People’s Republic of China, 2019), but as of the time of writing has not yet published specific DSAs for the countries to which it lends, hence we are still unable to evaluate China’s DSA. Given China’s growth as a lender, it will not be surprising if it continues developing frameworks for the implementation of its debt policies, just as the IMF does on a regular basis. If China becomes the largest lender of countries in debt distress, Chinese authorities may wonder why their country needs to follow the rules determined by Western nations. The IMF is the main player for conducting DSAs and it is usually the only actor to do so. The IMF DSA, launched in 2002, is a tool for the Fund’s lending policy. 8 The IMF produces DSAs either as part of routine surveillance of its member countries through their Article IV consultations, or in the context of its financing programs. While some define the IMF DSA as a strictly technical tool to mediate over the conflicts that arise in debt crises, in practice it is hard(or virtually impossible) to immunize the IMF DSA from the influence of the interests represented by the Fund’s shareholders, which often represent special interests within the creditor countries, such as those of the American financial sector, when those interests benefit from bailouts financed by IMF financing or from the IMF conditionalities in IMF-financed programs. The IMF has two frameworks for assessing debt sustainability: one for low-income countries, the IMF-WB Low Income Countries(LIC) debt sustainability framework(DSF), which is mostly focused on external debt sustainability(LICs are the countries that usually meet their external financings needs through concessional resources) and is also used by the World Bank. The other DSA framework is for“market-access countries (MAC).” The MAC framework, which applies to the countries that have access to international private credit markets(or have had it in the past, with the IMF-financed program designed to restore access) and is more focused on fiscal(public debt) sustainability. For the IMF, a public debt is sustainable when the government is able to meet all its current and future payment obligations without exceptional financial assistance, e.g. funds from the IMF(Hakura, 2020). The lines between the two frameworks are at times blurred. The LIC framework has been applied to countries that have had more market access than some other countries covered by the MAC framework. For example, Ghana’s latest DSA was done using the LIC framework, and Sri Lanka’s latest DSA was done using the MAC framework(Maret and Setser, 2023). According to its Articles of Agreement, the IMF should not lend to countries whose debt is not sustainable now or whose future sustainability is at high risk. The IMF’s disbursements are supposed to be linked to debt restructurings with the country’s private or official bilateral creditors if debt is not sustainable. In debt restructuring cases under an IMF arrangement, the IMF’s DSA is used to identify the amount of debt relief needed. 8. Five issues with the IMF’s DSA practice 8.1 Having an IMF DSA undertaken and published The common practice is that sovereign debt restructurings occur in the context of a program with the IMF. However, a country might well choose to restructure without having a program with the IMF. In fact, under certain circumstances, a restructuring could provide enough relief to restore the financing conditions for countercyclical macroeconomic policies. An example of this kind was Argentina’s 2001 debt crisis resolution(cf. Damill, Frenkel, and Rapetti(2015); Guzman, 2020). 8 For an analysis of the history of the IMF DSA, see Laskaridis(2021). Series: Debt Sustainability Assessments& Their Role in the International Financial Architecture 8