"...If Washington and the US consumer can't borrow cheap at the long end,
then they'll just go to the short end for cheap money instead..."
WHAT'S A CENTRAL BANKER to do?
Despite slashing the cost of short-term loans since last summer, the Federal
Reserve has yet to dent the cost of longer-term finance.
Which is a real problem for the Treasury and Congress alike.
To date, fully 3.25% of Fed cuts have knocked only 1.5% points off 10-year
US bond yields; thirty-year bond yields are barely 0.6% lower.
So while Ben Bernanke's big fix for the housing market has failed to squash
longer-term mortgage rates, it's also failed to reduce interest rates for the
government, too. It also represents an ugly return of the Greenspan Conundrum.
"The broadly unanticipated behavior of world bond markets remains a conundrum," admitted
the Maestro to the House of Representatives in official testimony in early
2005.
But lucky for him, the bond market then was keeping rates cheap. Indeed, the
yield on 10-year and longer-dated US Treasury bonds stayed near their multi-decade
lows - first reached when Greenspan slashed the Fed funds rate to just 1% in
the summer of 2003 - as he began "normalizing" short-term Fed rates from that
record bottom.
No one on Capitol Hill complained, therefore. Longer-term finance then cost
less than shorter-term loans. And with US Treasury debt heading for $9 trillion
and more, what politician didn't want easier terms from the bond market?
Whereas today, in sharp contrast, it's longer-term debt that's become more
expensive.
Once again, the Fed can't move long-dated yields; but now the cost of paying
for Washington's spending stands well above overnight loans. And the size of
Washington's spending only keeps growing. Won't the bond market play ball?
Pretty please?
"Over the last several months, changes in economic conditions, financial markets
and monetary and fiscal policy have impacted Treasury's marketable borrowing
needs," notes Anthony Ryan, assistant secretary for financial markets at the
US Treasury.
"Financial market strains have impacted the real economy and the nation has
experienced lower economic growth, lower receipts and increased outlays."
What to do? Thirty-year US bonds now yield fully 3% more than short-term Treasuries.
Last time this premium for long-term borrowing got so high, the US government
decided to stop issuing 30-year bonds altogether. It only re-introduced them
in late 2006, taking advantage of Greenspan's Conundrum to lock in 30-year
loans at below-short-term rates.
Put another way, "Just what will the Fed do if 10-year Treasury yields keep
rising?" as we asked here at BullionVault at
the start of June 2007.
"Well if Washington and the US consumer can't borrow cheap at the long end," we
guessed in Gold & the
Bond Market Panic, "then they'll just have to go to the short end for cheap
money instead. The Fed can take care of that.
"By slashing the price of overnight money, it will let the US government shift
the weight of its obligations out of 10-year and long-dated bonds into shorter-term
debt - the classic structure of borrowing for any banana republic."
And now - surprise, surprise! - the US Treasury says it's bringing back one-year
T-bills, last seen at the end of 2001. "The administration said [Wednesday]
it would begin selling the one-year bill, also referred to as a 52-week bill,
at an initial auction in June," reports the Associated Press.
"New one-year securities will be auctioned every four weeks [because] the
government will need to cover a budget deficit expected to jump to an all-time
high this year, surpassing the old mark of $413 billion set in 2004. A big
part of the increased borrowing reflects the need to pay for economic-stimulus
rebates to 130 million households."
Does it matter? "Countries don't go broke," as Walter Wriston, then chairman
of Citigroup, said just before Mexico, Brazil and Argentina went broke during
the Less-Developed Countries Crisis of 1982. And "governments with large exposures
to currency mismatches and interest rate or maturity risks are, of course,
particularly vulnerable," as Arturo Porzecanski, a scholar at New York and
Columbia universities, writes in Sovereign Debt at the Crossroads (OUP,
2006).
"Governments tend to default specifically when they must increase spending
quickly (for instance, to prosecute a war), experience a sudden shortfall in
revenues (because of a severe economic contraction), or face an abrupt curtailment
of access to bond and loan financing (e.g., because of political instability).
"It is usually very difficult for governments in such trouble to take the
necessary offsetting actions, such as hiking tax collections or cutting spending
on an emergency basis."
None of this points to a looming debt-default by the US Treasury, of course.
But jitters in confidence can destroy front-loaded debtors if (or when) lenders
go on strike. Witness last summer's collapse of Northern Rock - a top five
British mortgage lender - precisely because it relied on short-term refinancing
to keep itself running. Witness the classic "banana republic" structure of
short-term debt that needs constant re-funding.
There's a clear "maturity risk" built into America moving its government debt
out of long-dated bonds into ever-closer redemption dates. Not least if the
Federal Reserve keeps squashing its short-term interest rates - now way below
the rate of inflation - literally destroying the wealth of investors caught
holding short-dated bonds.
If the bond market won't play ball at the long end, will it always play ball
for short-term refinancing regardless?