QE still driving portfolio shifting

I’ve been watching for a ‘buy the rumor sell the news’ ‘risk off’ reversal, but it happened at best only momentarily after the Fed announcement, when the 10 year tsy note dipped to maybe 2.62 very briefly, stocks dipped, the dollar sort of held, gold was off a touch, etc. But now it looks like it’s ‘risk back on’ with a vengeance as both believers in QE and those who believe others believe in QE are piling on.

The fact remains that QE does nothing apart from alter the term structure of rates.

There are no ‘quantity’ effects, though from the following article and market reactions much of the world still believes there are substantial quantity effects.

And what we are seeing are the effects of ongoing portfolio shifting and trading based on the false notions about QE.

To review,

QE is not ‘money printing’ of any consequence. It just alters the duration of outstanding govt liabilities which alters the term structure of risk free rates.

QE removes some interest income from the economy which the Fed turns over to the Tsy. This works against ‘earnings’ in general.

QE alters the discount rates that price assets, helping valuations.

Japan has done enough QE to keep 10 year jgb’s below 1%, without triggering inflation or supporting aggregate demand in any meaningful way. Japan’s economy remains relatively flat, even with substantial net exports, which help domestic demand, a policy to which we are now aspiring.

QE does not increase commodity consumption or oil consumption.

QE does not provide liquidity for the rest of the world.

QE does cause a lot of portfolio shifting which one way or another is functionally ‘getting short the dollar’

This is much like what happened when panicked money paid up to move out of the euro, driving it briefly down to 118, if I recall correctly.

No telling how long this QE ride will last.

What’s reasonably certain is the Fed will do what it can to keep rates low until it looks like it’s meeting at least one of its dual mandates.

Asians Gird for Bubble Threat, Criticize Fed Move

By Michael Heath

November 4 Bloomberg) — Asia-Pacific officials are preparing
for stronger currencies and asset-price inflation as they blamed
the U.S. Federal Reserve’s expanded monetary stimulus for
threatening to escalate an inflow of capital into the region.

Chinese central bank adviser Xia Bin said Fed quantitative
easing is “uncontrolled” money printing,
and Japan’s Prime
Minister Naoto Kan cited the U.S. pursuing a “weak-dollar
policy.”
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority warned the city’s
property prices could surge and Malaysia’s central bank chief
said nations are prepared to act jointly on capital flows.

“Extra liquidity due to quantitative easing will spill
into Asian markets,”
said Patrick Bennett, a Hong Kong-based
strategist at Standard Bank Group Ltd. “It will put increased
pressure on all currencies to appreciate, the yuan in particular

has been appreciating at a slower rate than others.”

The International Monetary Fund last month urged Asia-
Pacific nations to withdraw policy stimulus to head off asset-
price pressures, as their world-leading economies draw capital
because of low interest rates in the U.S. and other advanced
countries. Today’s reactions of regional policy makers reflect
the international ramifications of the Fed’s decision yesterday
to inject $600 billion into the U.S. economy.

NYFed

Good find!

I recommended this years ago when Karim first introduced me to his Treasury contacts.
It moved forward and was passed around for discussion, but the dealers quashed it.

An unlimited lending program could replace much of the generic libor swap market.

Wish they would revisit it.

Why Is the U.S. Treasury Contemplating Becoming a Lender of Last Resort for Treasury Securities?

“A backstop lending facility turns this understanding on its head: the Treasury would be issuing securities not because it needs cash, but because market participants need securities.”

They don’t notice a difference between gold standard and “modern money”, actually they draw a parallel:

“… the markets for borrowing and lending Treasury securities in the 21st century are broadly analogous to the 19th century market for borrowing and lending money. Dealers and other market participants today have short-term liabilities denominated in Treasury notes; 19th century banks had deposit liabilities. Additionally, there is limited elasticity in the supply of individual Treasury securities today, just as there was limited elasticity in the supply of base money in the 19th century. A backstop securities lending facility would enhance the elasticity of supply of Treasury securities in the same way that the Federal Reserve Banks enhanced the elasticity of currency a century ago. It would mitigate chronic settlement fails, just as the Federal Reserve System mitigated suspensions of convertibility of bank deposits.”

They don’t discuss interest on reserves (and they should, these being functionally equivalent to Tsy securities).

China wanting to buy TIPS


[Skip to the end]

This is another blunder by the Obama administration due to not understanding the monetary system.

We don’t need China or any other investor to ‘buy the debt’ yet we think we do and think they are in a position to ‘demand’ anything.

Issuing/selling CPI indexed govt debt is functionally external debt. With we owe ‘real’ wealth rather than strictly nominal wealth, and are subject to nearly the same risks as if we were borrowing real goods and services and had to pay them back in kind.

The lack of understanding of the monetary system is getting more costly by the day.

U.S., in Nod to China, to Sell More TIPS

By Rob Copeland and Maya Jackson Randall

August 6 (WSJ) — The Treasury Department, responding to growing demand from China and other investors, will boost the sale of inflation-protected bonds that hold their value as consumer prices rise.

“We continue to hear growing demand for the product,” Treasury Deputy Assistant Secretary for Federal Financing Matt Rutherford said at a news conference announcing the plan on Wednesday.

The decision to increase sales of Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities, or TIPS, is part of a broader effort to ensure there is enough demand for Treasury bonds to help the U.S. finance its swelling budget deficit. The Treasury already has issued a record amount of debt in the past year, and the department said Wednesday it will sell a record $75 billion next week.

In particular, Treasury officials need to ensure demand from China, the largest holder of U.S. government debt. Last week’s auctions of fixed-rate notes saw lukewarm demand from China and other investors. Chinese officials had indicated they want inflation-protected securities, especially as the U.S. economy starts to recover.

“Inflation is the No. 1 worry,” said Marc Chandler, global head of currency strategy for Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. “This is the government saying, ‘We will take that inflation risk away from you.'”

Even with an increase, TIPS would remain a fraction of the overall market for Treasurys. Of the $6.66 trillion of government bonds issued between Oct. 1, 2008 and June 30 of this year, just $44 billion were TIPS.

The Treasury could easily sell as much as $10 billion more, said Jeffrey Elswick, director of fixed income at Frost Investment Advisors LLC. But those extra sales mightn’t be such great news for existing owners of inflation-protected notes. If the Treasury continues to ramp up TIPS sales, it will “cheapen” the bonds of existing investors, said Don Martin, a financial planner with Mayflower Capital in Los Altos, Calif.

The value of the securities fell after the announcement, sending the gap between TIPS and comparable nominal notes to a two-month high. The gap ended at 1.93 percentage points, signaling that investors expect annualized inflation of 1.93% over the next decade.

The Treasury also said it may issue 30-year TIPS in place of 20-year TIPS.


[top]

Nikkei News: China exporting inflation to Japan


[Skip to the end]

Cliff Viner writes:

This is important. We’ve mentioned it before. And although the article is about Japan, it applies to many of China’s other export markets.

Yes, the whole global backdrop shifted from a deflationary to an inflationary bias over the last couple of years.

Also, with all of our outsourcing, these imports costs or some extent replace what was unit labor costs in previous cycle.

So in that sense, labor costs are rising faster than our domestic labor numbers indicate.

China Switches From Deflation Exporter To Inflation Exporter

(Nikkei) The prices of Chinese goods are rising in Japan, with sharp increases hitting anything from clothing to audio equipment. If the rise persists, China, which has long underpinned Japan’s steady price structure with its inexpensive products, could become a factor in lifting Japan’s overall price level.

According to a Bank of Japan check on the July prices of imported products, of which more than 50% are supplied by China, polo shirts and gloves cost some 9% more than in July last year. Pajamas and sweat suits also were up 4%. As made-in-China items make up 80% of Japan’s total clothing imports, higher costs can translate into higher price tags at retailers down the road.

The price rise is not limited to clothing. Imports of toys, of which 90% come from China, shot up 10% in July on the year. The price tags on bags, 50% of which originate in China, also climbed 9%. Of audio and video equipment, with the Chinese import ratio of more than 50%, audio devices increased 3-4%. Among other items, China-made cotton cloth, used mainly for bedding and dress shirts, rose to nine-year highs indicating that rising prices of Chinese imports now run the gamut.

Running to a value of 15 trillion yen in fiscal 2007, Chinese products now account for some 20% of Japan’s total import bills. According to trade statistics compiled by the Ministry of Finance, the price index of Chinese imports, which had been falling, rebounded to positive territory in fiscal 2004 and climbed 7.7% on the year in fiscal 2007 with the uptick still continuing.

Increasing prices of Chinese imports are caused in large part by rising wages in that country. Average wages of China’s urban workers rose 18.7% during 2007 over the previous year. Moreover, labor costs in China are destined to rise further with the passage of the labor contract law in January this year which encourages employers to give employees longer contracts.

The substantial appreciation of the yuan is also to blame for increasing the costs of Chinese imports. The yuan’s value rose 20% against the dollar over the three years since Beijing revalued the currency’s exchange rate in July 2005.

So the Chinese factor is casting increasingly dark shadows over Japan’s price picture. “Attention tends to focus on soaring crude oil prices as the main culprit for the recent bout of inflationary pressure, but nearly 10% of the overall increase in imported products is attributable to the Chinese factor,” said Toshihiro Nagahama, chief economist at Dai-ichi Life Research Institute. This is perhaps why many Bank of Japan economists see China as switching, as far as Japan is concerned, from a deflation exporter to an inflation exporter.


[top]

Bloomberg: Paulson continues weak USD policy


[Skip to the end]

Seems Paulson is still blocking foreign CBs from accumulating USD financial assets. This is a negative for the USD and a negative for US real terms of trade.

It does support US exports and reduces the need to add to domestic demand, even as US consumption remains low.

Yuan Rises Most in 3 Weeks After Paulson Calls for Appreciation

by Kim Kyoungwha and Belinda Cao

(Bloomberg) The yuan climbed by the most in three weeks after U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson urged China to let its currency appreciate to curb inflation and deter Congress from introducing trade penalties. Bonds gained.


[top]

2008-08-13 JN News Highlights


[Skip to the end]

Highlights:

Economy Shrinks Annualized 2.4% On Weak Domestic Demand

 
 
Articles:

Economy Shrinks Annualized 2.4% On Weak Domestic Demand

(Nikkei) Declining consumer and capital spending contributed to pushing down Japan’s gross domestic product 0.6% in real terms from the previous quarter during the April-June period, for an annualized rate of minus 2.4%, according to preliminary data released Wednesday by the Cabinet Office.

The first contraction in four quarters was also attributed to a drop-off in exports amid the U.S. economic slowdown.

Domestic demand contracted 0.6%, with personal spending shrinking 0.5% as price hikes for a number of daily necessities dampened consumer sentiment. The weaker demand also reflected the fact that the previous quarter had one more day than in normal years because 2008 is a leap year.

Capital spending declined 0.2%, while housing investment slid 3.4%. Overall domestic demand pushed down GDP growth by 0.6 percentage point.

Exports, which had until recently driven economic growth, fell 2.3%, meaning overseas demand failed to push up GDP growth in the three months ended June.

In nominal terms, GDP contracted 0.7% for an annualized rate of minus 2.7%.

Fails to mention it grew at over 3% in the prior quarter, so the two quarter average is marginally positive. Japan data seems to have more noise than US data.

Also note the nominal measure over the last year:

Nominal GDP Q/Q:

Q2/08 -0.7%
Q1/08 +0.2%

Q4/07 -0.1%
Q3/07 flat

 
 
Lots of noise due to ‘inflation’ as they measure it.

Yes, a soft quarterly report, but as expected or slightly better than expected on most counts.

Same twin themes as the US: weakness and higher prices.

And lots of talk about a fiscal program over there.


[top]

2008-08-07 UK News Highlights


[Skip to the end]

Highlights:

ECB Leaves Interest Rates at Seven-Year High to Fight Inflation
German industrial orders drop
Western European Car Sales Fall by 6.7% in July, JD Power Says
German June Exports Rise the Most in Nearly Two Years
German Economy Contracted as Much as 1.5% in 2Q
French Trade Deficit Expands to Record as Euro Curbs Exports
Italian June Production Stalls as Record Oil Prices Damp Growth
Fall in output fuels Spanish recession fears

 
 
 
Article snip:

ECB Leaves Interest Rates at Seven-Year High to Fight Inflation (Bloomberg) – The ECBkept interest rates at a seven-year high to fight inflation even as evidence of an economic slump mounts. ECB policy makers meeting in Frankfurt left the benchmark lending rate at 4.25 %, as predicted by all 60 economists in a Bloomberg News survey. The bank, which raised rates last month, will wait until the second quarter of next year to cut borrowing costs, a separate survey shows. The ECB is concerned that the fastest inflation in 16 years will help unions push through demands for higher wages and prompt companies to lift prices. At the same time, record energy costs and the stronger euro are strangling growth. Economic confidence dropped the most since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in July and Europe’s manufacturing and service industries contracted for a second month. ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet will hold a press conference 2:30 p.m. to explain today’s decision.

Same as UK, less costly to address inflation now rather than support growth and address inflation later if it gets worse.

It’s been said in the US that the Fed needs to firm up the economy first, and then address inflation. To most Central Bankers this makes no sense, as they use weakness to bring inflation down.

In their view that means the Fed wants to get the economy strong enough to then weaken it.

The Fed majority sees it differently.

They agree with the above.

However, for the last year they have been forecasting lower inflation and lower growth were willing to take the chance that supporting growth would not result in higher inflation.

Now, a year later, the FOMC is faced with higher inflation and more growth than the UK and Eurozone, and systemic ‘market functioning’ risk remains.

The FOMC continues to give the latter priority as they struggle with fundamental liquidity issues that stem from a continuing lack of understanding of monetary operations.


[top]

Re: UK economy


[Skip to the end]

(an email exchange)

>   
>   
>   On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Prof. P. Arestis wrote:
>   
>   Dear Warren,
>   
>   Just received the piece below. The situation over here is getting
>   worse but pretty much as expected.
>   
>   Recession signalled by key indicators of British economy
>   
>   
>   Best wishes, Philip
>   

Dear Philip,

Yes, seems tight fiscal has finally taken its toll and is now reversing the ugly way – falling revenues and rising transfer payments.

Without support from government deficit spending, consumer debt increases sufficient to support modest growth are unsustainable.

And with a foreign monopolist setting crude oil prices ‘inflation’ will persist until there is a large enough supply response,

It’s the BoE’s choice which to respond to, though ironically changing interest rates is for the most part ceremonial.

All the best,
Warren


[top]

Fed Governor Mishkin on monetary policy


[Skip to the end]

In case there was any doubt things have changed.

from his July 28 speech:

Policymakers, academic economists, and the general public broadly agree that maintaining a low and stable inflation rate significantly benefits the economy. For example, low and predictable inflation simplifies the savings and retirement planning of households, facilitates firms’ production and investment decisions, and minimizes distortions that arise because the tax system is not completely indexed to inflation. Moreover, I interpret the available economic theory and empirical evidence as indicating that a long-run average inflation rate of about 2 percent, or perhaps a bit lower, is low enough to facilitate the everyday decisions of households and businesses while also alleviating the risk of debt deflation and other pitfalls of excessively low inflation.

The rationale for promoting maximum sustainable employment is also fairly obvious: Recessions weaken household income and business production, and unemployment hurts workers and their families.

No mention of lost real output. Must have been an oversight.

As I have outlined elsewhere, these two objectives are typically complementary and mutually reinforcing: that is, done properly, stabilizing inflation contributes to stabilizing economic activity around its sustainable level, and vice versa.

Hence the dual mandate is met by sustaining low and stable inflation rates.

Nevertheless, it’s important to note a fundamental difference between the objectives of price stability and maximum sustainable employment. On the one hand, the long-run average rate of inflation is solely determined by the actions of the Federal Reserve.

And they do believe that. They believe it’s all a function of the interest rates they select.

On the other hand, the level of maximum sustainable employment is not something that can be chosen by the Federal Reserve, because no central bank can control the level of real economic activity or employment over the longer run.

And they are not responsible for the level of economic activity, only the rate of inflation.

In fact, any attempt to use stimulative monetary policy to maintain employment above its long-run sustainable level would inevitably lead to an upward spiral of inflation with severe adverse consequences for household income and employment.


[top]