL was 

enhanced to provide greater potential resources to the same caliber of highest-performing 

member countries. At the same time, the IMF also created the Precautionary Credit Line 

(“PCL”), a similar instrument for strongly-performing countries with some vulnerabilities,

which entails more limited access than the FCL and some conditionality. Combined with 

responsive policy actions by country authorities, the FCL and PCL instruments can help to 

support a reduction in risk perception and contribute to stabilizing financial market 

conditions.

Other examples of instances where the United States has advanced these issues include:

• In a July 26 Board Statement on China’s 2010 Article IV review, the USED noted that 

much of the reduction in China’s current account surplus was due to cyclical factors, 

and that full implementation of the structural reform agenda outlined in the Article IV 

staff report, including greater exchange rate flexibility, was necessary for China to 

move towards greater domestic demand-led growth.

• In the April 2010 statement on the review of Iceland’s Stand-By Arrangement, the 

USED noted that, in addition to the difficult fiscal consolidation needed to stabilize 

public debt, there are also contingent claims on the Icelandic state that need to be 

addressed, including possible recapitalization of the Central Bank if reserves are 

depleted once capital controls are lifted, and covering remaining commercial bank

liabilities if asset recovery proves incomplete. The USED requested careful monitoring 

of all these contingent risks as the program moves forward. The USED also welcomed 

IMF technical assistance for building debt-management capacity.

(B) Strengthening of emerging markets' financial systems

The IMF continues to work with other IFIs to promote stronger financial systems in 

emerging market economies (also see Section 3). The 2007 Malan Report concluded that 

both the IMF and the World Bank play an important role in helping emerging economies 

address the challenges of globalization and obtain its benefits. It also recommended that 

their cooperation in this area be based on their comparative expertise, with the IMF taking 

the lead in instances where there are significant issues of domestic or global economic 

stability, and the World Bank leading in instances where financial sector development 

issues are paramount. 

The IMF is also actively involved with the World Bank in monitoring the 

implementation of the Basel Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision. The IMF, 

with United States support, has increased its cooperation with the World Bank in this area, 

through the joint FSAP and in assessing countries’ observance of other standards and 

codes.

In November 2008, G-20 Leaders called on advanced economies, the IMF, and other 

international organizations to provide capacity-building programs for emerging market 
13

economies and developing countries on the formulation and the implementation of new 

major regulations, consistent with international standards. About 85 per cent of IMF 

technical assistance goes to low- or lower middle-income countries. Technical assistance is 

provided in the Fund’s areas of core expertise, including financial sector sustainability.

Countries have asked for Fund assistance to address weaknesses identified in FSAPs, to 

adopt and adhere to international standards and codes, implement recommendations from 

off-shore financial center assessments, and strengthen measures to combat money 

laundering and the financing of terrorism. To meet the rising demand for Fund capacitybuilding programs, as well as to better coordinate assistance delivery, the Fund is seeking 

to strengthen its partnerships with donors by engaging them on a broader, longer-term, and 

more strategic basis. Towards this end, the Fund has initiated a pooling of donor resources 

in multi-donor trust funds that will supplement the Fund’s own assistance. The funding 

model operates by region and topic, and will include a focus on providing technical 

assistance on financial sector stability and development. 

Some key examples of where the USED has supported a strengthening of emerging 

market financial systems are:

• In a January 25, 2010, Board Statement on India’s Article IV review, the USED 

encouraged Indian authorities to agree to a comprehensive review and update of India’s 

financial sector through the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP).

• In the December 2009 review of Hungary’s Stand-By Arrangement, the USED noted 

the progress since the prior review, including submission by the authorities of proposed 

legislation to increase the stature of the supervisory authority and the progress made in 

strengthening on-site bank examinations. The increases in provisioning for nonperforming loans that followed some of those examinations were noted as a clear 

indication that enhanced inspections are paying off. The USED also welcomed pending 

regulations that would discourage foreign currency-denominated domestic lending as a 

critical element in strengthening the resiliency of the financial system.

• In an August 25 Board Statement on Korea’s Article IV review, the USED noted that 

the best protection against sudden changes in international capital flows is a sound 

financial regulatory framework and a flexible exchange rate that avoids generating 

expectations of one-way bets and that allows necessary adjustments to occur.

(C) Strengthened crisis resolution mechanisms

The IMF’s actions since the crisis began have stabilized markets and boosted 

confidence, winning broad support and underscoring the Fund’s central role in crisis 

response. A critical component of the response was ensuring that the IMF has adequate 

resources to address the needs of members hard hit by the global crisis. To this end, 

countries delivered on commitments to renew and expand the IMF’s New Arrangements to 

Borrow (“NAB”) by over $500 billion to backstop the IMF. The IMF also took action to 

supplement members’ reserves and boost global liquidity through allocations of Special 

Drawing Rights (“SDRs”) equivalent to $283 billion. More recently, IMF members agreed 
14

to a doubling of quotas (with a corresponding rollback in the NAB, preserving share 

values).

The United States, in cooperation with the IMF and the broader international financial 

community, promoted a strengthened framework for crisis resolution by overhauling the 

IMF’s non-concessional lending framework in early 2009. The United States supported the 

creation and enhancement of the FCL and the creation of the PCL in mid-2010. These 

facilities make it easier for strong-performing member countries to access resources by 

raising access limits, streamlining conditionality, and simplifying cost and maturity 

structures. More broadly, the IMF’s lending commitments have increased by over $210

billion since August 2008. 

In 2009, the IMF approved a package of extraordinary measures to sharply increase the 

resources available to low-income countries (LICs), more than doubling the Fund’s 

medium-term concessional lending capacity. These reforms allowed the Fund to 

dramatically expand its lending capacity during the crisis, with new Fund commitments for 

LICs totaling $5 billion, or four times the historical average, since the beginning of 2009.

In addition, in 2010, the IMF created the Post-Catastrophe Debt Relief (PCDR) Trust to 

provide debt relief for very poor countries hit by the most catastrophic of natural disasters.

The PCDR financed the elimination of Haiti’s entire debt stock to the IMF (about $268 

million) following the 2010 earthquake.

Some examples of where the USED has provided support in this area are:

• In the July 2010 statement for the euro area Article IV, the USED urged that remaining 

weaknesses in the euro area financial sector should be decisively addressed to avoid a 

drag on growth, and welcomed European bank stress test exercises then underway, 

encouraging maximum transparency in the publication of results. The USED also 

highlighted that adequate and credible capital backstops must be in place. In terms of 

achieving fiscal sustainability, the USED highlighted the role to be played by a 

rebalancing of demand within the euro area, which would assist economic adjustment 

in the countries that must undergo a necessary retrenchment in public and private 

consumption.

• In the September 2010 statement for the Global Financial Stability Report, the USED 

encouraged the European authorities to make the European Financial Stability Facility 

fully operational and to be prepared to undertake quick and coordinated action should 

demand for these backstops emerge. To reap the benefits of these steps, the USED 

noted that it would be critical that those countries most affected by market turmoil 

follow through with strong policy measures to restore fiscal sustainability, enact 

growth-enhancing structural reforms, and address financial sector weaknesses.

• The United States supported the IMF’s significant financial assistance and efforts at 

crisis resolution in Europe in 2010. For example, in the May 2010 statement 

supporting the proposed Stand-By Arrangement for Greece, the USED noted that 
15

economic vulnerabilities in Greece had become reality as market confidence wavered in 

the wake of continued fiscal deficits and enduring structural weaknesses. In particular, 

the USED highlighted the painful fiscal adjustment and ambitious structural reforms, 

within the confines of the euro, needed in order for Greece to return to a sustainable 

path. The USED welcomed the authorities’ commitment to redouble efforts and 

implement the measures needed, as well as the government’s resolve to carry out the 

reform program.

• When Afghanistan’s IMF program lapsed in September 2010 due to the Kabul Bank 

crisis, and the IMF was planning to re-engage the Afghan authorities on a new IMF 

program, the USED pressed for strong prior actions to stabilize the Afghan financial 

sector, including agreement on bank audits, resolution of Kabul Bank to address 

lingering corruption issues, and measures to significantly strengthen banking sector 

supervision.

• In the March 2010 Article IV Review for Mexico, the USED supported renewal of 

Mexico’s Flexible Credit Line (FCL) arrangement with the IMF at the same access 

level, pointing to the government’s track record of prudent policy and commitment to 

fiscal consolidation and tax reform in the 2010 budget.

(6) Good governance

The IMF places great importance on good governance when providing its policy 

advice, financial support, and technical assistance to its member countries. Its commitment 

to promoting good governance is outlined in its 1996 Declaration on Partnership for 

Sustainable Global Growth and its 1997 Guidelines on Good Governance. The IMF 

supports good governance through its emphasis on transparency, strong fiduciary 

diagnostics, and its promotion of market-based reforms.7

 The IMF has actively promoted

good governance through its efforts to protect against abuse of the financial system and to 

fight corruption.

The Fund’s involvement has focused on those governance aspects that are generally 

considered part of the IMF’s core expertise, such as improving public administration, 

increasing government transparency, enhancing data dissemination, and implementing 

effective financial sector supervision. The IMF promotes best practice principles through 

its codes and standards, including the Code of Good Practice on Transparency in Monetary 

and Financial Policies. The IMF also collaborates with the World Bank to strengthen the 

capacity of HIPC countries to develop essential public financial management (“PFM”) 

systems and track public sector spending. The IMF is also an active participant in the 

Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (“PEFA”) initiative which aims to support 

integrated and harmonized approaches to assessment and reform in the field of public 

expenditure, procurement, and financial accountability.

Examples of U.S. efforts to encourage good governance include the following:

 7 IMF financing is provided to central banks to address balance of payments difficulties. The IMF does not 

lend to fund specific projects in member countries aimed at improving procurement and financial 

management controls.
16

• In the 2010 Board statement for Iraq’s Stand-By Arrangement, the USED urged Iraqi 

authorities to reform public financial systems to enhance accountability and 

transparency, complete a public employee census, and reform the Public Distribution 

System to reduce fiscal inefficiencies and corruption. 

• In a September 2010 review of Mongolia’s Stand-by Arrangement, the USED noted the 

challenges that Mongolia’s growing natural resource revenues will bring to economic 

governance, and urged the authorities to work with civil society and the international 

financial community to build a broad consensus for sound economic policy.

• In the July 2010 Article IV Review for Nicaragua, the USED supported the decision by 

IMF staff to suspend review of the country’s ECF arrangement due to an unexpected

public salary bonus funded by off-budget donor support, agreeing that such practices 

raised governance and transparency concerns.

• In the June 2010 Board Statement on Chad’s Article IV Review, the USED called for 

more effective budget controls, increased budget transparency, and progress on public 

financial and expenditure management to ensure that resources are targeted and

consistent with debt sustainability and poverty objectives.

(7) Channeling public funds away from unproductive purposes, including large 

“showcase” projects and excessive military spending, and toward investment in 

human and physical capital to protect the neediest and promote social equity

The Fund’s Code of Good Practices on Fiscal Transparency, updated in 2007, 

identified principles and practices to enhance fiscal policy transparency, promote quality 

audit and accounting standards, and reduce or eliminate off-budget transactions, which are 

often the source of unproductive government spending. Supplementing this Code is the 

Fund's Guide to Resource Revenue Transparency, also updated in 2007, a complement to 

the Fiscal Report on Standards and Codes (“FISC ROSC”) for use in resource-rich (oil-gasmining) countries. The Guide is being used increasingly in diagnostic work in extractive 

industry intense economies. The IMF also has been a strong supporter of the Extractive 

Industries Transparency Initiative (“EITI”), by providing policy and technical support to 

the EITI Secretariat and Implementing Countries. Numerous countries have had resource 

revenue and extractive industries issues covered in their ROSCs, including: Gabon,

Indonesia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and Namibia.

Examples of how the U.S. promoted better channeling of public resources are:

• In the third review of Guatemala’s Stand-By Arrangement in June 2010, the USED 

called for IMF staff to be more detailed in its case for higher government expenditures

and to address more specifically if increased social spending was likely to be welltargeted.
17

• In the June 2010 Board Statement on Ghana’s Article IV Review, the USED urged 

authorities to move forward prudently in their budget planning and implementation,

given that in the near-term oil revenues will not produce a windfall. The USED also 

called for completion of EITI validation to enable planning for oil revenues.

• In the 2010 Board statement following the first review of Iraq’s Stand-By Arrangement, 

the USED called on Iraq to prepare its 2011 budget with conservative assumptions and 

ensure its consistency with a sustainable public sector debt trajectory. The USED also 

urged authorities to move towards establishing a Single Treasury Account to enhance 

fiscal transparency and the efficiency of government spending.

• In a November 2009 statement, the USED endorsed recommendations that Cambodia 

subscribe to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. 

(8) Economic prescriptions appropriate to the economic circumstances of each country

The United States has supported flexibility in Fund programs (and, more broadly, 

policy prescriptions), while emphasizing the need to focus conditionality on issues critical 

to growth and macroeconomic stability using measurable results. Partly as a result of U.S. 

efforts, program conditions have focused increasingly on debt and financial vulnerability in 

middle-income countries and macroeconomic management in low-income countries. 

• In the January 2010 review of Haiti’s Extended Credit Line (ECL), the USED stressed 

the importance of quickly adjusting policy prescriptions and performance criteria to 

assist Haiti in its recovery from the January 2010 earthquake, urging expeditious debt 

relief by bilateral creditors, concessional financial terms from multilateral institutions 

for reconstruction projects, and use of Fund resources to bolster reserves.

• In a July 2 Board Statement on Japan’s Article IV review, the USED called upon 

authorities to increase productivity in the non-tradables sector and strengthen domestic 

demand growth, critical for reducing Japan’s over-reliance on external demand as well 

as for rebalancing global demand for more sustainable and balanced global growth. 

• In an October 27 Board Statement on Australia’s Article IV review, the USED called 

for a counter-cyclical fiscal policy framework that would strengthen Australia’s fiscal 

position over the medium term and better position the public sector to deal with the 

fiscal costs of aging and rising health care expenditures.

(9) Core labor standards (“CLS”)

Core labor standards provide a useful benchmark for assessing countries’ treatment of 

workers against internationally agreed-upon standards. The State Department monitors 

labor standards in all IFI borrower countries and Treasury is mandated to submit a separate 
18

report to Congress assessing progress made with respect to internationally recognized 

worker rights. The most recent report was submitted in December 2009.

8

 

The IMF and International Labor Organization (“ILO”) continue to collaborate, as 

evidenced by the IMF Managing Director’s meeting with the ILO’s Governing Body in 

March 2009 and a joint IMF-ILO conference attended by the IMF Managing Director in 

September 2010 to discuss the adequacy of crisis response measures. In addition, the IMF, 

the World Bank, the United Nations, and the ILO are strengthening their cooperation to 

help least developed countries build basic social protection floors that are adapted to local 

realities and fiscally sustainable.

(10) Discouraging practices that may promote ethnic or social strife

By helping to create the conditions for a sound economy, IMF assistance facilitates the 

reduction of ethnic and social strife to the extent such strife is driven in part by economic 

deprivation. For example, with United States support, the IMF has increasingly 

encouraged the strengthening of social safety nets. The IMF also encourages consultation 

with various segments of society in the development of programs so that these segments 

have an opportunity to participate in the implementation of national priorities. IMF 

assistance has helped to free up resources for more productive public investment by 

contributing to a reduction in country military expenditures. 

(11) Link between environmental and macroeconomic conditions and policies

With respect to individual lending operations, the IMF itself does not evaluate positive 

or negative linkages between economic conditions and environmental sustainability. 

Rather, the IMF coordinates with the World Bank which, unlike the IMF, possesses the 

internal expertise to address such linkages. To the degree that environmental issues raise 

economic or financial vulnerabilities, however, the U.S. has raised concerns, as in the 

following case: 

• In a July 2010 Board Statement on Saudi Arabia’s Article IV, the USED emphasized 

that fiscal sustainability will be difficult to achieve without reforming energy subsidies 

that drag on fiscal balances, distort the Saudi economy, and are a major source of

energy inefficiency. The USED encouraged the authorities to elaborate on more 

concrete plans to reform the country’s energy subsidy regime.

(12) Greater transparency

The IMF continues to encourage, with strong United States support, member countries 

to make their economic and financial conditions more transparent. In recent years, the IMF 

has increased significantly the amount of information on its programs that it has made 

available to the public. The United States has stressed the need to build on this progress 

 8 2009 Report to Congress on Labor Issues and the International Financial Institutions, December 23, 2009.
19

and expand the number of publications and IMF practices open to public scrutiny. As a 

result of earlier efforts, publication of all Article IV and Use of Fund Resources staff 

reports is presumed unless a country objects. In addition, all exceptional access reports 

generally will be published as a pre-condition to the Board’s approval of such an 

arrangement.9 The USED consistently encourages countries to publish the full Article IV 

staff report on the IMF's public website. The percentage of staff reports published 

increased from 78 percent in 2004 to 93 percent in 2009. Moreover, Public Information 

Notices were produced following 98 percent of Article IV discussions in 2009, up from 82

percent the previous year, and all reports on current IMF-supported programs were 

published. The Board completed its latest review of IMF transparency in December 2009. 

The review suggested measures to increase the amount and timeliness of publications, 

protect the integrity of IMF documents, and enhance the accountability and legitimacy of 

the IMF. The IMF’s next transparency review is expected to take place in 2012.10

In addition to urging countries to publish their Article IV assessments, countries are 

urged to provide additional information to private market participants by regularly 

releasing data consistent with the IMF’s Special Data Dissemination Standard (“SDDS”). 

Fund members subscribing to either the General or Special Data Dissemination Standards 

increased from 75 percent of all members in 2005 to 88 percent in 2009.

• In the January 2010 Board Statement on the Republic of Congo’s Article IV 

Review, the USED called for immediate fiscal support for anti-corruption legislation to 

improve transparency surrounding oil revenues and expenditure.

• In a January 2010 Board statement for Fiji’s Article IV review, the USED called for the 

authorities to focus on better targeting and increased transparency in public 

expenditures.

(13) Greater IMF accountability and enhanced self-evaluation

In 2000, with the strong urging of the USED, the Executive Board established an 

Independent Evaluation Office (“IEO”) to supplement existing internal and external 

evaluation activities. The IEO provides objective and independent evaluation on issues 

related to the IMF and operates independently of Fund management and at arm's length 

from the IMF Board. On average, the IEO concludes two or three evaluations per year, and 

each evaluation normally takes about 18 months to complete. Recent evaluations include 

IMF Interactions with Member Countries (January 2010);11 IMF Involvement in 

International Trade Policy Issues (June 2009);12 Governance of the IMF: An Evaluation

(May 2008);13 Structural Conditionality in IMF-Supported Programs (January 2008);14

 9 “Exceptional access” refers to financing arrangements in amounts that exceed the Fund's normal limits. 10 http://www.imf.org/external/np/fad/trans/guide.htm 11 http://www.ieo-imf.org/eval/complete/pdf/01202010/IMC_Full_Text_Main_Report.pdf 12 http://www.ieo-imf.org/eval/complete/pdf/06162009/Full_Text_of_the_main_report.pdf 13 http://www.ieo-imf.org/eval/complete/pdf/05212008/CG_main.pdf 14 http://www.ieo-imf.org/eval/complete/pdf/01032008/SC_main_report.pdf
20

IMF Exchange Rate Policy Advice, 1999-2005 (May 2007);15 The IMF and Aid to SubSaharan Africaand 

(March 2007).16 All reports are publicly available on the IEO’s website at 

(http://www.imf.org/external/np/ieo/index.htm). 

(14) Structural reforms which facilitate the provision of credit to small businesses, 

including microenterprise lending

The lack of financial services available to the poor is a significant obstacle to growth 

for many developing countries. The IMF does not have the lead role in microeconomic 

reforms to benefit small businesses; however, Treasury engages with the IFIs to promote 

structural reforms that encourage the provision of credit to small and micro enterprises. The 

microfinance sector is frequently reviewed in the context of the FSAP in developing 

countries.

• In the September 2010 Article IV Review for Nicaragua, the USED expressed concern

regarding the success of the local “no payment” protest movement in unilaterally 

reducing microfinancing credit terms below market rates, which it said could jeopardize 

future provision of financing to small businesses and entrepreneurs.

• In the June 2010 Board Statement on Benin’s Article IV Review, the USED voiced 

support for further privatization of Benin’s banking sector to promote investment and 

the reform of regulations governing licensing for micro-finance organizations.

(15) Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (“AML/CFT”) 

Comprehensive integration of the efforts of the IMF and the other IFIs as part of the 

effort to fight terrorism worldwide has been a consistent policy priority for the United 

States and its partners. We have encouraged collaboration between the IFIs and the 

Financial Action Task Force (“FATF”) to assess global compliance with the anti-money 

laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) standards based on the 

FATF 40 Recommendations on Money Laundering and the Nine Special 

Recommendations on Terrorist Financing.

In April 2007, largely as a result of U.S. and G-7 leadership, the IMF Board reiterated 

the importance of AML/CFT standards to strengthening the integrity of financial systems 

and deterring financial abuse, and affirmed the collaborative arrangements presently in 

place with the FATF and FATF-style regional bodies (“FSRBs”) for assessing AML/CFT 

regimes in the context of the IMF's financial sector work. The Board also encouraged 

greater transparency by calling for the publication of comprehensive country evaluations.

Collaboration by the IMF, FATF, and FSRBs with the assessors, using the same 

common methodology, institutionalizes the global fight against terrorist financing and 

money laundering and helps countries to identify shortfalls in their AML/CFT regimes and 

implement reforms. As of September 2010, the IMF had conducted 46 assessments of 

 15 http://www.ieo-imf.org/eval/complete/pdf/05172007/ERP_main_report.pdf 16 http://www.ieo-imf.org/eval/complete/pdf/03122007/report.pdf
21

country compliance with AML/CFT as part of a third round of mutual evaluations, in 

cooperation with the FATF, FSRBs, and the World Bank.

The IMF is also a substantial source of funding for countries’ efforts to strengthen their 

own AML/CFT regimes – an activity that Treasury has supported and has joined in to 

leverage Treasury’s own bilateral AML/CFT assistance. The IMF has provided substantial 

technical assistance (“TA”) on a bilateral and regional basis. In late 2009, the IMF 

established a multi-donor technical assistance trust fund to finance further TA and research 

activities in the area of AML/CFT. In coordination with the establishment of the multidonor fund on AML/CFT, the IMF is now opening regional technical assistance centers in 

Latin America, Central Asia, and Southern and Western Africa to strengthen its delivery of 

assistance to recipient countries.

Treasury and the USED played a crucial role in mobilizing the IMF Board’s support for 

this initiative, as well as ensuring that note is taken of AML/CFT issues in Article IV 

reviews and reports, IMF programs, and other regular reviews of country progress. 

• In the January 2010 Article IV review for Bolivia, the USED encouraged the authorities 

to address deficiencies in Bolivia’s AML/CFT regime identified by the FATF, 

including enacting legislation that would criminalize terrorist financing and allow for 

the blocking of terrorist assets.

• In the February 2010 Article IV review for Iraq, USED encouraged Iraq to work to pass 

and implement a draft AML/CFT law that seeks to correct deficiencies in the current 

legal framework, and to focus efforts to develop a financial intelligence unit.

• In a January 25, 2010, Board Statement on India’s Article IV review, the USED 

recognized India’s efforts to fight money laundering and the financing of terrorism, 

noted that India was undergoing a joint FATF/Asia Pacific Group (“APG”) Mutual 

Evaluation of its anti-money laundering/combating financing of terrorism regime, and 

requested an update on the conclusion of the Mutual Evaluation process and next steps.

• In the July 2010 Board Statement on Mali’s Article IV Review, the USED supported 

Mali’s efforts to strength its AML/CFT regime, including the criminalization of 

terrorist financing, and urged authorities to bring customer due diligence requirements 

into compliance with international standards.

• In a February 24, 2010, statement, the USED recognized recent steps taken by the 

Burmese authorities to curb money laundering and the financing of terrorism, but noted

that the APG has assessed Burma as deficient in nearly all of the FATF’s 49 

Recommendations. The USED urged the authorities to strengthen Burma’s AML/CFT 

framework in line with the recommendations of the APG in order to safeguard the 

international financial system from illicit threats.

II. Section 801(c)(1)(B)
22

(I) Suspension of IMF financing if funds are being diverted for purposes other than the 

purposes for which the financing was intended

With strong United States support, the IMF has taken steps to ensure that IMF 

resources are used solely for the purposes for which they are intended. One of the IMF’s 

most effective tools against corruption is the Safeguards Assessment to prevent possible 

misuse of IMF resources and misreporting of information.17 All countries that request a 

loan from the IMF must agree to undergo a Safeguards Assessment. Its purpose is to 

identify vulnerabilities in a central bank’s control systems. IMF staff carry out this 

diagnostic exercise to consider the adequacy of five key areas of control and governance 

within a central bank: (i) the external audit mechanism; (ii) the legal structure and 

independence; (iii) the financial reporting framework; (iv) the internal audit mechanism; 

and (v) the internal controls system. The framework was introduced in March 2000 and 

reviewed in April 2005. As of September 2010, 192 Safeguard Assessments had been 

completed. 

(II) IMF financing as a catalyst for private sector financing 

The IMF recognizes that, if structured effectively, official financing can complement 

and attract private sector flows. The Fund promotes policy reforms that catalyze private 

financing and, in cases of financial crisis, allow countries to regain access to international 

private capital markets as quickly as possible. (See Section 5 above for a more in-depth 

discussion of private sector involvement.)

(III) Financing must be disbursed (i) on the basis of specific prior reforms; or (ii) 

incrementally upon implementation of specific reforms after initial disbursement

IMF disbursements are made in tranches based on a country’s performance against 

specified policy actions, both prior to and during the program. Together with the rest of the 

IMF’s Executive Board, the USED plays a strong oversight role in ensuring that 

management only brings forward new programs or releases a new tranche of funds after 

such targets have been met. 

• In the Board discussion of the July 2010 Extended Credit Facility request from Yemen, 

the USED observed that, given the significant risks to program implementation, 

staggering the disbursements into even tranches strengthens the incentives to maintain 

reform momentum throughout the program.

(IV) Open markets and liberalization of trade in goods and services

The IMF has advocated consistently for open markets and trade liberalization. The 

Fund also recognizes that trade adjustments can cause temporary balance of payments 

problems and has developed the Trade Integration Mechanism (“TIM”) to provide 

transitional financial assistance to countries if needed. The Fund also has a key 

responsibility in dealing with the revenue implications of trade liberalization, such as 

 17 http://www.imf.org/external/np/tre/safegrds/2002/review.htm
23

sequencing domestic tax reforms with the trade liberalization process. During the recent 

economic downturn, the IMF consistently advised countries that protectionism is not a path 

to economic recovery. 

 The IMF has developed an implementation plan for international trade policy issues 

that calls for reviews of Fund work on trade policy every five years, beginning in 2014. 

The plan deemphasizes trade policy as an element of program conditionality but still 

emphasizes trade liberalization where necessary to achieve the macroeconomic objectives 

of a Fund-supported program, as well as the need to avoid trade-restricting measures. The 

plan also calls for more frequent coverage of cross-cutting trade policy issues in the Fund’s 

multilateral and regional surveillance vehicles (such as the World Economic Outlook and 

the Regional Economic Outlooks) and closer cooperation with the WTO and World Bank 

on trade.

• In the August 2010 Article IV review for Indonesia, the USED encouraged Indonesia to 

continue to maintain a commitment to open capital flows, which have facilitated growth 

and innovation. 

(V) IMF financing to concentrate chiefly on short-term balance of payments financing 

In 2000 and again in 2009, with strong United States support, the IMF agreed to 

reorient IMF lending to discourage continued or prolonged use of IMF funds and provide 

incentives for quick repayment. As a result, the IMF shortened the repayment periods for 

both Stand-By and Extended Arrangements, introduced a time-based surcharge to promote 

early repayment, and raised commitment fees for higher levels of access.

Partly in response to United States advocacy, the IMF established the Standby Credit 

Facility (“SCF”) in July 2009 as a new instrument for concessional financing to lowincome countries. The SCF will fill a long-standing gap in the IMF concessional facilities 

architecture by providing low-income countries with a facility specifically designed for 

intermittent use in response to short-term balance of payments financing gaps. The SCF 

also carries a shorter repayment period than the IMF’s other concessional facilities. The 

United States also continues to be a strong advocate for the non-borrowing Policy Support 

Instrument (“PSI”) which provides a framework for IMF policy advice and donor signaling 

without the need for IMF lending. The United States has discouraged low-income 

countries from pursuing serial Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (“PRGT”) programs. 

The United States urges those countries without a clear balance of payments need to opt for 

a PSI, in which case they retain the option of seeking SCF financing in the event of sudden 

adverse developments. 

• In a June 2010 Board statement for the Solomon Islands’ request for a Stand-By Credit 

Facility (SCF), the USED noted that this was an example of the potential demand 

among the Fund’s lower-income members for shorter and more focused Fund 

engagement, as is the norm with the IMF’s non-concessional lending.

(VI) Graduation from receiving financing on concessionary terms
24

The United States supports comprehensive growth strategies to help countries graduate 

from concessional to market-based lending. The United States works closely with the IMF 

and World Bank to promote a growth-oriented agenda in developing countries based on 

strong macroeconomic and structural policies. The IMF extends concessional credit 

through the PRGT. Eligibility is based principally on a country's per capita income and 

eligibility under the International Development Association (“IDA”), the World Bank's 

concessional window. The current operational cutoff point for IDA eligibility is a 2009 per 

capita GNI level of $1,165. A member will graduate and be removed from the PRGTeligibility list if (1) its annual per capita GNI has been above the IDA cutoff point for the 

past five years, with an increasing trend; and/or (2) the member has the ability to durably 

and substantially access international financial markets and has a per capita GNI above 80 

percent of the IDA cutoff, with GNI per capita on an increasing trend for the past five 

years; and (3) faces low risk of a sharp decline in income or market access and limited debt 

vulnerabilities, as determined by the Fund’s quantitative analysis. While there was 

progress with more developing countries graduating from concessional finance in the mid 

2000s (notably Ghana’s Eurobond issuance in 2007), the global credit tightening resulting 

from the global financial crisis has greatly reduced these countries’ nascent access to credit. 
1

Legislative Provisions

Section 1503(a) of the International Financial Institutions Act, as amended

(originally passed as Section 610(a) of the 

Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and

Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1999, and amended in 2004) 

The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States Executive Director of the 

International Monetary Fund to use aggressively the voice and vote of the Executive Director to 

do the following:

(1) Vigorously promote policies to increase the effectiveness of the International Monetary Fund 

in structuring programs and assistance so as to promote policies and actions that will 

contribute to exchange rate stability and avoid competitive devaluations that will further 

destabilize the international financial and trade systems.

(2) Vigorously promote policies to increase the effectiveness of the International Monetary Fund 

in promoting market-oriented reform, trade liberalization, economic growth, democratic 

governance, and social stability through –

(A) Establishing an independent monetary authority, with full power to conduct monetary 

policy, that provides for a non-inflationary domestic currency that is fully convertible in 

foreign exchange markets;

(B) Opening domestic markets to fair and open internal competition among domestic 

enterprises by eliminating inappropriate favoritism for small or large businesses, 

eliminating elite monopolies, creating and effectively implementing anti-trust and antimonopoly laws to protect free competition, and establishing fair and accessible legal 

procedures for dispute settlement among domestic enterprises;

(C) Privatizing industry in a fair and equitable manner that provides economic opportunities 

to a broad spectrum of the population, eliminating government and elite monopolies, 

closing loss-making enterprises, and reducing government control over the factors of 

production;

(D)Economic deregulation by eliminating inefficient and overly burdensome regulations and 

strengthening the legal framework supporting private contract and intellectual property 

rights;

(E) Establishing or strengthening key elements of a social safety net to cushion the effects on 

workers of unemployment and dislocation; and

(F) Encouraging the opening of markets for agricultural commodities and products by 

requiring recipient countries to make efforts to reduce trade barriers.

(3) Vigorously promote policies to increase the effectiveness of the International Monetary 

Fund, in concert with appropriate international authorities and other international financial 

institutions (as defined in Section 1701(c)(2)), in strengthening financial systems in 

developing countries, and encouraging the adoption of sound banking principles and 

practices, including the development of laws and regulations that will help to ensure that 

domestic financial institutions meet strong standards regarding capital reserves, regulatory 

oversight, and transparency.

(4) Vigorously promote policies to increase the effectiveness of the International Monetary 

Fund, in concert with appropriate international authorities and other international financial 

institutions (as defined in Section 1701(c)(2)), in facilitating the development and 

implementation of internationally acceptable domestic bankruptcy laws and regulations in 

developing countries, including the provision of technical assistance as appropriate.
2

(5) Vigorously promote policies that aim at appropriate burden-sharing by the private sector so 

that investors and creditors bear more fully the consequences of their decisions, and 

accordingly advocate policies which include –

(A) Strengthening crisis prevention and early warning signals through improved and more 

effective surveillance of the national economic policies and financial market development 

of countries (including monitoring of the structure and volume of capital flows to identify 

problematic imbalances in the inflow of short and medium term investment capital, 

potentially destabilizing inflows of offshore lending and foreign investment, or problems 

with the maturity profiles of capital to provide warnings of imminent economic 

instability), and fuller disclosure of such information to market participants;

(B) Accelerating work on strengthening financial systems in emerging market economies so 

as to reduce the risk of financial crises;

(C) Consideration of provisions in debt contracts that would foster dialogue and consultation 

between a sovereign debtor and its private creditors, and among those creditors;

(D)Consideration of extending the scope of the International Monetary Fund’s policy on 

lending to members in arrears and of other policies so as to foster the dialogue and 

consultation referred to in subparagraph (C);

(E) Intensified consideration of mechanisms to facilitate orderly workout mechanisms for 

countries experiencing debt or liquidity crises;

(F) Consideration of establishing ad hoc or formal linkages between the provision of official 

financing to countries experiencing a financial crisis and the willingness of market 

participants to meaningfully participate in any stabilization effort led by the International 

Monetary Fund;

(G)Using the International Monetary Fund to facilitate discussions between debtors and 

private creditors to help ensure that financial difficulties are resolved without 

inappropriate resort to public resources; and

(H)The International Monetary Fund accompanying the provision of funding to countries 

experiencing a financial crisis resulting from imprudent borrowing with efforts to 

achieve a significant contribution by the private creditors, investors, and banks which 

had extended such credits.

(6) Vigorously promote policies that would make the International Monetary Fund a more 

effective mechanism, in concert with appropriate international authorities and other 

international financial institutions (as defined in Section 1701(c)(2)), for promoting good 

governance principles within recipient countries by fostering structural reforms, including 

procurement reform, that reduce opportunities for corruption and bribery, and drug-related 

money laundering.

(7) Vigorously promote the design of International Monetary Fund programs and assistance so 

that governments that draw on the International Monetary Fund channel public funds away 

from unproductive purposes, including large “show case” projects and excessive military 

spending, and toward investment in human and physical capital as well as social programs 

to protect the neediest and promote social equity.

(8) Work with the International Monetary Fund to foster economic prescriptions that are 

appropriate to the individual economic circumstances of each recipient country, recognizing 

that inappropriate stabilization programs may only serve to further destabilize the economy 

and create unnecessary economic, social, and political dislocation.
3

(9) Structure International Monetary Fund programs and assistance so that the maintenance 

and improvement of core labor standards are routinely incorporated as an integral goal in 

the policy dialogue with recipient countries, so that –

(A) Recipient governments commit to affording workers the right to exercise internationally 

recognized core worker rights, including the right of free association and collective 

bargaining through unions of their own choosing;

(B) Measures designed to facilitate labor market flexibility are consistent with such core 

worker rights; and 

(C) The staff of the International Monetary Fund surveys the labor market policies and 

practices of recipient countries and recommends policy initiatives that will help to ensure 

the maintenance or improvement of core labor standards.

(10) Vigorously promote International Monetary Fund programs and assistance that are 

structured to the maximum extent feasible to discourage practices which may promote ethnic 

or social strife in a recipient country.

(11) Vigorously promote recognition by the International Monetary Fund that 

macroeconomic developments and policies can affect and be affected by environmental 

conditions and policies, and urge the International Monetary Fund to encourage member 

countries to pursue macroeconomic stability while promoting environmental protection.

(12) Facilitate greater International Monetary Fund transparency, including by enhancing 

accessibility of the International Monetary Fund and its staff, foster a more open release 

policy toward working papers, past evaluations, and other International Monetary Fund 

documents, seeking to publish all Letters of Intent to the International Monetary Fund and 

Policy Framework Papers, and establishing a more open release policy regarding Article IV 

consultations.

(13) Facilitate greater International Monetary Fund accountability and enhance 

International Monetary Fund self-evaluation by vigorously promoting review of the 

effectiveness of the Office of Internal Audit and Inspection and the Executive Board’s 

external evaluation pilot program and, if necessary, the establishment of an operations 

evaluation department modeled on the experience of the International Bank for 

Reconstruction and Development, guided by such key principles as usefulness, credibility, 

transparency, and independence.

(14) Vigorously promote coordination with the International Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development and other international financial institutions (as defined in Section 1701 (c)(2)) 

in promoting structural reforms which facilitate the provision of credit to small businesses, 

including microenterprise lending, especially in the world’s poorest, heavily indebted 

countries.

(15) Work with the International Monetary Fund to 

(A) foster strong global anti-money laundering (AML) and combat the financing of terrorism 

(CFT) regimes;

(B) ensure that country performance under the Financial Action Task Force anti-money 

laundering and counterterrorist financing standards is effectively and comprehensively 

monitored;

(C) ensure note is taken of AML and CFT issues in Article IV reports, International Monetary 

Fund programs, and other regular reviews of country progress;
4

(D)ensure that effective AML and CFT regimes are considered to be indispensable elements

of sound financial systems; and

(E) emphasize the importance of sound AML and CFT regimes to global growth and 

development.
5

Section 801(c)(1)(B)

Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and

Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2001

Treasury should report on the extent to which the IMF is implementing –

I. Policies providing for the suspension of financing if funds are being diverted for 

purposes other than the purpose for which the financing was intended;

II. Policies seeking to ensure that financing by the Fund normally serves as a catalyst for 

private sector financing and does not displace such financing;

III. Policies requiring that financing must be disbursed (i) on the basis of specific prior 

reforms; or (ii) incrementally upon implementation of specific reforms after initial 

disbursement;

IV. Policies vigorously promoting open markets and liberalization of trade in goods and 

services;

V. Policies providing that financing by the Fund concentrates chiefly on short-term balance 

of payments financing;

VI. Policies providing for the use, in conjunction with the Bank, of appropriate qualitative 

and quantitative indicators to measure progress toward graduation from receiving 

financing on concessionary terms, including an estimated timetable by which countries 

may graduate over the next 15 years.
6

Section 605(d) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and

Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1999

On a quarterly basis, the Secretary of the Treasury shall report to the appropriate committees on 

the standby or other arrangements of the Fund made during the preceding quarter, identifying 

separately the arrangements to which the policies described in section 601(4) of this title apply 

and the arrangements to which such policies do not apply.

Section 601. 

***

(4) Policies providing that, in circumstances where a country is experiencing balance of 

payments difficulties due to a large short-term financing need resulting from a sudden and

disruptive loss of market confidence and in order to provide an incentive for early repayment 

and encourage private market financing, loans made from the Fund’s general resources after

the date of the enactment of this section are—

(A) made available at an interest rate that reflects an adjustment for risk that is not less than 300 

basis points in excess of the average of the market-based short term cost of financing of its 

largest members; and 

(B) repaid within 1 to 21⁄2 years from each disbursement.
7

ANNEX 1 

Report to Congress on International Monetary Fund Lending

October 1, 2009 – December 31, 2009

Board 

Approval Date Country Amount Type* U.S. 

Position

11/09/09 Dominican Republic SDR 1.0945 billion

($1.7 billion)

SBA Support

11/23/09 Angola SDR 858.9 million

($1.4 billion)

SBA Abstain 

12/04/09 Maldives SDR 49.2 million

($79.3 million)

SBA Support

SDR 8.2 million

($13.2 million)

ESF-HAC

12/07/09 Samoa SDR 5.8 million

($9.3 million)

ESF-RAC Support

12/11/09 D. R. Congo SDR 346.45 million

($551.45 million)

PRGF Support

12/14/09 Burkina Faso SDR 33.11 million

($52.52 million)

PRGF 

Augmentation

Support

12/18/09 Seychelles SDR 19.8 million

($31.1 million)

EFF Support

*Notes: 

1. PRGF: Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility; SBA: Stand-By Arrangement; EFF: 

Extended Fund Facility; ESF-HAC: Exogenous Shocks Facility-High Access Component; ESFRAC: Exogenous Shocks Facility-Rapid Access Component

2. The policies described in section 601(4) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and 

Related Programs Appropriations Act 1999 did not apply to any of the programs above.
8

January 1, 2010 – March 31, 2010

Board 

Approval Date Country Amount Type* U.S. 

Position

01/27/10 Haiti SDR 65.5 million

($102 million)

ECF 

Augmentation

Approve

01/29/10 Moldova SDR 369.6 million

($574.4 million)

ECF / EFF Support

02/04/10 Jamaica SDR 820.5 million

($1.27 billion)

SBA Support

02/19/10 Malawi SDR 52.05 million

($79.4 million)

ECF Support

02/19/10 The Gambia SDR 4.67 million

($7.1 million)

ECF 

Augmentation

Oppose

02/24/10 Iraq SDR 2.38 billion

($3.64 billion)

SBA Approve

03/08/10 Liberia SDR 4.2 million

($6.4 million)

Additional 

Interim 

Assistance 

Under 

Enhanced HIPC

Approve

03/17/10 El Salvador SDR 513.9 million

($790 million)

SBA Approve

03/25/10 Mexico SDR 31.528 billion

($48 billion)

Successor FCL Approve

03/31/10 Côte d’Ivoire SDR 5 million

($7.6 million)

Additional 

Interim 

Assistance 

Under 

Enhanced HIPC

Approve

*Notes: 

1. ECF: Extended Credit Facility; EFF: Extended Fund Facility; SBA: Stand-By Arrangement; 

EPCA: Emergency Post-Conflict Assistance; FCL: Flexible Credit Line

2. The policies described in section 601(4) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and 

Related Programs Appropriations Act 1999 did not apply to any of the programs above.
9

April 1, 2010 – June 30, 2010

Board 

Approval Date Country Amount Type

U.S. Position

04/02/10 Grenada SDR 8.775 million

($13.3 million)

ECF Approve

05/07/10

GuineaBissau

SDR 22.365 million

($33.3 million)

ECF Abstain

Colombia SDR 2.322 billion

($3.46 billion)

FCL Approve

05/09/10 Greece SDR 26.4 billion

(€30 billion)

SBA Approve

05/12/10 Uganda NCV PSI Approve

05/28/10 Nepal SDR 28.52 million

($42.05 million)

RCF Approve

06/02/10

Lesotho SDR 41.88 million

($61.4 million)

ECF Approve

Solomon 

Islands

SDR 12.48 million

($18.3 million)

SCF Approve

06/04/10

Sierra Leone SDR 31.11 million

($45.4 million)

ECF Approve

Tanzania NCV PSI Approve

06/07/10

Tajikistan SDR 26.1 million

($38.1 million)

ECF 

Augmentation

Abstain

Antigua and 

Barbuda

SDR 81 million

($117.8 million)

SBA Approve

06/14/10

Mozambique NCV PSI Approve

Burkina Faso SDR 46.154 million

($67.7 million)

ECF Approve

Benin SDR 74.28 million

($109 million)

ECF Abstain

06/16/10 Rwanda NCV PSI Approve

06/25/10 Togo SDR 11 million

($16.2 million)

ECF 

Augmentation

Abstain

06/28/10 Armenia SDR133.40 million

($197.4 million)

EFF Approve

SDR133.40 million

($197.4 million)

ECF

* Notes: 
10

1. ECF: Extended Credit Facility; FCL: Flexible Credit Line; SBA: Stand-By Arrangement; 

PSI: Policy Support Instrument; EFF: Extended Fund Facility

2. The policies described in section 601(4) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and 

Related Programs Appropriations Act 1999 did not apply to any of the programs above.
11

July 1, 2010 – September 30, 2010

Board 

Approval 

Date

Country Amount Type* U.S. Position

07/02/10 Poland SDR 13.69 billion

($20.43 billion)

FCL Support

07/21/10 Republic of 

Kosovo

SDR 92.656 million

($139.6 million)

SBA Support

07/21/10 Haiti SDR 40.9 million

($60 million)

ECF Support

07/28/10 Ukraine SDR 10 billion

($15.15 billion)

SBA Support

07/30/10 Republic of 

Yemen

SDR 243.5 million

($369.8 million)

ECF Support

09/15/10 Kyrgyz 

Republic

SDR 22.2 million

($33.73 million)

RCF Support

09/15/10 Pakistan SDR 296.98 million

($451 million)

ENDA Support

* Notes: 

1. FCL: Flexible Credit Line; SBA: Stand-by Arrangement; ECF: Extended Credit Facility; 

RCF: Rapid Credit Facility; ENDA: Emergency Natural Disaster Assistance

2. The policies described in section 601(4) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and

Related Programs Appropriations Act 1999 did not apply to any of the programs above.