|
As Gold confirms its performance as a currency and foreign exchange rates
move up a gear in volatility, the subject of Gold in Central Bank Reserves
is moving to center stage. Different nations construct their reserves for
different reasons, usually practical ones reflecting the nation's international
position in the global market place as well as for that 'rainy day' that
may come.
With this in mind we look at different nations reasons for having them
there as well as some postulated reasons put forward recently.
Around a year ago, as the U.S.$ came under the spotlight a very European reason
for holding gold in the reserves of a nation was put forward. It was the current
President of Germany's Bundesbank that described gold as a "useful counter
to the swings of the Dollar". Since then and particularly recently it has
become clear to all Central Bank and individuals that gold is a useful counter
to the swings of any currency. In the last month:
- We saw how the drop in the € against the $ spurred buying interest
in gold in Europe.
- We saw the falling Yen spurred Japanese Investor interest in Gold, in Japan.
Clearly there is substantive evidence that Investors globally are becoming
increasingly aware of the dangers to all currencies in this increasingly uncertain
and volatile world. Individuals as well as others are looking to diversify,
not only out of the $ but out of any currency that looks wobbly.
Despite
a certain almost nationalistic belief within the States, that the $ is the
global currency, and in the face of a relatively steady $ [a 3% two daily move
is now thought acceptable], which is performing well despite awful fundamentals,
almost to a man, financial experts are hyper-aware of the likelihood of a financial
accident in the future [particularly after seeing the report of the record
Trade deficit, again]. Part of the problem is the deeply held belief in the
$, which is an almost unreasoning one.
So how should and how do Central Bankers look at their gold and foreign exchange
reserves and what purpose do they serve? And on what is this view based? Should
gold form 15% of reserves, or 5% or 25% or 50%? Below are several views from
different nations.
Global Gold and Foreign Exchange Reserves, at present.
To begin with we re-print comments by G.F.M.S. giving perspective on global
reserves: -
"The peak in official sector "anti-gold" sentiment has passed, partly as
a result of the huge rise in global foreign exchange reserves and the prospect
of dollar weakness.
- At the end of September 1999, when the first Central Bank Gold Agreement
was put in place, total foreign exchange reserves were $2,011 billion,
of which gold constituted 15%.
- At the end of June 2005, this total had ballooned to $4,335 billion
(an average annual growth rate of 17.6%), with gold constituting only 9%.
Within this distribution (gold valued at market prices),
- The USA holds 64% of its reserves (defined as foreign exchange, gold
and other reserves) in gold.
- The CBGA signatories 42%.
- Japan, meanwhile, only holds 1% in gold.
- Reported figures for China imply 1%, but if other Chinese non-monetary
reserves were included then this would probably amount to 2%.
- Other countries hold 3% of their reserves in gold.
- Among the top ten gold holders, excluding CGBA-1 and CBGA-2 signatories,
there is little likelihood of sales and if anything there may be the potential
for some purchases.
- Venezuela is a potential buyer
Now we look at the view of the I.M.F. a body that stands as a holder of global
currency reserves, and as a support to nations across the globe.
The I.M.F. attitude to its gold reserves.
The I.M.F. considers gold as follows: - "It is an undervalued asset
held by the IMF, and provides a fundamental strength to its balance sheet.
Gold holdings provide the IMF with operational manoeuvrability both as regards
the use of its resources and through adding credibility to its precautionary
balances. In these respects, the benefits of the I.M.F.'s gold holdings are
passed on to the membership at large, to both creditors and debtors. The
IMF should continue to hold a relatively large amount of gold among its assets,
not only for prudential reasons, but also to meet unforeseen contingencies."
This gives us the sound reasoning behind holding reserves of gold.
But some say it should be held at 15% of reserves!
Gold Reserves 15%?
But then we turn to a view of some observers who have pointed to 'a currently
acceptable level of gold at 15% of national reserves' as a basis for indicating
future levels of reserves. This is the current view of the European Central
Bank, but not shared by the individual nations who form part of the Eurozone.
When we ask the question, 'how do you measure that level in the reserves to
understand the percentage in the first place'.
Inevitably a U.S.$ value will be used as a measuring line. But this does not
make sense if used as a permanent level. For instance, if we take that 15%
based on a $300 valuation of gold, then when gold hits $500 this level has
increased to 25%. Does that mean the Central Bank should now sell its gold
to bring it back down to 15%? Surely not? Surely it is fulfilling the function
for which it was chosen, namely to protect against the falling value of the
$.
It appears that this percentage is a level established in the days when currencies
were strong. If currencies fail to perform the gold price will increase and
provide a growing and sufficient basis for a nation to continue to function
financially in times when its currency is dubious. Then if gold reserves are
rapidly climbing to a much higher percentage they can act as collateral for
international financial loans, such as India sought and gained many years ago.
So we cannot take the view that gold reserves should be at a certain level
without stipulating under what circumstances! Certainly too, we cannot take
the view that they should be held at a certain level irrespective of circumstances
as that would imply they should be sold as currencies weaken and their proportion
of reserves rises! Whilst this is common sense it is usually overlooked.
Gold Reserves in case of financial accidents?
The U.S.A. has a gold level of its reserves of 64% and has no intention of
selling it, so we are told. Why? What other choices does it have? Which currency
should it hold alongside gold? What is the function of these reserves?
With most of their trading partners accepting the $ in payment for its goods
and them being paid in the $ for U.S. exports, the need for foreign currency
reserves seems to fall away, so it makes sense to hold one's reserves in gold
in this instance. Then the function of those reserves can be fully dedicated
to the day when the $ has its long awaited accident! The same thinking preceded
the Second World War, when the U.S. undertook to acquire the bulk of the globes
gold for its reserves. Its use in times of distress was that it was a credible
medium of exchange between all [including enemies], with no inherent obligations
attached.
But the U.S.A. was able to do that because of the market conditions that persisted
at the time. The Gold Standard was in its dying days and the gold price was
$20 [or was that the $ was worth 1/20 th of an ounce of gold!]. Having already
confiscated the gold of U.S. citizens, the U.S. raised the price of gold to
$35 a huge 75% devaluation of the Dollar.
Other nations did not follow! So the Bullion boys in most capitals of the
world bought the gold of those nations at the equivalent price of $20 in their
own currencies and shipped it to the States to be paid a handsome profit after
costs after selling the gold at $35 an ounce. This was just ahead of the War
in which the global flow of Capital was disrupted and paper currencies difficult
to trade except between 'friends'. This took their gold reserves up to over
26,000 tonnes of gold!
Try to do that today! The mere rumour that a Central Bank has entered the
gold market to buy gold is enough to send speculators into the market to send
up the gold price. Right now with the changing attitude to gold amongst Central
Bankers, we would not be at all surprised to see some publicly committed Central
Bank sellers of gold, change their mind and walk away keeping their gold [Germany
has already done so, Italy is a signatory to the C.B.G.A. and has stated it
has no intention of selling].
China or Japan are fully aware that to gain a significant holding of gold
from the open gold market would send the gold price well above $1,000 and once
they had finished buying, would see the price drop right back to where it had
come from.
Of course they could deal direct, but unfortunately trust is not sufficiently
high between them to do this!
Gold producing nations can only achieve a sizeable quantity of gold by buying
it from local producers at "market related prices", thereby avoiding the open
market and the impact of purchases on the price of gold. We fully expect to
see at some point Russian and Chinese gold removed from the open market [including
their own local one] and find its way into national coffers!
Reserves to earn a Yield?
In the days of strong currencies where they are trusted, the concept of performance
of currencies comes into the picture. We heard a couple of years ago [when
gold was still considered a barbarous relic] that reserves should provide a
yield, a return on investment. The level of interest rates became a factor
purportedly justifying the selling of gold from national coffers. After all
if you can get 4.25% from holding the Dollar isn't this better than holding
gold. A few were convinced but the majority just raised an eyebrow and said
well this justifies selling all currencies, including the € that do not
provide an equivalent yield.
Apart from the patently obvious fact that this would promote Tsunami-like
flows of capital throughout the world, i f yield were the attraction, then
currencies with highest levels of interest rates would be favored, which are
inevitably the softer currencies and more likely to lose exchange rate value?
As we watched immediately after the U.S. Fed Funds rate was elevated to 4.25%
and the Trade figures were released the $ dropped by 2% demonstrating that
interest rate yield on a currency is not an exchange rate moving item and that
the constant volatility of currencies negates looking for yield in reserves.
Gold and Foreign Exchange Reserves should be a protection against the accidents
that can result from volatility and realised uncertainties.
More to the point we live in days when a $ or a € exchange rate can change
1% or 2% in a day, so is it wise to wait for 360 days to get 4.25%? Clearly
interest rate yields should not motivate sales of gold!
The Asian view of reserves.
Another [Asian] view of reserves is that a nation should hold its reserves
in the currencies of the nations with which it trades in proportion to the
levels of trade it does with those countries. It appears that that is how China
sees its reserves, in the light of the valuation of the Yuan, in terms of a "basket
of currencies" which turned out to be those of its trading partners. This makes
practical sense but ignores the possibility of a breakdown in such relations
or indeed in the event of a war and the run up to it.
This explains why Asian reserves carry so little gold in their reserves!
Dominant or Satellite currencies?
Reserves of major and minor nations have to fulfil a role of protection in
difficult days. In today's world where considerable doubts hang over the currency
of the U.S. most nations are concerned at the solidness of their reserves.
In a case like Japan or Canada, reserves are mainly the U.S. $. Canada is almost
a financial colony of the U.S. and has little use for currencies other than
the $ from a Trade point of view. However the concept of abdicating gold reserves
[as Canada has effectively done] to become solely dependent on the U.S. $ is
not in the interest of the financial stability of Canada in a crisis. Their
reserves are failing to give any protection against a poor U.S.$ performance.
The concept of any nation selling its gold in favour of "Dominant Currencies" in
this way is unsound financial management and not likely to be emulated by other "Satellite
currencies" and their Central Banks except for political or trade reasons.
The example of the Eurozone bears out such thinking on our part. With Germany
and Italy and France major holders of gold [even after France's sale of gold]
and yet having abdicated their own currencies in favour of the €, we see
stiff resistance to the sale of their enormous tonnages of gold. And ask any
of them and they will give sound reasons for holding it, [such as, "as an effective
counter to swings in the $"]. This is in the face of the Eurozone's own Central
Bank holding 15% of its reserves in Gold!
In essence, we have seen gold react as a counter to government issued paper
currencies. It is not reasonable or responsible to willingly become totally
dependent on paper currencies, particularly if a nation already has gold in
its own gold reserves!
The structure of these reserves should be founded on the same reasoning as
used by the major powers. After all if a dominant currency should suffer a
crisis, a minor nation holding that currency exclusively, will face a far worse
crisis than the dominant currency nation and will need alternative assets with
which to counter such a crisis!
With gold performing as a currency now, the global reserve currency, the pivot
of the global monetary system needs to be looked at to see the future of the
global monetary scene. Here is our view of that currency: -
Prospects for the $.
Poor Performance
The $ is the Global Reserve currency. It has for some years had fingers pointed
at it as a currency being very poorly managed internationally, with eyes
introverted exclusively on the U.S. economy. The nation has a "Live now pay
later", "so far so good" attitude to the situation it and the $ finds themselves
in at present. With the U.S. trade deficit widening unexpectedly in October
to a record $68.9 billion despite a drop in the cost of imported oil, as
the deficits with China, Canada, the European Union, Mexico and OPEC all
hit records it is reasonable to think that fourth-quarter economic growth
will be even weaker than first thought. And if so, how long can this performance
continue until disaster strikes?
We should remember that a continuation of oil prices at +$60 [the average
was $56.29 a barrel] will keep oil imports at record levels. 2006 will see
a repeat of this type of report! As to trade with China we also expect more
of the same as we see now. A steadily rising trade deficit with China grew
2.1% to a record $20.5 billion as imports from that country rose 4.8% to $24.4
billion. The inflation beating cheaper imports extended beyond Asia to Canada,
Mexico, the European Union and OPEC countries with whom the deficit also widened
to record levels.
To date the overall trade deficit reached $598.3 billion. Earlier this year Global
Watch - The Gold Forecaster" forecast that the Trade deficit
for the year would be $720 billion, a figure ridiculed at the time.
But with two more months to go to complete the year, this forecast could
be less than the reality?
The U.S. Dollar - Two roles - The Global Reserve Currency and money for
U.S. citizens.
As we have highlighted in previous issues, the $ has two roles, a global reserve
currency and simply money within the U.S.
It is the global reserve currency role that is keeping it up its exchange
rate value. We continue to expect the U.S. Capital account to reflect continuing
and rising levels of investment in the U.S. $ [liquid instruments primarily],
greater than the Trade deficit.
Its internal role is heading to heavy-duty inflation within the States. It
can be bolstered to some extent by rising interest rates [as we saw this week
interest rate rises are not lifting the $, but the prospect of these rates
rising no more [and the deficit] saw the $ fall]. We do expect the Fed to keep
raising rates for as long as the growth in the economy will permit. Many believe
the Fed may finally be nearing an end to its campaign of raising interest rates.
There is a deep significance to the path the two roles of the $ is travelling.
The global reserve currency role is the steady one relied upon for global trade
by all. The internal $ is over-borrowing to finance the continuing boom and
internal deficits [now boosted by three Tax cut Bills].
Indeed the external Trade deficit joins the internal budget deficit to undermine
the credibility of the foreign value of the Dollar.
When the two eventually meet, the fall will be quick and destructive.
Our view is that the $ will continue along this road until it falls off a
cliff. But so long as the $ can pay bills, buy capital goods, buy oil and hold
relatively steady on the foreign exchanges it will be bought and held. The
moment its external buying power is seen to totter, as a result if internal
profligacy, then the breakdown will be swift!
It is this uncertainty ahead of the fall that is helping to raise gold to
new heights and will keep on doing so until the Global Monetary system unites
in retaining a steady value and reliability to all aspects of its global reserve
currency or its replacement!
Conclusions
Do Central Bankers construct their Gold & Foreign Exchange Reserves blithely
trusting in a sound monetary future? Perhaps they should follow this course:
-
- With such prospects for the U.S.$, the consequential ripple effect on
nations using it as a global reserve currency [all of them!], should factor
this future into the structure of their reserves.
- Central Banks, in prudently managing their Reserves should plan for
situations which they would find themselves in, in the event of a breakdown
in the $, or for any envisaged 'rainy day' for that matter.
Clearly, the swing back to gold in our present global monetary scene could
well gather pace. But only in a few cases [Gold Producing nations] can gold
be loaded into their reserves and two of the main ones have stated they will
be increasing their gold reserves [Russia and South Africa] without rattling
the gold market excessively [their gold simply won't reach the market].
- Consequently the first action to the return of gold as a reserve asset
of real note will be growing inaction.
- There will be a drying up of gold sales from selling banks first, which
of itself, will severely reduce supplies to the gold market.
- It is nearly impractical that Central Banks will go into the open market
to buy in volume, without triggering a gold price 'spike', in the present
supply / demand situation.
- Gold as a Reserve Asset is bound to grow considerably in importance,
possibly in line with the rising price.

To Subscribe to "Global Watch - The Gold Forecaster", please
go to: www.goldforecaster.com.
|