Malaysian Central Bank raises defence; weak currency

  Bank Negara_Defence
Malaysia banks told to set minimum CA ratio at 1.2% of total loans

PETALING JAYA: Banks have been told to have a minimum collective assessment (CA) ratio of 1.2% by the end of next year, sending a strong signal to the industry to improve its standards of prudence.

According to a circular from Bank Negara to financial institutions early last week, all banks are required to set aside a minimum of 1.2% of total loans effective Dec 31, 2015.

The requirement, effectively, will put a stop to the present situation where banks are left to set aside their CA ratio based on their own risk assessment of their asset profile.

“Most banks have maintained a CA ratio of lower than 1.2% because there is no minimum set by Bank Negara. This circular effectively sets the standard for a minimum requirement,” said a banker.

The CA ratio was previously known as the general provisions that all banks were required to adopt. The general provisions requirement was a minimum of 1.5% of total loans, a ratio set by the central bank.

However, after the introduction of the new accounting standards three years ago, the general provisions requirement was replaced with a CA ratio, with banks free to set their own ratio.

The central bank no longer set the minimum requirement for banks to comply with in regards to the provisions.

According to a research report by CIMB, banks that had a CA ratio of less than 1.2% as of September last year were Malayan Banking Bhd, Public Bank Bhd, Affin Bank Bhd and Alliance Bank Malaysia Bhd.

Bankers, when contacted, were divided on the impact that the requirement would have on their bottom lines.

According to one banker, the move to comply with the ruling will not impact profitability because the additional amount required to be set aside can be transferred from retained earnings.

“Funds out of retained earnings will not impact the profit and loss (P&L) account of banks. It’s not a P&L item,” he said.

However, it would affect the dividend payout ability of banks, added the banker.

Another banker said the financial institution was seeking clarification from Bank Negara on whether to set aside the provisions from its profits.

“If that were the case, then it would impact profitability,” said the banker.

OCBC Bank (M) Bhd country chief risk officer Choo Yee Kwan said the background to the new requirement was that Bank Negara wanted to ensure that impairment provisions could keep pace with strong credit growth.

“In addition, the regulator would like to promote consistency in practices in ensuring adequate rigour and data quality in arriving at the appropriate level of collective impairment and the factors that are considered by banking institutions.

“Adequate impairment provisions serve as necessary buffers against potential credit losses; hence, they can reduce the likelihood of systemic risk for the banking sector,” he said in an e-mail response to StarBiz.

He said the sector might witness an increase in the overall level of impairment provisions at the industry level.

“Nevertheless, this should be seen positively, as the higher credit buffers would now render the sector stronger,” he noted.

CIMB Research in a report stated that the proposed new guideline could have a negative impact on banks based on its theoretical analysis.

It pointed out that several banks would have to increase their CA provisions under the new ruling and this would lead to a rise in the banks’ overall credit costs.

“Those which do not meet the requirements would have to increase their CA (and ultimately credit cost) in 2014-2015, even if their asset quality is improving. For banks with a CA ratio of above 1.2%, the new ruling would limit the room for them to further reduce their CA ratios,” CIMB Research explained.

According to CIMB Research’s estimates, banks’ net profits could be lowered by around 0.5% (for Hong Leong Bank Bhd) to 11% (for Public Bank) in 2014 to 2015 if a minimum requirement of 1.2% for the CA ratio were implemented.

Another analyst, however, is of the view that the new requirement from Bank Negara would have a negligible impact on the operations and earnings of banks.

“We think it is not a major concern for most banks because, firstly, the grace period for the implementation of the new guideline is long. Secondly, the minimum ratio of 1.2% will not comprise of only the CA component alone, but is also a combination of the CA and the statutory or regulatory reserve.

“In general, we see the new guideline as a measure to standardise the way banks gauged their capital buffers.
“The bottom line is, we think the new guideline will only serve to further strengthen banks’ capital buffers,” the analyst added.

By Cecilia Kok and Daljit Dhesi StarBiz, Asia News Network

Silver lining in weak currency

Weaker currencies are a boon for Malaysia and Indonesia, helping to tip the balance of trade back in their favour, as exporters benefit from rising demand for goods and commodities from advanced economies, coupled with steady growth in China.The favourable trade surplus, economists said, would ease the pressure on these emerging countries’ deteriorating external accounts, which is a major sore point for foreign investors.

They added that rising exports would provide the much-needed tailwind for Asian economies to sustain growth even as domestic demand moderated.

Malaysia on Friday reported a 2.4% growth in exports in 2013, backed by a 14.4% jump in December that exceeded the market’s expectation by a wide margin.

“We still maintain our long-term view of impending growth momentum in the coming quarters,” Alliance Research economists Manokaran Mottain and Khairul Anwar Md Nor said in a report.

They predicted exports in 2014 to grow at a faster pace of 5%, backed by steady but improving export demand from advanced economies.

While imports grew at a faster pace than exports in 2013, Malaysia continued to enjoy a strong trade surplus.

The favourable trade surplus combined with an anticipated smaller services deficit and transfer outflows would translate into a larger current account surplus of RM16.7bil or 6.6% of gross domestic product (GDP) in the last quarter of 2013.

“The cumulative current account surplus is estimated to reach RM37.8bil or 3.9% of GDP in 2013, helping to assuage fears of a current account deficit,’’ CIMB Research economist Lee Heng Guie said.

This, he said, was positive for the ringgit and the capital market.

The ringgit, along with other emerging Asian currencies, have been under pressure since June last year after the US Federal Reserve began talking and later started to reduce its quantitative easing (QE).

The US Fed first pared its monthly bond purchases programme from the original US$85 billion a month to $75 billion in January. This was cut further by $10 billion starting from February.

“Capital outflows from emerging markets are likely to continue in the months ahead as the Federal Reserve winds down its QE3 programme,” said Macquarie Bank Ltd’s Singapore-based head of strategy for fixed income and currencies Nizam Idris.

Fears about the US Fed tapering down the supply of cheap money to the market first surfaced in May last year and it triggered a huge sell-off on emerging market assets.

Countries such as Indonesia and India had seen their currencies depreciate the most in 2013, Both economies had wide current account deficits.

Last year, the Indian rupee plummeted the most in two decades, while rupiah depreciated by about 20% against the US dollar over the past 12 months.

Not helping emerging market currencies is the recovery in advanced economies, such as a rebound in economic growth in the US which rose by 3.2% in the fourth quarter of last year.

But if economic recovery in the US and eurozone were to stay on course, so would demand for cheaper emerging market exports. This, in turn, would help shrink the huge current account deficits that had hobbled countries such as Indonesia, India and Turkey.

For many emerging economies, 2014 had gotten off to a grim start.

Concern over the Chinese economy’s marked slowdown and the Argentine peso’s steep slide in January has brought upon renewed pressure on the currency market.

But the current market volatility does not portend weaker growth.

CIMB Research in Indonesia observed that the strains in the financial markets did not translate into a significant slowdown in the economy as the country’s real GDP growth accelerated to 5.7% in the last quarter of 2013.

Its exports surged in December, while imports slowed on the weaker rupiah. This helped to widen its trade surplus to $1.52 billion, the largest since November 2011.

The favourable trade numbers narrowed its current account deficit of $4.06 billion.

CIMB Research expects growth in Indonesia “to trough” in the first half of 2014 as the lagged effect of the rupiah depreciation and Bank Indonesia’s aggressive policy-tightening cycle in June-November 2013 works through the economy.

“Pre-election bounce in consumption should offset the weakness, allowing Indonesia to post 5.6% GDP growth in 2014,’’ it said.

Malaysia, too, is on track for sustained growth. CIMB Research projected GDP growth in the third quarter would probably expand by 5.3%, taking the full year growth rate to 4.7% for 2013. – The Star/ANN

Related posts:

Capital controls: From heresy to orthodoxy


Principles for formulating capital control policies must take local conditions into account.

ON Sept 1, 2011, it would be 13 years to the day when Malaysia first introduced capital controls to stem the effects of the Asian financial crisis on the domestic economy. In 1998, it was heresy to introduce capital controls on capital flows, since it was the International Monetary Fund (IMF) orthodoxy to liberalise the capital account.

From the perspective of history, one tends to forget that in 1945, when the IMF was first established, the consensus opinion among bankers and academics alike was for hot money to be controlled. Indeed, the intellectual father of the IMF, John Maynard Keynes, remarked that “what used to be heresy is now endorsed as orthodoxy.”

In the old days, courtesy to living persons and the statute of limitations would allow history to be written only after 60 years when official archives are opened to the public.

Today, we live in an age of unfettered information, when oral and documented history can be published rapidly, from authorised biographies issued shortly after a leader leaves office to unauthorised leakages from Wikileaks.

The publication of a new book by Datuk Wong Sulong, former group chief editor of The Star, called Notes to the Prime Minister: the Untold Story of How Malaysia Beat the Currency Speculators, only two months after the IMF announced in April 2011 new thinking on capital inflows, is a remarkable achievement.

Sixty-six years after the IMF was formed, capital controls have moved full circle from orthodoxy to heresy and back again to (qualified) orthodoxy.

The book comprises 45 Notes written by Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, between Oct 3, 1997 and Aug 21, 1998 to then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

In short, they were the key briefs that helped Dr Mahathir make up his mind on the key economic policies to help combat the Asian financial crisis.

Book offers deep insights

For both historians and practicing policymakers, this new book offers deep insights into the serendipity and the practice of successful policy decision-making. There is an element of serendipity, because Dr Mahathir recalled that he spotted Nor Mohamed walking down a street in Kuala Lumpur just before he left for Buenos Aires in September 1997 via Hong Kong, where he attended the World Bank Annual Meetings and clashed publicly with George Soros on currency trading.

On Sept 29, 1997, he summoned Nor Mohamed to meet him in Buenos Aires, because he needed someone who understood currency trading. It is a tribute to a politician trained as a doctor that he was willing to spend repeated sessions with an experienced currency trader to understand the intricacies of modern financial markets.

Reading the 45 Notes in historical sequence, one gets a far better appreciation of how the decision to impose capital controls was arrived at. The Notes not only have historical value, but also current-day applicability, as they explain not only offshore currency, the psychology of fear and greed that drive markets, but also market manipulation in thinly traded emerging market currencies.

The major problem of the proponents of the Washington Consensus in 1997 was that most of them were macro-economists who had little understanding or experience of how the markets actually worked. Free markets became a dogma and objective in their own right, rather than the means to an end for better livelihood for all.

The Notes also revealed that in complex decisions under uncertainty, it was vital to understand clearly the key parameters for action. Note 7 clearly pointed out that Malaysia was different from other countries under currency attack because it did not have large short-term external debt. Note 11, dated Oct 21, 1997, spelt out the factors that determined exchange rates, with a particularly illuminating explanation of market manipulation.

Market manipulation was seen as due to concerted effort by hedge funds, using large gearing and available tools and then triggering the element of fear among the long-term investors who have legitimate currency risk.

In other words, if the wolves can trigger the herd to move, then the fundamentals can move. The perception of fear changes the whole game.

Effect of CLOB

Note 39 dated July 9, 1998 is an important study of the effect on Malaysia of the central limit order book (CLOB) for trading of Malaysian shares in Singapore. The Note identified that the CLOB was a convenient way for capital outflows.

Hence, one of the most effective ways for exchange control was to impose the condition that Malaysian shares could only be traded on a Malaysian exchange, which came on Aug 31, 1998, with exchange controls imposed on the following day.

In Dr Mahathir’s words, “during the financial crisis, we faced two parallel situations; the ringgit was falling rapidly and Malaysian shares were also falling rapidly. So we had to put an end to both.”
50th Mederka Malaysian National Day celebratio...Image via Wikipedia
The IMF has come out with six key principles for formulating capital control policies.

The first is that there is no “one-size-fits-all” policy mix. The second is that capital controls should fit long-term structural reforms. Third, capital controls are only one tool and not a substitute for the right macro policies. Fourth, capital controls can be used on a case-by-case basis, in appropriate circumstances. Fifth, the medicine should treat the ailment, and finally, the policy must consider its effect on other market participants.

It is hard to argue against these common sense “motherhood” principles. The trick in real life policy-making is how to apply them to local conditions.

On of the features of the current Chinese capital controls is that China also has a large amount of Chinese shares listed outside capital controls, such as Chinese shares listed in Hong Kong, Singapore and New York.

This is a book that is a must read for all emerging market policymakers interested in liberalising their capital accounts and for IMF experts to ponder emerging market experience.

I recommend that this new book be translated into Chinese, so that Chinese policymakers interested in internationalising the renminbi can look at the Malaysian experience.

Tan Sri Andrew Sheng is author of the book, From Asian to Global Financial Crisis.

Related post:

The untold story of Malaysia foreign exchange controls

Stronger Malaysian ringgit seen

Stronger ringgit seen


Economists expect the ringgit to strengthen further against the US dollar

PETALING JAYA: Economists expect the ringgit to further strengthen against the greenback and attract extensive capital inflow into the region. It will also lead to possible further hikes in statutory reserve requirement (SRR) to stem excess liquidity if the global financial volatility worsens following the US credit rating downgrade.

Standard and Poor’s (S&P’s) had last Friday downgraded the world’s largest economy a notch lower to AA+ from a triple A rating since the credit rating was issued to the US in 1917.

MIDF Research chief economist Anthony Dass said he expected the ringgit to strengthen against the US dollar at an average 2.97 for the year supported by a combination of healthy economic fundamentals and strong inflow of liquidity.

Stronger ringgit: Dass expects the ringgit to trade at an average 2.97 to the greenback for the year.

He added that the stronger ringgit against the US dollar would help cushion some level of imported inflation, which would give some breathing space for Bank Negara on further raising the overnight policy rate (OPR), which now stood at 3%.

“We have now placed a 30% odd for the OPR to stay at 3% for the rest of the year and expect the central bank to raise it by another 25 basis points (bps) in the second half of this year,” Dass said.

Much depends on the direction of the ringgit, the global commodity and food prices, liquidity and whether there will be further relaxation of subsidies.

Underpinned by healthy economic fundamentals and benefiting from the regional net inflow of funds, liquidity inflow into Malaysia has been strong, forcing the central bank to raise the SRR by 300 bps to 4% between April-June 2011. SRR are non-interest deposits kept at the central bank to mop up excess liquidity in the financial system.

With lingering uncertainties on the global front, Dass said he expected Malaysia, like other Asian ex-Japan economies, to continue to see inflow of funds. While this would strengthen the ringgit, he said ample liquidity would add pressure on inflation, adding that he was not ruling out the possibility of further hikes in SRR by another 50 bps to 100 bps should the inflow of liquidity pose a problem.

RAM Holdings economist Jason Fong, in response to a query from Starbiz, said if the financial volatility in the US turned out to be very significant and persistent, the impact on its external markets, including Malaysia, could be substantial.

One of the worst case scenarios would entail extensive capital flight from US-centric assets, he said. In this scenario, he added that there would be considerable decline in the value of the US dollar, causing an appreciation of US-denominated assets, particularly commodities.

The US financial volatility might also cause investors to put their money into safe haven assets such as precious metals, like gold, Fong noted.

Furthermore, he said if there were further US debt rating downgrade within the next two years as pointed out by S&P, then banks (depending on its portfolio weightings in US Treasuries) might slow down lending activities to meet international banking guidelines and this could slow domestic lending and cause consumption and investment to decline.

Fong said a larger-than-usual capital inflow would likely put upward pressure on the ringgit, causing Malaysia’s exports to be more uncompetitive.

He said the rating agency maintained its economic growth forecast of 5.6% for Malaysia this year but acknowledged that the downside risk to growth had risen in the last few months.

This included a prolonged US slowdown coupled with a deteriorating external economic environment, he noted.

AmResearch Sdn Bhd director of economic research Manokaran Mottain reckons that the impact on Malaysia from the US credit rating downgrade will be minimal as the local economy is more domestic-oriented.

Countries more exposed to US Treasuries, including Japan and China, would face the brunt in the near term. China would be pressured to ease the grip on a weaker yuan policy, he added.

For Malaysia, the biggest impact will be in the currency market, with the ringgit rallying again towards RM2.93 per dollar again. The ringgit was traded at RM3.019 to a US$1 yesterday.

In the medium term, a possible quantitative easing (QE3) in the US would lead to the appreciation of the regional currencies, including the ringgit – which is expected to rally towards RM2.90 per dollar before settling between the RM2.80-RM2.90 range for this year.

Manokaran, who is maintaining the country’s gross domestic product forecast at 5% this year, said the Government had trimmed its exposure to the G3 and plans to boost domestic demand. Apart from the US, the G3 also include Japan and the European Union.

European choice: Greek bailout Mark II – it’s a default !


The European debt crisis has evolved rather quickly since my last column, “Greece is Bankrupt” (July 2). The European leadership was clearly in denial. The crisis has lurched from one “scare” to another. First, it was Greece, then Ireland, then Portugal; and then back to Greece. On each occasion, European politicians muddled through, dithering to buy time with half-baked solutions: more “kicking the can down the road.” By last week, predictably, the crisis came home to roost. Financial markets in desperation turned on Italy, the euro-zone’s third largest economy, with the biggest sovereign debt market in Europe. It has 1.9 trillion euros of sovereign debt outstanding (120% of its GDP), three times as much as Greece, Ireland and Portugal combined.

Greece austerity vote: Q & A Over the next two weeks the EU must come up with a second Greek bailout which could be as high as £107billion on top of the £98billion in rescue loans agreed for Greece in May

The situation has become just too serious, if contagion was allowed to fully play out. It was a reality check; a time to act as it threatened both European integration and the global recovery. So, on July 21, an emergency summit of European leaders of the 17-nation euro-currency area agreed to a second Greek bailout (Mark II), comprising two key elements: (i) the debt exchange (holders of 135 billion euros in Greek debt maturing up to 2020 will voluntarily accept new bonds of up to 15 to 30 years); and (ii) new loans of 109 billion euros (through its bailout fund and the IMF). Overall, Greek debt would fall by 26 billion euros from its total outstanding of 350 billion euros. No big deal really.

Contagion: Italy and Spain

By mid-July, the Greek debt drama had become a full-blown euro-zone crisis. Policy makers’ efforts to insulate other countries from a Greek default, notably Italy and Spain, have failed. Markets panicked because of disenchantment over sloppy European policy making. For the first time, I think, investors became aware of the chains of contagion and are only now beginning to really think about them.

The situation in Italy is serious. At US$262bil, total sovereign claims by international banks on Italy exceeded their combined sovereign exposures to Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain, which totalled US$226bil. European banks account for 90% of international banks’ exposure to Italy and 84% of sovereign exposure, with French & German banks being the most exposed. Italy & Spain have together 6.3 trillion euros of public and private debt between them. Reflecting growing market unease, the yield on Italy’s 10-year government bonds had risen to 5.6% on July 20, and Spain’s, to 6%, against 2.76% on German comparable bunds, the widest spread ever in the euro era.

Italy and Spain face different challenges. Spain has a high budget deficit (9.2% of GDP in 2010, down from 11.1% in 2009) the target being to take it down to 6% in 2011 which assumes high implementation risks. Its debt to GDP ratio (at 64% in 2011) is lower than the average for the eurozone. The economy is only gradually recovering, led by exports. But Spain suffers from chronic unemployment (21%, with youth unemployment at 45%), weak productivity growth and a dysfunctional labour market.

It must also restructure its savings banks. Spain needs to continue with reforms; efforts to repair its economy are far from complete and risks remain considerable. Italy has a low budget deficit (4.6% of GDP) and hasn’t had to prop-up its banks. But its economy has barely expanded in a decade, and its debt to GDP ratio of 119% in 2010 was second only to Greece. Italy suffers from sluggish growth, weak productivity and falling competitiveness. Its weaknesses reflect labour market rigidities and low efficiency. The main downside risk comes from turmoil in the eurozone periphery.

Another decade of stagnation also poses a major risk. But both Spain and Italy are not insolvent unlike Greece. The economies are not growing and need to be more competitive. The average maturity of their debt is a reasonable six to seven years. But the psychological damage already done to Europe’s bond market cannot be readily undone.

The deal: Europeanisation of Greek debt

The new bailout deal soughts to ring-fence Greece by declaring “Greece is in a uniquely grave situation in the eurozone. This is the reason why it requires an exceptional solution,” implying it’s not to be repeated. Most don’t believe it. But to its credit, the new deal cuts new ground in addition to bringing-in much needed extra cash – 109 billion euros, plus a contribution by private bondholders of up to 50 billion euros by mid-2014. For the first time, the new framework included solvent counterparties and adequate collateral. For investors, there is nothing like having Europe as the new counterparty instead of Greece. This europeanisation of the Greek debt lends some credibility to the programme. Other new features include: (i) reduction in interest rates to about 3.5% (4.5% to 5.8% now) and extension of maturities to 15 years (from 7 years), to be also offered to Ireland and Portugal; (ii) the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), its rescue vehicle, will be allowed to buy bonds in the secondary market, extend precautionary credit lines before States are shut-out of credit markets, and lend to help recapitalise banks; and (iii) buy collateral for use in the bond exchange, where investors are given four options to accept new bonds carrying differing risk profiles, worth less than their original holdings.

The IIF (Institute of International Finance), the industry trade group that negotiated for the banks, insurance funds and other investors, had estimated that one-half of the 135 billion euros to be exchanged will be for new bonds at 20% discount, giving a savings of 13.5 billion euros off the Greek debt load. Of the 109 billion euros from the new bailout (together with the IMF), 35 billion euros will be used to buy collateral to serve as insurance against the new bonds in exchange, while 20 billion euros will go to buy Greek debt at a discount in the secondary market and then retiring it, giving another savings of 12.6 billion euros on the Greek debt stock.

Impact of default

Once again, the evolving crisis was a step ahead of the politicians. There are fears that Italy and Spain could trip into double-dip recession as global growth falters, threatening the debt dynamics of both countries. This time the IMF weighed in with serious talk of contagion with widespread knock-on effects worldwide. Fear finally struck, forcing Germany and France to act, this time more seriously. The first reaction came from the credit rating agencies. Moody’s downgraded Greece’s rating three notches deeper into junk territory: to Ca, its second-lowest (from Caa1), short of a straight default. Similarly, Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor’s have cut Greece’s rating to CCC.

They have since downgraded it further. They are all expected to state Greece is in default when it begins to exchange its bonds in August for new, long-dated debt (up to 30 years) at a loss to investors (estimated at 21% of their bond holdings). The rating agencies would likely consider this debt exchange a “credit event”, but only for a limited period, I think. Greece’s financial outlook thereafter will depend on whether the country would likely recover or default again. History is unkind: sovereigns that default often falters again.

What is also clear now is the new bailout would not do much to reduce Greece’s huge stock of sovereign debt. At best, the fall in its debt stock will represent 12% of Greece’s GDP. Over the medium term, Greece continues to face solvency challenges. Its stock of debt will still be well in excess of 130% of GDP and will face significant implementation risks to financial and economic reform. No doubt the latest bailout benefitted the entire eurozone by containing near-term contagion risks, which otherwise would engulf Europe. It did manage to provide for the time being, some confidence to investors in Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy that it’s not going to be a downward spiral. But the latest wave of post-bailout warnings have reignited concerns of contagion risks and revived investor caution.

Still, the bailout doesn’t address the very core fiscal problems across the eurozone. This is not a comprehensive solution. It shifted additional risks towards contributing members with stronger finances and their taxpayers as well as private investors, and reduces incentives for governments to keep their fiscal affairs under strict check. This worries the Germans as it weakens the foundation of currency union based on fiscal self-discipline. Moreover, the EFSF now given more authority to intervene pre-emptively before a state gets bankrupt, didn’t get more funds.

German backlash appears to be also growing. While the market appears to be moving beyond solvency to looking at potential threat to the eurozone as a whole, the elements needed to fight systemic failure are not present. At best, the deal reflected a courageous effort but fell short of addressing underlying issues, leading to fears that Greece-like crisis situations could still flare-up, spreading this time deep into the eurozone’s core.

Growing pains

The excitement of the bailout blanked out an even bigger challenge that could further destabilise the eurozone sluggish growth. The July Markit Purchasing Managers Index came in at 50.8, the lowest since August 2009 and close enough to the 50 mark that divides expansion from contraction. And, way below the consensus forecast. Both manufacturing and services slackened. Germany and France expanded at the slowest pace in two years in the face of a eurozone that’s displaying signs it is already contracting. Looking ahead, earlier expectations of a 2H’11 pick-up now remains doubtful.Lower GDP growth will require fiscal stimulus to fix, at a time of growing fiscal consolidation which threatens a downward spiral. At this time, the eurozone needs policies to restart growth, especially around the periphery. Without growth, economic reform and budget restraints only exacerbate political backlash and social tensions. This makes it near impossible to restore debt sustainability. Germany may have to delay its austerity programme without becoming a fiscal drag. This trade-off between growth and austerity is real.

IMF studies show that cutting a country’s budget deficit by 3% points of GDP would reduce real output growth by two percentage points and raise the unemployment rate by one percentage point. History suggests growth and austerity just do not mix. In practical terms, it is harder for politicians to stimulate growth than cut debt.

Reform takes time to yield results. And, markets are fickle. In the event the market switches focus from high-debt to low-growth economies, a crisis can easily evolve to enter a new phase one that could help businesses invest and employ rather than a pre-mature swing of the fiscal axe. Timing is critical. It now appears timely for the United States and Europe to shift priorities. They can’t just wait forever to rein in their debts. Sure, they need credible plans over the medium term for deficit reduction. More austerity now won’t get growth going. The surest way to build confidence is to get recovery onto a sustainable path only growth can do that. Without it, the risk of a double-dip recession increases. Latest warnings from the financial markets in Europe and Wall Street send the same message: get your acts together and grow. This needs statesmanship. The status quo is just not good enough anymore.

Former banker Dr Lin is a Harvard educated economist and a British chartered scientist who now spends time writing, teaching and promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome; email:

A choice for Americans: Spend more Borrow more? Spend less Tax more?

Debt crisis: America faces a decision that will affect us all

The financial crisis will force the Obama administration to make a choice that will define its future – and ours.

Wall Street blues: America's problem is political, not economic - Debt crisis: America faces a decision that will affect us all

Wall Street blues: America’s problem is political, not economic Photo: ALAMY By Jeremy Warner

To understand the origins of today’s stand-off between Republicans and Democrats over the US debt crisis, it is necessary to revisit an event which took place in Boston Harbour nearly 238 years ago. On December 16, 1773, a group of Massachusetts colonists boarded ships belonging to the East India Company and threw the entire cargo into the sea. There, in tax rebellion, began the American Revolution.

This iconic event in US history, the one from which the modern Tea Party takes its name, helped establish a national aversion to taxation that has remained at the heart of the American psyche ever since. For a people defined by the idea of rugged individualism, self-reliance and the frontier spirit, the presumption of low taxes – and correspondingly small government – is an article of faith as sacred as motherhood and apple pie.

 The Problem

Few would contest the manifold economic success that these principles have delivered. They are the very foundation of the American economic model, and helped to make the US the richest and most powerful nation the world has ever seen. But here’s the problem. In recent times, both government and its spending commitments have been getting a whole lot bigger. Taxation, on the other hand, has failed to keep pace. On the contrary: under George W Bush, America reduced its tax burden even as its spending escalated. Since President Obama came to power, spending has run further out of control, with no compensating tax increases.

Hard as it is to believe in some of its states, America as a whole remains a low-tax economy in comparison with most other “rich” nations. Yet its government spending is approaching the heroic levels seen in Europe. For the time being, the gap is filled by borrowing from foreigners, a plainly unsustainable and humbling path – made all the more worrying by the fact that there are huge spending pressures still to come from the needs and demands of an ageing population. Something has to give. Either America must spend less, or tax more.


But before analysing the significance of this choice, we need to lay a couple of misconceptions about the nature of the current crisis to rest. From President Obama to Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary, to Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF, to our own Vince Cable, the airwaves have been ringing with apocalyptic warnings about the likely consequences for the world economy should Congress fail to break the impasse over the debt ceiling by the August 2 deadline. Any American default, Summers has warned, would be like “Lehman on steroids… it’s gonna be financial Armageddon”.

Lagarde has wagged her finger at the US and urged action similar in its “courageousness” to that taken last week by the eurozone, which she somewhat optimistically seems to think has now largely solved its problems. Meanwhile, the Business Secretary, in an extraordinary and ill-advised outburst, accused “a few Right-wing nutters” in Congress of posing a bigger threat to the world economy than the trials and tribulations of the euro.

To heap the blame for America’s indecision on a particular ideology is to misunderstand the nature and importance of the debate – yet Mr Cable seems determined to accuse President Obama’s opponents of holding the world to ransom.

Are any of these warnings valid? Well, if America were to default, it would indeed be a seismic upheaval of shattering dimensions. In reality, it’s not going to happen. What’s being played out here is not, at this stage at least, an existential event, but a political charade.

Distress signs

There have been signs of distress in financial markets in recent days, but in the main, investors have displayed a remarkable lack of concern, with US Treasuries still trading at yields close to their historic lows.

They are right to be sanguine. The bottom line is that Mr Obama is not about to go down as the first president in history to default – which in any case would be to breach the Constitutional amendment stating that “the validity of the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned”.

Much as he would like to blame Republicans for such a calamity, he would not be able to escape responsibility. It is the President’s job to find solutions. The buck ultimately stops with him.

If, by some outside chance, the President does petulantly decide to throw himself off the cliff, it will be an unnecessary and surreal type of default. America is not insolvent, in the same way that some of the peripheral economies of the eurozone plainly are. It’s simply that it cannot agree on the correct balance between spending and tax. The crisis is political, not economic – which makes it quite unlike the situation in the eurozone, where it is both.

The immediate problem of the deficit – and possibly of the longer-term demographic challenges, too – could easily be solved with a single measure, the imposition of a European-style federal sales tax, akin to VAT. Yet hell will freeze over before such an abomination is agreed.

With characteristic wit, Mr Summers has summarised the issue thus: Democrats are against VAT because they see it as a regressive tax which would hit the poor, while Republicans are against it because they see it as a money machine that would entrench high state spending. Perhaps if Democrats came to appreciate its qualities as a revenue generator, and Republicans its regressive characteristics, they might actually be able to agree.

The parties have produced several rival plans for fiscal consolidation, but there’s little merit in getting into the minutiae: to the outside world, they all look as flawed and implausible as each other.

And the detail of the argument is, in any case, almost irrelevant compared to the titanic battle for the heart and soul of America’s future that underlies it.

Staying loyal

Does the US economy stay loyal to its low-tax, libertarian traditions, or does it retreat into serene, low-growth, European-style old age by reinforcing its social welfare programmes and charging citizens the taxes necessary to pay for them? Not since the Civil War has the nation been so polarised. If it were possible to split the US in two, and for each half to go its own way, it might provide some kind of a solution. But, ultimately, one voice must triumph over another.

For the US to forsake the principles that have underpinned its economic success for more than two centuries would be a disaster not just for the country, but for the world. European experience teaches that rising taxes almost invariably entrench higher spending. Once a culture of entitlements – a cushy, cradle-to-grave welfare state – becomes established, it’s very difficult to remove. When a choice then has to be made between spending on welfare and productive investment in the nation’s future – education, defence and so on – the latter is always culled first.

European style

Paradoxically, although moving to a European-style tax base would provide all the revenues the country needs, it would inevitably mark the start of America’s long retreat from military and economic hegemony.

Economic might is as much to do with confidence and perception as reality. The spectacle of a nation so lacking in credible political leadership that it cannot resolve its differences, threatens to default on its debts, and would rather print money than face up to its underlying economic challenges, is already perilously close to breaking the spell. America needs to wake up, before it’s too late.

US dollar cracking at the seams



MY last columns dealt with the international monetary system (IMS), specifically why the world monetary order is in disorder, and why free movement of capital underpinning the IMS is increasingly being challenged.

Today’s column concerns the basic anchor of the IMS the reserve currency role of the US dollar and why it will give way to rapidly rising pressures towards multipolarity, that is, the concurrent pulling of forces emanating from more than two growth centres.

In 20 years, the World Bank expects the newly emerging BRIIKs (Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia and Korea) to join China as new drivers of growth towards a multipolar world. Today, none of their currencies is used for reserve accumulation, invoicing or exchange rate anchor. The status quo remains centred on the US dollar. But change is in the air. In 1991, the G3 (US, euro-zone and Japan) accounted for 49% of world trade, and the BRIICKs (BRIIKs plus China) only 9%. By 2010, the G3’s share had fallen to 29%, while the BRIICKs’ share rose beyond 30%. Without doubt, the post-war structure dominated by advanced nations is in the midst of fundamental change. Globalisation and the rapid growth of the emerging market economies (EMEs) are bound to translate into greater global economic power. It’s just a matter of time.


We are witnessing the cracking of the global institutions created in 1945. They are still unadjusted to the growing weight of the EMEs, reflecting reluctance by the United States and euro-zone to come to terms with a world they no longer dominate. It is also a manifestation of uneasiness in China, India and Brazil that the management of their domestic economy, long the jurisdiction of internal prerogative, now matters to the rest of the world.

This is understandable. The founding of the Bretton Woods institutions (IMF and World Bank) after the devastation of the Great Depression and WWII set in motion an era of stability at a time when the US was unchallenged in the global economy. In international finance, this post-war order began to fall apart in the 1970s as the US economy floundered, the dollar tanked, Europe was rebuilt and Japan asserted itself.

The move towards multipolarism was, however, interrupted in the 1980s and 1990s by the Soviet Union’s collapse, the euro-zone’s indigestion after swallowing a re-united Germany, and the Asian currency crisis. The US was thrust into the forefront to lead. But, the home-made US financial crisis in the 2000s in the face of rapidly rising EMEs, brought the era of US dominance to an end.

Yet, neither the US, euro-zone nor China has the capacity and clout to manage global problems. Happily, the G-20 came along to replace the G7, stumbling on to a mutually beneficial co-operation. Prof Barry Eichengreen‘s reference in history of another scenario is scary: “The decades following WWI were marked by the inability of rising or declining powers to stabilise the world economy or create functioning global institutions; the result was the Great Depression & WWII.”

A definite shift is taking place, driven by the rising power of the emerging BRIICKs, together representing more than one-half of global growth in 14 years. According to the World Bank report, Multipolarity: The New Global Economy, the EMEs will grow at 4.7% per annum up until 2025, which is double the rate of the advanced nations (2.3%). The implications are far-reaching:

  • the balance of global growth and investment will shift to the EMEs;
  • this shift will lead to boosts in investment flows to nations driving global growth, with a significant rise in cross-border M&As, and a changing corporate landscape where established multinationals will largely be absent;
  • a new IMS will gradually evolve, displacing the US$ as the world’s main reserve currency by 2025;
  • the euro and the RMB (renmimbi, China’s currency) will establish themselves on an equal footing in a new “multi-currency” monetary system;
  • the euro is the most credible rival to the US$; “its status is poised to expand provided the euro can successfully overcome sovereign debt crisis currently faced by some member countries and can avoid moral hazard problems associated with bailouts within the European Union;”
  • the rising role (and internationalising) of the RMB should “resolve the disparity between China’s growing economic strength on the global stage and its heavy reliance on foreign currencies;” and
  • the transition will happen gradually

At no time in modern history have so many EMEs been at the forefront of an evolving multipolar economic system.

A strong US dollar a delusion

The US dollar is the reserve currency. This refers to its use by foreign central banks and governments as part of their international reserves. This role, combined with its widespread use as a medium of exchange (transactions and settlement vehicle), a standard of measurement (unit of account) and a store of value (method of holding wealth), has given rise to the key currency status of the US dollar. For these reasons, the US serves as world banker.

This was not planned. It just evolved since it met various needs of foreign official institutions and foreign private parties more effectively than any alternative could. Many of the reasons for the use of US dollar by official and private parties are the same. However, the aims of the two users need not always coincide. If the US dollar’s role as reserve currency was terminated, its use by private traders and institutions would most likely remain, perhaps even stronger. The wheels of commerce keep turning. The role of the US dollar as world banker remains relevant.

It is a long-standing tradition for the US Treasury to favour a strong US dollar. The US Fed has no say since it is outside its purview of fighting inflation and unemployment.

The exchange rate is just another price. The price of the US dollar relative to other currencies is determined in the market, and not under the control of anyone. An increase in demand for US dollar or a reduction in its supply strengthens the US dollar. Lower demand and increased supply will weaken the US dollar.

A strong US dollar is not always good. It depends on what causes it to strengthen; if the cause is rising productivity or innovation, that’s good. But in an economy struggling to grow and to create more jobs, a strong US dollar is not so desirable. A weak dollar means goods are cheaper relative to foreign goods; it stimulates exports and reduces imports. Foreign goods get more expansive but more US jobs are created.

At this time, US is better off with a weak dollar. Strangely, most politicians thinks it’s desirable for the US dollar to weaken only against one currency, the renminbi. The US Congress routinely bashes China for not weakening the US dollar enough. Indeed, a fall in the value of the US dollar against all currencies would help the US even more. Yet, in the next breath, the same Congress wants the US dollar to be strong. This delusion just won’t go away. They are like failed dieters who talk earnestly about healthy living while eating a chocolate doughnut.

The US dollar isn’t going anywhere. It is not about to be replaced anytime soon. The only dangers are (i) reckless US mismanagement giving rise to chronic inflation (or deflation if the exit of QE2, the second round of quantitative easing, is not well handled), which is implausible; and (ii) US budget deficits run out of control; outright debt default is far-fetched. Mark Twain once responded to accounts of his ill health by saying “reports of my death are greatly exaggerated”. He might well have referred to the US dollar. For the moment, the patient is stable, external symptoms notwithstanding. But there will be grounds for worry if he doesn’t commit to a healthier lifestyle.

The euro and renminbi

Today, the US dollar faces growing competition in the global currency space. The serious contender is the euro, which has gained ground as a currency goods are invoiced and as official reserves held. Nevertheless, share of reserves held in US dollar remains well over double the share held in euros; US$ share did fall from 71% in 2000 to 67% in 2005 and 62% in 2009, while euro’s share rose from 24% in 2005 to more than 27% in 2009. In terms of global forex, the US$ market turns over US$3.5 trillion daily, more than double that in euros. But the US dollar share of the market fell from 45% in 2001 to 42% in 2010. Euro capital markets are of comparable depth and liquidity as the US dollar’s, and the euro-zone and US economies are roughly the same size.

Events since 2008 have shaken faith in the US financial markets. But the banking crisis and its economic fallout are a trans-Atlantic affair. Continuing euro bailouts is a sign the old continent is not much safer than the US. Worried savers may still sleep better with US$ under their pillow. So for the euro, it’s going to be a long haul.

The sheer dynamism of China and the globalisation of its corporations and banks will propel the renminbi to a greater international role. It can become a global settlement currency this year. China has made good progress, signing currency swaps with more central banks. The issuance of renminbi-denominated bonds is actively promoted. Renminbi offshore deposits in Hong Kong (to top 1 trillion renminbi by year-end) are rising rapidly, and offshore renminbi trading will expand beyond Hong Kong.

But with the undervalued exchange rate, an asymmetry in settlement has arisen. Foreign importers are reluctant to settle in renminbi, while foreign exporters are glad to do so. In the end, success at internationalising the renminbi depends on the pace China liberalises the capital account.

The problem lies in speculative capital flows aimed at profiting from arbitrage. Capital controls remain as China’s last line of defence against hot’ money inflows. Its policy continues to encourage non-residents to hold more renminbi and renminbi-denominated assets. The sequencing of policy adjustments remains critical as China moves forward. The road ahead is going to be bumpy.

Policies co-ordination

By 2025, the World Bank’s best bet is the emergence of a multipolar world centered around the US dollar, euro and renminbi. A world supported by the likelihood US, euro-zone & China will constitute the three major “growth poles” by then. They would provide stimulus to other nations through expanding trade, finance and technology transfers, which in turn creates international demand for their currencies. Already, private investment inflows into EMEs are expected at US$1.04 trillion this year (mainly to China) against US$990bil in 2010 and US$640bil in 2009.

Inherent in this shift is rising competition among them, which is real. This is bound to create situations of potential conflict, which can exact a heavy toll on global financial markets and growth. This calls for workable mechanisms to strengthen policy co-ordination across the major growth poles in particular. This is critical in reducing risks of political and economic instability.

In the recent crisis, the G-20 was able to pick low-hanging fruits by managing the re-alignment of macro-economic policies aimed at generally common objectives to get out of recession and to rebuild financial systems. In today’s world, shifts in policy co-ordination will be increasingly towards more politically sensitive domestic fiscal and monetary and exchange rate policies. Also, the interests of the least developed countries (LDCs) have to be safeguarded against pressures accompanying the transition to a multipolar order.

Against the backdrop of the tragic earthquakes and tsunami that hit Japan, the political turmoil of the Arab spring’ gripping much of Middle East and North Africa (MENA), and growing uncertainties emanating from euro-zone sovereign debt crisis, global growth remains at sub-par this year with high unemployment, and rising inflation in the EMEs and LDCs. This calls for building confidence and promoting investments to boost productivity and create jobs to absorb the large pool of youth in MENA in particular. The LDCs and MENA nations are heavily dependent on external demand for growth. Aid and technical assistance have the ability to cushion adjustments as they adapt in the transition process.

According to the World Bank: “It is also critical that major developed economies and EMEs simultaneously craft policies that are mindful of the growing interdependency associated with the increasing presence of developing economies on the global stage and leverage such interdependency to derive closer international cooperation and prosperity worldwide.”

A former banker, Dr Lin is a Harvard-educated economist and a British Chartered Scientist who now spends time writing, teaching and promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome at

U.S. gets C credit rating, lower than Mexico


Weiss judgment ‘attention-grabbing,’ says president of Egan-Jones

By Alistair Barr, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — The U.S. got a sovereign credit rating of C on Thursday, in line with ratings for such smaller economies as Mexico, Estonia and Colombia.

Weiss Ratings, based in Jupiter, Fla., has rated the creditworthiness of financial institutions for several years, but the firm launched sovereign- debt ratings of 47 countries on Thursday. The U.S. rating of C (Fair) ranks it 33rd, Weiss noted in a statement.

A C from Weiss is roughly equivalent to a BBB rating from the big rating agencies like Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch. That’s about two notches above non-investment grade, or junk, status.

U.S. dollar gets crushed, again

Why the dollar’s getting sold lower, pushing the euro to a rate of $1.48, and how the Federal Reserve is factoring into the greenback’s decline.

The rating comes just over a week after S&P revised the outlook on its AAA rating for U.S. government debt, cutting it to negative from stable. Read the story here.

”The AAA/Aaa assigned to U.S. sovereign debt by Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch is unfair to investors and savers, who are under-compensated for the risks they are taking,” Weiss Ratings President Martin Weiss said in a statement. “An honest rating is also urgently needed to help support the political compromises and collective sacrifices the U.S. must make in order to restore its finances.”

China, Thailand get top ratings

The firm gave top A ratings to China and Thailand and assigned A- ratings to Switzerland, South Korea, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.

By contrast, Greece got a rating of E (very weak), while Portugal, Pakistan, Spain and Venezuela received D+ ratings from Weiss.

The U.S. shares C ratings from Weiss with such large countries as Japan, Brazil and Canada as well as with smaller economies like Colombia, Estonia and Mexico.

The amount of U.S. sovereign debt outstanding has soared in recent years as the government bailed out financial institutions and used huge fiscal stimulus programs to get the economy out of the worst slump since the Great Depression. Read more about the second debt storm hitting nations.


Despite high government debt, the U.S. still has attributes that make it more creditworthy, according to Sean Egan, president of Egan-Jones Ratings, a rating agency that’s paid by investors rather than issuers.

“The U.S. is the largest economy in the world, home to most industry-leading firms and maintains the reserve currency of the world,” Egan said. “That provides significant support beyond credit metrics like debt to GDP.”

The Weiss rating is “attention grabbing,” Egan added. “But unless they’re seeing very different things from other people it’s hard to support a C rating.”

In its Thursday report, Weiss gave a C- rating to Argentina, which defaulted on some of its external debt in 2002.

“The U.S. and Argentina don’t usually travel in the same sphere,” Egan noted.

‘Enough time’

Egan-Jones has a AAA rating on U.S. government debt. But the firm put that on negative watch in early March. That means there’s a “better-than-even chance” of a downgrade within the next six months, according to Egan.

“This problem is being given the highest-level attention currently in Washington,” Egan said. “Typically one shouldn’t worry as much about problems that have a spotlight on them — especially when there’s still enough time to react.

Dollar Falls against Euro, Ringgit hits new level since Asian financial crisis!


U.S. Dollar Falls Against The Euro

By Benzinga Staff

The U.S dollar fell further against the Euro Monday, April 25th, just in time for the April 26-27 Federal Open Market Committee meeting, Reuters reports.

This news comes shortly after Standard & Poor shifted the United States AAA credit rating from a stable outlook to a negative one, and the bad news and uncertainty continues for the U.S.

Reuters reports that the main reason for the weak dollar is the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy coupled with stagnant interest rates. The European Central Bank is raising interest rates while the U.S. Fed has remained steady.

Last week, the European Central Bank raised its refinancing rate from 1%, a record low, to 1.25%. The U.S. Federal Reserve has kept its main refinancing rate close to zero since December 2008.

The dollar is currently trading at 73.972, only a slight increase from the three-year low of 73.735 reached last week. The Euro is currently at 1.4604, which is very close to the 16-month high of 1.4649 also reached last week.

Market members will be anxiously awaiting the Federal Open Market Committee post-meeting news conference, with hopes of more competitive interest rates to drive up U.S. currency. The internal conflict within U.S government regarding budget deficits and growing debt does not help the dollar either.

Despite the U.S. unemployment rate continuing to decrease, people applying for jobless benefits is still too high and further reinforcing the stagnant low interest rates. At the end of the week of April 9th, the number of applications for unemployment benefits fell from 382,000 to 380,000.

Regardless of the outcome of Federal Open Market Committee meeting, it won’t be a speedy recovery for the dollar. The Federal Reserve expects to slowly recover all of the money initially circulated back in 2008 to help the economy get out of the recession.

According to Reuters, inflation and rising commodity prices are only driving the value of competitor currencies up, with Canadian and Australian dollars hitting multi-year peaks.

Ringgit hits new level since Asian financial crisis


PETALING JAYA: The ringgit closed below 3 to the greenback yesterday, breaking a psychological barrier and hitting a level not seen since the dark days of the Asian financial crisis.

The local currency settled at 2.992 to the US dollar, gaining 2.34% since the beginning of the year and charting another multi-year high.

However, exporters need not fear as its rise has been in tandem with the strengthening of other currencies in the region.

Economists told The Star there would be cause for concern only if the ringgit appreciated more than currencies whose exports competed head-to-head against Malaysia’s.

Better deal: Money changer Kamaruddin Packiry counting US dollar notes at his shop in Ikano Power Centre at Mutiara Damansara yesterday. — GLENN GUAN / The Star

They said investors were now focusing on emerging economies, including Asia’s, given that there was less risk to growth.

They pointed out that the reasons for the better performance of the region’s currencies were expectations of tighter monetary policy due to inflation worries, stronger economic fundamentals and robust demand (compared to developed economies).

When compared with other major currencies, the ringgit had generally weakened since the beginning of the year. The ringgit weakened by 4.06% against the pound and fell by 3.07% versus the Aussie dollar and 2% against the Canadian dollar.

Bank Islam Malaysia Bhd chief economist Azrul Azwar said the ringgit’s rise should not pose many problems for local exporters as long as it was not out of sync with regional currencies.

He believed Bank Negara would continue to intervene in currency markets to ensure “orderly and gradual” movement of the currency.

Affin Investment Bank Bhd economist Alan Tan said compared with the region’s currencies, the greenback’s weakness was largely due to concerns over still unclear US data on housing and jobs, as well as signals from the Federal Reserve that monetary policy would continue to remain easy.

Stronger ringgit not a problem


So long as rise in tandem with other regional currencies

PETALING JAYA: An appreciating ringgit will not have as much of an impact on the exports front as long as it strengthens in tandem with other currencies in the region.

Malaysia’s top five export destinations in February were Singapore, China, Japan, the European Union and the United States. These countries were also the top five destinations for exports last year.

Economists told StarBiz that a strengthening ringgit would not be a problem as long as the currency’s movement was synchronised with the region where competitors include Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Malaysia’s competitors in the electrical and electronics (E&E) industry, which made up nearly 40% of total exports last year, include South Korea and Taiwan.

To varying degrees, emerging Asia’s currencies have appreciated against their major trade partners as growth risks faded and the loose monetary policies of the United States and the 17-member eurozone prompt investors to shift their focus to more robust markets.

Bank Islam Malaysia Bhd chief economist Azrul Azwar said the ringgit’s rise should not post much problem for local exporters as long as the currency’s rise was not out of sync with regional currencies.

In any case, economists have pointed out time and again that Bank Negara would continue to intervene in the currency markets to ensure that the ringgit’s movement remained orderly and gradual.

“This has always been the case, Bank Negara will intervene so as to ensure that the ringgit’s movement will not impact the manufacturing sector’s exports-intensive industries,” Azrul said.

He added that part of the reason for the rise of currencies in emerging Asia was due to expectations of tighter monetary policy as inflation fuelled by higher crude oil and commodity prices hit these economies, where demand has been stronger compared to the developed economies.

Affin Investment Bank Bhd economist Alan Tan said there were indications that the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) would continue to keep US benchmark interest rates low and monetary policy loose.

Filepic: A money changer counts U.S. dollar bank notes and Malasyian ringgit notes for customers in Kuala Lumpur. Economists told StarBiz that a strengthening ringgit would not be a problem as long as the currency’s movement was synchronised with the region where competitors include Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines.

“The FOMC members are signalling that the easy monetary policy will continue as jobs and housing remain weak while the first-quarter gross domestic product growth is likely to be softer than the previous quarter,” he said.

The FOMC would release its rate decision on Wednesday while the first-quarter figures would be released on Thursday.

Meanwhile, SMI Association of Malaysia national president Chua Tiam Wee, whose members expect the ringgit to strengthen further, said any rise in the ringgit would have some impact on exporters.

“As trade is mostly conducted in US dollars, exporters will still have to fulfill their orders and absorb the losses,” he said.

Chua added that exporters would just have to be more productive and find ways to mitigate the strengthening ringgit via hedging or source their raw material in a more cost-effective way.

Related Stories:
No joy for parents with kids studying in Australia
Ringgit closes at new 13-year high
Fomca cautions against euphoria
Joy over strong ringgit
Good news for consumers as currency hits 13-year high

Regional currencies to rise on China factor



SPECULATION about China’s intention to allow its currency to appreciate soon has been strengthened after an official paper over the week said the Chinese government would let the yuan, or sometimes called the renminbi, rise about 5% against the US dollar this year.

That’s about two-percentage point higher than the expectations of most investors, who thought the maximum that the Chinese government would allow this year would just be an appreciation of 3% in the value of the yuan against the US dollar.

Needless to say, any appreciation of the yuan would certainly be welcomed by Western powers, especially the US government, which has long blamed China’s currency policy of keeping its exchange rate significantly undervalued against the others as the main cause of global imbalances.

Western powers claim that China’s significantly undervalued currency has given the country unfair trade advantage, and they point to China’s ability to continuously enjoy huge trade surpluses over the years, while leaving the West with continuously huge trade deficits, as support of their claim.

Economists at Washington-based Peterson Institute for International Economics say their recent calculation show that the yuan remains 17%-20% undervalued against the US dollar to this day. That, the institute claims, is a deliberate manipulation to gain export competitiveness.

So, given the perceived significant undervaluation of the yuan, many economists do not think that the (probable) 5% rise in the yuan’s value would be enough to appease the Western governments. Market observers believe China will remain under tremendous international pressure to let its currency rise faster to help in the global-rebalancing effort.

But to be fair, China has indeed made an effort to reform its currency policy the only thing is that it is doing it gradually. This is to maintain stability in its own financial and economic system.

Inflation management tool

In June last year, the Chinese government removed the two-year peg of the yuan to the US dollar, which had stayed at around 6.83 per US dollar since July 2008, to allow its currency to appreciate.

The removal of the yuan peg resulted in the yuan gaining about 3.33% against the US dollar as at the end of 2010. Nevertheless, the yuan was still an under-performer last year compared with other currencies in the region (as shown in the chart).

According to the China Securities Journal, a leading voice on the country’s economic affairs, the Chinese government would most likely allow the intended rise of the yuan to be accelerated in the first half of this year. This comes as the Chinese government concedes to the use of currency as a tool to manage its fast-rising inflation.

China faces mounting inflation pressures after its November consumer price index (CPI) soared to a new 28-month high at 5.1%, and some economists had warned that if no urgent measures were implemented, the country’s CPI could grow by 7%-8% over the next two months.

Economists say that by allowing its yuan to appreciate, China can alleviate the inflationary pressure as its imports of goods and services will naturally become cheaper. A higher value of its currency can also help reduce the impact of rising global commodity prices, especially that of crude oil and crude palm oil, on its domestic economy.

Regional currencies to advance

Besides the urgent need to curb rising inflation pressure, many believe that China President Hu Jintao‘s upcoming visit to the United States in the middle of this month, will also lead to the yuan rising faster in the first half of this year.

And with growing expectations of the yuan’s appreciation in the near term, economists say regional currencies, including that of Malaysia, will likely gain further momentum, particularly in the early part of this year. Regional currencies tend to move in tandem with the changes in China’s yuan, as the latter is often regarded as the “anchor” currency of the region.

Last year, the China factor had also played a role in lifting regional currencies, as wide expectations of a yuan revaluation then attracted many investors to put their bets on Asia-Pacific. Of course, the region was also attractive to investors because of its growth prospects and wide interest rate differentials with major developed economies.

And as foreign capital poured into the region, Malaysia’s ringgit turned out to be the top-performing currency last year, having appreciated from 3.424 against the US dollar from the beginning of 2010 to 3.0635 against the US dollar at the end the year.

(As at the time of writing yesterday, the ringgit was quoted at 3.0698 to the US dollar.)

Based on local economists’ report so far, the ringgit is expected to strengthen further in 2011, but only marginally, as policymakers are expected to intervene to minimise its rise. Economists believe the ringgit would end the year trading within the band of 3.00-3.05 to the US dollar.

They also believe that the strengthening of other regional currencies will also be somewhat curtailed, as Asian policymakers become increasingly concerned over the impact of the rise of their currencies on export competitiveness.

On the back of all these recent developments, it will be interesting to see how Asian governments adapt their currency policies this year to balance between the need of maintaining export competitiveness to support economic growth and boosting their purchasing power by allowing the currencies to rise, and hence, promote domestic demand.

Currency wars! China warns against rapid rise in yuan, IMF warms, Global central banks may act, Weak US dollar fuels financial bubble fears!

Wen Jiabao tells EU to stop pressuring Beijing to revalue the yuan or risk unleashing serious social unrest in China

Wen Jiabao
China’s Wen Jiabao rejected calls for a rapid appreciation of the yuan. Photograph: Koji Sasahara/AP

The war of words over international currency valuations escalated yesterday when the Chinese premier Wen Jiabao told the European Union to stop pressuring Beijing to revalue the yuan as any rapid shift risked unleashing serious social unrest in China.

Speaking in Brussels, Wen said that China would move towards making its currency more flexible but he rejected calls for a rapid appreciation as the issue threatened to dominate this weekend’s meeting of the International Monetary Fund and G7 countries in Washington.

“Do not work to pressurise us on the renminbi [yuan] rate,” Wen said, departing from a prepared speech on the sidelines of a summit with EU leaders. “Yes, we are going to proceed with the reforms.”

China has been criticised by the EU and even more so by the US for pegging its currency at a low level, meaning that its exports are cheaper worldwide, hindering the efforts of western nations to recover from recession via export-led growth.

But Wen said yesterday that China’s trade surplus with the US was explained by the specific structures of the two economies, not the yuan exchange rate.

He noted that a US congressman had predicted social unrest in China if there was a rapid rise in the yuan. “Many of our exporting companies would have to close down,” Wen said. “Migrant workers would have to return to their villages. If China saw social and economic turbulence, then it would be a disaster for the world.”

His remarks come as finance ministers from the G7 are about to discuss growing concerns over currency wars on the sidelines of the annual IMF gathering in Washington on Friday.

Timothy Geithner, the US treasury secretary who visited China earlier this year to plead the case for a higher yuan, said in Washington that a “damaging dynamic” of large economies keeping their currencies undervalued can cause inflation and asset bubbles. He called on countries to co-ordinate their policies.

“More and more countries face stronger pressure to lean against the market forces pushing up the value of their currencies,” he said yesterday at the Brookings Institution in Washington. He said currencies are “inherently a multilateral issue. It’s much easier to solve if countries come together and do things to complement each other.

Geithner’s comments echoed calls by the IMF for greater currency flexibility. The organisation’s chief waded into the row, warning governments against using exchange rates as a weapon. Dominique Strauss-Kahn told the Financial Times: “There is clearly the idea beginning to circulate that currencies can be used as a policy weapon. Translated into action, such an idea would represent a very serious risk to the global recovery … any such approach would have a negative and very damaging longer-run impact.”

The Bank of Japan reinstated its zero interest-rate policy and pledged to buy ¥5tn (£37bn) of assets, leading to a drop in the yen. In recent weeks it has also intervened in the currency markets to weaken the yen for the first time in six years, although the impact was short-lived.

Brazil has threatened intervention to weaken the real. On Monday, it doubled a tax on foreign investors buying local bonds to put a lid on a recent rally in its currency. Brazil’s finance minister, Guido Mantega, coined the phrase “international currency war” last week, following a series of interventions by central banks in Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and Taiwan to make their currencies cheaper.

Strauss-Kahn appeared to refer to Mantega’s comments when he said: “We have seen reports that some emerging countries whose economies face big capital inflows are saying that maybe it is time to use their currencies to try to gain an advantage, particularly on the trade side. I don’t think that is a good solution.”

The weak dollar and expectations that the US Federal Reserve may announce stimulus measures pushed gold to a new record high yesterday. Spot gold hit $1,349.80 an ounce. Silver soared to a fresh 30-year high and platinum reached a four-and-a-half-month peak.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

6 Oct, 2010, 05.41PM IST,REUTERS

IMF warns against currency war, dollar heads lower

A growing drive by nations to cap the strength of their currencies risks derailing the world economic recovery !

LONDON: The head of the IMF warned that a growing drive by nations to cap the strength of their currencies risked derailing economic recovery while the dollar dropped further on Wednesday.

Concerns that the Federal Reserve is about to embark on another round of policy easing that could weaken the dollar, tallied with China’s polite refusal to let its yuan rise fast, has pushed currencies to the top of the agenda at Friday’s meeting of finance chiefs from the Group of Seven nations.

Few hold out much hope of any meaningful agreement at the G7 or the International Monetary Fund meeting that follows.

“It’s doing nothing for the American economy, but it’s causing chaos over the rest of the world. It’s a very strange policy that they are pursuing,” Nobel economics laureate Joseph Stiglitz said of US policy.

The dollar extended its losses on Wednesday, falling to an 8-1/2 month low against a basket of currencies and edging toward a 15-year trough versus the yen.

That trend prompted Japan to intervene to weaken the yen last month and some emerging economies have followed suit or are threatening to.

“There is clearly the idea beginning to circulate that currencies can be used as a policy weapon,” IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn was quoted as saying in Wednesday’s edition of the Financial Times.

“Translated into action, such an idea would represent a very serious risk to the global recovery … Any such approach would have a negative and very damaging longer-run impact,” he said.

The IMF, which holds its twice-yearly meeting in Washington this weekend, is also expected to discuss foreign exchange moves as part of its mission to get countries working for balanced global growth.

Brendan Brown, economist at Mitsubishi UFJ Securities International in London, said the Fund, which has the United States as its biggest stakeholder, would not try to prevent further US monetary easing or a resulting slide of the dollar.

“That Washington institution has failed in its central mission to prevent currency war ,” he wrote in a report.


Euro zone policymakers urged Chinese premier Wen Jiabao on Tuesday to allow the yuan to rise more rapidly, but he politely rebuffed them, repeating Beijing’s standard line on seeking currency stability.

Wen was due to hold a joint news conference with EU leaders in Brussels at 1515 GMT.

Policymakers have highlighted the issue of global imbalances for years, with fundamental problems seen as the dollar’s global dominance, China’s overvalued yuan and Germany’s lack of domestic consumption.

Emerging nations say the cash flows seen this year have damaged their exports due to the determination of major economies to restrain their own currencies’ levels.

But entrenched positions make it unlikely that officials sitting down to IMF and G7 meetings this weekend, and G20 meetings later in the year, will resolve their differences.

Brazil fired the latest shot in what it has dubbed an “international currency war,” doubling on Monday a tax on foreign investors buying local bonds to 4 per cent to curb a strong real.

Policymakers from emerging Asian economies have voiced growing concerns about the risk of a flood of hot money inflows. South Korea warned investors it might impose further limits on forward trading and India and Thailand said they were looking at steps to control speculative surges.

“It’s natural in that context for them to say — we can’t just let our exchange rates appreciate and destroy our exports,” Stiglitz told reporters at Columbia University on Tuesday.


Adding to speculation that the Federal Reserve will soon extend asset purchases to pump money into the economy, Chicago Fed President Charles Evans was quoted as saying the central bank should do much more to spur the economy.

And in a surprise move, Japan pulled interest rates on the yen back to zero on Tuesday and pledged to pump more funds into an economy struggling to compete while the currency remains close to a 15-year high against the dollar.

The euro gained 7.6 per cent versus the dollar last month as Fed easing speculation hotted up. Europeans are worried they will be saddled with an overvalued currency, stifling recovery, because they have few tools to contain the euro’s rise.

France, which takes over the presidency of the Group of 20 major economic powers next month, has put reforming the international monetary system at the top of its agenda, hoping to draw China into multilateral talks on currency coordination.

Global Central Bank Action May Follow BOJ Moves

Wednesday, 06 Oct 2010 11:46 AM

The Bank of Japan may have acted first in a new round of central bank action to prop up the global economy as recoveries in industrial nations falter.

The unexpected decision by the Japanese central bank yesterday to drop its interest rate to “virtually zero” and expand its balance sheet follows the U.S. Federal Reserve’s move toward more unconventional easing. Bank of England officials will consider further stimulus tomorrow, while the central banks of Australia, Canada and New Zealand are among those now holding fire on further interest-rate increases.

The renewed push for easier monetary policy comes as the International Monetary Fund warns growth in advanced economies is falling short of its forecasts ahead of its annual meetings in Washington this week. The dilemma for policy makers is that their actions may do little to revive growth and end up roiling currency markets.

“The Bank of Japan is at the head of the pack,” said Stewart Robertson, an economist at Aviva Investors in London, which manages about $370 billion in assets. “It looks like a lot of others will follow. Whether it’s right or not is another matter.”

Group of Seven ministers will gather Oct. 8 in Washington, on the sidelines of the IMF meeting. Currency issues will be discussed, Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, who will chair the meeting, said this week. Japanese Finance Minister Yoshihiko Noda said he’s ready to explain his country’s actions at that meeting.

BOJ Move

The Bank of Japan cut its overnight call rate target from 0.1 percent and established a 5 trillion yen ($60 billion) fund to buy government bonds and other assets. It moved as the yen’s surge to a 15-year high last month hurts exports and damps economic growth. The yen traded at 83.13 per dollar at 2:32 p.m. in Tokyo, close to a Sept. 15 record of 82.88.

The central bank said today that weaker exports and slower global growth are causing the nation’s rebound to moderate. “Japan’s economy shows signs of a moderate recovery, but the pace of recovery is slowing down,” the bank said in a monthly economic report released in Tokyo.

‘Vicious Spiral’

Bank of Japan Governor Masaaki Shirakawa may not be alone for long in taking action and Daiwa Institute of Research argues he’s now engaged in a “vicious spiral” of monetary easing with the Fed as both compete to bolster their economies.

“The BOJ’s next moves will depend on the Fed,” said Maiko Noguchi, an economist at Daiwa in Tokyo. “The bank will have no choice but steadily take easing measures.”

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and his colleagues have signaled they may announce the purchase of more Treasuries as soon as their next policy meeting on Nov. 2-3 in an effort to boost growth and reduce an unemployment rate stuck near 10 percent for the past year.

“The irony is that the Fed is creating all this liquidity with the hope that it will revive the U.S. economy. It is doing nothing for the U.S. economy and causing chaos for the rest of the world,” Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize- winning professor at New York’s Columbia University, said today in New York.

Quantitative Easing

Bernanke said on Oct. 4 that the Fed had aided the economy by buying $1.75 trillion of mortgage debt and Treasuries from August 2008 through March 2010. Pacific Investment Management Co. says a new round of quantitative easing, the policy of creating money by enlarging the central bank’s balance sheet, is “likely.”

“The bottom line for the U.S. is a growth trajectory so slow you’d nearly call it stalled,” Paul McCulley, a portfolio investor at Pacific Investment Management Co., wrote on the company’s website this week.

Steven Englander, New York-based head of Group of 10 currency strategy at Citigroup Inc., said he anticipates the dollar will continue to fall, with the euro likely to pass through $1.40 from $1.37 yesterday. The dollar has already dropped 7 percent against the euro since the start of September.

Asset Purchases

At the Bank of England, policy maker Adam Posen made the strongest call yet on Sept. 28 for the U.K. central bank to resume asset purchases after keeping its bond-buying program at 200 billion pounds ($317 billion) for the past 11 months. That proposal lays the ground for the first three-way split when the Monetary Policy Committee meets tomorrow, with member Andrew Sentance advocating higher interest rates.

“At the present time, the growth threat is more of a danger than inflation,” said Graeme Leach, chief economist at the Institute of Directors, a London-based business lobby group. “Yes, inflation is above target now. But a double-dip recession would raise the specter of deflation.”

The revival of quantitative easing is a reversal from earlier this year, when central banks were halting stimulus or debating how to tighten policy. What’s changed is the loss of momentum in industrial economies.

Global Slowdown

John Lipsky, the IMF’s No. 2 official, said on Sept. 27 that global growth in the second half of the year will fall short of the fund’s 3.75 percent forecast. The Washington- based lender revises its outlook today.

While not yet looking to buy assets, some central banks are suspending their interest-rate increase campaigns.

After embarking on the most aggressive policy tightening in the Group of 20, the Reserve Bank of Australia unexpectedly left its benchmark rate unchanged yesterday at 4.5 percent for a fifth straight month. Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney, who has overseen three rate hikes this year, said Sept. 30 that “the unusual uncertainty surrounding the outlook warrants caution.”

Not all policy makers are changing course. The central banks of Israel and Taiwan raised borrowing costs in the last ten days and the European Central Bank, whose Governing Council convenes tomorrow in Frankfurt, has indicated it wants to continue withdrawing liquidity support for banks.

‘Fully On’

The ECB will be forced to postpone tighter policy as European exports fade and investors continue to fret about peripheral euro-area economies such as Portugal and Ireland, said Silvio Peruzzo, an economist at Royal Bank of Scotland Group Inc. in London.

“The ECB’s exit strategy is fully on, but the business cycle will turn against them,” said Peruzzo. “The communication will then be adjusted to consider downside risks greater than what they have anticipated.”

The ECB last week stepped up its government bond purchases as the cost of insuring against default on Portuguese government debt surged to a record and Irish bond spreads soared to euro-era highs.

Bolster Expansion

The question for those central banks leaning toward buying more assets is whether doing so will actually bolster expansion, said Charles Dumas, director of international research at Lombard Street Research Ltd., a London-based consultancy.

“Is quantitative easing going to cause people to spend more? I don’t think so,” he said. “It does add value in reducing the risk of a downward spiral in markets.”

Another risk is that the use of unconventional monetary policy is viewed as an effort to weaken currencies to boost exports, rising competitive devaluations and protectionist responses, said Eric Chaney, chief economist at AXA Group in Paris. Japan, Switzerland and Brazil are among the countries that have already intervened in markets to restrain their exchange rates.

“This is close to a currency war,” said Chaney, a former official at the French France Ministry. “It’s not through exchange-rate manipulation, but through monetary policies.”
© Copyright 2010 Bloomberg News. All rights reserved.

Weak US dollar fuels financial bubble fears !

October 7, 2010


Emerging markets stepping up measures to control speculation!

PETALING JAYA: There is rising concern that the weak US dollar is fuelling new financial bubbles in emerging markets.

A growing number of Asian and South American countries, whose currencies had seen unwarranted appreciation, are stepping up control to curb speculative short term investments from overseas.

The flood of investment money into emerging market is expected to reach US$825bil this year, according to the latest estimate by Institute of International Finance (IIF) on Monday.

This is higher than the previous forecast of US$709bil it made in April. Last year’s figure was US$581bil.

The Malaysian ringgit, like other emerging market currencies, has been rising steadily against the greenback. — AP

Analysts expect capital flows from advanced economies into emerging markets to remain strong as long as central banks in developed nations continue to pursue a loose monetary policy.

Earlier this week, South Korea and Brazil announced plans to increase measures aimed at discouraging disruptive capital flows.

CIMB Research, in a recent note, said instead of imposing tough capital controls on inflows, central banks in South Korea, Taiwan and Indonesia had implemented quasi-capital controls by restricting currency derivatives and imposing a minimum holding period.

But the trend in capital flows from advanced economies into emerging markets will likely continue because the widening yield gap is in the emerging markets’ favour.

Growth prospects are also stronger and there are lingering worries about sovereign credit quality in mature economies,

CIMB Research said the “push and pull” factors are reinforcing competition to attract private capital flows into emerging economies.

Reuters reported yesterday that the falling dollar had escalated a global currency war, and that the exchange rate issue was now expected to top the agenda as finance officials from around the globe meet this week starting with those from the Group of 7 tomorrow followed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) over the weekend.

Ultra low interest rates in Europe and Japan and concerns that the US Federal Reserve is about to embark on another round of money printing could weaken the dollar further.

This could result in further appreciation of emerging market currencies to a point that it would start to hurt exports.

London’s Financial Times reported yesterday that the head of IMF had warned that governments were risking currency wars if they tried to use exchange rates to solve domestic problems.

At the same time, emerging countries are also increasingly edgy about the flood of capital inflows from advanced economies.

The massive inflows had sent Asian stock indices, as well as their currencies, to or near record highs.

“If the situation continues for a while and Asian currencies continue to appreciate, there is a possibility that emerging Asian economies may have to do something to protect their interests.

“This may lead to, perhaps, some form of tax on capital inflows,’’ said Peck Boon Soon, an economist at RHB Research Institute.

In his report, Peck noted that overseas investors held 27% of Indonesia’s local currency government debts as at end-July, compared with 16% a year earlier.

In Malaysia, foreigners owned 18.8% in July versus 10% a year earlier.

Demand for Asian currency-denominated debts was so huge that the Philippines’ US$1bil worth of peso bonds directed at global investors was oversubscribed by 13 times.

Investors were so bullish that the Philippines was able to sell the bonds at just 5% yield. Based on Moody’s Investors Service’s calculation, the yield implied the bonds were rated at A3 by investors, which was six notches higher than the firm’s rating.

The weak US dollar also boosted the price of gold – viewed by some as the leading reserve currency – to a new all-time high of US$1,349.80 an ounce yesterday.

At home, the ringgit rose for the first time in two days to 3.0925 against the US dollar. The local currency hit a 13-year high at 3.085 last week.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,230 other followers

%d bloggers like this: