ECB earns €555m on Greek bond holdings FT.com

Posted on by

ECB earns €555m on Greek bond holdings

By Michael Steen in Frankfurt

(FT) —The European Central Bank said it earned €555m last year on its holdings of Greek sovereign bonds that were bought during the crisis in an attempt to calm financial market fears of a break-up of the eurozone.

The bank also revealed for the first time that nearly half of its holdings in the so-called Securities Markets Programme are of Italian debt. At the end of 2012 it held €99bn in Italian sovereign bonds, €30.8bn in Greek debt, €43.7bn in Spanish paper, €21.6bn in Portuguese debt and €13.6bn in Irish bonds.

Remember this?

Core Europe Sitting Pretty in their PIIGS Drawn Chariot

By Marshall Auerback and Warren Mosler

October 3, 2011 — The refusal to countenance a Greek default is now said to be dragging the euro zone toward even greater crisis. Implicit in this view, of course, is the idea that the current “bailout” proposals are operationally unsustainable and will lead to a broader contagion which will ultimately afflict the pristine credit ratings of core countries such as Germany and France.

Well, we see a very different view emerging: The “solution” currently on offer – i.e. the talk surrounding the European Financial Stability Fund (EFSF) now includes suggestions of ECB backing. This makes eminent sense. Let’s be honest: the EFSF is a political fig-leaf. If 440 billion euros proves insufficient, as many now contend, the fund would have to be expanded and the money ultimately has to come from the ECB — the only entity that can create new net financial euro denominated assets — which means that Germany need no longer fret about being asked for ongoing lump sums to fund the EFSF in a way that would ultimately damage its triple AAA credit rating.

Despite public protestations to the contrary, it is beginning to look like the elders of the euro zone have begun to embrace the reality that, when push comes to shove, it is the ECB that must write the check, and that it can continue to do so indefinitely.

That means, for example, the ECB can buy sufficient quantities of Greek bonds in the secondary markets to allow Greece to fund itself in the short term markets at reasonable interest rates. And it gets even better than that for the ECB, as the ECB also substantially enhances its profitability by continuing to buy deeply discounted Greek bonds and using Greece’s income stream to build the ECB’s stated capital. As long as it continues to buy Greek debt, Greece remains solvent, and the ECB continues to increase its accrual of profits that flow to capital.

The logical conclusion of all of this is ECB ownership of most of Greece’s debt, with austerity measures imposed by the ECB steering the Greek budget to a primary surplus, along with sufficient taxation to keep the ECB’s capital on the rise, and help fund the ECB’s operating budget as well. Now add to that similar arrangements with Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy and it’s Mission Accomplished!

Mission Accomplished? Are we daring to suggest that the Fathers of the euro zone had exactly this in mind when they signed the Treaty of Maastricht?

Or, put it another way: it’s all so obvious, so how could they not have this mind?

So let’s take a quick look at the central bank accounting to see if this seemingly outrageous thesis has merit.

Here is what is actually happening. By design from inception, when the ECB undertakes its bond buying operation, the ECB debt purchases merely shift net financial assets held by the ‘economy’ from Greek government liabilities to ECB liabilities in the form of clearing balances at the ECB. While the Greek government liabilities shift from ‘the economy’ to the ECB. Note: this process does not alter any ‘flows’ or ‘net stocks of euros’ in the real economy.

And so as long as the ECB imposes austerian terms and conditions, their bond buying will not be inflationary. Inflation from this channel comes from spending. However, in this case the ECB support comes only with reduced spending via its imposition of fiscal austerity. And reduced spending means reduced aggregate demand, which therefore means reduced inflation and a stronger currency. All stated objectives of the ECB.

We would stress that this is NOT our PROPOSED solution to the euro zone crisis (see here and here for our proposals), but it is clearly operationally sustainable, it addresses the solvency issues, and puts the PIIGS before the cart, which at least has the appearance of putting them right where the core nations of the euro zone want them to be.

Additionally, the ECB now officially has stated it will provide unlimited euro liquidity to its banks. This, too, is now widely recognized as non-inflationary. Nor is it expansionary, as bank assets remain constrained by regulation including capital adequacy and asset eligibility, which is required for them to receive ECB support in the first place.

To reiterate, it is becoming increasingly clear, crisis by crisis, that with ECB support, the current state of affairs can be operationally sustained.

The problem, then, shifts to political sustainability, which is a horse of a different color. And here is where the Greeks (and the other PIIGS) paradoxically have the whip hand. So long as the Greeks continue to accept the austerity, they wind up being burdened by virtue of their funding of the ECB. The ECB takes in their income payments from the bonds, and the ECB alone ensures that Greece remains solvent. It’s a great deal for the ECB and the core countries, such as Germany, France and the Netherlands, as it costs the core’s national taxpayers nothing. And, as least so far, Greece thinks the ECB is doing them a favor by keeping them out of default. The question remains as to whether the Greeks will continue to suffer from this odd variant of Stockholm (Berlin?) Syndrome.

Perhaps not if some of the more recent proposals make headway. As an example of what might be in store for Greece, consider the “Eureca Project”, publicly mooted in the French press last week. In essence, it aims to reduce “Greek debt from 145% to 88% of GDP in one step” without default (so protecting all northern European banks); reduce ECB exposure to Greek debt (that is, force Greece to pay the ECB for the bonds it has purchased in secondary bond markets) and it claims that it will “kick-start the Greek economy and revive growth and job creation” and promote “structural reform.”

So how is it going to do all of that? Simple: engage in the biggest asset strip in history. The proposal in essence calls for a non-sovereign entity to take all the public assets – hand them over to a holding company funded by the EU which pays Greece who then pay off all it debtors. End of process – except that if it is implemented, the Greeks could well say “Stuff it. Let’s default and take our chances. At least we get to keep our national assets.” That’s the risk that is being run if the ECB and the economic moralists in Germany take this too far. If this proposal were accepted, the eurocrats would in fact have a failed nation state on their hands in 3 months time — in the eurozone, not the Mideast or Africa.

By contrast, the current arrangements seem tame in comparison. They obviate the solvency issue, but even here one wonders how much more can be inflicted on countries such as Greece. We stress that the current arrangements have OPERATIONAL sustainability, not necessarily POLITICAL sustainability. The near universally accepted austerity theme is likely to result in continuously elevated unemployment, and a large output gap in general characterized by a lagging standard of living and high personal stress in general. This creates huge systemic risk insofar as it might well make sense for Greece (and others) ultimately to reject this harsh imposition of austerity. But, so far so good for the core nations, as there appears to be no movement in that directions (except on the streets of Athens, rather than in the Greek Parliament).

By the ECB continuing to fund Greece, and not allowing Greece to default, but instead to continue to service its debt, the whole dynamic has changed from doing Greece a favor by not allowing Athens to default to disciplining Greece by not allowing the country to default. And while that’s what the Germans SEEMINGLY haven’t yet figured out, if one is to judge from the current debate, particularly in Germany itself, at the same time they have approved the latest package and are quickly moving in the direction we are suggesting. Note that Angela Merkel has been most adamant on the particular question of allowing Greece to default or allowing an “orderly restructuring.” It’s also worth noting that when the ECB funds Greece, that funding facilitates Greek purchases of German goods and services, including military, at no cost to the German taxpayer. In fact, Germany gets to run larger trade surpluses, which means by accounting identity it is able to run lower government budget deficits, which allows it to feel virtuous and continue its incessant economic moralizing.

So what’s in it for Germany? That should be obvious by now: Germany gets to export to Greece, and to control/impose austerity on Greece, which keeps the euro strong, interest rates in Germany low, and FUNDS the ECB. All in the name of punishing the Greeks for past sins. It doesn’t get any better than that for the core nations. It’s time for the Germans to stop pushing their luck. Rather, they should embrace the genius of one of the so-called southern profligates, Italy, as they have surely created an operationally sustainable doomsday machine of which Machiavelli himself would be proud. How could this not be the Founding Fathers’ dream come true?

The earnings on the Greek debt are particularly significant as there has been a political agreement to pay back profits made from holding the bonds to the Greek government. Because the bonds still pay interest and were bought at depressed prices, they yield a lot of interest.

The €555m compares with income of €654m in 2011 on Greek debt – also published on Thursday – but only represents the ECB’s share of the earnings, which is a combination of interest paid on the bond and a paper profit derived from amortising its value over time.

The Eurosystem as a whole, which comprises all 17 national central banks that work with the ECB, would have made a significantly larger amount on the Greek bond holdings.

The ECB, which declared a net profit of €998m for 2012, up from €728m the year before, pays its profits to the other Eurosystem central banks, which then declare their own profits before passing money to national governments. Only then can any declared profits on Greek bond holdings be returned to Athens.

Share

Former Fed economist on the QE tax

Posted on by

The fallacy of Fed ‘profits’ (and ‘losses’)

But for Bob Eisenbeis, a former Atlanta Fed economist now at Cumberland Advisors, any discussion about Fed “profits” is inherently deceptive. He explains in a research note:

That Fed remittances are considered profits is a total misrepresentation and a fiction. The Fed is part of the government and is not a private-sector, profit-making entity. (The Federal Reserve Banks are quasi-public, but the Board of Governors is a government agency, and the system’s debts are guaranteed by the government.)

The Fed purchases Treasury debt from the public, paying for that debt with deposits it creates by a stroke of the pen. Looking at the Fed’s portfolio of securities from the perspective of the nation’s consolidated balance sheet, we see that one form of government debt (Treasury debt) is taken out of circulation and replaced with another form of government debt (Federal Reserve liabilities).

In effect, Treasury debt is taken out of circulation and is now owned by the government. It just happens to be the debt is on the books of the Fed and not the Treasury, but that is simply an accounting artifact and effectively the debt has been retired. The Treasury pays the Fed interest, which is an intra-governmental transfer of funds. From the funds received from Treasury, the Fed extracts both its operating expenses and contributions to capital, makes the required 6% dividend payment to member banks, and remits the remainder back to the Treasury.

Share

Thaler’s Corner 19th Februaryy 2013: Positive Currency Wars!

Posted on by

The usual excellent post!

Positive Currency Wars!

19 February 2013


Financial markets are today being buffeted about by a slew of highly complex and changing influences. As readers may recall, at end-January (Thaler’s Corner 31/01: Too Cloudy), we advised people to favor Risk Off positions (references 2725 Euro Stoxx and 141.85 Bund), but this morning we returned to a neutralization of asset allocation biases (references 2635 and 142.85).

Not only do European markets seem to have lagged too far behind their American and Japanese peers, but, above all, I consider the current jitters about currency wars to be completely off the wall!

That said, there are still dark clouds hovering over Europe, mainly the eurozone, which is why we have yet to join the clan of the optimists.

Let us examine the macroeconomic situation area-by-area.

United States

The Fed is pursuing its easy money policies, the target QE, and I do not see them ending these policies any time soon. Despite the prevailing conventional wisdom, these policies are not boosting inflation at all, quite the contrary!

By continuously removing treasuries and MBS from the private sector via its QE asset-purchasing program and by replacing them with base money reserves, the Fed is in reality absorbing the interest that the private sector would have received on these bonds, as base money does not pay a coupon! The best illustration of the absorption carried out by the government is the amount of profits earned and transferred to the Treasury, a total of €335 billion since 2009!

This QE program functions like a tax, or more specifically, a savings tax somewhat like the French ISF or wealth tax (except that it is not at all progressive). It is nonetheless “progressive” in that it has helped the federal government, among others.

The 0% interest rate policy is certainly supposed to help reignite the American economy by making its easier for investment projects to achieve profitability, but at a time when the private sector feels overloaded with debt (deleveraging), its “inflationist” aspect is limited to the value of financial assets.

As long as US government budget policy remains frankly expansionist, with cumulative deficits totaling over $5 trillion since 2009, this deflationist aspect of the QE has little importance. However, not only have US budget deficits been trending downwards since 2009 (at a record high of $1.415 trillion), falling from 10.4% to 6.7% of GDP, but the latest budget measures raise concerns that the trend will accelerate.

In the first place, the hike in the payroll tax has had a direct impact on the American consumer. This 2% decrease in take-home income, for which employees were hardly prepared, led Wal-Mart Vice President Jerry Murray to declare February sales figures to be a “total disaster”:

“In case you haven’t seen a sales report these days, February MTD (month-to-date) sales are a total disaster. The worst start to a month I have seen in my seven years with the company. Where are all the customers? And where’s their money?”

Moreover, if sequester negotiations between Congress and the White House do not lead to a deal by the beginning of March, the ensuing decline in spending would represent about 1% of GDP and thus a new tightening of budget policy.

In contrast, the real estate market continues to give encouraging signs of a rebound. I will provide you the stats fresh February 22nd publication date.

The yen’s decline (currency wars) is a positive factor, which I will examine in the conclusion.

Europe

The eurozone is the world’s weakest economic zone, with the economic outlook as desperate as ever. The zone is suffering from an unfortunate mix of pro-cyclical budgetary policies and monetary policy, which refuses to use all the means available to counter recessive austerity.

Aside from their crazy devotion to Ricardian theories, supporters of “expansionist austerity” do not seem to take into account that the rare examples of such policies being successful are with very open small economies who, boasting their own currency, devalue their money and cut interest rates while defaulting on or restructuring foreign debt!

As for the distressed eurozone countries, which mainly trade with their neighbors, they not only lack their own currency and thus the possibility of devaluation, but also, in addition, suffer from a euro that remains high compared to the currencies of its trading partners!

And that’s leaving aside monetary policy and how its non-transmission to peripheral countries is making their economies even worse.

In addition, there are the problems specific to the zone, as exemplified by the Cypriot turmoil, the Italian elections, the protest movements in Spain and Portugal and the painful establishment of a common banking solution, etc.

But a ray of hope may be on the horizon, with the restructuring plan of the Promissory Notes just established by Ireland. Without going into the highly technical details, you can believe me when I say that this is the closest thing to fiscal financing ever carried out by a central bank on the eurozone or even in a developed country!

Quite simply, the Irish state has issued very long-term bonds, at very low interest rates, directly into the capital of the restructured bank, which then refinances it with the Irish central bank. The state thus skirts appealing to markets; this is monetary financing, albeit indirectly so. In any case, it would have had a hard time raising capital on such good terms with the public.

And Mario Draghi’s apparent nod to this operation, limiting himself to stating the ECB board had unanimous taken note of the deal, augurs well! We will not be surprized to hear the screams of alarm from Mr Weidmann and the Bundesbank, but they seem to have definitely lost control.

In short, while the euro’s rise is a drag on European exporters in the short term, reflecting more far more restrictive monetary and budgetary policies than those of our trading partners, this is also a case of the tree hiding the forest, as I will explain in the case of the Land of the Rising Sun.

Japan

This is where things are really going to play out!

The latest comments by Japanese government officials suggest that the next BoJ President will not only be a lot more dovish than his predecessors but that he will also work much more closely with the government.

Such coordination is absolutely necessary in times of deflation when the country has been faced with 0 Lower Bound for so many years. Check out the excellent paper written by Paul McCulley and Zoltan Pozsar on this topic in MG.

If a country in the midst of severe deflation/recession, like Japan, whose trade balance has deteriorated so abruptly since 2011, does not have the right to use all the tools at its disposal to pull itself out of this quagmire, who does?

I would farther than the prevailing discourse, with its focus on Japanese-style quantitative easing, and say flat out that the country should electronically print money!

Screams of a Weimer situation aside, such an approach would technically change little, since it would amount to injecting the budget deficit into the economy in the form of Monetary Financing instead of JGBs (Bonds Financing), which are nearly identical to cash (floor rate and possibility of going through the repo market).

In contrast, one thing is for sure: the fears generated by such an announcement would be enough to send the yen back to 110 vis-à-vis the dollar, which is in no way catastrophic. Bear in mind that this parity averaged 118.40 between the two shocks of 1987 and 2008!

These jitters would also fuel inflationist expectations, which is precisely the goal of a country in which the latest statistics show the economy stuck in deflation.

But the main reason I say that such a monetary and budgetary turnabout by Japan would be good for the rest of the world is that one of its main goals is to reignite domestic consumption, a natural corollary of easier monetary conditions and higher inflationist expectations.

And that would also benefit its foreign trading partners!

We are not witnessing so much a race to competitive devaluation (currency wars) as a race to more accommodative monetary policies, under the impulsion of the Fed and the BoJ, not to mention the BoE and the SNB, among others.

And all this will end up influencing the ECB, which, if it does not change its policies, will end up with a euro climbing toward 140 against the yen and 1.45 against the dollar. Let’s not forget that in 2007-2008, the euro was trading at 170 against the yen and 1.60 against the dollar, mainly due to the ECB’s intransigence, with the results we all know.

As Mr Draghi has declared that he will take the euro’s level into consideration, not as a target, but as a variable in monetary policy, we can only hope that it will continue to appreciate and thus force our central banks to carry out its own Copernican revolution and enter into concertation with the world’s central banks managing modern currencies.

In conclusion, thanks to these monetary hopes stemming from the Japanese initiatives, I have decided to put between parentheses the still heavy clouds, cited above, and advise clients this morning to abandon the Risk Off bias to capture profits offered by the last market shifts and to, at minimum, put ourselves in a position of maximum reactivity.

Share

Japan Trade Deficit Hits Record as Yen Inflates Imports

Posted on by

The old J curve as previously discussed.

Japan Trade Deficit Hits Record as Yen Inflates Imports: Economy

By James Mayger and Andy Sharp

Feb 20 (Bloomberg) — (Bloomberg) Japan’s trade deficit swelled to a record 1.63 trillion yen ($17.4 billion) on energy imports and a weaker yen, highlighting one cost of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s policies that are driving down the currency.

Exports climbed 6.4 percent in January from a year earlier, the first rise in eight months, exceeding the median 5.6 percent estimate in a Bloomberg News survey of 24 economists. Imports increased 7.3 percent, the Finance Ministry said in Tokyo today.

Share

Draghi on sector balances

Posted on by

The euro declined against the dollar on Monday after the European Central Bank President Mario Draghi said economic indicators signaled further weakness in the euro zone.

“Available indicators signal further weakness at the beginning of 2013, with domestic demand remaining dampened. This is due to weak consumer and investor sentiment and to the necessary balance sheet adjustments in both the public and private sectors. Foreign demand also remains subdued,” Draghi said in a statement before the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs in Brussels.

Public and private sectors to continue to deleverage?

Share
Posted in ECB

Lombard says unemployment could go over 8%

Posted on by

If I recall correctly this was/is a ‘monetarist’ shop? Nice to see them recognizing the role of fiscal policy to this extent.

Why Over 8% Unemployment Could Lie Ahead

By Matt Clinch

Feb 18 (CNBC) — Severe fiscal tightening in the U.S. will lead to no growth or a contraction in the first two quarters of 2013 and will push unemployment over the 8 percent level, according to Lombard Street Research.

The knock-on effect will mean pain for the business sector, with corporate profits falling after a hit to consumer spending power, the firm said.

“Our view that unemployment could rise above 8 percent and that profits will be squeezed reflects a forecast of nil to negative 2013 (first quarter) growth, and further stagnation in (the second quarter),” a Lombard Street report released on Friday said.

The view contrasts sharply with that of other analysts who are considerably more bullish on the U.S. economy.

Keith McCullough, CEO of Hedgeye Risk Management told CNBC last week that he thinks employment could actually improve below 7 percent by the fourth quarter, adding that from a housing and employment perspective U.S growth is “pretty solid”.

Lombard Street does not agree.

At the start of the year, the payroll tax that funds Social Security was raised two percentage points to its 2010 level of 6.2 percent. This was the largest component of tax increases approved by Congress in the resolution to the “fiscal cliff”.

Retail sales rose 0.1 percent in January, data released by the Commerce Department showed on Wednesday. These two events together should set alarms bells ringing as tax increases suggest a slowdown in the pace of consumer spending, Lombard Street said.

“Retail sales data encouraged the idea that the payroll tax hike from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent, worth 1 percent of personal disposable incomes, would pass off with little impact. But the effect of the payroll tax was only partly in January,” it said, indicating that only a modest impact would have been expected for January.

Monetary easing by the Federal Reserve provides few offsets to this drop in demand outside of the housing sector, according to Lombard Street.

“The contribution of housing growth to GDP (gross domestic product) has been about 0.4 percent and promises to continue; that of government spending has averaged -0.4 percent for the past three years, and could easily exceed this in (the first and second quarter),” it said.

This -0.4 percent contribution that the research firm cite is set to be complicated further with extra spending cuts after the “fiscal cliff” resolution and the sequestration – a deadline for automatic government spending cuts – due to kick in on March 1.

“Our assumption is that the sequestration is canceled in favor of further cuts in a new provision. But this means the contribution from public spending to GDP growth could well be more negative than the past -0.4 percent,” Lombard said.

“In February the full effect of the payroll tax hike will be reflected in disposable income, and the initial savings “cushion” is likely to give way, so real consumer spending could be down.”

This real consumer spending could be down by more than 2 percent (annualized), it said, with little recovery in March. Thus for the first quarter a dip of 1.5 percent on an annual rate should be expected, contributing -0.1 to GDP growth.

Inventory building and capital expenditure could prove positive factors on that figure, hence its forecasts that GDP could be flat to slightly down for the first quarter and remain stagnant for the second quarter. Along with the last quarter being negative, three straight quarters of zero growth will lead to a rise in the unemployment rate, the firm said.

“Given underlying labor force growth of about 1 percent, this would add 0.7-0.8 percent to the unemployment rate, which was 7.9 percent in January. Even a less pessimistic view of (first quarter) and (second quarter) would send unemployment over 8 percent,” it said.

The chief risk to the stock market is that a reduction of the budget deficit is likely to be offset largely by cuts in the business sector’s surplus, Lombard said, meaning a hit to corporate profits.

However, this might be considered to be a contrarian view with some seeing U.S. growth stabilizing in 2013.

Fed chief Bernanke has previously said that interest rates will be kept low until the unemployment rate reaches 6.5 percent. At the current rate of 150,000 jobs created every month, and 110,000 new entrants to the labor force, that will be around January 2017.

Share

G-20 seeks to allay fear of currency war – latimes.com

Posted on by

They don’t even know if they want their currencies to be strong or weak. But they want them ‘free floating’, whatever that means.

Last I heard, for example, the US wanted a strong dollar, and at the same time wanted China to move their currency higher vs the dollar.

Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways!

G-20 seeks to allay fear of currency war

Share