Reuters blog archive
from Global Investing:
Many emerging economies have been banking on weaker currencies to revitalise economic growth. Oil's 25 percent fall in dollar terms this year should also help. The problem however is the dollar's strength which is leading to a general tightening of monetary conditions worldwide, more so in countries where central banks are intervening to prevent their currencies from falling too much.
Michael Howell, managing director of the CrossBorder Capital consultancy estimates the negative effect of the stronger dollar on global liquidity (in simple terms, the amount of capital available for investment and spending) outweighs the positives from falling oil prices by a ratio of 10 to 1. Not only does it raise funding costs for non-U.S. banks and companies, it also usually forces other central banks to keep monetary policy tight, especially in countries with high inflation or external debt levels. Howell says:
If you get a strong dollar and intervention by EM cbanks what it means is monetary tightening...The big decision is: do they allow currencies to devalue or do they defend them? But when they use reserves to protect their currencies, there is an implicit policy tightening.
The tightening happens because central bank dollar sales tend to suck out supply of the local currency from markets, tightening liquidity. That effectively drives up the cost of money, as banks and companies scramble for cash to meet their daily commitments. Central banks can of course offset interventions via so-called sterilisations - for instance when they buy dollars to curb their currencies' strength, they can issue bonds to suck up the excess cash from the market. To ease the tight money supply problem they can in theory print more cash to supply banks. But while many emerging central banks did sterilise interventions in the post-crisis years when their currencies were appreciating, they are less likely to do so when they are trying to stem depreciation, says UBS strategist Manik Narain. So what is happening is that (according to Narain):
By this time tomorrow, the anti-EU United Kingdom Independence Party is likely to be celebrating its first member of the Westminster parliament. Polls have just opened in the deprived seaside town of Clacton where the sitting Conservative lawmaker switched to UKIP and called a vote.
A second member of the ruling Conservative party has now defected to UKIP and will force another by-election before long leaving the party on tenterhooks over who might be next. Many fear they will lose their seats at the May 2015 general election as UKIP splits their vote.
You wait ages for a no-confidence vote then two come along on the same day. Neither are expected to cause governments to topple.
Greece’s ruling coalition will hold a confidence vote in parliament in an effort to end speculation that the country may be facing snap elections early next year.
By Andy Mukherjee
The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.
The U.S. dollar could be the winner of Asia’s fight against capital flight. The world economy might be the loser.
Euro zone inflation figures are due and after Germany’s rate held steady at 0.8 percent the figure for the currency bloc as a whole could marginally exceed forecasts and hold at 0.4 percent.
One upside for the currency bloc is the falling euro which has broken below its 2013 lows and is down almost nine percent from the peak it hit against the dollar in May. With U.S. money printing about to end next month and speculation intensifying about the timing of a first interest rate rise from Washington, there are good reasons to think that this trend could continue.
It's all over but the dissection of the Fed statement, due later today, which will follow with a Janet Yellen press conference after the U.S. markets get word of whether the Fed did or did not eliminate the "considerable time" bit from its statement that saw markets go into a tizzy all of Tuesday. At this point the market believes that phrase now may *not* be eliminated, which marks the second reversal in about a week on this point. No matter what, somebody is going to be caught leaning in the wrong direction, but if the latest intelligence is that the Fed's statement won't change materially until the October meeting, then the freshest bets are probably in the direction of those betting on that much. So if the statement does cut out that language or modifies it in any way, you could see a selloff in equities, the dollar and bonds.
The meeting also brings with it the update on the Fed's "central tendencies," that is, its sure-to-be-incorrect projections on where the economy is going. Given the rebound in the second quarter that seems to have at least been somewhat sustained in the third quarter, it wouldn't be surprising to see the Fed outlook for GDP bumped up for 2014 (currently 2.1 to 2.3 pct) and 2015 (at 3.0 to 3.2 pct - the Fed will predict 3 percent growth for the year-out period until we're all Morlocks), and the unemployment rate expectations are projected to drop to maybe 5.7 to 5.8 percent from the current 6 to 6.1 percent expected at year-end. Which is all well and good, but it doesn't give us a good sense, really, of what's to happen going past the meeting.
Something has changed in the bond market in some ways - but it's a bit difficult to tease out when you're talking about yields still near very low levels. But there's a sense that the San Francisco Fed's paper on the way in which economists are underestimating the Fed's own view of interest rates is a game-changer, or maybe it's just that people are waking up to the idea that the Fed really does have to raise rates eventually, or even more so, that it's an overreaction to a previous overreaction: backlash to the idea that the August jobs report was so lousy that the Fed was still firmly in "not doing anything ever" mode.
The dynamics of the long-dated market haven’t been altered all that much just yet – or rather, it’s a bit early to declare that. The 10-year is still hovering around 2.50 percent, and the spread between that and 10-year Treasury Inflation Protected Securities stands at about 2.11 percent, and it’s remained in a steady range for the last year-plus as well, actually trending lower in the last few months.
Having woken up to the very real possibility of Scotland going it alone, the leaders of Britain’s main parties have scrapped their parliamentary business and headed north to campaign in what amounts to a huge gamble.
The “No” campaign has been criticized for many things – being too negative (though no is negative by definition), being too aloof, failing to address the hole’s in Alex Salmond’s manifesto. The question is whether it is too late to do anything about it. It is risky to deploy Prime Minister David Cameron who, by his own admission, is not catnip to the Scots.
Global ructions are dominating asset flows right now, and we’re not even talking about violent events such as the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, the rise of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or the Israel-Palestine situation. Right now smaller events – yet uncertain ones – seem to be affecting the larger markets a bit more, contributing to a decided shift in factors that U.S. assets are reacting to.
The bond market is no longer just about a steady belief in lower-for-forever activity from the Federal Reserve, but about the expectation for more flows from overseas as U.S. assets look more attractive and the U.S. dollar continues to strengthen. The dollar had a banner session against the pound with the threat of Scottish independence growing more and more possible (cue everyone yelling “Freedom!” while being drawn and quartered), as the messy considerations surrounding what happens to oil revenue and the diminution of the U.K. economy is considered. It also threatens to drive more flows toward the dollar as the Bank of England might be expected to hold off on raising interest rates when they had been expected to be the first central bank to act.
A second opinion poll in three days has put the Scottish independence vote as too close to call.
TNS gave the “No” vote 39 percent support and “Yes” 38. Its last poll in late July gave the “No” campaign a 13-point lead. Taking only those who are certain to vote, the two camps are tied at 41 percent.