Germany to the Rescue!

And so it comes to pass that my comment yesterday on the German need for a rescue package for Ireland (see WSJ blog here) is today's FT Deutschland topic du jour:

FT Deutschland reports that Germany's Finance Minister, Peer Steinbruck said that the euro area will find a way to 'circumvent the legal no-bailout clause'. Steinbruck was talking specifically about the potential need to rescue Ireland on the back of a dramatic increase in our CDS spreads - those pesky 'speculative' things that our DofF dismissed as being irrelevant minority instruments (see here).

Oh, yes. Brian Cowen can start making the rounds - cap in hand. Just don't send that embarassment-in-a-Ministerial-Merc Mary to do the job, please, and don't tell Germans that we too share their fondness for a pint... We are no longer in a polite-visit-to-Japan territory. We are in a begging mood.

Steinbruck's comment is worrisome in terms of three issues:

1. Last night, the dollar rallied and the US Treasuries yeilds compressed on the back of a flight to safety, including the outflows from European bonds. Should Ireland tap into German funds for a rescue loan, Eurozone's golden standard German Bunds will suffer. If the rest of PIIGS were to follow Irish suit, there will be a wholesale downgrade in the Bund - a calamity for the Eurozone stability. So in the end, there is an argument that a rescue of Ireland might be forthcoming, if and only if that rescue is small enough - €2-3bn would work, €10bn probably won't. But of course Ireland's need for cash is nothing close to €2-3bn. Can Germany afford sacrificing its own bonds stability to plug Mr Cowen's budget deficit? Will Germany stand by and lend money to Ireland with no strings attached? Will German loans be better termed than those of the IMF?
2. No one in the media has mentioned the turn of the phrase used by Steinbruck: that 'circumvent the legal no-bailout clause' thingy. Even in better days of global growth, international markets did not look kindly on Eurozone's penchant for arbitrarilly re-writing its own rules of fiscla and monetary stability, as was done with the Maastricht criteria earlier this decade. Now, the appetite for reckless decisions is even lower. This presents a serious problem for the Euro - young currency's credibility is based on the rules underpinning its existence. Should these rules be 'circumvented', we may kiss good-by the idea of a stable Euro.
3. Steinbruck's comments on Ireland did nothing to explain his view of the risks facing the Eurozone in the context of reckless Irish spending and economic management. This might be signaling that instead of economic stability concerns, Steinbruck was thinking about political issues. Will German rescue of Ireand come at the expense of forcing this country to ratify the Lisbon Treaty? Quite possibly so. Blackmail has been used by the EU before - most notably in the agreements with Norway and Switzerland and in the case of Nice Treaty vote in Ireland, as well as in the case of the Danish rejection of the Maastricht Treaty.

Oh, dear...

Aha, DofF - and the PIIGS will fly...

This is from Bloomberg (here):

Credit-default swaps (CDS) on Irish government bonds climbed to 386 today from 378.5... Irish swaps last week surged 95 basis points... Contracts linked to French, German, U.K and Spanish debt also rose to all-time highs.

CDS, conceived to protect investors from default, pay the buyer face value in exchange for the underlying securities or the cash equivalent should a company fail to adhere to its debt agreements. An increase signals a deterioration in the perception of credit quality.

Ireland’s Finance Ministry said it’s incorrect to draw conclusions about the “soundness of Ireland’s public finances” from credit-default swaps.

“The credit default market is small and opaque,” the Dublin-based Ministry said in an e-mail today. “It is generally used as a speculative tool by a small number of market participants to gamble on movements in the CDS market itself rather than to insure against default.”

Oh, yes, and the DofF would know what they are talking about. After all, they do have on their staff:

• no financial markets economists at a PhD level;
• no financial risk economists at a PhD level;
• no finance professionals at a PhD level;
• no finance practitioners in fixed income with any reasonable senior private sector experience, and so on.

In fact, the DofF can't even forecast its the figures under its own remit. Forget making markets pricing statements.

But, hey, a good preemptive strike at the markets before things go further South is a way to go amongst Irish officials now days. And what a timely preemption this one was. The latest figures from CDS markets for inter-trading period show: 390-405 spreads. As B. puts it, "we are 50% up in a week, and its only Tuesday!"

And what about that ages-old deus ex machina of all incompetent polticians - the referencing to some "small number of market participants" keen on speculating in the financial markets. Surely we've seen them being proved wrong before... many times... hmmm, like with the EMU crisis. It is clear that our DofF boffins are simply too economically illterate to understand that no small handful of speculators can win absent real arbitrage opportunities. Thus, if the small numbers of such speculators still exist in the market, there is something true to their gambles. In other words, there is no smoke without a fire. Dough!

Of course, it is not just the markets that are noticing Irish fairytale story of 12+% deficits and unbelievable DofF-cooked-up figures showing 3% deficit rule being met by 2013. Germans are noticing it too (see above mentioned Bloomberg report). And about time (see my comment to the WSJ blog here). What would Mrs Merkel have to say about the German taxpayers having to rescue our DofF from the clutches of the handful of market speculators?

Back from the snow

I am back in Dublin after a few days of snow-capped Italian Alps, great food, great wine, sunshine, crisp and clean mountains air. Friuli was, as it always is, a marvel!

What did I miss while away?

First, the recapitalization announced last week is not working. The magic, if a promise of the state taking a large chunk out of any future profitability, growth strategies and competitiveness of the Irish banks has had any magic in the first place, is now all gone. Gone because of the terms of this senile arrangement for all sides involved.
Here is how:
(1) The state is borrowing money at ca 5.5-5.7% in the market and injects money into the banks at 8%, earning risk unadjusted 2.5% return implying a risk-adjusted return (assuming our banks CDS spreads for last week) of ca -2-2.5%,
(2) The banks get money at 8%. Hostage to Government's demands on boards composition and lending, their profitability is shot for the foreseeable future,
(3) The banks are required to lend money out to businesses at... 8% (cost of funds) + admin cost (1.5%) so, say, ca 10% to repay the state,
(4) Businesses will stay away from this latest Government-engineered rip-off, while Ireland Inc's corporate and household balance sheets will still carry excessive levels of risk and debt and the economy will continue to spiral downward.
So, Minister Lenihan, the scheme cannot work even in theory. Forget about trying to make it work in practice.

Second, my favourite charts are updated to show that the things I missed while away were duly priced into Irish shares valuations by the market. Hey, at least the market still functions...

Third, I've missed some lively debates on certain 'academic' blogs about the pesky foreign commentators 'talking down' Irish Miracle Economy (and Government credit ratings). Needless to say, I am not amused:
(1) Some of those who made these comments themselves are keen on offering consultancy services advising foreign governments and commenting on their policies. Do their comments suggest that they claim a privilege to do what others should not be allowed?
(2) A part of this debate has finally exposed the undemocratic, technocratic nature of some of the members of the Irish intellectual elite. One commentator went as far as state that any publicly open debate exposes Ireland to the irrationality of the masses and that openness and freedom of expression thus are best reserved exclusively for discussions involving only 'informed' policymakers and analysts.

Which brings us to today's news: Irish 5-year CDS spreads have hit 378bps today, with a recovery rate of 40%, implying (assuming frictionless markets and no arbitrage) a lower bound of the Ireland Inc's default rate of 22%. Adding thinness of the markets (Irish bonds being traded in relatively small volumes, plus the half-day trading yesterday in the US) our implied sovereign default rate stands probably closer to 25%.

These are the resignable-level figures for our Brian-Brian-Mary Triumvirate of the Incompetents.

The end of the road?

Prepare for carnage once the markets open tomorrow. Per latest RTE report (here), Irish Life & Permanent admitted that it provided 'exceptional support' to Anglo Irish Bank following the taxpayers-paid-for Government [banks] Guarantee Scheme.

According to IL&P at the times of 'unprecedented turmoil' there was 'an acceptance that financial institutions would seek to provide each other with appropriate support where possible'. It is claimed that the transactions were fully and appropriately accounted for in the books and in regular reports to the Financial Regulator.

Anyone still surprised that the global markets are treating Irish equities as some sort of the corporate governance lepers? Any surprise that some institutional investors are no longer willing to hold any shares in the cozy cartel of 'supporters' that is Ireland Inc?

Here are some questions that must be asked immediately and with a view of taking up resolute corrective measures should any wrongdoing be uncovered:

1. Can these actions by IL&P be interpreted as a deliberate manipulation of the market? Corporate deposits are the components of bank's balance sheet that support share price valuations. Interbank loans - a normal procedure - are not. If deposits were made to provide 'support' to the Anglo, without an immediate publication of these deposits and their underlying causes to the markets, did IL&P and Anglo collude to alter the bank's balance sheet without revelation of this price-sensitive information?
2. Did IL&P deposits undermine own balance sheet and were they properly cleared through the risk-assessment process? Was IL&P shareholder value safeguarded in the process of making this gesture of camaraderie?
3. If IL&P did disclose such deposits to the Financial Regulator, why these deposits were allowed to proceed and why this information was not made public immediately? If the FR knew about the covert nature of deposits, were they de facto a party to concealment of a price-sensitive information?
4. We are all aware of the rumors that both the Guarantee Scheme and the Anglo's nationalization were carried out due to some critical events involving the Anglo and (in the case of the Guarantee) some other banks. Withdrawals of corporate deposits on a massive scale were rumored in late September and December 2008. Why is the Government unwilling to disclose the nature, the extent and the timing of these problems? After all, the Government is (largely rightly, I believe) using taxpayers money to shore up our financial system, committing tens of billions of our own and our children's funds to underpin the Guarantee, the nationalization and the bailouts.
   
5. At an even deeper level: has there been an implicit (hear-no-evil, see-no-evil) or explicit (via refusal by the Government to admit the nature and extent of the triggers for emergency measures) collusion between the Government and the banking sector to sweep under the rug the problems of governance and management at some of our financial institutions?

Not a single revelation about the mis-conduct events associated with the Anglo has been made public by the Government in a voluntary fashion. Not a single piece of information concerning the due diligence process in re-capitalisation decisions by the State has been made public by the Government. In light of this it is legitimate to ask questions of the Government as to the nature of the silence that shrowds the taxpayers' bailout of the banaking sector.

Over recent days there has been a lot of talk in the international finance circles about the skeletons hidden in the closets of Irish banks. Reputational capital of Ireland Inc is no longer running thin - it is, by now, about as hole-ridden as a slice of Swiss cheese!

Functioning markets require compliance with the letter and the spirit of law. The law requires that all price-sensitive information relating to the publicly listed companies should be disclosed in a timely and appropriate manner. The IL&P-Anglo case suggests that, potentially:

1. The law that supports functioning markets might have been severely breached; and
2. Public safeguards that were entrusted to enforce this market-supporting law might have comprehensively failed.

If this is the case, it is time for heads to roll. Now! Starting at the top of the Financial Regulator's office and right through to the companies involved.

And as per re-capitalization scheme, any injection of public money must be preceded by a comprehensive independent (internationally-administered) review of the banks' balance sheets and books, prior to any State-financed repairs can be made.

Paul De Grauwe View: Credit Trouble Ireland

"Spreads of sovereign debt within the eurozone have increased dramatically during the last few months, largely as a result of panic in the financial markets. When it engages in quantitative easing, the ECB should privilege the buying of Irish, Greek, Spanish and Italian government bonds to eliminate the distortions and the externalities that these spreads create,"
says Paul De Grauwe in his yesterday's post on Vox - a worthy reading.

What this means is that, as predicted in my earlier posts, Ireland is now a prime candidate for an ECB-led rescue. De facto, De Grauwe's proposition implies Irish Government issuing (near-)worthless bonds and placing these with ECB in return for loans - a scenario that is indistinguisheable from an actual lender-of-last-resort rescue or equivalent to IMF lending money to Ukraine, Latvia, Hungary and Iceland.

De Grauwe offers a rather conventional - but not necessarilly wrong - view of the bond markets as being gripped by a speculative panic:
"My hypothesis is that the widening bond spreads within the eurozone are the result of panic in the financial markets. The panic that followed the banking crises has led investors into a stampede away from private debt into assets that are deemed safe. These are mainly government bonds of a few countries. The US, Germany, and possibly France are a few of these countries that, for some strange reason, have been singled out as supplying safety. Other countries do not profit from the same 'panic flight to safety'."

This statement prompted, yesterday, a rushed welcoming from a member of the officialdom of Irish ecnomics (see here). And yet, had Irish econocrats read through De Grauwe's article in full, they would have arrived at the following statement:
"Only Greece and Ireland saw their bond rates increase significantly over the last year, suggesting that the increased spreads of these countries are not only due to panic."

Needless to say - I agree with De Grauwe. Irish (and PIIGS in general) spreads are fundamentally linked not to those of the other Eurozone states but to the lack of national competitiveness (see De Grauwe's chart on unit labour costs reproduced below), economic diversification, cumulative wealth of society, infrastructural and human capital and indeed many other economic fundamentals which determine the resilience of economy in a downturn. In short - not a panic, but a low productivity of the PIIGS economies drives the crisis.

Relative unit labour costs in Eurozone
Source: http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/3009

In short, our econocrats, so keen on pumping public sector investment into building up Ireland's capital base, infrastructure, education etc somehow managed to convince themselves that our deficit in these areas, alongside our vast and widening Exchequer shortfall, uncontrollable public spending growth, massive banks guarantees and recapitalization commitments by the state and macroeconomic management that requires raising taxes during a severe recession, all matter little to the bonds markets. Instead, the panic - that deus ex machina of economics - is the answer.

No need to panic then...

DofF Forecast: Update II

As promised - here are two scenarios estimating the state of the nation's finances.
The tables are based on DofF Update January 2009. Benign scenario assumes moderately deeper growth contraction (GDP), a fall-off in the tax receipts (as outlined in my previous update - in line with January 2009 Exchequer returns), a contraction in semi-state companies returns and my forecast for the 'savings' to be achieved in 2009-2013. All changes are marked in red. Blue color denotes differences in assumptions between moderate and benign scenarios, with moderate scenario assuming slightly deeper contractions in tax revenue, semi-states returns and shortfall in committed 'savings'.

Perhaps the most important lines to consider in both scenarios are lines: GEN GOV BALANCE and Gen Gov balance as % of GDP, which show that even under benign scenario, current dynamics in tax receipts and semi-states' revenue imply that Ireland will not be able to achieve Growth and Stability Pact limits on Governement deficit of 3% by 2013. The range for Gen Gov Balance Deficit is between €21bn and €22bn in 2009 - a far cry from the DofF forecast of €17.2bn.

Another important aspect of these estimates is the sensitivity of the general deficit to the assumption on 'savings' to be generated in 2009-2013. Given last week's fiasco with Mr Cowen's proposals, it is now absolutely clear to me that:

• the cuts planned by the DofF for 2009-2013 are not going to materialise in full;
• the cuts that will have a cumulative effect over the years forward are not going to cover the entire amounts planned, so that one-off-measures will play a significant role in total savings to be achieved.