And with internationally active banks managing multi-currency balance sheets, a local approach to liquidity regulation is becoming less relevant. It is for this reason that the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision decided to convene a Liquidity Working Group to take stock of prudential approaches internationally and to explore whether there is a case for greater consistency. The critical role of infrastructure The financial market infrastructure – exchanges and the systems used to clear and settle market trades or cash obligations – also plays a critical role here. Market participants rely on such infrastructure to implement their desired portfolio allocation; to execute risk management strategies; to raise liquidity, both in normal course and in times of stress; and to manage contingent exposures and cash-flows. It is therefore important for financial stability that these systems function efficiently and continuously, and do not introduce unnecessary costs, risks or frictions to trading and post-trade processes. Frequent interruptions to pre- or post-trade processing, or excessive costs in accessing core components of the market infrastructure, can impose significant welfare costs. Under such circumstances, agents may be forced to deviate from their desired portfolio allocations and risk exposures, or indeed may be prevented from meeting their obligations as they fall due. With markets for credit risk transfer (CRT) growing rapidly, there has been an expansion in the range of transactions for which robust, resilient and well-designed infrastructure is essential.
BANCO DE ESPAÑA  10	 TESTIMONY BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE BANCO DE ESPAÑA BEFORE PARLIAMENT IN RELATION TO THE DRAFT STATE AND SOCIAL SECURITY BUDGET FOR 2019  The third source of risk for projected revenues that I wish to highlight relates to the fact that the estimation of the revenue impact of the new taxes is subject to a high degree of uncertainty, given the absence of any data on how they have functioned in the past. Finally, caution should be exercised in relation to the potential delay in the entry into force of the measures accompanying the Draft Budget, which adds a further risk for expected revenues in 2019. 2.3  The government deficit target and the fiscal policy stance in 2019  Having discussed the spending policies and revenues of the Draft Budget separately I will now consider them together, in order to assess the uncertainty surrounding achievement of the deficit target of 1.3%. For this purpose, economists at the Banco de España have conducted a preliminary updating of the December projections, which I have already considered in detail. In particular, the impact on these projections of the revenue and spending measures that have been included in the Draft Budget since then is estimated, resulting in a general government deficit of around 2% of GDP in 2019, as compared with the Banco de España’s December projection of 2.4%. Moreover, the economic growth forecast would be revised down slightly, mainly as a result of incorporation of the impact of the tax measures.