|
An Occasional Letter From The Collection Agency
Whilst the great inflation/deflation debate continues (it's deflation that
wins, the inflationistas are being misled by the Fed's actions with its bail
out facilities) we need to look at some startling new facts and projections
that have appeared in the public arena. My worry, as you can gather from the
title of this article, is that we face a global depression that cannot be avoided
even if the events discussed below favour the results that the Central Banks
et al seek.
Events are moving to a point were attempts to disguise the effects of certain
outcomes can no longer be hidden.
The Federal Reserve.
"The Federal Reserve on Tuesday announced the extension through October 30,
2009, of its existing liquidity programs that were scheduled to expire on April
30, 2009. The Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)
took these actions in light of continuing substantial strains in many financial
markets.
-
The Board of Governors approved the extension through October 30 of the
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility
(AMLF), the Commercial Paper Funding Facility (CPFF), the Money Market
Investor Funding Facility (MMIFF), the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF),
and the Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF). The FOMC also took action
to extend the TSLF, which is established under the joint authority of the
Board and the FOMC.
In addition, to address continued pressures in global U.S. dollar funding
markets, the temporary reciprocal currency arrangements (swap lines) between
the Federal Reserve and other central banks have been extended to October
30. This extension currently applies to the swap lines between the Federal
Reserve and each of the following central banks: the Reserve Bank of Australia,
the Banco Central do Brasil, the Bank of Canada, Danmarks Nationalbank,
the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Bank of Korea, the
Banco de Mexico, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand, the Norges Bank, the
Monetary Authority of Singapore, the Sveriges Riksbank, and the Swiss National
Bank. The Bank of Japan will consider the extension at its next Monetary
Policy Meeting. The Federal Reserve action to extend the swap lines was
taken by the Federal Open Market Committee.
The current expiration date for the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan
Facility (TALF) remains December 31, 2009. Other Federal Reserve liquidity
facilities, such as the Term Auction Facility (TAF), do not have a fixed
expiration date.
The AMLF provides loans to depository institutions to purchase asset-backed
commercial paper from money market mutual funds. The CPFF provides a liquidity
backstop to U.S. issuers of commercial paper. The MMIFF supports a private-sector
initiative to provide liquidity to U.S. money market investors. The PDCF
provides discount window loans to primary dealers. Under the TSLF, the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York auctions term loans of Treasury securities
to primary dealers. The TALF will support the issuance of asset-backed
securities collateralized by student loans, auto loans, credit card loans,
and loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration. Under the TAF,
Reserve Banks auction term discount window loans to depository institutions."
Regular readers will know that the extension comes as no surprise to me and
I expect further extensions to happen for sometime to come. Clearly the supposed
purpose of all these schemes, to recapitalise Banks (and just about anything
else) and allow the credit markets functionality to return to a state of "normality" has
failed. The extension reflects the Fed's position as lender/borrower of last
resort, rather than any ongoing success in achieving the aims they were designed
for.
Fear not readers for the Fed is readying itself for the next stage of the
battle to defeat deflation, as the Chairman so presciently foresaw:
-
"However, a principal message of my talk today is that a central bank
whose accustomed policy rate has been forced down to zero has most definitely
not run out of ammunition. As I will discuss, a central bank, either alone
or in cooperation with other parts of the government, retains considerable
power to expand aggregate demand and economic activity even when its accustomed
policy rate is at zero.
U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited
in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing
press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce
as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing
the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening
to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in
terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices
in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money
system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and
hence positive inflation.
Of course, the U.S. government is not going to print money and distribute
it willy-nilly (although as we will see later, there are practical policies
that approximate this behavior). Normally, money is injected into the economy
through asset purchases by the Federal Reserve. To stimulate aggregate
spending when short-term interest rates have reached zero, the Fed must
expand the scale of its asset purchases or, possibly, expand the menu of
assets that it buys. Alternatively, the Fed could find other ways of injecting
money into the system--for example, by making low-interest-rate loans to
banks or cooperating with the fiscal authorities.
So what then might the Fed do if its target interest rate, the overnight
federal funds rate, fell to zero? One relatively straightforward extension
of current procedures would be to try to stimulate spending by lowering
rates further out along the Treasury term structure --that is, rates on
government bonds of longer maturities. There are at least two ways of bringing
down longer-term rates, which are complementary and could be employed separately
or in combination. One approach, similar to an action taken in the past
couple of years by the Bank of Japan, would be for the Fed to commit to
holding the overnight rate at zero for some specified period. Because long-term
interest rates represent averages of current and expected future short-term
rates, plus a term premium, a commitment to keep short-term rates at zero
for some time--if it were credible--would induce a decline in longer-term
rates. A more direct method, which I personally prefer, would be for the
Fed to begin announcing explicit ceilings for yields on longer-maturity
Treasury debt (say, bonds maturing within the next two years). The Fed
could enforce these interest-rate ceilings by committing to make unlimited
purchases of securities up to two years from maturity at prices consistent
with the targeted yields . If this program were successful, not only would
yields on medium-term Treasury securities fall, but (because of links operating
through expectations of future interest rates) yields on longer-term public
and private debt (such as mortgages) would likely fall as well.
Lower rates over the maturity spectrum of public and private securities
should strengthen aggregate demand in the usual ways and thus help to end
deflation. Of course, if operating in relatively short-dated Treasury debt
proved insufficient, the Fed could also attempt to cap yields of Treasury
securities at still longer maturities, say three to six years . Yet another
option would be for the Fed to use its existing authority to operate in
the markets for agency debt (for example, mortgage-backed securities issued
by Ginnie Mae, the Government National Mortgage Association)."
Quotes from "Deflation:
Making Sure "It" Doesn't Happen Here" Ben Bernanke November 2002.
(Red highlights mine)
Within the next few days we will see the ideas in this speech, now set up
as a theory, tried in actual market conditions. Its success or failure will
set the future direction of the global economy. The enabling agent to allow
this test to go ahead is:
The US Treasury:
-
Washington, DC - Treasury is announcing the following changes to the issuance
calendar:
A new monthly 7-year note, with the first auction occurring in February
2009.
A regular reopening of the quarterly 30-year bond in the month following
the initial new offering, with the first reopening occurring in March 2009.
Details of the February Refunding
We are offering $67 billion of Treasury securities to refund approximately
$36.3 billion of privately held securities maturing or called on February
15 and to raise approximately $30.7 billion. The securities are:
A new 3-year note in the amount of $32 billion, maturing February 15,
2012;
A new 10-year note in the amount of $21 billion, maturing February 15,
2019;
A new 30-year bond in the amount of $14 billion, maturing February 15,
2039.
During the last several months, changes in economic conditions, financial
markets, and fiscal policy, as well as a decline in nonmarketable debt
issuance have contributed to an increase in Treasury's marketable borrowing
needs.
Treasury has responded to the increase in marketable borrowing requirements
by raising issuance sizes of regular weekly and monthly bills, increasing
the frequency and issuance sizes of cash management bills, increasing the
issuance sizes of nominal coupon security offerings, and adjusting the
securities offering calendar, including adding monthly 3-year notes, a
second reopening of 10-year notes, and introducing newly issued 30-year
bonds on a quarterly basis.
Introduction of a monthly 7-year note: Treasury is announcing the addition
of a monthly new-issue 7-year note. The monthly 7-year notes will have
an end-of-month settlement along with the 2-year and 5-year notes. The
first auction of the 7-year notes will occur on Thursday, February 26,
2009
Introduction of a regular 30-year bond reopening: Treasury is announcing
the addition of a regular reopening of the 30-year bond in the month following
the initial quarterly offering. This will result in eight 30-year bond
auctions a year. The first auction of the reopening of 30-year bonds will
occur on Thursday, March 12, 2009
Below is a copy of the tentative Treasury issuance schedule through to the
end of March, showing the future pattern:

With the increase of debt issuance upward pressure will be exerted upon yields.
This counter-acts the Feds attempts to keep both short term rates and those
further out along the curve at a level the Fed perceives as conducive to encouraging
credit markets to allow the flow of funds to re-start. The real test of course
is whether buyers turn up at the auctions. A failure will force the Fed to
enact its statement from the last FOMC minutes:
- "The Committee also is prepared to purchase longer-term Treasury securities
if evolving circumstances indicate that such transactions would be particularly
effective in improving conditions in private credit markets."
To control rates the will have to step up to the plate and bid at prices that
keep yields within its targeted band. We don't know exactly what the boundaries
of the band are but we can look at recent yield levels to garner some idea
from previous support and resistance levels:





Courtesy of StockCharts.com
Bond yields are in a move higher as you would expect, bond buyers know what
the increase in market supply will do to prices if no one (in essence foreign
buyers) turns up for the auctions and bond yields are acting accordingly as
long positions are closed.
The Fed will end up reacting to the results of the auctions; if buyers insist
on higher yields (by setting lower prices) the Fed will step in and start buying
across the curve, indeed if they are looking at the yields across the curve
now they may well be feeling some concern that the plan to hold rates at low
levels may already be under attack.
If the Fed fails to react to higher yields or failed auctions (when not enough
bids are received to cover the issuance) bond markets will take fright as the
Feds credibility to back up the words from the FOMC minutes is destroyed. Without
a buyer of last resort supporting the market then a bout of panic selling,
even dumping could take place. In some ways this would suit the Fed as it would
begin its intervention at a lower price level and if the policy is successful
the balance sheet would benefit from appreciating prices as yields fall back.
Why do I think Fed intervention is inevitable?
IMF
The ability of Foreign Central Banks to buy US issued debt has been a function
of increasing dollar flows taken in payment for exports to the US and re-circulated
back (to stop domestic inflation) by buying US debt.

As the IMF says "Global output and trade plummeted in the final months of
2008". The requirement to re-circulate dollars back into US debt will also
be severely curtailed just at the time when the US wishes to raise debt issuance.
The need for the re-circulation of dollars is not going to increase anytime
soon:

Indeed a further contraction of "available" dollars, produced in exchange
for goods imported into the US, is more likely that the chart above suggests.
The IMF has a tendency to be optimistic in its views. To enable the US Treasury
to issue new and increasing amounts of debt in an environment of decreasing
need, when world trade has almost halved, leaves the Fed no alternative but
to put its words into action.
If however the Fed decides not to deploy the printing presses and its
unconventional policies then the result will be as the IMF states:
-
"Downside risks continue to dominate, as the scale and scope of the current
financial crisis have taken the global economy into uncharted waters. The
main risk is that unless stronger financial strains and uncertainties are
forcefully addressed, the pernicious feedback loop between real activity
and financial markets will intensify, leading to even more toxic effects
on global growth.
In addition, the risks of deflation are rising in a number of advanced
economies, while emerging economies' corporate sectors could be badly damaged
by continued limited access to external financing. Furthermore, while fiscal
policy is providing important short-term support, the sharp increase in
the issuance of public debt could prompt an adverse market reaction, unless
governments clarify their strategy to ensure long-term sustainability."
In the IMF paper, "Gauging
Risks for Deflation" the work of Kumar and others is reproduced, showing
the overall vulnerability to deflation for the world:

The IMF have the risk indicator flattening off in 2009, again this seems optimistic
considering that the downside risks are much, much greater than any possible
upside to the current situation. As it happens, the IMF do have an important
caveat to the indicator, which may:
- "underestimate the risks today relative to those for earlier episodes,
as it does not consider house prices. In 2002/03, housing markets were very
strong, with low interest rates boosting prices and construction, helping
pull the global economy out of its weak patch. Also, the indicator does not
do full justice to the credit crisis because it does not consider quantitative
indicators of financial conditions other than bank credit, which is being
buoyed by temporary forces. Spreads on bonds, for example, are much wider
today than during 2002-03 in advanced economies and have reached levels similar
to those prevailing in 2002-03 in emerging economies."
Of more concern is the IMF risk assessments for the G3 (US, Eurozone & Japan)
based on the Global Projection Model. This agrees with my interpretation of GB
Eggertsson's work, available here.
I quote from the IMF paper:
-
"This section proposes to analyze deflation vulnerability with the help
of the IMF staff's Global Projection Model (GPM), which explicitly considers
the implications of the zero interest floor (ZIF) for monetary policy.
The most intractable deflation problem occurs when policy interest rates
reach the ZIF for a prolonged period of time because if a zero interest
rate fails to close the output gap, downward pressure on prices is reinforced.
Unless other policies are implemented to raise aggregate demand, this
could result in a downward deflationary spiral. The model incorporates
three country models, for the United States, the euro area, and Japan (the
G-3); and it covers output and unemployment, the rate of inflation, the
exchange rate, and, with a modified Taylor rule, the monetary policy interest
rate.
26. Figure 4 shows the current World Economic Outlook (WEO) baseline outlook
(black line) and GPM-based fan charts for the G-3 economies (see also IMF,
2009a).

- To sum up, the WEO baseline projection, in itself, does not contain an
unduly serious deflation problem. However, the GPM-based fan charts reveal
a significant probability of much more negative deflationary outcomes, and
hence a deeper and more prolonged recession in the G3."
As a cautionary note I would mention Japan in the early '00s often presented
future inflation and GDP charts with an upside bias, that bias was not fulfilled
until 2006 and even then the rise was weaker than earlier projections suggested.
However the risk of inflation in the G3 even using the IMF projections is low
and remains low for some time. Unless inflation fulfills the upper percentile sustained projection
of 2-2.5% I think the Fed will continue the Zero Interest Rate and Quantitative
(Credit?) Easing policies.
I see nothing that supports a hyperinflationary environment in the G3 in the
medium term. If the IMF red projection line (mid 50th percentile) is accurate,
inflation, growth and price levels will not engender a credible expectation
of future inflation and monetary and fiscal stimulus will fail. That failure
will lead to a period of extended deflationary forces acting upon the global
economy.
The initiation of increased debt issuance by the US Treasury begins next week.
Any sign of weakness in the Fed's response to low prices or failure at the
auctions will cause major disruption in the bond market. However such disruption
should be short term as long as the Fed responds vigorously to put right its
previous inaction.
Even if the Fed is successful and keeps interest rates along the curve artificially
low, there is no guarantee that the expected result of increased inflation
expectations will occur in the future. Without the future threat of inflation
business and consumer spending patterns will remain "tight" and a continuing
hoarding of cash and cash like assets will remain attractive, even in an environment
where real interest rates are negative. Only when a point is reached when cash, held
as an asset, shows a depreciation will it become viable to swap cash for
other assets that will give a higher return. This is why many schemes are failing,
the dollar has become an asset in its own right:

Coutesy of StockCharts.com
Looking at the chart, is it just me or is the Dollar waiting for news?
Some have put forward an idea that US taxes should be cut for Businesses who
wish to repatriate overseas profits, allowing an injection of cash into the
US domestic economy. However with the main theme of investing already focused
on highly liquid uptrends (see US Treasuries until recently) the increase in
demand for Dollars as profits are converted from other currencies would cause
further appreciation of the Dollar. This would make the hoarding of cash more
attractive and negate the attempts to loosen the flow of funds. Indeed the
suggestion of such a repatriation, especially from the US Treasury, would cause
longs to take positions prior to the event occuring, pre-emptively causing
the uptrend to strengthen, encouraging an acceleration of savings. Thus such
a scheme would encourage the very conditions that the Fed and US Treasury are
attempting to thwart.
Until economic conditions are conducive to the deployment of savings to allow
profitable investment then the hoarding of cash and cash like assets will continue.
I very strongly suspect we will have to live through a global depression before
such economic conditions appear.
|