Suchergebnisse

U radu se obrađuju emisije optjecajnog kovinskog novca država članica Europske unije koje koriste nacionalni novac kao zakonsko sredstvo plaćanja (države članice s odstupanjem) sa aspekta utjecaja tih okolnosti na obvezu uvođenja zajedničke valute. Godine 2021. to su Bugarska, Češka, Danska, Hrvatska, Mađarska, Poljska, Rumunjska i Švedska. Prema Ugovoru o osnivanju Europske unije države članice ove asocijacije su obvezne (uz dvije iznimke) uvesti zajedničku valutu Unije - euro u trenutku kada ispune uvjete za to. Ovakvo uređenje novčanog suvereniteta u Europskoj uniji implicira da u ovoj zajednici sada postoji devet različitih valutnih područja. Jedno, ujedno i najveće novčano područje je eurozona sa zajedničkom valutom i čini ga devetnaest država članica Unije te osam novčanih područja (država) s nacionalnom valutom. Države članice s odstupanjem su dužne ispunjavati svoje obveze u odnosu na ostvarenje ekonomske i monetarne unije kao najvišeg stupnja integracije. Ove aktivnosti su predmet valorizacije najmanje svake dvije godine ili po zahtjevu države članice s odstupanjem. Novčana rješenja u segmentu optjecajnog kovinskog novca u državama Europske unije sa nacionalnim novcem su različita i drukčija od uređenja u eurozoni. Prije svega se to odnosi na gospodarenje ovim novcem, ali i numizmatičkim aspektima njihovih izdanja kao i tradicijom u pojedinim sredinama. Stoga ovakvo stanje ima i utjecaj na proces uvođenja zajedničkog novca u tim državama. Zajednički optjecajni kovinski novac u Europskoj uniji je euro i njegov stoti dio euro cent. Ovaj je novac zakonsko sredstvo plaćanja na području svih država koje su ga prihvatile i one čine eurozonu. Svaka država emitent ovoga novca samostalno uređuje njegov avers dok je revers zajednički. Optjecajni kovinski novac, unatoč činjenici da bezgotovinska plaćanja postaju sve zastupljenija, i dalje, posebno u nekim sredinama, je izuzetno prisutan i značajan novčani oblik. Kroz analizu veličine apoenskog niza emisija optjecajnog kovinskog novca u svakoj državi koja koristi nacionalnu valutu, materijala koji se koristi u njihovoj izradi, vremenu puštanja ovih apoena u optjecaj te njihovoj kupovnoj snazi zaključuje se o monetarnim politikama u segmentu optjecajnog novca ovih država i odrazu istih na prihvaćanje zajedničkog novca. U radu se daje prikaz značajnijih novčanih unija u povijesti te osnovne specifičnosti novčanih rješenja u Europskoj uniji. ; The article addresses the issue of circulating coins of the EU member states that use their national currency as legal tender (member states with a derogation), from the aspect of how these circumstances affect the obligation to introduce the common currency. In 2021, these were Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Rumania and Sweden. In accordance with the Founding Treaties of the EU, the member states of this association have the obligation (with two exceptions) to introduce the common EU currency – the euro, at the moment when they meet conditions to do so. This way of regulating EU monetary sovereignty implies that this community at present has nine different currency areas. The largest currency region is the Eurozone with a common currency, and it consists of nineteen EU member states, and there are also eight currency regions (states) that use their national currencies. The member states with a derogation have the obligation to fulfil their commitments with respect to joining the economic and monetary union as the highest level of integration. These activities are evaluated at least every two years, or on demand of a member state with derogation. The monetary solutions concerning the circulating coins in the EU states with national currency are different from the regulation in the Eurozone. In the first place this refers to managing this currency, but also to numismatic aspects of their issuing and the tradition of particular countries. This state of affairs also influences the process of introducing the common currency in these countries. The common circulating coins in the EU are the euro and its hundredth part, the euro cent. This currency is legal tender in all the states that introduced it and they make up the Eurozone. Each country that issued these coins independently regulated their obverse, while the reverse is common. The circulating coins are still, although noncash payment is increasing, a very present and important form of payment, especially in some communities. Through analysing the denominations of the currency in each state that uses the national currency, the material used to produce it, the time when these denominations were issued and their market value, the author concludes about the monetary policies concerning the circulating currency in these states and how they will be reflected on accepting the common currency. The article also gives a survey of the more important monetary unions in history and the basic specifics of the monetary solutions in the EU.

Unsuccessful attempts to join the euro zone enables the authors to state that Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union is an insufficiently researched topic. Identification of the problems and prospects of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union is especially important, because only when the problems are rectified, will it be possible to join the European Monetary Union successfully. It will also be possible to assess the potential risks and benefits of changing the national currency to the euro. Therefore, Lithuanian macroeconomic indicators are analyzed and compared with the convergence criteria. In addition, Estonia's and Slovenia's experience is investigated, because these countries have joined the euro area despite having a difficult macro-economic environment. It should be noted that the establishment of a single currency completed the integration of European countries and preconditioned the belief that joining the European Monetary Union will maintain price stability and a sustainable economic growth. Performed analysis of macro-economic indicators allows the authors to state that the major risk factor for Lithuania's integration process into the European Monetary Union has been and remains a too high rate of inflation. The main factors influencing the high inflation are a large amount of money in circulation, low inflation control, budget imbalances and a lack of execution about strict fiscal policy. In 2013, it is predicted that Lithuania will have a 2.5 percent inflation rate and the convergence criteria is expected to be equal to 2.6 percent, so the risk that inflation may be uncontrolled remains. In order to finally integrate into the monetary union, the Lithuanian government should pursue strict fiscal policy as well as structural reforms to ensure stability for prices and finance in the government sector. Establishment of the euro would promote foreign investment in the country, [.]

Unsuccessful attempts to join the euro zone enables the authors to state that Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union is an insufficiently researched topic. Identification of the problems and prospects of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union is especially important, because only when the problems are rectified, will it be possible to join the European Monetary Union successfully. It will also be possible to assess the potential risks and benefits of changing the national currency to the euro. Therefore, Lithuanian macroeconomic indicators are analyzed and compared with the convergence criteria. In addition, Estonia's and Slovenia's experience is investigated, because these countries have joined the euro area despite having a difficult macro-economic environment. It should be noted that the establishment of a single currency completed the integration of European countries and preconditioned the belief that joining the European Monetary Union will maintain price stability and a sustainable economic growth. Performed analysis of macro-economic indicators allows the authors to state that the major risk factor for Lithuania's integration process into the European Monetary Union has been and remains a too high rate of inflation. The main factors influencing the high inflation are a large amount of money in circulation, low inflation control, budget imbalances and a lack of execution about strict fiscal policy. In 2013, it is predicted that Lithuania will have a 2.5 percent inflation rate and the convergence criteria is expected to be equal to 2.6 percent, so the risk that inflation may be uncontrolled remains. In order to finally integrate into the monetary union, the Lithuanian government should pursue strict fiscal policy as well as structural reforms to ensure stability for prices and finance in the government sector. Establishment of the euro would promote foreign investment in the country, [.]

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that all Member States of the European Union shall harmonize their economic and exchange rate policies, conduct an appropriate fiscal policy, and join the euro area once they fulfill the conditions for the adoption of the single currency set out in the Treaty. The European Union institutions assess the economic convergence with the euro area of a country which is preparing to adopt the euro and it's eligibility for the changeover to the single currency of the European Union. In the 1st of May, 2004, when Lithuania became an official member of the European Union, automatically goal was set to abandon the national currency and become a full member of the euro zone, when Lithuania meet the convergence criteria. The first attempt to join the euro zone has been since 1st of January, 2007, but Lithuania met only three if the four convergence criteria. When inflation exceeded the convergence criteria by 0.1 percent, the European Commissions report on Lithuanias accession to the euro zone was negative. Unsuccessful attempts to join the euro zone shows that Lithuania‗s integration into the European Monetary Union is not properly analyzed topic in Lithuania, therefore for achieving the final success of the integration into European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 the identification and assessment of integration problems and prospects extremely important. So the basic aim of the article is to assess the costs of Lithuania fully integrate into the European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 by simulating the most favorable economic environment adoption of the euro. The object is the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union. And the tasks are to analyze the positive and negative aspects in order to join into the European Monetary Union and to assess the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union.

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that all Member States of the European Union shall harmonize their economic and exchange rate policies, conduct an appropriate fiscal policy, and join the euro area once they fulfill the conditions for the adoption of the single currency set out in the Treaty. The European Union institutions assess the economic convergence with the euro area of a country which is preparing to adopt the euro and it's eligibility for the changeover to the single currency of the European Union. In the 1st of May, 2004, when Lithuania became an official member of the European Union, automatically goal was set to abandon the national currency and become a full member of the euro zone, when Lithuania meet the convergence criteria. The first attempt to join the euro zone has been since 1st of January, 2007, but Lithuania met only three if the four convergence criteria. When inflation exceeded the convergence criteria by 0.1 percent, the European Commissions report on Lithuanias accession to the euro zone was negative. Unsuccessful attempts to join the euro zone shows that Lithuania‗s integration into the European Monetary Union is not properly analyzed topic in Lithuania, therefore for achieving the final success of the integration into European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 the identification and assessment of integration problems and prospects extremely important. So the basic aim of the article is to assess the costs of Lithuania fully integrate into the European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 by simulating the most favorable economic environment adoption of the euro. The object is the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union. And the tasks are to analyze the positive and negative aspects in order to join into the European Monetary Union and to assess the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union.

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that all Member States of the European Union shall harmonize their economic and exchange rate policies, conduct an appropriate fiscal policy, and join the euro area once they fulfill the conditions for the adoption of the single currency set out in the Treaty. The European Union institutions assess the economic convergence with the euro area of a country which is preparing to adopt the euro and it's eligibility for the changeover to the single currency of the European Union. In the 1st of May, 2004, when Lithuania became an official member of the European Union, automatically goal was set to abandon the national currency and become a full member of the euro zone, when Lithuania meet the convergence criteria. The first attempt to join the euro zone has been since 1st of January, 2007, but Lithuania met only three if the four convergence criteria. When inflation exceeded the convergence criteria by 0.1 percent, the European Commissions report on Lithuanias accession to the euro zone was negative. Unsuccessful attempts to join the euro zone shows that Lithuania‗s integration into the European Monetary Union is not properly analyzed topic in Lithuania, therefore for achieving the final success of the integration into European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 the identification and assessment of integration problems and prospects extremely important. So the basic aim of the article is to assess the costs of Lithuania fully integrate into the European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 by simulating the most favorable economic environment adoption of the euro. The object is the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union. And the tasks are to analyze the positive and negative aspects in order to join into the European Monetary Union and to assess the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union.

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that all Member States of the European Union shall harmonize their economic and exchange rate policies, conduct an appropriate fiscal policy, and join the euro area once they fulfill the conditions for the adoption of the single currency set out in the Treaty. The European Union institutions assess the economic convergence with the euro area of a country which is preparing to adopt the euro and it's eligibility for the changeover to the single currency of the European Union. In the 1st of May, 2004, when Lithuania became an official member of the European Union, automatically goal was set to abandon the national currency and become a full member of the euro zone, when Lithuania meet the convergence criteria. The first attempt to join the euro zone has been since 1st of January, 2007, but Lithuania met only three if the four convergence criteria. When inflation exceeded the convergence criteria by 0.1 percent, the European Commissions report on Lithuanias accession to the euro zone was negative. Unsuccessful attempts to join the euro zone shows that Lithuania‗s integration into the European Monetary Union is not properly analyzed topic in Lithuania, therefore for achieving the final success of the integration into European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 the identification and assessment of integration problems and prospects extremely important. So the basic aim of the article is to assess the costs of Lithuania fully integrate into the European Monetary Union since 1st of January, 2015 by simulating the most favorable economic environment adoption of the euro. The object is the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union. And the tasks are to analyze the positive and negative aspects in order to join into the European Monetary Union and to assess the costs of Lithuania's integration into the European Monetary Union.

U radu se obrađuje monetarna politika Europske ekonomske i monetarne unije u segmentu optjecajnog kovinskog novca koji glasi na euro i euro cente kojeg izdaju države članice Europske unije (europodručje) te države koje službeno koriste ovu valutu. Budući da je Hrvatska u fazi uvođenja eura, jedna od aktivnosti je, i uređenje nacionalne strane hrvatskih eurokovanica kako bi se zaključio ovaj proces. Gotovinski novac europodručja i država koje službeno koriste euro je kovinski novac i novčanice. Kovinski novac nije jedinstvena kategorija. Čine ga optjecajni kovinski novac, prigodni optjecajni kovinski novac te prigodni kovinski novac. Pritom se, prigodni optjecajni kovinski novac u europodručju emitira kao zajednički i nacionalni. Optjecajni kovinski novac koji glasi na eure i euro cente te zajednički prigodni optjecajni kovinski novac koji isključivo glasi na 2 eura (uz novčanice) zakonsko je sredstvo plaćanja u svim državama koje koriste zajedničku valutu. Trenutno europodručje čini devetnaest država Europske unije. Euro kao zajedničku valutu koriste službeno i četiri države koje nisu članice Unije temeljem zaključenih monetarnih sporazuma s Unijom s pravom izdavanja eurokovanica sa nacionalnom stranom. Optjecajni kovinski novac i zajednički prigodni optjecajni kovinski novac su jedine vrste gotovinskog novca europodručja i četiri države koje službeno koriste euro koje imaju jednu stranu – revers identičnu bez obzira na državu izdavatelja (zajednička strana), a drugu stranu (nacionalna strana) - avers s nacionalnim obilježjima. ; The article addresses the monetary policy of the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) in the section of euro and eurocent coins issued by member states of the European Union (Eurozone) and by states which officially use this currency. Since Croatia is in the stage of introducing the euro, one of the activities is the design of the national side of Croatian euro coins as a way of concluding this process.

The essence of monetary union derives from the fact that when a country relinquishes its national currency, it also loses the ability to conduct an independent monetary policy. The possible asymmetric shocks of a supply or demand determine the optimality of monetary policy. If there are asymmetric shocks in the union, they might cause inflation in one country and deflation in another one, so different monetary policy should be applied. In practice, shocks are always some mixture of demand and supply movements. The major problem with witch the European Central Bank confronts is how to conduct monetary policy when asymmetric shocks occur. The situation is more complicated when supply shock originates in the country of monetary union. This shock lowers output and increases prices. The ECB is responsible for maintaining price stability, also for stabilizing the economy, if it does not interfere with price stability. The price stability is the primary aim in any case. If countries are affected by asymmetric shocks, the common monetary policy won't be appropriate for some of them. The countries which differ from the union as a whole have difficulties with stabilizing output and employment. The aim of the article is to analyse the differences of GDP growth rates and inflation rates between the European Monetary Union countries in respect of the possible incongruity when seeking the price stability. Methods of the research: the analysis and the synthesis of scientific literature, analysis of the statistical data, Theil's inequality coefficient. Differences of GDP growth rates and inflation rates have shown that there were asymmetric shocks of a supply and demand in the European Monetary Union countries. Netherlands, Austria, Belgium and France were identified 373 as countries, which best mach the union as a whole. [.].

The essence of monetary union derives from the fact that when a country relinquishes its national currency, it also loses the ability to conduct an independent monetary policy. The possible asymmetric shocks of a supply or demand determine the optimality of monetary policy. If there are asymmetric shocks in the union, they might cause inflation in one country and deflation in another one, so different monetary policy should be applied. In practice, shocks are always some mixture of demand and supply movements. The major problem with witch the European Central Bank confronts is how to conduct monetary policy when asymmetric shocks occur. The situation is more complicated when supply shock originates in the country of monetary union. This shock lowers output and increases prices. The ECB is responsible for maintaining price stability, also for stabilizing the economy, if it does not interfere with price stability. The price stability is the primary aim in any case. If countries are affected by asymmetric shocks, the common monetary policy won't be appropriate for some of them. The countries which differ from the union as a whole have difficulties with stabilizing output and employment. The aim of the article is to analyse the differences of GDP growth rates and inflation rates between the European Monetary Union countries in respect of the possible incongruity when seeking the price stability. Methods of the research: the analysis and the synthesis of scientific literature, analysis of the statistical data, Theil's inequality coefficient. Differences of GDP growth rates and inflation rates have shown that there were asymmetric shocks of a supply and demand in the European Monetary Union countries. Netherlands, Austria, Belgium and France were identified 373 as countries, which best mach the union as a whole. [.].

The article looks into the process of "building" the monetary union of the EU member countries & creating the European currency, the euro. Following lengthy negotiations, the euro-system era commenced on 1 Jan 1999, when the euro was launched, marking the beginning of the third phase of the monetary union. At first, the euro will be virtual money & function as a dual currency, but in 2002, it will be printed/coined for everyday usage. In the first half of that year, local currencies will be replaced by the euro in eleven EU countries that have satisfied the stringent criteria of "suitability" for joining the monetary union. 1 Appendix. Adapted from the source document.

Introduction of Euro ended the money integration process which lasted for 50 years . Euro became the key axis of integration. In the context of the international monetary system, formation of the Monetary Union in Europe is perhaps the most important event since the failure of the world monetary system that functioned on the basis of the Bretton Woods treaty. The experience of the first Eurofunctioning year has shown that it became a factor that stabilized the fluctuation of interest, price, and exchange courses in a complicated economics globalization environment. When evaluating in the context of other monetary unions, the Euro project is a particular event in monetary history. Never before did it happen that a group of independent slates would refuse their national money at their own vvill and would concurrently retain political independence. This act determines quite a new combination of macroeconomic policy, based on general values and following the subsidizing principles. The policy based only on national interests can be neither productive, nor stable enough. The policy based on the common currency has an effect on all tjie spheres of economics: allocation of resources and revenues, economic growth, as well as labor, product, service, and finance markets.[.].

Introduction of Euro ended the money integration process which lasted for 50 years . Euro became the key axis of integration. In the context of the international monetary system, formation of the Monetary Union in Europe is perhaps the most important event since the failure of the world monetary system that functioned on the basis of the Bretton Woods treaty. The experience of the first Eurofunctioning year has shown that it became a factor that stabilized the fluctuation of interest, price, and exchange courses in a complicated economics globalization environment. When evaluating in the context of other monetary unions, the Euro project is a particular event in monetary history. Never before did it happen that a group of independent slates would refuse their national money at their own vvill and would concurrently retain political independence. This act determines quite a new combination of macroeconomic policy, based on general values and following the subsidizing principles. The policy based only on national interests can be neither productive, nor stable enough. The policy based on the common currency has an effect on all tjie spheres of economics: allocation of resources and revenues, economic growth, as well as labor, product, service, and finance markets.[.].

Europe is a contingent product of its institutions rather than a political project. Although the announced goal was simplification & rationalization of its institutional system, the opposite occurred: the system has become even more complex. The author looks into the process dynamics & implementation results of the Lisbon Treaty (effective 1 December 2009), showing that the traditional European compromise leads to outcomes that none of the actors really wanted, & that no one is satisfied with. The European Union is an arena of institutional coercions & games, the rules of which are occasionally readjusted. This occasional readjustment accounts for the survival of the system, which is a priori unstable, for each unsatisfied partner thinks & hopes that redefinition might provide him with an opportunity to gain a better position. The process is especially visible in negotiations regarding the Lisbon Treaty, above all in the institutional innovation which is the function of the new president (of the European Council). The conclusive interpretation of the Lisbon Treaty will depend on the outcome of the bureaucratic struggle right until 2011, & prior to a new definition of the rules, undoubtedly no later than 2014. The new EU system testifies primarily to the fundamental trait of European integration, which strongly favoured from the outset a repeated rethinking of its form (its institutions) in the light of considerations regarding its goals (its policies). Adapted from the source document.

The doctoral dissertation analyses the recent overhaul of the EU banking policy framework in 2012–2016 with the aim of answering two interrelated questions. First, why did the euro area member states decide to surrender national control over their banking systems by creating a banking union despite the fact that similar proposals had been constantly rejected in the past? Second, what accounts for the content of the established banking union? The research argues that the European sovereign debt crisis and, more specifically, its Spanish episode in the first half of 2012 were a necessary but insufficient condition for the European leaders' historic decision. Building on a deterministic interpretation of punctuated equilibrium theory, the author explains the creation of the banking union by three intervening factors: interdependence of the euro area member states that led to changes in the EU banking policy image held by the governments of the largest euro area states, and the politicisation of the related banking policy-making venue. Having showed that the content of the final agreements corresponded to the identified 'preventive' banking union type, the author argues that it can be best explained by the interaction of preference intensity of member states and political legitimacy of their national positions. Accordingly, the research explains the content of the banking union by the exposure of German banks' to the most stressed Southern euro area member states at the start of negotiations and the German government's 'rhetorical entrapment' at later stages. It is also argued that the entire EU bargaining process was facilitated by 'constructive ambiguity' related to the finality of the banking union.