For the rating action annex, click here.

Rating action

Scope Ratings GmbH has today upgraded the Republic of Lithuania’s long-term issuer and senior unsecured debt ratings to A in both local and foreign currency and revised the Outlook to Stable from Positive. The short-term issuer rating has been affirmed at S-1 in both local and foreign currency with a Stable Outlook.

Summary and Outlook

The upgrade of Lithuania’s long-term ratings to A from A- reflects the strengthened resilience of the Lithuanian economy, which reduces the country’s underlying vulnerability to shocks, underpinned by an improved macroeconomic-policy framework, a strengthened external position, physical-infrastructure advancements and comparative stability in the banking sector. The upgrade reflects Scope’s opinion that improvements in Lithuania’s economic and financial stability will be sustained. Scope considers these factors will reduce macroeconomic volatility including after the current Covid-19 crisis. Lithuania’s track record of conservative fiscal policies provides Scope with a level of confidence that the new government, in office since December 2020, will commit to fiscal prudence as the pandemic recedes, in order to stabilise public-debt ratios.

The upgrade reflects improvements in the ‘domestic economic risk’ and ‘external economic risk’ categories of Scope’s sovereign ratings methodology.

Lithuania’s credit ratings are, moreover, supported by the country’s EU and euro-area memberships, which support a credible macroeconomic-policy framework and confer advantages via a strong reserve currency and eligibility for the asset purchase facilities of the European Central Bank. Scope expects the new government to focus on further improving the investment environment and maintain continuity in foreign policies, including closer integration with the two other Baltic states, the rest of the EU and NATO.

Lithuania faces challenges relating to: i) still moderate per capita income levels relative to the euro-area average, and wage-productivity growth imbalances; ii) adverse demographics, with an ageing population and skilled-labour shortages; iii) a large export sector relative to the small size of the national economy; and iv) risks in the banking sector related to dependence on large Nordic banks.

The Stable Outlook reflects Scope’s view that downside risks to the ratings over the next 12 to 18 months are balanced compared with upside risks. The ratings/Outlooks could be upgraded if, individually or collectively: i) the continued implementation of structural reform, for example further liberalising the labour market, reforms supporting innovation and education, and/or infrastructure advancement, leads to a better-than-expected growth outlook; and/or ii) public debt-to-GDP returns on to a firm downward trajectory.

Conversely, the ratings/Outlooks could be downgraded if, individually or collectively: i) the economic or public-finance outlooks materially weaken; and/or ii) Lithuania’s external finances deteriorate, due, as an example, to significant erosion of external competitiveness.

Rating rationale

The upgrade of Lithuania’s long-term ratings to A reflects the economy’s increased resilience, improved external position, pre-crisis track record of sound fiscal management and Scope’s expectation of a prudent and predictable macroeconomic policy over the medium term, focused upon supporting sustainable growth.

The first driver of the upgrade is Lithuania’s improved economic and financial resilience. The economy’s per-capita income increased substantively to a projected 83% of the euro-area average in 2020 in purchasing-power-standard terms, from 71% as of 2016. This was due to strong real growth averaging 4.2% annually over 2017-19 and a comparatively-moderate economic contraction in 2020 compared with those experienced by peer economies – projected in Lithuania’s case at 1.5% by Scope (versus 2% according to the Bank of Lithuania’s December 2020 projections¹).

Scope expects Lithuania’s real GDP to recover to pre-crisis levels within 2021 (growing 2.5% this year as an annual average), supported by recovery in domestic demand and investment, and assisted by Lithuania’s high absorption rate of EU funds². Scope notes that its baseline growth forecast is subject to significant uncertainty and depends on how the pandemic evolves and impacts the economy and labour market. Lithuania is a major beneficiary of EU funds, with the EU’s financial allocations to Lithuania under the 2014-20 EU budget totalling around 3% of the country’s GDP every year. Lithuania’s allocation under the 2021-2027 EU budget, which includes the Next Generation EU recovery fund, totals EUR 14.5bn, which is EUR 1.7bn more than over the 2014-20 period.

Scope estimates Lithuania’s growth potential at 2.5% annually over the medium term. Medium-run growth is supported by public-infrastructure investment projects co-financed by the EU, including the construction of Rail Baltica connecting the Baltic region with the European rail network via Poland (envisioned to be completed by 2026). Real investment into the economy grew 8% between 2017-19, more than twice the EU average³, driven by investment in the non-residential construction and transport sectors. In June 2020, the government adopted a public-investment plan covering the period to 2022. The plan is appraised at EUR 6.3bn or 13% of 2019 GDP (one-third of this amount reflecting new investment, the remainder already planned but to be stepped up) and comprises planned investments in infrastructure, human capital, research & development, and climate change⁴, including via the channelling of EU funds. The plan will be adjusted by the new government based on an assessment of the projects’ economic feasibility. In Scope’s view, this signals the government’s commitment to balancing higher public investment with fiscal discipline.

In addition, the Covid-19 crisis has not caused exceptional macroeconomic imbalances, with household and non-financial corporations’ debt ratios at low levels as of Q3 2020, at 24.3% and 38.6% of GDP respectively, nearly unchanged compared with 2019 levels⁵. Scope considers Lithuania’s Nordic-dominated banking sector to be in a good position to absorb the current economic shock. The banking sector is highly profitable compared with those of euro-area peers, is highly capitalised and displays strong asset quality. As of Q3 2020, the system-wide tier 1 capital ratio was 21.8% of risk-weighted assets, among the highest in the euro area, and the non-performing loan ratio was just 1.2%⁶.

The second driver for the rating upgrade is Lithuania’s improved external position. Net external debt declined to 3% of GDP in Q3 2020, down from 13.1% one year before, and the net international investment position improved to -18.2% of GDP in the same quarter, from -27.8% in Q3 2019. Lithuania has been continuously gaining global export market share over recent years, supported by improvements in the value-added structure of exports. Despite rising unit labour costs, growing 3% annually over 2017-19 relative to that of the euro-area average, relative wages of Lithuania still compare favourably against relative productivity when compared with the euro-area average, and wage growth has not significantly undermined the competitiveness of Lithuania’s export sector. Annual net earnings in purchasing-power-standard terms amounted to 54% of the euro-area average in 2019, while productivity (per person) was 72% of the euro-area average in the same year. Supported by this, the current-account surplus widened to 3.3% of GDP in 2019, from 0.3% of GDP in 2018. According to the Bank of Lithuania’s December 2020 projections, the current-account surplus is forecast at 8% of GDP in 2020 before 7.3% of GDP in 2021. This could further improve Lithuania’s external finances.

Important for the country’s medium-term growth prospects and external resilience is Lithuania’s ability to improve the security and sustainability of its energy supply and diversify domestic energy sources. Here, Scope notes positively that the connection of the Baltic states’ with continental Europe’s gas and electricity networks is planned by 2022 and by 2025⁷ respectively. In Scope’s view, this will support Lithuania’s economic resilience.

Looking ahead, Scope believes Lithuania’s track record of fiscal discipline has provided the government with fiscal space to absorb the Covid-19 crisis short term. The government’s fiscal measures adopted last year to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic amounted to 5.9% of GDP⁸, of which 1.5% of GDP was directed to short-time work schemes, with the rest comprising of subsidies to businesses, additional funds for public investment and social security benefits. The budgetary impact of state guarantees to firms affected by the pandemic is small (state guarantees amount to around 2.1% of GDP), given the low take-up of guarantees at just 0.2% of GDP as of December 2020. For 2021, the draft budgetary plan foresees discretionary fiscal measures of 3.9% of GDP.

Medium term, the budget framework reform⁹, which incorporates medium-term strategic goals and expenditure reviews in the design of budgets starting 2022, could improve the longer-term effectiveness of public spending. Improving tax collections will also be important for medium-run fiscal dynamics, considering the still-sizeable shadow economy and comparatively restricted tax base in Lithuania.

As a result of fiscal stimulus and cyclical fiscal deterioration, Scope estimates Lithuania’s general-government balance to have deteriorated from a surplus of 0.3% of GDP in 2019 to a deficit of 8% of GDP in 2020 before narrowing to a deficit of 6% of GDP this year. This is slightly more optimistic than the government’s expected deficits of 7.6% of GDP and 7% of GDP in 2020 and 2021, as presented in the draft budgetary plan. Scope expects the general government debt-to-GDP ratio to increase from around 36% of GDP in 2019 to 46% of GDP in 2020 and further to 51% of GDP in 2021 due to large projected fiscal deficits in 2020-21. Thereafter, Scope expects the public-debt ratio to stabilise, remaining below the EU’s 60% Maastricht threshold.

Risks related to deterioration in Lithuania’s short- to medium-term fiscal dynamics are mitigated by favourable debt financing costs, with the 10-year government bond yield at close to 0% at time of writing, anchored by Lithuania’s access to the European Central Bank’s asset purchase facilities, alongside a long weighted-average maturity of debt, of 9.2 years, and improving debt structure. Lithuania’s foreign-currency denominated debt (reflecting two Eurobonds denominated in USD), totalling USD 2.85bn, will be repaid by 2022 through accumulated pre-financing.

In addition, together with Estonia, Latvia and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Lithuania is planning to develop a Baltic commercial-paper market¹⁰. In Scope’s view, this will enhance market liquidity and the resilience of Lithuania’s private sector to economic shocks.

Despite these credit strengths, Lithuania faces a number of challenges.

The pandemic has had a significant negative impact on the labour market, mitigated by government-subsidy schemes. The unemployment rate increased to 10.4% as of November 2020, from 6.1% at the beginning of last year. The percentage of employed persons in the working-age population fell from 73.4% as of Q1 2020 to 70.5% as of Q3 2020 – representing a steeper deterioration than those seen in other central and eastern European member countries of the EU. Scope expects only a gradual recovery in the Lithuanian labour market and in wage growth by 2022.

Lithuania’s medium-term growth is hindered by demographics, reflecting an ageing population and shortages of skilled labour. The old-age dependency ratio (those aged 65 years and over as a percentage of those aged 15-64) will increase to 41% by 2030, from 31% in 2020, representing the highest such increase among EU-27 economies. Labour productivity grew solidly before the crisis (averaging 3.6% annually between Q1 2017 and Q1 2020). However, productivity growth remained under real wage growth. Positively, the government set up the Innovation Promotion Fund in 2021 to increase public financing for innovation and stimulate private investment. Total expenditure on research & development across all sectors amounted to 1% of GDP in 2019, significantly under a euro-area average of 2.2% of GDP. This is in part due to the large share of smaller firms in the Lithuanian economy, with such firms spending less on R&D. Importantly, immigration has exceeded emigration since 2019 (by around 10,000 persons in 2019 and 20,000 persons in 2020). In Scope’s view, this mitigates labour shortages in some sectors and raises potential growth.

Lithuania’s small, open economy remains vulnerable to external shocks and is reliant on external demand, due to a large export sector (in goods and services) relative to the size of the economy, of around 75%. The recent reform of the EU road transport sector (as part of the EU Mobility Package), which requires truck drivers to return to their home countries regularly to improve working conditions, could negatively impact Lithuania’s transportation services to the rest of the EU, which account for 14% of total exports.

Lithuania’s banking sector is exposed to concentration and spill-over risks due to integration with neighbouring banking systems. Two Swedish banks, Swedbank and SEB, account for 63% of Lithuanian bank assets. Cross-border money-laundering risks are curbed by the small share of non-resident deposits, at 1.9% of total deposits as of November 2020, significantly under that of Latvia (19.1%) and Estonia (9.8%). At the same time, the swift expansion of FinTech, while benefitting the quality of the financial infrastructure, also brings new challenges for anti-money-laundering supervision.

Core Variable Scorecard (CVS) and Qualitative Scorecard (QS)

Scope’s Core Variable Scorecard (CVS), which is based on the relative rankings of key sovereign credit fundamentals, provides a first indicative rating of ‘aa-’ for the Republic of Lithuania. Lithuania receives a one-notch positive adjustment for the euro’s status as a global reserve currency under the reserve currency adjustment. As such, a ‘aa’ indicative rating can be adjusted by the Qualitative Scorecard (QS) by up to three notches depending on the size of relative qualitative credit strengths or weaknesses against a peer group of countries.

For Lithuania, no relative qualitative credit strengths have been signalled. The following relative credit weaknesses have been identified: i) growth potential of the economy; ii) macro-economic stability and sustainability; iii) fiscal policy framework; iv) current account resilience; v) resilience to short-term external shocks; vi) financial imbalances; vii) environmental risks; and viii) social risks.

The QS generates a three-notch downward adjustment and indicates A long-term ratings for Lithuania.

A rating committee has discussed and confirmed these results.

Factoring of Environment, Social and Governance (ESG)

Scope explicitly factors in ESG sustainability issues during the ratings process via the sovereign methodology’s stand-alone ESG sovereign risk pillar, with a 20% weight in the quantitative model (CVS). Under governance-related factors in the CVS, Lithuania’s performance is average compared with that of central and eastern European sovereign peers as assessed under the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators. In general, policymaking in Lithuania has been largely effective and enjoyed relative continuity.

Lithuania’s performance across key social factors is mixed. This is reflected in above-EU-average poverty ratios, although ratios are declining (26.3% of the population was at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2019, compared with 20.9% for the EU-27 as an entirety), relatively high levels of income inequality, but high labour-force participation rates. The European Commission’s Digital Economy and Society Index 2020, which assesses EU member states’ digital competitiveness, ranks Lithuania as average (13th) among the EU-27. Lithuania ranks 20th among the 193 countries on the United Nations’ E-Government Survey 2020, which measures effectiveness in the delivery of public services via information and communication technologies.

Environmental factors are explicitly considered in the rating process via the environment sub-category under the ESG risk pillar. The share of renewable energy in total energy consumption in Lithuania stood at 25.5% in 2019, which exceeds the EU’s average of 19.7% and the national target for 2020 of 23%. Lithuania has an ambitious plan to increase this share to 45% by 2030, including by making use of EU development funds, such as EUR 385m in EU funding for renewable-energy installations. The synchronisation of the Baltic States’ electricity networks with the European network, recent liberalisation of the retail-electricity market and the encouragement of households to self-generate and store solar electricity support Lithuania’s objectives for energy sustainability.

Rating committee
The main points discussed by the rating committee were: i) Lithuania’s growth outlook, exposure to the Covid-19 pandemic; ii) fiscal dynamics and debt sustainability; iii) labour market and demographics; iv) external sector developments; v) financial sector developments; vi) ESG; and vii) peers.

Rating driver references
1. Bank of Lithuania, Macroeconomic projections (December 2020)
2. European Commission, European structural & investment funds
3. European Commission, Country report Lithuania 2020
4. Ministry of Finance, Plan for the DNA of the Future Economy
5. Bank of Lithuania, Private sector debt
6. ECB, Supervisory banking statistics Q3 2020
7. European Commission, Baltic energy market interconnection plan
8. European Commission, Analysis of the updated Draft Budgetary Plan of Lithuania
9. Ministry of Finance, 2021 Lithuanian Draft Budgetary Plan
10. EBRD, Memorandum of understanding

Methodology
The methodology used for this rating and/or rating outlook, (Rating Methodology: Sovereign Ratings, 9 October 2020), is available on https://www.scoperatings.com/#!methodology/list.
Information on the meaning of each rating category, including definitions of default and recoveries can be viewed in the “Rating Definitions - Credit Ratings and Ancillary Services” published on https://www.scoperatings.com/#!governance-and-policies/rating-scale. Historical default rates of the entities rated by Scope Ratings can be viewed in the rating performance report on https://www.scoperatings.com/#governance-and-policies/regulatory-ESMA. Please also refer to the central platform (CEREP) of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA): http://cerep.esma.europa.eu/cerep-web/statistics/defaults.xhtml. A comprehensive clarification of Scope’s definitions of default and rating notations can be found at https://www.scoperatings.com/#governance-and-policies/rating-scale. Guidance and information on how Environmental, Social or Governance factors (ESG factor) are incorporated into the rating can be found in the respective sections of the methodologies or guidance documents provided on https://www.scoperatings.com/#!methodology/list.
The rating outlook indicates the most likely direction of the rating if the rating were to change within the next 12 to 18 months.

Solicitation, key sources and quality of information
The rating was not requested by the rated entity or its agents. The rating process was conducted:
With Rated Entity or Related Third Party Participation NO
With Access to Internal Documents                              NO
With Access to Management                                        NO
The following material sources of information were used to prepare the credit rating: public domain.
Scope considers the quality of information available to Scope on the rated entity or instrument to be satisfactory. The information and data supporting Scope’s ratings originate from sources Scope considers to be reliable and accurate. Scope does not, however, independently verify the reliability and accuracy of the information and data.
Prior to the issuance of the rating, the rated entity was given the opportunity to review the rating and/or outlook and the principal grounds upon which the credit rating and/or outlook is based. Following that review, the rating was not amended before being issued.

Regulatory disclosures
This credit rating and/or rating outlook is issued by Scope Ratings GmbH, Lennéstraße 5, D-10785 Berlin, Tel +49 30 27891-0. The credit rating and/or outlook is UK endorsed.
Lead analyst: Levon Kameryan, Analyst
Person responsible for approval of the rating: Dr Giacomo Barisone, Managing Director, Sovereign and Public Sector
The ratings/outlook were first assigned by Scope in January 2003. The ratings/outlooks were last updated on 4 October 2019.

Potential conflicts
Please see www.scoperatings.com under Governance & Policies/EU Regulation/Disclosures for a list of potential conflicts of interest related to the issuance of credit ratings.

Conditions of use / exclusion of liability
© 2021 Scope SE & Co. KGaA and all its subsidiaries including Scope Ratings GmbH, Scope Ratings UK Limited, Scope Analysis GmbH, Scope Investor Services GmbH, and Scope ESG Analysis GmbH (collectively, Scope). All rights reserved. The information and data supporting Scope’s ratings, rating reports, rating opinions and related research and credit opinions originate from sources Scope considers to be reliable and accurate. Scope does not, however, independently verify the reliability and accuracy of the information and data. Scope’s ratings, rating reports, rating opinions, or related research and credit opinions are provided ‘as is’ without any representation or warranty of any kind. In no circumstance shall Scope or its directors, officers, employees and other representatives be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental or other damages, expenses of any kind, or losses arising from any use of Scope’s ratings, rating reports, rating opinions, related research or credit opinions. Ratings and other related credit opinions issued by Scope are, and have to be viewed by any party as, opinions on relative credit risk and not a statement of fact or recommendation to purchase, hold or sell securities. Past performance does not necessarily predict future results. Any report issued by Scope is not a prospectus or similar document related to a debt security or issuing entity. Scope issues credit ratings and related research and opinions with the understanding and expectation that parties using them will assess independently the suitability of each security for investment or transaction purposes. Scope’s credit ratings address relative credit risk, they do not address other risks such as market, liquidity, legal, or volatility. The information and data included herein is protected by copyright and other laws. To reproduce, transmit, transfer, disseminate, translate, resell, or store for subsequent use for any such purpose the information and data contained herein, contact Scope Ratings GmbH at Lennéstraße 5, D-10785 Berlin.