14/11/2011: Tourism to Ireland - Q3 2011 data

Q3 2011 data for overseas travel to and from Ireland is out today and here are the updates.

From the top figures:

• In Q3 2011, total number of overseas trips to Ireland rose 6.49% yoy (+129,600 visitors). Relative to peak of Q3 2007, the number of visits to Ireland remains down 19.66% (-520,200 visitors).
• Number of overseas trips from Ireland fell 7.02% yoy (-150,000) and is down 15.64% on peak of Q3 2007 (-368,500 visitors).
• Net travel to Ireland in Q3 2011 was 139,000, up on 10,600 in Q2 2011 and up on -140,600 in Q3 2010, making this quarter the second highest in terms of net number of visitors to Ireland since Q1 2007 and the highest since Q3 2007.

• Numbers of visitors to Ireland from Great Britain rose to 910,500 in Q3 2011 (+6.79% yoy) but remains 28.27% (-358,800) down on same period in 2007.
• Numbers of visitors from Other Europe rose 5.84% yoy to 741,800 in Q3 2011, but remains down 15.09% on Q3 2007 (-131,800).
• Numbers of visitors from North America rose 5.17% yoy (to 350,000) and is down 10.33% on Q3 2007.
• Proportionally, visitors from Great Britain to Ireland comprised 42.82% of all visitors to Ireland in Q3 2011, up on 42.7% in Q2 2011, but down on 47.96% in Q3 2007.

So overall, some encouraging news for tourism and transport sector. This is especially encouraging since Q3 2011 was a quarter of heightened economic concerns across the EU, UK and the US, so it is hard to argue that some sort of 'recovery bounce' is driving tourists to Ireland. Which might suggest that improved costs of hotels and associated services are working through to make Ireland more attractive destination. That and PR stunts by the Queen and the US President?

PS: after I have posted the above, one of the twitterati @hayspender came back with a comment:
"you dont think zombie hotels have a influence also? ie not true economics!" I agree, sometimes, when you write, not all possible permutations of potential causes can be captured. Of course, part of the 'improved competitiveness' is the factor of NAMA-owned hotels which receive an implicit (and very real) subsidy on their capital costs, allowing them to offer rooms at rates well below true cost that is faced by other hoteliers.

Yet another potential factor, also overlooked by me and flagged by another twitterati, is that some of the overseas travel relates to people commuting for work. This, however, does not appear to be reflected in the data, since the CSO releases data based on surveys which do collect information about the residency of travelers and reasons for travel.

13/11/2011: Non Performing Loans and links to macroeconomy

‘Often, the banking problems do not arise from the liability side, but from a protracted deterioration in asset quality, be it from a collapse in real estate prices or increased bankruptcies in the nonfinancial sector’’ (Kaminsky and Reinhart, 1999).

How true this sounds today. Take Euro area banks:

1) Collapse in US and European real estate valuations in recent years has triggered fall off in the value of linked assets held on the banks balance sheets

2) Collapse in the European bonds valuations has triggered a precipitous decline in core assets, including capital-linked assets

3) General recession have further undermined core assets on the loans side in corporate, SME and household lending.

A recent IMF paper: “Nonperforming Loans and Macrofinancial Vulnerabilities in Advanced Economies” by Mwanza Nkusu (2011) (IMF WP/11/161, July 2011) looks into the asset-focused linkages between financial and macroeconomic shocks, aiming “to uncover macro-financial vulnerabilities from the linkages between nonperforming loans (NPL) and macroeconomic performance in advanced economies”.

Based on a sample of 26 advanced countries from 1998 to 2009, the paper deals with two empirical questions on NPL and macrofinancial vulnerabilities: 

1) the determinants of NPL and 

2) the interactions between NPL and economic performance. 

With respect of the first question, the literature suggests that the determinants of NPL can be macroeconomic, financial, or purely institutional. In addressing the second question, the paper investigated “the extent to which falling asset prices and credit constraints facing borrowers may backfire and lead to an extra round of financial system stress and subdued economic activity”. 

The findings show that “NPL play a central role in the linkages between credit markets frictions and macroeconomic vulnerabilities. The results confirm that a sharp increase in NPL weakens macroeconomic performance, activating a vicious spiral that exacerbates macrofinancial vulnerabilities. …The broad policy implication is that, while NPL remain a permanent feature of banks’ balance sheets, policies and reforms should be geared to avoiding sharp increases that set into motion the adverse feedback loop between macroeconomic and financial shocks.”

Per authors: “empirical regularities …shape the modeling of NPL, …include the cyclical nature of bank credit, NPL, and loan loss provisions. In particular, in upturns, contemporaneous NPL ratios tend to be low and loan loss provisioning subdued. Also, competitive pressure and optimism about the macroeconomic outlook lead to a loosening of lending standards and strong credit growth, sowing the seeds of borrowers’ and lenders’ financial distress down the road. The loosening of lending standards in upturns depends on the existing regulatory and supervisory framework. In downturns, higher-than-expected NPL ratios, coupled with the decline in the value of collaterals, engenders greater caution among lenders and lead to a tightening of credit extension, with adverse impacts on domestic demand.”

In other words, first order effects of ‘positive’ pressures on lending expansion are reinforced by ‘positive’ second order effects of reduced risk management provisions, regulatory slackening and counter-cyclical capital buffers. Once things blow, however, the same effects again reinforce each other. The bubble acceleration is supported by both moments as well as the bubble explosion – yielding higher peaks and deeper troughs.

Thus, the determinants of NPL “are both institutional/structural and macroeconomic”.

The institutional / structural determinants are found in financial regulation and supervision and the lending incentive structure. “Intuitively, disparities in financial regulation and supervision affect banks’ behavior and risk management practices and are important in explaining cross-country differences in NPL.” 

The macroeconomic environment drivers work by altering “borrowers’ balance sheets and their debt servicing capacity. The set of macroeconomic variables [includes]… broad indicators of macroeconomic performance, such as GDP growth and unemployment...”

The core findings of the study are: 

• “A sharp increase in NPL triggers long-lived tailwinds that cripple macroeconomic performance from several fronts. …of all the variables included in the model, NPL is the only one that has both a statistically significant response to- and predictive power on- every single [macroeconomic performance] variable over a 4-year forecast period. …Regardless of the factors behind the deterioration in loan quality, the evidence suggests that a sharp increase in aggregate NPL feeds on itself leading to an almost linear incremental response that continues into the fourth year after the initial shock.”
• “The confluence of adverse responses in key indicators of macroeconomic performance—GDP growth and unemployment—leads to a downward spiral in which banking system distress and the deterioration in economic activity reinforce each other.”
• “The broad policy implication [is that] …policies and reforms should be geared to avoiding sharp increases that set into motion the adverse feedback loop between macroeconomic and financial shocks. … preventing excessive risk-taking during upturns through adequate macroprudential regulations is the first best.”

In other words, folks, you can’t ignore the macroeconomic effects of Non Performing Loans, as Ireland’s Government is implicitly doing by refusing to focus on repairing household debt overhang here. And, via a link between negative equity and NPL (the study cites evidence that house prices have direct negative effect on NPL – with house prices collapse leading to increased NPLs), we can’t ignore negative equity effects either.

13/11/2011: Euro area - history of insolvency

Nouriel Roubini makes a very compelling argument as to the nature of the Euro area crisis - the nature revealed by unsustainable economic model based on running excessive external deficits and accumulating debt (see his blogpost here).

I have frequently referenced this problem to a deeper underlying force - the propensity of the European social democratic models to spend beyond their means. As the Euro area economies pursued populist agendas of 'social' services and subsidies expansion throughout the 1990s and 2000s, some (indeed majority) of the European economies stagnated, implying diminished capacity to sustain subsidies transfers within the vested interests-run Union. Thus, current account deficits - mask both Government and private sectors imbalances (with Governments in effect pumping the private economy with steroids of debt and cheap interest rates to extract tax rents that can be used to finance political largesse).

To see this, look no further than the links between Current Account deficits (external imbalances across entire economy - public and private) and Government deficits (fiscal imbalances), as well as Structural deficits (fiscal imbalances corrected for recessionary impacts).

Chart below shows cumulated current account deficits for 12 years since 2000 as well as cumulated structural deficits.

The striking feature of this chart is that over 12 years horizon, only 6 countries of the Euro area have managed to post a cumulative external surplus, while only one country (Finland) has managed to live within its means both in terms of external balance and fiscal balance. Any wonder that Finns are so opposed to the idea of 'burden sharing' that will see their surpluses transferred to the profligate states?

Another striking feature of the graph is that, contrary to Mr Roubini's assertion, France too was running dual external and fiscal deficits. Albeit, its deficit on current account side was small. Germany - another paragon of 'stability' run structural deficits on the fiscal side - i.e. spent beyond its means when it comes to Government expenditure outside that needed to correct for recessionary imbalances. Ditto for the Netherlands.

Ireland - our engine of 'exports-led growth' - is, alas, firmly NOT an engine of external balances. Cumulated current account deficit for the country is -19.5% of GDP. Any hopes for reversing 12 years of that experience, folks, will require re-wiring of our economy, preferences, political and institutional structures etc. Good luck getting there before the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

In fact, deficits are sticky - hard to reverse. Past deficit experience, it turns out, shapes much of the future achievement, as illustrated in the chart below.

Once you are insolvent for a decade (1990s) you are likely to remain insolvent for the next decade too (2000s). And, hence, the headwinds against us (Ireland) reversing that and moving into strong surpluses on current account in years ahead are strong. Not that they can't be overcome. If we look at transition from 1990s external balance position to 2000s position, the following holds:

• Finland and the Netherlands stand out as the only 2 countries that managed to improve their surpluses on the current account side between 1990s and 2000s averages
• France, Belgium and Luxembourg are 3 countries that managed to retain surpluses, but weakened their performance between 1990s and 2000s
• Malta was the only country that managed to reduce its external deficits between 1990s and 2000s in terms of averages
• Portugal, Greece, estonia, Cyprus, Slovak Republic, Sapin, Ireland, Slovenia and Italy all saw average deficits of the 1990s deepening in the 2000s
• Only two economies - Austria and Germany have managed to reverse previous deficits (in the 1990s) to surpluses in the 2000s. 

That means that, historically, a chance of reversing average current account deficit in the previous decade to a surplus in the next decade is 2/17 or less than 12%. not an impossible feat, but an unlikely one.

And current account deficits do appear to relate closely to the General Government deficits and Structural fiscal deficits as the two charts below show (note of caution - the equations estimated below are imprecise, of course, due to small sample).

At last, a table to summarize:

Yep, insolvency - of the deepest (across all three measures) variety is the domain of 10 out of 17 member states when it comes to the last 12 years of Euro area history. Another 5 member states are insolvent by two out of three criteria. Lastly, only two member states - Finland and Luxembourg - were actually fully solvent since 2000.

That, folks, makes for a rather spectacular failure of the Euro area institutional design.

12/11/2011: Russian economy - Summary 2011

Summary of the Russian economy in the light of the removal of the final barriers to the country accession to the WTO (see the related note here). To see the slides, click on the individual frame to enlarge

12/11/2011: Russia's accession to the WTO - opportunities for Irish exports & investment

This week, finally, with much delay, there is a full agreement for Russia accession to WTO, clearing the few issues that remained the stumbling block to the country membership. It is now expected that Russia’s membership will be approved at the WTO Council meeting on December 15-17. The decision is expected to go for ratification to the Duma some time in early 2012. Following the ratification, Russia will be formally admitted to the WTO within 30 days after the vote.

Under the core conditions for entry, import tariffs will be reduced from the average of 10% to 7.8% with at least 1/3 of all tariffs reductions to take place on the date of formal accession. 25% of the rest of tariffs reductions will take place after 3 years of transition. The balance will take effect after 7 years of transition (these focusing in the 'sensitive' areas of car manufacturing and aircraft manufacturing) and 8 years for some agricultural tariffs (e.g. poultry).

One core achievement will be in the area of customs clearance, with maximum customs fee to be reduced from the current Rb90,000 - or ca USD2,900 to Rb30,000.

Another core development is that the previously-announced major privatisations programme will be subject of reporting to the WTO

More specifically, in the areas of importance for irish exporters:

• Agricultural imports will see average tariffs falling from 13.2% current to 10.8% post-adjustment period. Cereals tariffs will declined from 15.15% to 10% and dairy tariffs will fall from 19.8% to 14.9%. Domestic agricultural supports - subsidies - will be reduced from USD9bn in 2011-2012 to USD4.4bn in 2018. 
• Russia will privatise 100% shareholding in the United Grain Company in 2012, as well 50%+1 share of the Rosagrolizing (by 2013).
• Overall, agricultural measures can be expected to drive significant change in the sector in Russia post-2020, with some expected capex growth in advance of these as domestic enterprises re-tool to enhance competitiveness.
• Manufacturing tariffs are to fall from 9.5% average to 7.3%. While automotive manufacturing imports tariffs are to declined from 15.5% to 12% over 7 years period. 
• In chemicals sector, average tariffs are to decline from 6.5% current to 5.2%.
• In telecoms sector, by the end of 2016 there will be lifting of the restriction on foreign ownership from the current 49% to allow full ownership of enterprises.
• Similarly, there will be no restriction on full foreign ownership of banks. However, foreign banks combined market share of the Russian market will remain capped at a maximum of 50%. In addition, by 2021 foreign insurance companies will be allowed to open fully-owned subsidiaries and branches in Russia.
• In transport sector, there will be equalization of treatment of foreign-made aircraft to that of the Russian-made aircraft in terms of leasing, eliminating current preferential treatment of Russian manufactured aircraft. By mid 2013, Russian railways will phase out price differentials for shipments of Russian-made and foreign-made goods.
• In services, the restriction on share ownership for wholesale, retail and franchise companies will be lifted immediately after the accession.

It is unlikely, however, that the accession will have an immediate impact on Russian trade and investment relations with the rest of the world, as compliance period relating to the accession is long, especially in the more 'sensitive' areas, such as car industry, transport industry, agriculture etc. However, we can expect an improved drive toward domestic (Russian) enterprises increasing their competitiveness and the Russian Government to accelerate efforts to improve institutional frameworks and enhance institutional capital. More active Government drive to secure key internal markets reforms is expected and this is likely to shape forthcoming Presidential elections.

On the net, I expect significant changes in the markets for Irish exporters into Russia and a long-term process of reforms and investment growth for Russian markets as the result of the accession. This is hugely positive development. The market potential for Irish trade with Russia is in the region of €1.3-1.5 billion or roughly double the current levels of exports.  The market potential for Irish investment into Russia is in the region of €1 billion per annum, although achieving this potential requires significant changes in the supply of auxiliary services to Irish investors (access to functional banking and investment advice).

Lastly, there is also a huge potential for Russian investment into Ireland. In recent years, Russian investments into EU have been increasing from about €3 billion annually in 2008 to the expected volume of €4.1 billion in 2011. But Ireland remains off the map for Russian investors with just two Russian-owned companies being clients of the IDA.

Note: Russia is currently the largest economy in the world outside the WTO, with GDP in excess of USD1.9 trillion expected in 2011. The World Bank estimates that joining WTO will add 3.7% to the country GDP between 2012 and 2016 and 11% within 2012-2021. See a follow up note summarizing the Russian economy.

11/11/2011: Ireland's Consumer Prices: October

Irish CPI and HICP figures for October show continued pattern of public sector-controlled costs inflation and continued pressures on prices in the domestic economy. Here are the details.

Per chart above, Irish CPI rose from 104.4 in September to 104.7 in October compared to December 2006 when it stood at 100. Re-based to December 2001, October CPI was at 123.6, up on 126.2 in September. Mom CPI rose 0.3% and 3mo change is 0.8%. Annualized rate of change is now 2.8% - the highest since April 2011. All items CPI rose from 2.6% in September to 2.8% in October. 3mo MA is now at 2.53% and 6mo MA is at 2.62%.

Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices also increased 0.3% mom to 107.1 in October from 106.8 in September. A year ago, index reading was 105.5, so controlling for rounding yoy HICP rose 1.5% in october, up on 1.3% in September and 1% increases in July and August.

 CPI by household budget components was also worrying:

• Food and non-alcoholic beverages prices inflation remained at 1.4% for the third month in a row, with 6mo MA of 1.17% and 3mo MA of 1.4%. In 3mo through October, average price inflation rose 50% on 3mo period through July.
• Alcoholic beverages & tobacco remained in deflation of -0.5% for the fourth month running. 3mo MA is -0.5% and 6mo MA is -0.3, which means we are witnessing slightly accelerating deflation.
• Clothing & footwear posted -0.3% CPI in October, same as in September, down from -1.2% deflation in August. 3mo MA is -0.6% and 6mo MA is -1.2%, so we are seeing some slowdown in deflation.
• Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels posted another double-digit price increase of 10.2% in October, up on CPI of 8.9% in September. 3mo MA CPI is now at 8.77% and 6mo MA CPI is at 9.07%. Largest yoy increases in this category were: 20.5% increase in natural gas prices, 20.3% hike in liquid fuels prices, 18.1% increase in mortgage interest costs, 11.5% rise in electricity prices, and 6.9% price increase for bottled gas.
• Deflation continued to build up in Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance category with CPI of -2.2% in October against -2.3% in August and September. 3mo MA is now at -2.27% and 6mo MA is at -2.37%.
• As far as state-controlled sectors go, Health had another bumper crop year with price increases of 2.3% in October, against CPI of 3.4% in June-September. 3mo MA is at 3.03% and 6mo MA is at 3.42%. Hospital services drove inflation here with annual rate of price change of 9.8%. In contrast, pharmaceutical products prices are down 3.3% yoy in October.
• Transport - another heavily state-controlled or dominated sector also posted robust inflation of 3.6% in October against 4.2% in September. CPI for the sector is now at 3mo MA of 3.67% and 6mo MA of 3.52%. Costs of purchasing vehicles have fallen 4.3% yoy through October, but costs of fuels and lubricants rose 14.5%. Rail transport costs are up 1.8%, Bus fares are up 10.0%, Air transport costs up 5.6% and Sea transport costs up 6.4%.
• Communications CPI in October stood at 1%, same as in previous 2 months. 6mo MA is now at 2.08%.
• Recreation & culture CPI posted -0.8% growth in October, more deflationary that -0.5% in September. 3mo MA is at -0.7% and 6mo MA at -0.65%.
• Education CPI showed the buoyancy of the Celtic Tiger era with 6.5% increase in October on the foot of 12 previous months posting deflation. 3mo MA is now at 1.1% and 6mo MA at -0.1%. THe swing in CPI was a massive 8.1 percentage points. Virtually all inflation in the sector was accounted for by the third level education costs - up 13.4% yoy in October (+13.5% mom). Education costs now run +21.9% ahead of December 2006 level for primary education, +22.7% for second level education, +50.1% for third level education and only +4.7% for Other education & training.
• Restaurants and hotels CPI came in at -0.9% in October from -0.8% in September. 3mo MA is at -0.8% and 6mo MA is at -0.65%. Accommodation services posted the largest deflation of -3.8% mom and -3.0% yoy, with Restaurants, cafes & fast-food posting deflation of -0.2% mom and -1.9% yoy.
• In Miscellaneous Goods and Services category, the only notable changes were: 12.7% yoy increase in insurance costs, broken down into a massive 23.8% yoy rise in Health insurance costs, and 4.2% rise in Transport Insurance costs. Overall, this category costs rose 6.4% yoy in October and 0.5% mom

State-controlled sectors and prices inflation is now running at 1.15% in October, up on 1.03% in September. 3mo MA and 6mo MA for the series are both at 1.0%. In contrast, private sectors prices are rising at 0.51% in October down from 0.55% in September. 3mo MA for these prices increases is 0.50% and 6mo MA is at 0.56%

Cumulative gap between state-controlled sectors prices and private sectors prices from December 2007 through today now stands at 140.51%, up from 139.62% in September.