foreign dollar buying


[Skip to the end]

The possibility of announcing an exit from Afghanistan with the funds saved to pay down the deficit would be extremely popular short term and contribute to lower GDP and higher levels of unemployment over the medium term.

Those shorting dollars are selling them to foreign central banks who want their currencies weaker vs the dollar. This means it is unlikely they ever sell their dollars.

Float to lower crude prices and modestly declining us gasoline consumption would threaten the viability of the dollar shorts.

Much of this has been a reaction to the fed building its portfolio, which many presume to be an inflationary act of ‘printing money’ which it is, in fact, not.


Dollar Overwhelms Central Banks From Brazil to Korea

By Oliver Biggadike and Matthew Brown

Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) — Brazil, South Korea and Russia are losing the battle among developing nations to reduce gains in their currencies and keep exports competitive as the demand for their financial assets, driven by the slumping dollar, is proving more than central banks can handle.

South Korea Deputy Finance Minister Shin Je Yoon said yesterday the country will leave the level of its currency to market forces after adding about $63 billion to its foreign exchange reserves this year to slow the appreciation of the won. Chile Finance Minister Andres Velasco said the same day that lawmakers approved an increase in local debt sales to finance spending, a move that will allow the government to keep more of its dollar-based savings overseas and slow the peso’s rally.

Governments are amassing record foreign-exchange reserves as they direct central banks to buy dollars in an attempt to stem the greenback’s slide and keep their currencies from appreciating too fast and making their exports too expensive. Half of the 10-best performers in the currency market this year came from developing markets, gaining at least 14 percent on average, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

“It looked for a while like the Bank of Korea was trying to defend 1,200, but it looks like they’ve given up and are just trying to slow the advance,” said Collin Crownover, head of currency management in London at State Street Global Advisors, which has $1.7 trillion under management.

The won, after falling 44 percent against the dollar in March 2009 from its 10-year high of 899.69 to the dollar in October 2007, is now headed for its biggest annual rally since a 15 percent gain in 2004. It traded today at 1,160.32, up 8.6 percent since the end of December.

‘Suffered Tremendously’

Brazil’s real is up 1.6 percent this month, even after imposing a tax in October on foreign stock and bond investments and increasing foreign reserves by $9.5 billion in October in an effort to curb the currency’s appreciation. The real has risen 33 percent this year.

“We have to be careful that our exchange rate doesn’t appreciate too much as to deindustrialize the country,” Marcos Verissimo, chief of staff at Brazil’s state development bank known as BNDES, said yesterday at a conference in Sao Paulo. “The capital goods industry has suffered tremendously.”

Russia’s Bank Rossii increased its foreign reserves by 15 percent since March 13 as it sold rubles in an attempt to cap the currency’s gain. Even so, the surge in commodities prices this year means Russia’s steps to fight a stronger ruble may “not be productive,” the International Monetary Fund said yesterday. Energy, including oil and natural gas, accounted for 69.5 percent of exports to countries outside the former Soviet Union and the Baltic states in the first nine months, according the Federal Customs Service.


[top]

Carry trade


[Skip to the end]

The article completely misses the point.

There is no ‘cash pouring into’ anything.

Nor is there a constraint on lending/deposits in any non convertible currency.

It is not a matter of taking funds from one currency and giving them to another.

There is no such thing.

Yes, the interest rate differential may be driving one currency high in the near term (not the long term) due to these portfolio shifts.

But the nation with the currency seeing the appreciation has the advantage, not the other way around.

Imports are the real benefits, exports the real costs, which the author of this piece has backwards.

The nation with the stronger currency is experiencing improving real terms of trade- more imports in exchange for fewer exports.

The most common way to realize this benefit is for the government to use the currency strength to accumulate foreign currency reserves by ‘pegging’ its currency to sustain it’s exports. This results in the same real terms of trade plus foreign exchange accumulation which can be of some undetermined future real benefit.

Better still, however, is cut taxes (or increase govt. spending, depending on your desired outcome) and sustain domestic demand, employment, and output, so now the domestic population has sufficient spending power to buy all that can be produced domestically at full employment, plus anything the rest of the world wants to net export to you.

Unfortunately those pesky deficit myths always seem to get in the way of anyone implementing that policy, as evidenced by this
article below and all of the others along the same lines. Comments in below:

>   
>   Steve Keen pointed me to it. Talks about the carry trade in US$ over to AUD$.
>   There are not Federal unsecured swap lines, would be interested in your take.
>   

Foreign speculation on our currency is a bubble set to burst

By Kenneth Davidson

Oct. 26 (National Times) — The pooh-bahs running US and British hedge funds and the banks supporting them are more than capable of reading the minutes of the Reserve Bank of Australia board meetings and coming to the conclusion that RBA Governor Glenn Stevens is committed to pushing up the cash rate from the present 3.25 per cent to 4 to 5 per cent if necessary.

And they are already betting tens of billions of dollars on what has so far been a sure bet.

But is always high risk, and not permitted for US banks by our regulators, though no doubt some gets by.

These foreign financial institutions are up to their old tricks. After getting trillions of dollars out of their respective governments to avoid GFC-induced bankruptcy – which was largely engineered by their criminal greed – because they are ”too big to fail”, they are already using their influence to maintain ”business as usual”.
Why funnel the money gouged out of American and British taxpayers into lending to their national economies to maintain employment when there are richer pickings elsewhere?

As above, these transactions directly risk shareholder equity. The govt. is not at risk until after private capital has been completely eliminated.

Two of those destinations are Brazil and Australia. Their resource-rich economies are still doing well compared with most other countries because they are riding in the slipstream of the strong demand for commodities from China and India.

Cash is pouring into these economies, not for development, but to speculate on the local currency and the sharemarket. The rising value of the Brazilian real and the Australian dollar against the US dollar has had a disastrous impact on both countries’ non-commodity export and import competing industries.

Yes, except to be able to export less and import more is a positive shift in real terms of trade, and a benefit to the real standard of living.

Brazil’s popular and largely economically successful left-wing Government led by President Lula da Silva is meeting the problem head on. It has decided to impose a 2 per cent tax on all capital inflows to stop the real appreciating further.

Instead, it could cut taxes to sustain full employment if that’s the risk they are worried about.

Arguably, the monetary strategy adopted by Stevens has compounded Australia’s lack of international competitiveness for our manufacturing and service industries, especially tourism. Since the end of 2008 our dollar has appreciated 27 per cent (as of last week). This means that financial institutions that invested money at the beginning of January are enjoying an annual rate of return on their investments of 35 per cent.

Tourism is an export industry. Instead of working caring for tourists a nation is better served taking care of its people’s needs.
And those profits are from foreign capital paying ever higher prices for the currency.

US and British commercial banks can borrow from their central banks at a rate less than 1 per cent. The equivalent RBA rate is 3.25 per cent and many pundits are forecasting the rate could go to 3.75 per cent before the end of 2009. This will increase the differential between Australian and British and US interest rates and make the scope for speculative profits even higher.

They are risking their shareholder’s capital if they do that, not their govt’s money, at least not until all the private equity is lost.
And the regulators are supposed to be on top of that.

Since the beginning of the year, $64 billion has poured into Australia in the form of direct and portfolio (share) investment and foreign lenders have switched $80 billion of foreign debt payable in foreign currencies to Australian currency. Most of the portfolio investment ($41 billion) has gone into bank shares. Banks now represent 40 per cent of the value of shares traded on the stock exchange, and while shares in the big four bank shares have increased by about 80 per cent (as measured by CBA shares), the Australian Stock Exchange Index has risen by only 30 per cent.

When anyone buys shares someone sells them. There are no net funds ‘going into’ anything.

Also, portfolio mangers do diversify globally, and I’d guess a lot of managers went to higher levels of cash last year, and much of this is the reversal. And it’s also likely, for example, that Australian managers have increased their holdings of foreign securities as well.

Foreigners have shifted out of Australian fixed interest debt and into equities because as interest rates go up, the capital value of fixed debt declines. By driving up interest rates to curb inflationary expectations and the prospect of a housing price bubble the RBA is in far greater danger of creating a stock exchange asset price bubble as well as an Australian dollar bubble. Once foreigners believe interest rates have peaked, the bubbles are likely to be pricked as financial speculators attempt to realise their gains. This could lead to a stampede out of Australian denominated securities.

Markets do fluctuate for all kinds of reasons, both short term and long term. The Australian dollar has probably reacted more to resource prices than anything else. But again, the issue is real terms of trade, and domestic output and employment.

With unemployment expected to continue to rise, and the level of unemployment disguised by growing numbers of workers being forced to work part-time, there is little chance of the underlying inflation rate, already below 2 per cent, increasing as a result of a wages break-out. The last wages breakout (leaving aside the explosive growth in executive salaries in the past three decades) occurred in 1979.

This gives the govt. cause to increase domestic demand with fiscal adjustments, including Professor Bill Mitchell’s ‘Job Guarantee’ proposal which is much like my federally funded $8/hr job for anyone willing and able to work proposal.

The world has moved on but the obsessive debate about wage inflation and union powers hasn’t. Since the beginning of the ’80s, the problem has been periodic bouts of asset price inflation. It is the biggest danger now.

Instead of controlling the unions, there should be control of financial institutions. The Australian dollar bubble and the incipient housing bubble should be micro-managed. Capital inflow could be dampened by a compulsory deposit of 1 to 2 per cent to be redeemed after a year to stop speculative inflow. Home ownership has become a tax shelter. The steam could be taken out of the rise in house prices if negative gearing was limited to new housing. This would obviate the need for higher interest rates that affect everyone.

The Job Guarantee offers a far superior price anchor vs our current use of unemployment as a price anchor. Also, I strongly suspect that the mainstream has it wrong, and that it is lower rates that are deflationary.


[top]

Brazil


[Skip to the end]

Rates high, deficit up, state sponsored lending that’s functionally a fiscal transfer more than making up for the drop in private sector lending.

Looks good!

Brazil:

Rates: Currently at 8.75%. Down from cycle high of 13.75% in January 2009.

Deficit: Currently at 3.4% of GDP. Largest since December 2006.

Brazilian Development Bank Lending has been instrumental in increasing credit.

In May 2009, the government also lowered to a record 6 percent the long-term interest rate charged by the BNDES state development bank for lending that, with private credit tight, it plans to expand 30 percent to 120 billion reais ($70 bln) this year.

Total domestic credit has grown 21% y/y as of July

Private sector bank lending has fallen 11% y/y

Public sector bank lending has jumped 40% y/y.

Foreign Direct Investment fell off sharply in 2009 and should return roughly to 2007 levels in 2010.


[top]

LatAm News


[Skip to the end]

In general, Latin America seems to continue to be doing the right thing with fiscal policy including state sponsored lending and finance programs that are quasi fiscal transfers as well.

Highlights

Brazil’s August Retail Sales Rise 4.7% From Year-Ago
Brazil to Extend Tax Cut on Appliance Purchases, Folha Says
Peru GDP Will Rebound Stronger Than Peers, Morgan Stanley Says
Chilean Banks Relax Credit Conditions in 3Q, Central Bank Says


[top]

Fate of the US Dollar?


[Skip to the end]

I think they want to accumulate financial assets and would like to get a currency they could feel good about to do that.

And at the same time they want to net export.

The only way they could do that is to somehow ‘force’ us to borrow their new currency in order for us to net import from them.

It would be easier for them to instead come up with an inflation index and only sell their exports in exchange for financial assets linked to their new inflation index. As long as the financial assets are linked to their index the currency of denomination isn’t critical. But credit worthiness would be critical.

>   
>   (email exchange)
>   
>>   The following was printed in the Independent in the UK. Doesn’t this move
>>   threaten the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency?
>   

Doesn’t matter what anything is ‘priced in’ as that is just a numeraire. What matters is what the ‘save in’ which determines trade flows.

>   
>   Interesting. A political move.
>   Seems a clumsy project though: they need to find a name for this ‘basket
>   currency’ (petrodollar?) and then accept payments in any ‘real’ currency
>   equivalent to the value of the ‘petrodollar’ at the time of payment.
>   Possible that all will continue to use dollars for payment.
>   Economic consequences will depend on whether this has any effect on the
>   willingness of foreigners to hold the given amount of dollars they own.
>   

>>   
>>   â€œIn the most profound financial change in recent Middle East history, Gulf
>>   Arabs are planning – along with China, Russia, Japan and France to end
>>   dollar dealings for oil, moving instead to a basket of currencies including
>>   the Japanese yen and Chinese yuan, the euro, gold and a new, unified
>>   currency planned for nations in the Gulf Co-operation Council, including
>>   Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar. Secret meetings have already
>>   beenheld by finance ministers and central bank governors in Russia, China,
>>   Japan and Brazil to work on the scheme, which will mean that oil will no
>>   longer be priced in dollars.”
>>   


[top]

OECD Calls an End to the Global Recession


[Skip to the end]

Guess it wasn’t as bad as most of the doomsday crowd thought?

They never give sufficient credit to the automatic stabilizers and fiscal policy in general.

I suppose that were understood there would have been a policy response at least a year ago to avert the damage that resulted by their lack of appropriate action.

Nor is a double dip out of the question, with proposals to tighten fiscal looming and interest rates very low.

OECD calls an end to the global recession

By David Prosser

September 12 (The Independent) — The global downturn was effectively declared over yesterday, with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) revealing that “clear signs of recovery are now visible” in all seven of the leading Western economies, as well as in each of the key “Bric” nations.

The OECD’s composite leading indicators suggest that activity is now improving in all of the world’s most significant 11 economies – the leading seven, consisting of the US, UK, Germany, Italy, France, Canada and Japan, and the Bric nations of Brazil, Russia, India and China – and in almost every case at a faster pace than previously.

Composite Leading Indicators point to broad economic recovery

September 11 (OECD) — OECD composite leading indicators (CLIs) for July 2009 show stronger signs of recovery in most of the OECD economies. Clear signals of recovery are now visible in all major seven economies, in particular in France and Italy, as well as in China, India and Russia. The signs from Brazil, where a trough is emerging, are also more encouraging than in last month’s assessment.


[top]

China’s Commodity Stockpiles Prompt Market Concerns, Hands-on China Report, Jing Ulrich


[Skip to the end]

Looks like they are running their own passive commodity fund for a portion of their reserves!

China’s Commodity Stockpiles Prompt Market Concerns

By Jing Ulrich

Following record inflows of base metals, iron ore, crude oil and coal this year, investors are questioning whether the surge in imports of industrial commodities reflects a recovery in end-demand or excessive stockpiling. Imports of most base metals have softened month-on-month, reflecting an end to government stockpiling and rising domestic production – but remained high by historical standards in July. With current stockpiles at elevated levels for major industrial commodities, there is some near-term risk that a turn in market sentiment could trigger destocking by speculative traders and merchants, bringing continued price weakness.

– Iron ore inventories at major Chinese ports have surpassed last year’s peak at 76.5mn tons, equivalent to about 1 month of consumption. Steelmakers’ iron ore inventories are estimated at 30-40mn tons. Spot iron ore vessel bookings from Australia and Brazil to China have declined to a 9-month low, reflecting ample stocks and the recent slump in steel prices.

– China’s crude steel output reached an all-time record in early August. With major mills running near full capacity, overproduction is the primary reason for the recent price weakness. Steel inventories at the traders’ level have risen 21% since June, suggesting that inventory destocking could continue to weigh on steel prices.

– China’s coal imports totaled 62.2mn tons from Jan-Jul, compared to 40.8mn tons in FY08, while inventory at China’s main coal port is down 7.5% from a month earlier and 29% from July’s peak. Higher imported coal prices and the restructuring of smaller mines in recent months should result in lower imports going forward.

– Surging imports of iron ore and other bulk commodities increased demand for capesize ships earlier in the year, boosting the Baltic Dry Index. However, expectations of some moderation in China’s appetite for iron ore have contributed to a correction of 44% since early-June, to a level of ~2400 since late-August. Freight rates may remain under pressure due to overcapacity in dry bulk shipping.

– China’s crude oil imports jumped 42% YoY in July to reach a record 4.6 million bpd (19.6 mt) level. Although the government’s expansion of strategic petroleum reserves, may occasionally bolster monthly imports, higher oil imports primarily reflect the demand recovery.

– According to Chalco, aluminum inventories held by traders and warehouses amount to 500,000-600,000 tons, and industry oversupply is expected to last for 3 years.

The attached note provides an update of inventory, production and demand conditions for major industrial commodities.


[top]

Brazil Lula Vetoes Spending Limits for 2010 Budget, Estado Says


[Skip to the end]

Brazil seems to be catching on?

Brazil Lula Vetoes Spending Limits for 2010 Budget, Estado Says

August 14 (Bloomberg) — Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva vetoed 20 items in the guidelines for next year’s budget that sought to curtail government spending on public
works, O Estado de S. Paulo said.

Lula also vetoed a measure that would have limited the government’s ability to increase investment under its so-called Growth Acceleration Program, which is comprised of infrastructure spending on ports, roads and energy projects, the Sao Paulo-based newspaper reported, citing the official gazette.


[top]

U.S. Federal Reserve Extends Swap Line with Brazil Central Bank


[Skip to the end]

Wonder if they’ve used it?

In my humble opinion lending them $30 billion unsecured is a high risk proposition.

U.S. Federal Reserve Extends Swap Line With Brazil Central Bank

June 25 (Bloomberg) — Brazil’s central bank said today it
has extended an agreement to access up to $30 billion from the
U.S. Federal Reserve as part of a coordinated international
effort to shore up shaky financial markets.


[top]

Nonsense from Wells Fargo


[Skip to the end]

Please send this on to Eugenio Aleman at Wells Fargo

Thinking The Unthinkable: The Treasury Black Swan, And The LIBOR-UST Inversion

Posted by Tyler Durden

>   The below piece is a good analysis of a hypothetical Treasury/Dollar black swan
>   event, courtesy of Eugenio Aleman from, surprisngly, Wells Fargo. Eugenio does
>   the classic Taleb thought experiment: what happens if the unthinkable become
>    not just thinkable, but reality. Agree or disagree, now that we have gotten to
>   a point where 6 sigma events are a daily ocurrence, it might be prudent to
>   consider all the alternatives.

In previous reports, I have touched upon the concerns I have regarding the overstretching of the federal government as well as of monetary policy while the Federal Reserve tries to maintain its independence and its ability, or willingness, to dry the U.S. economy of the current excess liquidity.

Excess reserves are functionally one day Treasury securities.
It’s a non issue.

Furthermore, we heard this week the Fed Chairman’s congressional testimony on the perils of excessive fiscal deficits and the effects these deficits are having on interest rates at a time when the Federal Reserve is intervening in the economy to try to keep interest rates low.

His thinking is still on the gold standard in too many ways.

Now, what I call “thinking the unthinkable” is what if, because of all these issues, individuals across the world start dumping U.S. dollar notes, i.e., U.S. dollar bills?

The dollar would go down for a while.
Prices of imports would go up.
Exports would go up for a while

All assuming the other nations would let their currencies appreciate and let their exporters lose their hard won US market shares, which is certainly possible, though far from a sure thing.

Why? Because one of the advantages the U.S. Federal Reserve has over almost all of the rest of the world’s central banks is that there seems to be an almost infinite demand for U.S. dollars in the world, which has made the Federal Reserve’s job a lot easier than that of other central banks, even those from developed countries.

In what way? They set rates, that’s all. It’s no harder or easier for the Fed than any other central bank.

if there is a massive run against the U.S. dollar across the world then the Federal Reserve will have to sell U.S. Treasuries to exchange for those U.S. dollars being returned to the country, which means that the U.S. Federal debt and interest payments on that debt will increase further.

Not true. First, they have a zero rate policy anyway so they can just sit as excess reserves should anyone deposit them in a bank account, and earn 0. Or they can hold the cash and earn 0.

This means that we will go from paying nothing on our “currency” loans to having to pay interest on those U.S. Treasuries that will be used to sterilize the massive influx of U.S. dollar bills into the U.S. economy, putting further pressure on interest rates.

No treasuries have to sold to sterilize anything.
A little knowledge about monetary operations would go a long way towards not letting this nonsense be published in respectable forums.

If we add the nervousness from Chinese officials regarding U.S. debt issues, then we understand the reason why we had Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner in China last week “calming” Chinese officials concerned with the massive U.S. fiscal deficits. I remember similar trips from the Bush administration’s Treasury officials pleading with Chinese officials for them to continue to buy GSEs (Freddie Mac and Freddie Mae) paper just before the financial markets imploded.

Yes, they have it wrong, and it’s making the administration negotiate from a perceived position of weakness while the Chinese and others take us for fools.

But the situation today is even more delicate because of the impressive amounts of U.S. Treasuries s we will have to issue during the next several years in order to pay for all the programs we have put together to minimize the fallout from this crisis.

Issuing Treasuries does not pay for anything. Spending pays for things, and spending is not operationally constrained by revenues.

The Treasuries issued support interest rates. They don’t ‘provide’ funds.

Furthermore, if China and other countries do not keep buying U.S. Treasuries, then interest rates are going to skyrocket.

There’s some hard scientific analysis. They go to the next highest bidder. The funds to pay for the securities come from government spending/Fed lending, so by definition the funds are always there and the term structure of rates is a matter of indifference levels predicated on future fed rate decisions.

This is one of the reasons why Bernanke was so adamant against fiscal deficits in his latest congressional appearance.

And because on a gold standard deficits can be deadly and cause default. He’s still largely in that paradigm that’s long gone.

Of course, the U.S. government knows that the Chinese are in a very difficult position: if they don’t buy U.S. Treasuries, then the Chinese currency is going to appreciate against the U.S. dollar and thus Chinese exports to the U.S., and consequently, Chinese economic growth will falter.

Yes, as I indicated above.

The U.S. and China are like Siamese twins joined at the chest and sharing one heart. This is something that will probably keep Chinese demand for Treasuries elevated during the next several years. However, this is not a guarantee, especially if the Chinese recovery is temporary and they have to keep on spending resources on more fiscal stimulus rather than on buying U.S. Treasuries.

Again, this shows no understanding of monetary operations and reserve accounting. The last two are not operationally or logically connected.

Thus, my perspective for the U.S. dollar is not very good. And now comes the caveat. Having said this, what is the next best thing? Hugo Chavez’s Venezuelan peso? Putin’s Russian rubble? The Iranian rial? The Chinese renminbi? Kirchner’s Argentine peso? Lula da Silva’s Brazilian real? That is, the U.S. dollar is still second to none!


[top]