Vivek Kaul
The Western central banks(primarily the Federal Reserve of United States and the Bank of England) have been printing money (or quantitative easing as they like to call it) at a very rapid rate since the start of the financial crisis in late 2008. The idea is to print and pump money into the financial system and thus ensure that there is a lot of money going around, leading to low interest rates.
At low interest rates people were expected to borrow and spend more. When they did that businesses would benefit and the economic growth would improve. But this theory hasn’t really worked as well as it was expected to.
The money that was and continues to be printee, has found its way into various financial markets around the world, leading to bubbles and at the same time benefiting those it wasn’t intended to. As Albert Grice of Societe Generale writes in a report titled Is the Fed blowing bubbles to cover up growing inequality…again? dated September 27, 2013 “Quantitative Easing(QE) has mainly helped the rich. The Bank of England admitted as much a year ago. Specifically it said that its QE programme had boosted the value of stocks and bonds by 25%, or about $970 billion. It then calculated that about 40 percent of those gains went to the richest 5 percent of British households.”
The situation is similar in the United States as well where the Federal Reserve prints $85 billion every month to keep interest rates low. As Gary Dorsch Editor, Global Money Trends newsletter, writes in his later newsletter dated October 3, 2013, “The Fed has always kept its foot pressed firmly on the monetary accelerator, and thus, keeping the speculative juices flowing. Over the past 1-½ years, the Fed has increased the…money supply by +10% to an all-time high of $12-trillion. In turn, traders have bid-up the combined value of NYSE and Nasdaq listed stocks to a record $22-trillion. That’s great news for the Richest-10% of Americans that own 80% of the shares on the stock exchanges.”
Hence, it is safe to say that bubbles across various financial markets have helped the rich get richer, which wasn’t the idea in the first place. Numbers confirm this story. As Emmanuel Saez, of University of California at Berkeley, points out in a note titled Striking it Richer: The Evolution of Top Incomes in the United States and dated September 3, 2013 “From 2009 to 2012, average real income per family grew modestly by 6.0%…However, the gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 31.4% while bottom 99% incomes grew only by 0.4% from 2009 to 2012. Hence, the top 1% captured 95% of the income gains in the first three years.”
This rise in income inequality might be one reason why the Federal Reserve of United States continues to print money. As Edwards writes “while governments preside over economic policies that make the very rich even richer…the middle classes also need to be thrown a sop to disguise the fact they are not benefiting at all from economic growth.”
So how is the middle class offered a sop in disguise? This is done through an easy money policy of maintaining low interest rates by printing money. In the process, the home prices continue to go up and this ensures that the home owning middle class(which forms a significant portion of both the American and the British population) feels richer.
The S&P/Case-Shiller 20 City Home Index which measures the value of residential real estate in 20 metropolitan areas of the U.S., shows precisely that. Overall home price rose by 12.4% in July 2013, in comparison to July 2012. Home prices were up by 27.5% in Las Vegas. They were up 24.8%, 20.8% and 20.4%, in San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego, respectively.
A similar scenario seems to be playing out in Great Britain as well. As Edwards wrote in a report titled Fools dated September 19, 2013 “Evidence is mounting that easy money …in the UK housing market is leading to another explosion of prices, with London, as always, leading the way with double-digit house price inflation.”
Edwards further points out in another report titled If UK Chancellor George Osborne is a moron, Fitch’s Charlene Chu is a heroine dated June 4, 2013, that people have been unable to buy homes despite interest rates being at very low levels because the prices continue to remain very high. As he wrote “Young people today haven’t got a chance of buying a house at a reasonable price, even with rock bottom interest rates. The Nationwide Building Society data shows that the average first time buyer in London is paying over 50% of their take home pay in mortgage payments – and that is when interest rates are close to zero!”
Of course people who already own homes and form a major portion of the population are feeling richer. And thus income inequality is being addressed.
This mistake of propping up housing prices to make the middle class feel rich was one of the major reasons for the real estate bubble in the United States, which burst, before the start of the current financial crisis.
The top 1% of the households accounted for only 7.9% of total American wealth in 1976. This grew to 23.5% of the income by 2007. This was because the incomes of those in the top echelons was growing at a much faster rate.
The rate of growth of income for the period for those in the top 1% was at 4.4% per year. The remaining 99% grew at 0.6% per year. What is even more interesting is the fact that the difference was even more pronounced since the 1990s.
Between 1993 and 2000, the income of the top 1% grew at the rate of 10.3% per year, and the income of the remaining 99% grew at 2.7% per year. Between 2002 and 2007, the income for the top 1% grew at the rate of 10.1% per year. For the remaining it grew at a minuscule 1.3% per year. In fact the wealthiest 0.1% of the population accounted for 2.6% of American wealth in 1976. This had gone up to 12.3% in 2007.
But it was not only the super rich who were getting richer. Even those below them were doing quite well for themselves. In 1976, the top 10% of households earned around 33% of the national income, by 2007 this had reached 50% of the national income.
American politicians addressed this inequality in their own way by making sure that money was available at low interest rates. As Raghuram Rajan writes in Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy “Politicians have therefore looked for other ways to improve the lives of their voters. Since the early 1980s, the most seductive answer has been easier credit. In some ways, it is the path of least resistance…Politicians love to have banks expand housing credit, for all credit achieves many goals at the same time. It pushes up house prices, making households feel wealthier, and allows them to finance more consumption. It creates more profits and jobs in the financial sector as well as in real estate brokerage and housing construction. And everything is safe – as safe as houses – at least for a while.”
Of course this is really not a solution to the problem of addressing inequality. It only makes people feel richer for a short period of time till the home prices keep rising and the bubble becomes bigger. But eventually the bubble bursts.
The irony is that people refuse to learn from their mistakes. The same mistake of propping up home prices is being made all over again.
The article originally appeared on www.firstpost.com on October 3, 2013
(Vivek Kaul is a writer. He tweets @kaul_vivek)
Raghuram Rajan
Decoding Rajan’s Frankfurt speech: Why central banks fuel bubbles
Vivek Kaul
Alan Greenspan, when he was the chairman of the Federal Reserve of United States, the American central bank, used to say “I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”
Greenspan was known to talk in a very roundabout manner, never meaning what he said, and never saying what he meant. Thankfully, all central bank governors are not like that. There are some who like calling a spade a spade.
Raghuram Rajan, the governor of the Reserve Bank of India(RBI), was in Frankfurt yesterday to receive the Fifth Deutsche Bank Prize for Financial Economics. In his speech he said things that would have embarrassed central bank governors of the Western nations, who are busy printing money to get their economies up and running again.
In the aftermath of the financial crisis that started in late 2008, Western central banks have been printing money. With so much money going around, the hope is that interest rates will continue to remain low (as they have). At low interest rates people are likely to borrow and spend more. When they do that this is likely to benefit businesses and thus the overall economy.
But what has happened is that the citizens of the countries printing money are still in the process of coming out of one round of borrowing binge. When interest rates were at very low levels in the early 2000s, they had borrowed money to speculate in real estate in the hope that real estate prices will continue to go up perpetually. This eventually led to a real estate bubbles in large parts of the Western world.
Eventually, the bubbles burst and people were left holding the loans they had taken to speculate in real estate. Hence, people who are expected to borrow and spend, are still in the process of repaying their past loans. So, they stayed away from taking on more loans.
But money was available at very low interest rates to be borrowed. Hence, banks and financial institutions borrowed this money at close to zero percent interest rates and invested it in stock, real estate and commodity markets all around the world. Some of this money also seems to have found its way into fancier markets like art. And this has again led to several asset bubbles in different parts of the world. As Rajan put it in Frankfurt “We seem to be in a situation where we are doomed to inflate bubbles elsewhere.”
Economists still do not agree on what is the best way to ensure that there are no real estate or stock market bubbles. But what they do agree on is that keeping interest rates too low for too long isn’t the best way of going about it. It is a sure shot recipe for creating bubbles. Even the once great and now ridiculed “Alan Greenspan” agrees on this. In an article for the Wall Street Journal published in December 2007(after he had retired as the Fed chairman), he wrote “The 1% rate set in mid-2003…lowered interest rates…and may have contributed to the rise in U.S. home prices.”
What he was effectively saying was that by slashing the interest rate to 1%, the Federal Reserve of United States may have played a part in fuelling the real estate bubble in the United States. Rajan in his Frankfurt speech for a change agreed with Greenspan. As he said “We should wonder whether lower and lower interest rates are in fact part of the problem, I say I don’t know.”
It is easy to conclude from the statements of Greenspan as well Rajan that central bank governors do understand the perils of printing money to keep interest rates low. Given that why are they still continuing to print money? Ben Bernanke, the current Chairman of the Federal Reserve hinted in May 2013, that the Fed plans to go slow on money printing in the months to come. He repeated this in June 2013. But when the Federal Reserve met recently, nothing happened on this front and it decided to continue printing $85 billion every month.
As Albert Edwards of Societe Generale put it in a February 2013 report titled Is Mark Carney the Next Alan Greenspa…? “I keep seeing Central Bankers saying again and again that QE(quantitative easing, a fancy term for printing money) and more recently, helicopter money is not only necessary but essential.”
So the question is why do central banks in the Western world continue to print money? Dylan Grice, formerly of Societe Generale, has an answer in his 2010 report Print Baby Print. As he writes “What’s interesting is that central banks feel they have no choice. It’s not that they’re unaware of the risks…They’re printing money because they’re scared of what might happen if they don’t. This very real political dilemma… It’s like they’re on a train which they know to be heading for a crash, but it is accelerating so rapidly they’re scared to jump off.”
Sometimes the withdraw symptoms are so scary that it just makes sense to continue with the drug. Dylan compares the current situation to the situation that Rudolf von Havenstein found himself in as the President of the Reichsbank, which was the German central bank in the 1920s.
Havenstein printed so much money that it led to hyperinflation and money lost all its value. The increase in money printing did not happen overnight; it had been happening since the First World War started. By the time the war ended, in October 1918, the amount of paper money in the system was four times the money at the beginning of the war. Despite this, prices had risen only by 139%. But by the start of 1920, the situation had reversed. The money in circulation had grown 8.4 times since the start of the war, whereas the wholesale price index had risen nearly 12.4 times. It kept getting worse. By November 1921, circulation had gone up 18 times and prices 34 times. By the end of it all, in November 1923, the circulation of money had gone up 245 billion times. In turn, prices had skyrocketed 1380 billion times since the beginning of the First World War.
So why did Havenstein start and continue to print money? Why did he not stop to print money once its ill-effects started to come out? Liaquat Ahamed has the answer in his book The Lords of Finance. As he writes “were he to refuse to print the money necessary to finance the deficit, he risked causing a sharp rise in interest rates as the government scrambled to borrow from every source. The mass unemployment that would ensue, he believed, would bring on a domestic economic and political crisis.”
The danger for central bank governors is very similar. If they stop printing money then interest rates will start to go up and this will kill whatever little economic growth that has started to return. Hence, the choice is really between the devil and the deep sea.
As far as Rajan is concerned he is possibly back to where it all started for him. The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, one of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks in the United States, organises a symposium at Jackson Hole in the state of Wyoming, every year.
The 2005 conference was to be the last conference attended by Alan Greenspan, as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Hence, the theme for the conference was the legacy of the Greenspan era. Rajan was attending the conference and presenting a paper titled “Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier?”
Those were the days when Greenspan was god. The United States was in the midst of a huge real estate bubble, but the bubble wasn’t looked upon as a bubble, but a sign of economic prosperity. The prevailing economic view was that the US had entered an era of unmatched economic prosperity and Alan Greenspan was largely responsible for it.
Hence, in the conference, people were supposed to say good things about Greenspan and give him a nice farewell. Rajan spoiled what was meant to be a send off for Greenspan. In his speech Rajan said that the era of easy money would get over soon and would not last forever as the conventional wisdom expected it to. “The bottom line is that banks are certainly not any less risky than the past despite their better capitalization, and may well be riskier. Moreover, banks now bear only the tip of the iceberg of financial sector risks…the interbank market could freeze up, and one could well have a full-blown financial crisis,” said Rajan.
In the last paragraph of his speech Rajan said it is at such times that “excesses typically build up. One source of concern is housing prices that are at elevated levels around the globe.”
He came in for a lot of criticism for his plain-speaking and calling a bubble a bubble. As he later recounted about the experience in his book Fault Lines – How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy, “Forecasting at that time did not require tremendous prescience: all I did was connect the dots… I did not, however, foresee the reaction from the normally polite conference audience. I exaggerate only a bit when I say I felt like an early Christian who had wandered into a convention of half-starved lions. As I walked away from the podium after being roundly criticized by a number of luminaries (with a few notable exceptions), I felt some unease. It was not caused by the criticism itself…Rather it was because the critics seemed to be ignoring what going on before their eyes.”
The situation is no different today than it was in 2005, when Rajan said what he did. The central bank governors are ignoring what is going on before their eyes and that is not a good sign. Or as Rajan put it in Frankfurt “When they (central banks) say they are the only game in town, they become the only game in town.”
The article originally appeared on www.firstpost.com on September 27,2013
(Vivek Kaul is a writer. He tweets @kaul_vivek)
Is Rajan trying to do what Paul Volcker did in the US ?
Vivek Kaul
Going against market expectations Raghuram Rajan, the governor of the Reserve Bank of India(RBI), raised the repo rate yesterday by 25 basis points (one basis point is one hundreth of a percentage) to 7.5%. Repo rate is the interest rate at which RBI lends to banks.
It was widely expected that Rajan will cut the repo rate. But that did not turn out to be the case. In his statement Rajan explained that he was worried about inflation. As he said “recognizing that inflationary pressures are mounting and determined to establish a nominal anchor which will allow us to preserve the internal value of the rupee, we have raised the repo rate by 25 basis points.”
The RBI’s Mid-Quarter Monetary Policy Review echoed a similar sentiment. “What is equally worrisome is that inflation at the retail level, measured by the CPI, has been high for a number of years, entrenching inflation expectations at elevated levels and eroding consumer and business confidence. Although better prospects of a robust kharif harvest will lead to some moderation in CPI inflation, there is no room for complacency,” the statement pointed out.
Rajan, as I explained yesterday, believes in first controlling inflation, instead of being all over the place and trying to do too many things at once. As Rajan wrote in a 2008 article (along with Eswar Prasad) “The RBI already has a medium-term inflation objective of 5 per cent…But the central bank is also held responsible, in political and public circles, for a stable exchange rate. The RBI has gamely taken on this additional objective but with essentially one instrument, the interest rate, at its disposal, it performs a high-wire balancing act.”
And given this the RBI ends up being neither here nor there. As Rajan put it “What is wrong with this? Simple that by trying to do too many things at once, the RBI risks doing none of them well.”
Hence, Rajan felt that the RBI should ‘just’focus on controlling inflation. As he wrote in the 2008 Report of the Committee on Financial Sector Reforms “The RBI can best serve the cause of growth by focusing on controlling inflation and intervening in currency markets only to limit excessive volatility…an exchange rate that reflects fundamentals tends not to move sharply, and serves the cause of stability.”
Given this, Rajan’s strategy seems to be similar to what Paul Volcker did, as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, to kill inflation in the United States, in the late 1970s and early 1980s. On August 6,1979, Volcker took over as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve of United States .
When Volcker took office, things were looking bad for the United States on the inflation front. The rate of inflation was at 12%. In fact, the inflation in the United States had steadily been going up over the years. Between 1964 and 1968, the inflation had averaged 2.6% per year. This had almost doubled to 5% over the next five years i.e. 1969 to 1973. And it had increased to 8%, for the period between 1973 and 1978. In the first nine months of 1979, inflation had averaged at 10.75%. Such high inflation during a period of peace had not been experienced before. As inflation was high people bought gold. On August 6, 1979, the day Volcker had started with his new job, the price of gold had stood at $282.7 per ounce. On August 31, 1979, gold was at $315.1 per ounce. By the end of September 1979, gold was quoting at $397.25 per ounce having gone up by 26% in almost one month.
On January 21, 1980, five and a half months after Volcker had taken over as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve of United States, the price of gold touched a then all time high of $850 per ounce.
In a period of five and a half months, the price of gold, had risen by an astonishing 200%. What was looked at as a mania for buying gold was essentially a mass decision to get out of the dollar. Given this, lack of stability of the dollar, Volcker had to act fast.
After he took over, the first meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) was held on August 14,1979. FOMC is a committee within the Federal Reserve, the American central bank, which decides on the interest rate. The members of the committee expressed concern about inflation but they seemed uncertain on how to address it. In September 1979, the FOMC raised interest rates. But it was split vote of 4:3 within the seven member committee, with Volcker casting a vote in favour of raising interest rates. Volcker clearly wasn’t going to sit around doing nothing and came out all guns blazing to kill inflation, which by March 1980 had touched a high of 15%. He ] kept increasing the interest rate till it had touched 20% by January 1981. This had an impact on inflation and it fell to below 10% in May and June 1981.
The prime lending rate or the rate, at which banks lend to their best customers, had been greater than 20% for most of 1981. Increasing interest rates did have a negative impact on economic growth and led to a recession. In 1982, unemployment rate crossed 10%, the highest it had reached since 1940 and nearly 12 million Americans lost their jobs. During the course of the same year nearly 66,000 companies filed for bankruptcy, which was the highest since the Great Depression.
And between 1981 and 1983, the economy lost $570 billion of output. But the inflation was finally brought under control. By July 1982, it had more than halved from its high of 15% in March 1980. The steps taken by Paul Volcker ensured that the inflation fell to 3.2% by 1983.
By continuously raising interest rates, Volcker finally managed to kill inflation. This ensured that the confidence in the dollar also came back. By doing what he did Volcker established was that he was an independent man and was unlike the previous Chairmen of the Federal Reserve, who largely did what the President wanted them to do.
In fact, when Arthur Burns was appointed as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve on January 30, 1970, Richard Nixon, the President of United States, had remarked that “I respect his independence. However, I hope that independently he will conclude that my views are the ones that should be followed.”
The feeling in the political class of India is along similar lines. The finance minister expects the governor of the RBI to bat for the government. But that hasn’t turned out to the case. The last few RBI governors (YV Reddy, D Subbarau) have clearly had a mind of their own. And Raghuram Rajan is no different on this front. His decision to raise interest rates in order to rein inflation is a clear signal of that.
But the question is can the RBI do much when it comes to controlling consumer price inflation(CPI)? Can Rajan like Volcker did, bring inflation under control by raising interest rates? Or can he just keep sending signals to the government by raising interest rates to get its house in order, so that inflation can be brought under control?
In India, much of the consumer price inflation is due to food inflation, which currently stands at 18.8%. While overall food prices have risen by 18.8%, vegetable prices have risen by 78% over the last one year. As a discussion paper titled Taming Food Inflation in India released by Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) in April 2013 points out, “Food inflation in India has been a major challenge to policy makers, more so during recent years when it has averaged 10% during 2008-09 to December 2012. Given that an average household in India still spends almost half of its expenditure on food, and poor around 60 percent (NSSO, 2011), and that poor cannot easily hedge against inflation, high food inflation inflicts a strong ‘hidden tax’ on the poor…In the last five years, post 2008, food inflation contributed to over 41% to the overall inflation in the country.”
The government procures rice and wheat from farmers all over the country at assured prices referred to as the minimum support price. This gives an incentive to farmers to produce more rice and wheat for which they have an assured customer, vis a vis vegetables.
As a discussion paper titled National Food Security Bill: Challenges and Options released by CACP points out “Assured procurement gives an incentive for farmers to produce cereals rather than diversify the production-basket…Vegetable production too may be affected – pushing food inflation further.”
There is not much that the RBI can do about this. As Sonal Varma of Nomura Securities puts it in a report titled RBI Policy – A Regime Shift “Inflationary expectations are elevated primarily due to supply-side driven food inflation. In the absence of a supply-side response, severe demand destruction may become necessary to lower inflationary expectations.” Hence, it remains to be seen how successful the Rajan led RBI will be at controlling inflation.
The article originally appeared on www.firstpost.com on Septmber 21, 2013
(Vivek Kaul is a writer. He tweets @kaul_vivek)
Phata Poster Nikla Zero – Why Rajan hasn't joined the party
Vivek Kaul
Raghuram Govind Rajan, the governor of the Reserve Bank of India, has refused to join the party.
The financial markets were expecting the Rajan led RBI to cut the repo rate in its Mid Quarter Monetary Policy Review. But that has not happened. Instead the repo rate has been raised by 25 basis points(one basis point is equal to one hundredth of a percentage) to 7.5%. Repo rate is the interest rate at which RBI lends to banks. Hence, the BSE Sensex has fallen by more than 500 points after the policy review was announced. As I write this it is down by around 350 points. The rupee is now quoting at 62 to a dollar, having touched 62.6 to a dollar earlier.
So now Rajan is suddenly looking like a villain after having been turned into a hero by the media over the last few weeks. As a Facebook friend quipped Phatta Poster Nikla Zero.
What Rajan has done needs to be analysed in line with the economic philosophy he believes in. A major reason for increasing the interest rate is high inflation. As the Monetary Policy Review points out “What is equally worrisome is that inflation at the retail level, measured by the CPI (consumer price inflation), has been high for a number of years, entrenching inflation expectations at elevated levels and eroding consumer and business confidence. Although better prospects of a robust kharifharvest will lead to some moderation in CPI inflation, there is no room for complacency.”
This statement is totally in line with Rajan’s thinking on the issue. In fact, Rajan has clearly pointed out in his earlier writings that RBI should simply concentrate on managing inflation instead of trying to do mulitple things at once.
As Rajan wrote in a 2008 article (along with Eswar Prasad) “The RBI already has a medium-term inflation objective of 5 per cent…But the central bank is also held responsible, in political and public circles, for a stable exchange rate. The RBI has gamely taken on this additional objective but with essentially one instrument, the interest rate, at its disposal, it performs a high-wire balancing act.”
And given this the RBI ends up being neither here nor there. As Rajan put it “What is wrong with this? Simple that by trying to do too many things at once, the RBI risks doing none of them well.”
Hence, Rajan felt that the RBI should ‘just’focus on controlling inflation. As he wrote in the 2008 Report of the Committee on Financial Sector Reforms “The RBI can best serve the cause of growth by focusing on controlling inflation and intervening in currency markets only to limit excessive volatility…an exchange rate that reflects fundamentals tends not to move sharply, and serves the cause of stability.”
Currently, the RBI is trying to control inflation, accelerate economic growth and stabilise the value of the rupee, all at the same time. Something which is not possible. Rajan understands this well enough. “The RBI’s objective could be restated as low inflation, and growth consistent with the economy’s potential. They amount to essentially the same thing! But it would let the RBI off the hook for targeting the exchange rate. And that is the key point,” Rajan wrote in the 2008 article cited earlier. Given this focus on inflation, it isn’t surprising that Rajan has chosen to go against market expectations and raise the repo rate. His belief is that if inflation is brought under control, other things will sort themselves out.
Rajan is also trying to address the high current account deficit by raising the repo rate. Lets try and understand how. As the monetary policy review of the RBI points out “However, inflation is high and household financial saving is lower than desirable.” Lower savings have an impact on the current account deficit. As Atish Ghosh and Uma Ramakrishnan point out in an article on the IMF website “The current account can also be expressed as the difference between national (both public and private) savings and investment. A current account deficit may therefore reflect a low level of national savings relative to investment.”
If India does not save enough, it means it will have to borrow capital from abroad. And when these foreign borrowings need to be repaid, dollars will need to be bought. This will put pressure on the rupee and lead to its depreciation against the dollar.
This is something that Rajan said in an interview to the India Brand Equity Foundation. As he said “Current account deficit (CAD) essentially reflects the fact that you are spending more than you are saving. That’s technically the definition of the CAD, which means that you need to borrow from abroad to finance your investment. Ideally, the way you would reduce your current account deficit is by saving more, which means consuming less, buying fewer goods from abroad and importing less. Or, the other way is by investing less, because that would allow you to bridge the CAD. Now we don’t want to invest less. We have enormous investment needs. So ideally, what we want to do is save more.”
And to achieve this “the first way is for the government to cut its under-saving or its deficit.” “The second way is when the public decides to save more rather than spend. We need to encourage financial saving,” Rajan said in the interview.
The fact of the matter is that India has not been saving enough over the last few years. As the recent RBI financial stability report released in June 2013 points out “Financial savings of households…have declined from 11.6 per cent of GDP to 8 per cent of GDP over the corresponding period (i.e. between 2007-08 to 2011-12.”
Financial savings are essentially in the form of bank deposits, life insurance, pension and provision funds, shares and debentures etc. In fact between 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, the household financial savings fell by a massive Rs 90,000 crore. This has largely been on account of high inflation. Savings have been diverted into real estate and gold in the hope of earnings returns higher than the prevailing inflation.
Also people have been saving lesser as their expenditure has gone up due to high inflation. And the financial savings will only go up, if inflation comes down, pushing up the real returns on various kinds of deposits.
“Households also need stronger incentives to increase financial savings. New fixed-income instruments, such as inflation-indexed bonds, will help. So will lower inflation, which raises real returns on bank deposits. Lower government spending, together with tight monetary policy, are contributing to greater price stability,” wrote Rajan in a column in April 2013.
Rajan has increased the repo rate hoping that bank’s and other financial institutions increase the interest rates on their deposits. This will encourage people to save more. Also, by trying to control inflation Rajan hopes that the real return on deposits (nominal return minus inflation) will go up. Once this happens, people are likely to stay away from investing in gold. If people stay away from investing in gold, it helps bring down our imports and hence, also the current account deficit. This puts lesser pressure on the rupee. The current account deficit(CAD) can also be expressed as the difference between total value of imports and the sum of the total value of its exports and net foreign remittances.
Also, as India saves more the need to borrow from abroad will come down. India’s external debt as on March 31, 2013, stood at at $ 390 billion. Of this nearly 79% debt is non government debt. External commercial borrowings(ECBs) made by corporates form nearly 31% of the external debt.
The trouble is that a lot of this external debt needs to be repaid before March 31, 2014. NRI deposits worth nearly $49 billion mature on or before March 31, 2014. Nearly $21 billion of ECBs raised by companies need to be repaid before March 31, 2014.This will mean a demand for dollars and thus further pressure on the rupee. If India’s borrowing from abroad comes down in the coming years that will mean lesser pressure on the rupee, as the demand for dollars to repay these loans will go down. But for that to happen financial savings need to go up. And that can only happen if inflation is brought under control and real returns on fixed income instruments (like deposits, bonds etc) go up.
Of course, raising the repo rate just once by 25 basis points is not enough for all this to be achieved. Hence, chances are Rajan will keep raising the repo rate in the days to come.
The article originally appeared on www.firstpost.com on September 20, 2013
(Vivek Kaul is a writer. He tweets @kaul_vivek)
Aaya Toofan, Bhaga Shaitan: Why Raghuram Rajan is no Amitabh Bachchan
Raghuram Rajan is currently having what I would like to call an “aaya aaya toofan, bhaga bhaga shaitan” moment. For those who are not as fond of trashy 80s cinema as I am, this needs some explanation. “Aaya aaya toofan, bhaga bhaga shaitan (Here comes Toofan, there runs the devil),” is a song from the Amitabh Bachchan starrer Toofan, which released in 1989.
The film has a character called Toofan (played by Bachchan) who plays a superhero, fighting evil. And the song keeps playing in the background whenever Toofan is out taking on the evil forces.
Rajan took over as the twenty third governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), yesterday. He had his first press conference at 5.30pm in the evening. In this press conference he outlined a stream of measures that he plans to take over the next few months.
Within seconds of his press conference ending television channels, started to go gaga over his performance. The feeling one got while watching was that all of India’s economic problems have/will come to an end because Raghuram Rajan had taken over as the governor of the RBI.
This excitement seems to have rubbed off on the newspapers as well. The Economic Times has compared him to James Bond. The Times of India called Rajan’s entry “a big bang entry”. Business Standard said that “Rajan hits the ground running” and so did The Indian Express. Firstpost has called Rajan a Rockstar.
The impact of Rajan’s maiden performance has been seen great. The rupee has risen against the dollar and is currently quoting at 66 to a dollar. The stock market has rallied around 400 points, as I write this. This is in response to a slew of measures that Rajan announced yesterday.
Rajan announced plans to internationalize the rupee, several steps to improve the inflow of dollars into India and improve exports. He also said that the RBI would allow ‘good’ banks to open branches without approaching the RBI for a license. To control the appetite Indians have for gold, he announced that the RBI would soon launch bonds indexed to consumer price inflation.
Some of the capital controls introduced sometime back to prevent the rupee from falling have also been done away with. Individuals will be allowed to spend more than $75,000 per year abroad, if the money is being spent on education and medical treatment. Rajan also announced plans for a nation wide bill payment system for payment of utilities like medical bills and school fees. A string of technical measures to shore up the value of the rupee against the dollar, were also announced. All in all, a great first day at work.
Having said that, there isn’t much that Rajan can do to improve the major ills that are plaguing the Indian economy. Let’s start with inflation. As Rajan said yesterday “the RBI takes its mandate from the RBI Act of 1934, which says the Reserve Bank for India was constituted “to regulate the issue of Bank notes and the keeping of reserves with a view to securing monetary stability in India and generally to operate the currency and credit system of the country to its advantage.””
Hence, the primary role of the RBI is to ensure monetary stability. Or as Rajan put it “That is, to sustain confidence in the value of the country’s money. Ultimately, this means low and stable expectations of inflation, whether that inflation stems from domestic sources or from changes in the value of the currency, from supply constraints or demand pressures.”
There isn’t much that the RBI can do to control inflation. The primary reason for the same is that the government of India is the main creator of inflation. The expenditure of the government has jumped considerably over the last few years and this has created inflation. As Ashok Gulati and Shweta Saini write in a research paper titled Taming Food Inflation in India “RBI has indicated time and again that government needs to rein-in the fiscal deficit before it can reduce interest rates,else, too much money in the system will be putting further pressures on prices in general and food prices in particular… The Economist in its February 2013 issue highlights that it was the increased borrowings by the Indian government which fuelled inflation and a balance-of-payments gap. It categorically puts the responsibility on the government for having launched a pre-election spending spree in 2008, which continued even thereafter.”
There is nothing that the RBI can do about this. With many state elections due this year and a Lok Sabha election due towards the middle of next year, the chances are the government is likely to continue spending big money. Several boondogles to influence the voters, might be on their way.
Also, a lot of the inflation created by the government shows up as food inflation, on which RBI has no control. As Gulati and Saini write “High food inflation, which has averaged 10 percent during FY 2008-09 to December 2012, has been a major concern for policy makers in India.” Even after December 2012, food inflation continues to be higher than 10%.
The RBI has tried to control high inflation by maintaining interest rates at high levels. One school of thought goes that since the RBI cannot do much to control food inflation, so it might as well cut interest rates. The risk here is that low interest rates might fuel other kinds of inflation. So, it remains to be seen whether Rajan is ready to take on that risk or not.
High inflation can come in from other areas which Rajan has absolutely no control over. It can come from rising oil prices due to threat of an American attack on Syria. As an international fund manager told me earlier this week “if that happens(i.e. American does attack Syria) we can have oil prices touching even $150 per barrel.” In that scenario, inflation will spike and that will have a huge impact on economic growth, something an RBI governor has no control over.
Also, if the Federal Reserve of United States, RBI’s American counterpart, decides to go slow on printing money, that will lead to further economic problems in India. The Fed has indicated in the recent past that it plans to go slow on the $85 billion it has been printing and pumping into the American financial system every month, to keep interest rates low. The hope is that at low interest rates Americans will borrow and spend more, and that will help revive the American economy.
The danger of course is that all the money being printed and pumped into the financial system can create high inflation. So at some point of time the Federal Reserve needs to start going slow on printing money.
If the Federal Reserve decides to go slow on money printing, as it has said in the recent past, interest rates in America will go up. This will lead to foreign investors selling out of India and other emerging markets. This will put further pressure on the rupee against the dollar. As the rupee will lose value, it will mean that our main imports i.e. oil, coal, fertilizer, palm oil etc, will become costlier, leading to a rise in inflation. If this scenario plays out, there is not much that Rajan can do about it. The RBI can sell dollars and buy rupees to stop the rupee from depreciating against the dollar. But it is worth remembering that the RBI does not have an unlimited supply of dollars.
Another worrying factor is the slowdown in economic growth and the impact that it will have on government borrowings. The government expects the GDP to grow by 13.4%(in nominal terms) during this financial year (as per the annual budget). This is unlikely to happen.
As Dylan Grice, formerly with Societe Generale and now the editor of the Edelweiss Journal wrote in a February 2010 research report titled Government hedonism and the next policy mistake “If I’m a finance minister mulling out how much money I should be borrowing, I want my GDP growth (and therefore my tax revenue growth) to pay coupons (i.e. interest) on any debt that I take on today…If the interest rate is higher than GDP growth, my incremental tax revenue won’t cover interest payments. I’ll be in deficit and I’ll have to issue more debt to plug the gap and my debt ratio will rise.”
What this means is that the tax revenue collected by the government should be rising at a rate which is good enough to pay the interest on the accumulated debt. If that does not happen, the government will have to borrow more money to make its interest payments. And that is not a good sign. The government will either end up with a higher fiscal deficit or it will have to cut its expenditure in other areas to maintain the fiscal deficit. Fiscal deficit is the difference between what a government spends and what it earns. India is in that kind of a situation right now and there is nothing that Rajan can do about it.
Also, to repeat a point that is made often, India’s economic growth is being hurt by the poor physical infrastructure that we have. The country needs better roads, more ports, better railway infrastructure and so on. These are things the RBI governor cannot do much about, even though as Rajan said the RBI has “additional tools to generate growth”.
All this is not to suggest that Rajan is not a good choice for the governor’s job. He is an excellent choice given his impeccable credentials, but expecting him to do miracles is unjustified.
To conclude, let me quote what Jerry Tsai, a famous American fund manager had to say about the penchant of the media to create heroes. “And I can say this from experience: the trouble with getting a little bit of good publicity is, when something goes wrong they love to kill you on the way down. The media like to build things up so they can tear them down.” (Source: What Goes Up – The Uncensored History of Modern Wall Street by Eric J Weiner). Rajan should keep that in mind as he goes about his business of rescuing the troubled Indian economy.
The article originally appeared on www.firstpost.com on September 5, 2013
(Vivek Kaul is a writer. He tweets @kaul_vivek)