Aussie Bank Asks “Will Bitcoin Replace The Dollar?”

Bitcoin is rapidly becoming part of the everyday lexicon. Following David Woo's investigation, National Australia Bank's Emma Lawson looks at its creation, use, and quality as "currency," and find that Bitcoin meets most, but not all the conditions required to be a currency. Lawson concludes Bitcoin may not be the most efficient monetary system, given the costs to create, and that the supply set-up can be seen as both an advantage (hyperinflation is not possible) but also a disadvantage (there are conditions which may create deflation). But, if enough people believe in it, and use it, it may be here to stay as a payment system. Simply put, its success (or failure) will depend on establishing trust and adoption.

Via National Australia Bank's Emma Lawson,

The Rise In Crypto-Currency

What are Bitcoin?

Definition of a currency:

Noun: a system of money in general use in a particular country: the fact or quality of being generally accepted or in use.

“Bitcoin” has entered the popular lexicon, challenging our idea of what makes a currency, currency. The definition of currency above does not mention the physical characteristics of the same but that it must be generally accepted.

There have been different forms of currency over the centuries, but what is important is that users believe it to be currency. Banknotes themselves were introduced in China in 118BC as a promissory note. Marco Polo, in the 13th Century recorded that paper bark was used in the place of gold or silver. The first colony in New South Wales used rum for currency, in the absence of printing presses. These examples show that currency or money can be different things, they are not static and they do not have to be physically valuable in themselves (like gold).

As such, Bitcoins can indeed be currency, as could anything labelled as such. As long as you believe it is.

Firstly, what are crypto-currencies? Bitcoin is one of around 50 crypto-currencies, albeit the most well-known, traded and first established in 2009. These are de-centralised digital (or electronic) medium of exchange. They are not backed by physical assets but rather peer security.

Primary issuance of Bitcoin is determined by computer algorithms which require large amounts of computer power, to validate sequences (blocks) and proof-of-work. As more “miners” participate in calculating blocks, the required computer power and sequence of blocks increase; thus not allowing an increase in the speed of Bitcoin issuance despite more mining. Participants become Bitcoin miners to claim transaction fees and initial Bitcoin.

Indeed one claimed benefit of Bitcoin is that in a world of quantitative easing, this alternative is designed not to increase above the scheduled path. Bitcoin are created at a “decreasing and predictable rate…issuance halts completely with a total of 21 million Bitcoins in existence."

The secondary market for Bitcoin is where most participants will acquire them for their digital “wallets” i.e. accounts. The price is determined on exchange via demand and supply, similar to the broader FX market.

At present there are eight dominant exchanges but there have been more and the number changes (Chart 1). In a study of 40 Bitcoin exchanges, 18 were found to have closed and taken customer accounts. Popular exchanges were also found more likely to experience security breaches2.Prices may also vary between exchanges. The most popular in the USD market is Mt Gox, which constitutes 52% of USD volume (based on the latest month average volume); closely followed by Bitstamp at 46%.

Trading of Bitcoin is most popular in CNY, at 46% of the total Bitcoin market by currency, closely followed by USD at 45%, EUR takes up a small percentage at 4%. This makes the China Bitcoin exchange the largest available; it makes up 47% of total Bitcoin trading (Chart 1).
 

The price on a singular exchange has been particularly volatile recently (Chart 2). There have been calls of a bubble in the Bitcoin price. The price tracked an average of $5.44 in 2011 and $8.29 in 2012 but has risen exponentially from October 2013. It peaked at $1200, and has dropped back to $575 more recently, after regulatory changes in China.

The fact that there are multiple exchanges but only 1723 registered businesses worldwide advertised as using Bitcoin (no doubt there are more in reality), suggests there may be something in the idea that there is currently more people buying Bitcoin in anticipation of an increase in Bitcoin value, rather than buying Bitcoin in order to use them as a payment method. That strongly suggests a bubble in the present value of Bitcoin.

Be that as it may, it does not discount the idea of Bitcoin as a currency or payment system, albeit a presently volatile one.

Bitcoin as a desirable currency

There are a number of qualities that a currency must have to be effective and sustainable. The NSW colony’s use of rum fit the bill by being recognisable but it arguably wasn’t durable when holders got thirsty! Bitcoin has certainly captured the attention of markets and the media, but if it is to have longevity, these tried and tested qualities must be in existence. These are necessary but not sufficient conditions to qualify as currency.

Durability: the unique feature of Bitcoin is that they are electronic, and not physical money. The concept of electronic funds has grown, and examples of electronic units of exchange have been around for some time in the shape of, arguably, credit cards, but also PayPal. Stories of throwing the hard-drive at the local tip aside, crypto-currencies are durable in their electronic records. Computer back-ups are recommended.

Portability: similar to durability, with an electronic version of currency, the portability of Bitcoin is less of an issue. As long as you have a smart-phone. Clearly there are some issues here, with access to smart phones or portable technology not universal. There may be restrictions on use by age or location for example. Anyone trying to just make a mobile phone call in a remote area in Australia could perhaps attest to that.
Fungibility: or the ability to exchange Bitcoins for other Bitcoin without cost. For example, swapping a $10 note for two $5’s. Bitcoin are fungible, although as they come in only one denomination it is less of a concern.

Divisibility: the ability to split a whole Bitcoin. This is possible. It is this ability to split into fraction of Bitcoin that the proponents of the crypto-currency believe will solve the problem of there being a finite amount ever minted. They believe that when there is expanded use and demand for Bitcoin, combined with a limited supply (at 21 million), that Bitcoin will become increasingly divided or fractionalised.

The clear flaw of that plan is the concern regarding deflation. If one Bitcoin can provide the owner with increasingly more goods or services over time (ie. demand outstrips supply for Bitcoin, not goods and services), that means the price of goods and services are falling. This tends to dampen consumption. This may occur only when the final Bitcoin is minted and if demand for Bitcoin use continues to rise.

Scarcity: Bitcoins are scarce as they require expensive and time-consuming computing resources to create. Hacking or counterfeiting is claimed to be prevented by peer pressure or game theory to prevent an invalid increase in minting. This has not been entirely successful, with breaches in June and August 2011 and April 2013. The security features are being adapted over time to address problems as the system matures.

The scarcity can also be considered a flaw. The supply of Bitcoin is inelastic. There are periods of time at which an increase in the money supply is warranted, to meet demand and then cyclically reduced. Bitcoin does not allow for that. The current spike in Bitcoin is an example. Demand for it has risen (arguably on speculative grounds), and supply cannot match it; hence the rise from $100 to $1200 over four months.

One factor is that there are a number of alternative crypt-currencies. Bitcoin is the dominant system now but that is not to say that it will remain that way. Crypto-currencies may stay around and thrive as a payment system but not Bitcoin.

Recognisability: there is a growing awareness of Bitcoin as a payment system. But, its use is limited. Some might suggest that its recognisability at present is concentrated on its own price, rather than a medium of exhcange.

The Bitcoin website shows 1723 sites worldwide that advertise their use. In Australia, there is a café in Adelaide, a website services firm in Melbourne, a juice bar in Sydney and a currency exchange on the Gold Coast. There are likely to be more than that and it is growing. But it is not yet universal.

Mention Bitcoin at present and many would discuss its use as a store of value before its use as a medium of exchange. And this takes us to the other properties of being a currency.

Trust and Adoption are Critical

“Bitcoins have value because they are useful as a form of money”

In a discussion about Bitcoin with a computer engineer I asked “how is it created?” and had the spiel about computing power, energy and the resources needed to identify prime numbers. Ok, that’s great, I may never understand the maths but I get that it requires substantial resources to compute. The next question “so what does it produce that is valuable?” answer – nothing.

Bitcoin are valuable because they exist, because people believe that it may be so. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. There must be trust in the system, for Bitcoin to retain any value. This is how it differs from other payment methods like credit cards and PayPal, which have a pool of funds backing them. Crypto-currencies may be cheaper as a payment method because they do not have that asset backing, but it thus relies more on trust than alternatives.

Bitcoin comes about as a response to quantitative easing and concern regarding central banks’ printing money. But what it cannot replicate is the revenue generating abilities of central banks and the governments that control them, or their inflation fighting credentials. Neither does it have the centuries of history that gold is backed by.

Bitcoin will work as a medium of exchange as long as participants believe in the security of the triple-counting system and peer-to-peer security. But this takes time. Given this, we shall likely not know for a prolonged period of time how successful the crypto-currency experiment will be.
The other condition that Bitcoin needs to be successful is adoption. It needs to become broadly used and accepted. Its (short) history so far has mostly encapsulated illegal activity characterised by the deep-web site Silkroad; subsequently shut-down. As already noted, there are only four businesses in Australia registered on the Bitcoin User site showing they accept it as a medium of exchange.

The connection between Bitcoin and illegal activity will have to be broken before it becomes widely trusted and accepted. Again, this takes a long time to establish. So while we cannot say that Bitcoin will definitely not become a medium of exchange, what we can say is that it will take a prolonged period of time to prove.

The Regulatory Environment

The increased focus on Bitcoin has led to a wealth of commentary and legal stance on its use from central banks and regulators. A few are outlined below, no country has wholeheartedly adopted its use:

Australia – RBA’s Stevens: “maybe there will be a world in which currencies based on some computer algorithm to limit supply as opposed to physical gold or something. There have been many such currencies through the ages…the ones that will survive will be the ones that hold their value which is why we have an inflation target which we’re hitting.”.

China’s PBoC have banned the use of Bitcoin by commercial banks and the clearing of payments in Bitcoin by third-party providers. China has been the most vocal and proactive in preventing the use of Bitcoin as an alternative to local currency in the major nations using (or investing in) Bitcoin. With the Chinese market for Bitcoin the largest so far, this may be a natural response to protect the central bank’s authority on the money system. Needless to say, the price of Bitcoin in CNY fell sharply on the latest announcement (18 December 2013).

The Swiss have taken a slightly different tack, by preparing to declare Bitcoin as a foreign currency. This ensures that it is not a domestic alternative but that it can be tracked and must be declared so as to meet tax and money-laundering laws, but not banning it altogether.

Germany has acknowledged its existence by declaring it a “unit of account” for tax purposes. It is not a foreign currency but “private money.” It now attracts a 25% capital gains tax.

The EU banking regulator has warned on the use of Bitcoin, in regards to theft, price fluctuations and the lack of central bank backing or security on the same. This has been followed by the French Central Bank which said its use is highly speculative and poses a financial risk to users. Dutch Central Bank President Wellink noted that Bitcoin hype was akin to the 17th century tulip bubble (but didn’t result in a flower at the end of it). The Dutch central bank has warned against their use as they are not regulated and there was no underlying liability. There is no deposit guarantee scheme.

Most jurisdictions treat Bitcoin as assets and require tax to be paid on capital gains. The Norwegian government said that Bitcoin were not considered money or currency and will tax it as an asset, similar to Germany, at 25%,

Thailand was the first country to ban its use as it was ruled not to be a currency.

In November, the US held a Senate hearing on the use of crypto-currencies. Much of the discussion was positive and upheld their use as “legal means of exchange’” There are ongoing concerns about its use in illegal activity.

In a world that is used to being bailed out when the financial system fails, Bitcoin’s decentralised system is a benefit to those in favour of limited government control, but is a distinct disadvantage to those who are used to the final bill being picked up by governments. If the present leap in Bitcoin price proves to be a bubble, it will be the individuals picking up the tab, not governments. There is no deposit scheme or any “too big to fail.” While investment in Bitcoin is small, that poses individual risk. If Bitcoin use becomes much broader, that becomes a risk to financial stability. Caveat emptor.

Bitcoin to replace the AUD? Not Now

We have established that Bitcoin meet most, but not all the conditions required to be a currency. The rest may follow, but that it will take a very long time to be proven. Its success (or failure) will depend on establishing trust and adoption.

Bitcoin may not be the most efficient monetary system, given the costs to create, and that the supply set-up can be seen as both an advantage (hyperinflation is not possible) but also a disadvantage (there are conditions which may create deflation). But, if enough people believe in it, and use it, it may be here to stay as a payment system.

However, there is a large red flag saying buyer beware at current levels of price and use. With no macroeconomic backing, it is impossible to determine fair value for Bitcoin aside from demand and supply – but the chart of AUD/BTC (Chart 3) above shows, BTC’s trajectory is not one of a stable currency.
 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/4iQv5-AReO0/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Relaxing Oil Export Ban is Bad News for US Consumers

By EconMatters  

 

 

US Energy Boom

 

The US is producing much more energy domestically the last decade in all forms from natural gas to crude oil with a myriad of boutique products along the way, and so it is natural for producers to want to maximize profits by expanding their marketplace.

 

 

Free Markets haven`t been Free for a long time

 

This would be the free market response, and that would be a great principle in theory, but nothing has been ‘free market’ in this country, and the world we live in for decades; that nostalgic business ideology has been replaced with corporate cronyism, powerful lobbying, state sponsored agendas, and closed door deal-making. 

 

Petroleum Products versus Natural Gas

 

We have seen the inevitable outcome of any lifting of this ban by looking at the products markets, namely gasoline. There is an abundance of cheap domestic oil (would be a lot cheaper without excessive QE Stimulus & Artificial Demand created by refinery Exports of Products) but still domestic oil production, and oil production in North America is at multi-decade highs, and yet gasoline prices are at record highs for this time of the year, and this is after coming down considerably from earlier highs in 2013.

 

An Abundance of Natural Gas & Oil Subsidizing Gulf Coast Refiners

 

Why is this the case? It is because the highly profitable export market for end products like gasoline where refiners along the gulf coast have expanded capacity to take advantage of cheaper North American oil, and low natural gas prices that enabled lower petro manufacturing costs. 

 

 

These cheaper input costs made US fuel and other derivative petroleum products very competitive on a global price basis which had the effect of higher prices for US consumers as supply markets were much tighter than they would have otherwise been without a robust export market during the last five years of this US Energy resurgence. 

 

Lower Prices Good for US Economy

 

Natural Gas is the energy market that has helped domestic businesses and consumers with lower prices which has benefited the overall US economy, while the domestic oil market which should be helping US consumers and businesses more, is being pegged higher due to the exporting of products. This gets even worse for US Consumers and businesses if the Oil Export Ban is relaxed. 

 

 

Somebody Wins, Somebody Loses

 

In effect, this results in the following scenario: US Consumers & Businesses pay higher prices, US Domestic Oil becomes more expensive due to widening the marketplace for exports, and Global Oil becomes cheaper for international consumers. This process just becomes a giant wealth transfer, another tax, a business subsidy from the US Consumer & Businesses that utilize domestic energy to foreigners and companies exporting said products to these international consumers.

 

Let`s just be consistent: Lift all Exporting Bans

 

While the government is at it let us just lift any Natural Gas bans on exporting, and just raise costs all along the energy input continuum for 2014. I am sure Dow Chemical will love this outcome and open up more manufacturing capacity here in the United States. Profits will be great for those who benefit from the aforementioned changes to energy export bans. But those business interests who rely on energy input for operations will be hurt from this legislative change, and so will US Consumers. 

 

I am sure these same gulf coast petro-refiners will have no problem with also lifting the export bans on any natural gas products so that their manufacturing and operational costs will rise along with higher natural gas prices which will eat into their operating margins and thus transfer this wealth to the natural gas industry players.

 

Market Correlations & Paradigm Shifts 

 

One can see the positive correlations in the charts between the increased production of domestic natural gas, thus leading to much lower input prices for refiners; and the takeoff in petroleum products exports from a pretty stable baseline previously , starting to gain steam around the 2005 to 2006 timeframe.  

 

 

This export dynamic for petroleum products along with high oil prices relative to the economy due to QE Stimulus liquidity and potential Middle-East instability inflated commodities and oil specifically thus further incentivizing US Domestic Oil Production along with new and cheaper technological drilling techniques in the energy industry activating the rebound around 2010 for the increased Domestic Oil part of the equation. 

 

This led to the Gulf Coast refiners expanding capacity and seeking cheaper transportation methods of this increased North American and Domestic Oil via pipelines, rail, and barges. The US domestic Oil production was the definite laggard in this US energy boom renaissance.

 

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out from a market standpoint, i.e., will US Domestic Oil production continue to trend higher without a robust export market like Natural Gas or will the recent trend reverse itself with production shutdowns in domestic Oil production projects? 

 

Another interesting dynamic to watch is what price is needed for the marginal cost of production for these domestic oil producers? Some refiners close to the fields are currently paying $25 below the WTI price for Oil – this is telling in how inefficient and costly our oil transportation system currently is, and that the actual market price needed for oil projects is much lower than the rhetoric thrown around in the media.  

 

When you factor in alternative opportunities for capital use, the oil industry has been quite attractive for investment over the last decade at these prices; that ought to tell you something given the contraction in most other industries. 

 

Consequently what happens when the Oil production market gets too frothy relative to demand, and what happens if there is a major pullback in oil price
s which has been built into many market intelligence scenarios at the big oil companies? 

 

Moreover, would cheaper oil prices be all bad as this could lead to an improved economy both domestically and globally causing demand for consumption to rise thus soaking up some of these increased production gains of the last three years. 

 

The energy markets will be fascinating to watch over the next ten years as the big players fight for production share and lucrative revenue streams on a global scale from Iran and Venezuela to the United States and Canada.

 

Self-Interests Problem & Power

 

If this comes down to a self-interest problem which it usually does then one would think that the vote would fall along the lines of a 2-1 constituency vote against lifting the export ban on these domestic energy resources, but US Consumers haven`t had a vote at the table for a long time.

 

It probably will come down to which corporate lobby is stronger, and has more sway with the politicians in the decision making process. If past history is any indication, consumers usually get taxed with higher prices in the end, so the exports ban probably has a bunch of complicated and opaque loopholes added that provide enough cover for the politicians, and increased profits for the oil exporters.

 

But the lobbyists better get going and influence the politicians on this issue ASAP because once the next presidential election comes around higher gas prices seem to matter a whole bunch to these same politicians – see Barack Obama during the last election cycle.

 

 

© EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | Post Alert | Kindle


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/cCsdS2W2Z9Y/story01.htm EconMatters

Relaxing Oil Export Ban is Bad News for US Consumers

By EconMatters  

 

 

US Energy Boom

 

The US is producing much more energy domestically the last decade in all forms from natural gas to crude oil with a myriad of boutique products along the way, and so it is natural for producers to want to maximize profits by expanding their marketplace.

 

 

Free Markets haven`t been Free for a long time

 

This would be the free market response, and that would be a great principle in theory, but nothing has been ‘free market’ in this country, and the world we live in for decades; that nostalgic business ideology has been replaced with corporate cronyism, powerful lobbying, state sponsored agendas, and closed door deal-making. 

 

Petroleum Products versus Natural Gas

 

We have seen the inevitable outcome of any lifting of this ban by looking at the products markets, namely gasoline. There is an abundance of cheap domestic oil (would be a lot cheaper without excessive QE Stimulus & Artificial Demand created by refinery Exports of Products) but still domestic oil production, and oil production in North America is at multi-decade highs, and yet gasoline prices are at record highs for this time of the year, and this is after coming down considerably from earlier highs in 2013.

 

An Abundance of Natural Gas & Oil Subsidizing Gulf Coast Refiners

 

Why is this the case? It is because the highly profitable export market for end products like gasoline where refiners along the gulf coast have expanded capacity to take advantage of cheaper North American oil, and low natural gas prices that enabled lower petro manufacturing costs. 

 

 

These cheaper input costs made US fuel and other derivative petroleum products very competitive on a global price basis which had the effect of higher prices for US consumers as supply markets were much tighter than they would have otherwise been without a robust export market during the last five years of this US Energy resurgence. 

 

Lower Prices Good for US Economy

 

Natural Gas is the energy market that has helped domestic businesses and consumers with lower prices which has benefited the overall US economy, while the domestic oil market which should be helping US consumers and businesses more, is being pegged higher due to the exporting of products. This gets even worse for US Consumers and businesses if the Oil Export Ban is relaxed. 

 

 

Somebody Wins, Somebody Loses

 

In effect, this results in the following scenario: US Consumers & Businesses pay higher prices, US Domestic Oil becomes more expensive due to widening the marketplace for exports, and Global Oil becomes cheaper for international consumers. This process just becomes a giant wealth transfer, another tax, a business subsidy from the US Consumer & Businesses that utilize domestic energy to foreigners and companies exporting said products to these international consumers.

 

Let`s just be consistent: Lift all Exporting Bans

 

While the government is at it let us just lift any Natural Gas bans on exporting, and just raise costs all along the energy input continuum for 2014. I am sure Dow Chemical will love this outcome and open up more manufacturing capacity here in the United States. Profits will be great for those who benefit from the aforementioned changes to energy export bans. But those business interests who rely on energy input for operations will be hurt from this legislative change, and so will US Consumers. 

 

I am sure these same gulf coast petro-refiners will have no problem with also lifting the export bans on any natural gas products so that their manufacturing and operational costs will rise along with higher natural gas prices which will eat into their operating margins and thus transfer this wealth to the natural gas industry players.

 

Market Correlations & Paradigm Shifts 

 

One can see the positive correlations in the charts between the increased production of domestic natural gas, thus leading to much lower input prices for refiners; and the takeoff in petroleum products exports from a pretty stable baseline previously , starting to gain steam around the 2005 to 2006 timeframe.  

 

 

This export dynamic for petroleum products along with high oil prices relative to the economy due to QE Stimulus liquidity and potential Middle-East instability inflated commodities and oil specifically thus further incentivizing US Domestic Oil Production along with new and cheaper technological drilling techniques in the energy industry activating the rebound around 2010 for the increased Domestic Oil part of the equation. 

 

This led to the Gulf Coast refiners expanding capacity and seeking cheaper transportation methods of this increased North American and Domestic Oil via pipelines, rail, and barges. The US domestic Oil production was the definite laggard in this US energy boom renaissance.

 

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out from a market standpoint, i.e., will US Domestic Oil production continue to trend higher without a robust export market like Natural Gas or will the recent trend reverse itself with production shutdowns in domestic Oil production projects? 

 

Another interesting dynamic to watch is what price is needed for the marginal cost of production for these domestic oil producers? Some refiners close to the fields are currently paying $25 below the WTI price for Oil – this is telling in how inefficient and costly our oil transportation system currently is, and that the actual market price needed for oil projects is much lower than the rhetoric thrown around in the media.  

 

When you factor in alternative opportunities for capital use, the oil industry has been quite attractive for investment over the last decade at these prices; that ought to tell you something given the contraction in most other industries. 

 

Consequently what happens when the Oil production market gets too frothy relative to demand, and what happens if there is a major pullback in oil price
s which has been built into many market intelligence scenarios at the big oil companies? 

 

Moreover, would cheaper oil prices be all bad as this could lead to an improved economy both domestically and globally causing demand for consumption to rise thus soaking up some of these increased production gains of the last three years. 

 

The energy markets will be fascinating to watch over the next ten years as the big players fight for production share and lucrative revenue streams on a global scale from Iran and Venezuela to the United States and Canada.

 

Self-Interests Problem & Power

 

If this comes down to a self-interest problem which it usually does then one would think that the vote would fall along the lines of a 2-1 constituency vote against lifting the export ban on these domestic energy resources, but US Consumers haven`t had a vote at the table for a long time.

 

It probably will come down to which corporate lobby is stronger, and has more sway with the politicians in the decision making process. If past history is any indication, consumers usually get taxed with higher prices in the end, so the exports ban probably has a bunch of complicated and opaque loopholes added that provide enough cover for the politicians, and increased profits for the oil exporters.

 

But the lobbyists better get going and influence the politicians on this issue ASAP because once the next presidential election comes around higher gas prices seem to matter a whole bunch to these same politicians – see Barack Obama during the last election cycle.

 

 

© EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | Post Alert | Kindle


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/PZ9PJKf1jg4/story01.htm EconMatters

Indian Bitcoin Exchanges Halted As Government Shifts Capital Control Attention Away From Gold

Having failed miserably in the "control" of capital outflows from the Rupee (via Gold), the India government (following a Reserve Bank Of India advisory) has raided one Bitcoin seller and issued a warning cautioning citizens against acquiring and trading virtual currencies. As VentureBeat reports, the RBI did not outright ban the currencies, but it slammed them as risky and potentially illegal. On Thursday, the "Enforcement Division" raided the premises of Mahim Gupta who provides trading platform through his website – buysellbit.co.in – finding it in clear violation of Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) rules. Whether smuggling gold or utilizing Bitcoin, it seems the government is fighting a losing battle…cue confiscation?

India practically "bans" Bitcoin (via VentureBeat)…

Several Bitcoin exchanges in India have suspended operations amid fears they could violate anti-money laundering and financial terrorism laws.

They’re reacting to a warning issued on Tuesday by the Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, which cautions citizens against acquiring and trading virtual currencies. The RBI didn’t outright ban the currencies, but it slammed them as risky and potentially illegal:

It is reported that VCs, such as Bitcoins, are being traded on exchange platforms set up in various jurisdictions whose legal status is also unclear. Hence, the traders of VCs on such platforms are exposed to legal as well as financial risks.

 

There have been several media reports of the usage of VCs, including Bitcoins, for illicit and illegal activities in several jurisdictions. The absence of information of counterparties in such peer-to-peer anonymous/ pseudonymous systems could subject the users to unintentional breaches of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) laws.

First Bitcoin exchange raid has occurred (via DNA India),

We have found that through the website 400 persons have recorded 1,000 transactions that amount to a few crores of rupees. We are gathering the data of the transactions, name of the people who have transacted in the virtual currency from Gupta’s server that is hired in the US. At present, we believe that this is a violation of foreign exchange regulations of the country. If we are able to establish money laundering aspect then he can be arrested,” said a top ED official.

As per sources, a separate raid was also conducted in Satellite area of the city, however, the person the investigation agency was looking for could not be found. “When we reached his office, he was not there. We have sealed the premises,” the official added.

Sources also added that there are a handful of entities that provide trading in the virtual currency in India. “I think there are only five entities. Of these, we believe two are operating from Ahmedabad. We believe that they have channel of agents or people who promote the use of such currency but entities that provide online platform are few,” official said.

Perhaps it is time to confiscate all the gold, computers, and internet access for anyone not invested in stocks?


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/XqMauezq1dE/story01.htm Tyler Durden

13 Data Milestones For 2013

In the course of conducting public opinion surveys and demographic analyses, the Pew Research Center found a wide range of data milestones, breakthroughs, peaks and valleys in 2013, including record support for same-sex marriage and the legalization of marijuana; record levels of distrust of the federal government; record numbers of mothers who were the primary breadwinners for their families; and record numbers of Millennials living with their parents. Here is a look at the highs and lows Americans reached this year, according to Pew's data.

 

Via Pew Research,

 

1… Just over half (51%) of the public now favors same-sex marriage, while 42% are opposed.

 

2… A majority of Americans (52%) now favor legalizing the use of marijuana.

 

3… A majority agrees the U.S. should mind its own business internationally, the highest measure in nearly a half century of polling.

 

4… The share of Americans saying they do not want their own representative in Congress reelected – 38% – is at its highest point in two decades.

 

5… For the first time, a majority of the public (53%) says that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms.

 

6… 36% of the nation’s young adults ages 18 to 31—the so-called Millennial generation— now live in their parents’ home, the highest share in at least four decades.

 

7… A record 40% of all households with children under the age of 18 include mothers who are either the sole or primary source of income for the family.

 

8… The U.S., which has a total population of 317 million, is now home to a record 40.4 million immigrants.

 

9… A record seven-in-ten (69%) Hispanic high school graduates in the class of 2012 enrolled in college that fall, two percentage points higher than the rate (67%) among their white counterparts.

 

10… The percentage of Americans who say the U.S. plays a more important and powerful role as a world leader than it did 10 years ago has fallen to a 40-year low of just 17%.

 

11… The percentage of American Catholics calling themselves “strong” Catholics is at a four-decade low.

 

12… For the first time since Pew Research Center began tracking smartphone adoption, a majority of Americans now own a smartphone of some kind.

 

13… 50% of the public now cites the internet as a main source for national and international news.


< tr>

    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/_eCqP-jPw40/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Turkish Stocks, Bonds, Lira Collapse As Erdogan Fires Prosecutor, Asks "Who He Works For?"

Muammer Akkas, the prosecutor who complained his government corruotion investigation efforts were being blocked by the government – has been removed from the investigation. Prime Minister Erdogan's efforts to rein in "the final attack" on "new Turkey" are failing even after his cabinet reshuffle but this morning's rhetoric has sent asset prices tumbling once more:

  • *'THE NEW TURKEY IS UNDER SERIOUS ATTACK': ERDOGAN
  • *IN NEW TURKEY, SOVEREIGNTY CAN'T LIE WITH JUDICIARY: ERDOGAN
  • *LAWMAKERS SHOULD AVOID REMARKS HURTING ERDOGAN: ARINC
  • *ERDOGAN SAYS HE'S ISSUING LEGAL COMPLAINT AGAINST MEDIA LEAKS

As one analyst noted, "Erdogan continues to present the developments as a conspiracy despite having to shuffle his cabinet, which indicates that there may be some serious findings behind the probe."

 

 

Perhaps the finest example of total and utter hyprocrisy came this morning…

 

 

 

Via WSJ,

 

"My investigation as a public prosecutor has been blocked," Mr. Akkas said. "The judiciary has been openly pressured, and the implementation of court decisions have been prevented."

 

His removal doesn't end the case, as at least two additional prosecutors are still at work. Mr. Colakkadi's office has pledged to conduct a thorough investigation and said Thursday he would "do whatever justice requires."

 

Meanwhile, the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, which issues final opinions on Justice Ministry proposals, sought to annul a government measure adopted Saturday that bars prosecutors from conducting probes without informing superiors.

 

 

"It is still unclear how deep the scandal is going to reach," said analysts led by Marc Chandler at Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. "We remain bearish on Turkish assets, as we still think the political tensions could get worse before they get better."

 

 

At handover ceremonies Thursday morning, several of the departing ministers echoed Mr. Erdogan and decried the corruption case as a "dirty plot."

 

Outgoing Economy Minister Zafer Caglayan, with tears in his eyes, blamed his ouster on the "interest-rate lobby"—an alleged cabal of international investors, economists and journalists seeking to profit from Turkey's turbulence.

 

"We stepped on the interest-rate lobby's foot. For as long as I live, I won't step on their foot but on their veins," said Mr. Caglayan.

 

 

"The overall impression is that Erdogan is preparing to strike back at the Gulen movement," he said, adding that the power struggle "has the potential to affect significantly Turkey's political stability in the months ahead."

 

But, of course, none of that matters because US equities are soaring… for now


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/BoP1CRCo4Jw/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Turkish Stocks, Bonds, Lira Collapse As Erdogan Fires Prosecutor, Asks “Who He Works For?”

Muammer Akkas, the prosecutor who complained his government corruotion investigation efforts were being blocked by the government – has been removed from the investigation. Prime Minister Erdogan's efforts to rein in "the final attack" on "new Turkey" are failing even after his cabinet reshuffle but this morning's rhetoric has sent asset prices tumbling once more:

  • *'THE NEW TURKEY IS UNDER SERIOUS ATTACK': ERDOGAN
  • *IN NEW TURKEY, SOVEREIGNTY CAN'T LIE WITH JUDICIARY: ERDOGAN
  • *LAWMAKERS SHOULD AVOID REMARKS HURTING ERDOGAN: ARINC
  • *ERDOGAN SAYS HE'S ISSUING LEGAL COMPLAINT AGAINST MEDIA LEAKS

As one analyst noted, "Erdogan continues to present the developments as a conspiracy despite having to shuffle his cabinet, which indicates that there may be some serious findings behind the probe."

 

 

Perhaps the finest example of total and utter hyprocrisy came this morning…

 

 

 

Via WSJ,

 

"My investigation as a public prosecutor has been blocked," Mr. Akkas said. "The judiciary has been openly pressured, and the implementation of court decisions have been prevented."

 

His removal doesn't end the case, as at least two additional prosecutors are still at work. Mr. Colakkadi's office has pledged to conduct a thorough investigation and said Thursday he would "do whatever justice requires."

 

Meanwhile, the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, which issues final opinions on Justice Ministry proposals, sought to annul a government measure adopted Saturday that bars prosecutors from conducting probes without informing superiors.

 

 

"It is still unclear how deep the scandal is going to reach," said analysts led by Marc Chandler at Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. "We remain bearish on Turkish assets, as we still think the political tensions could get worse before they get better."

 

 

At handover ceremonies Thursday morning, several of the departing ministers echoed Mr. Erdogan and decried the corruption case as a "dirty plot."

 

Outgoing Economy Minister Zafer Caglayan, with tears in his eyes, blamed his ouster on the "interest-rate lobby"—an alleged cabal of international investors, economists and journalists seeking to profit from Turkey's turbulence.

 

"We stepped on the interest-rate lobby's foot. For as long as I live, I won't step on their foot but on their veins," said Mr. Caglayan.

 

 

"The overall impression is that Erdogan is preparing to strike back at the Gulen movement," he said, adding that the power struggle "has the potential to affect significantly Turkey's political stability in the months ahead."

 

But, of course, none of that matters because US equities are soaring… for now


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/BoP1CRCo4Jw/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Chart Of The Day: Worst. Loan Creation. Ever

For all the endless talk of a recovery during the past five years, there is a very tangible reason why for most people this is nothing but spin, propaganda and lies: when one strips away the retroactively adjusted GDP, the seasonally adjusted (and politically mandated) counting of temp jobs, the constantly upward revised jobless claims, the Fed’s $4+ trillion balance sheet of course, and even the declining (yes, declining) real disposable income per capita, what one is left with is the lowest loan creation out of a recession (or depression) in history, and is at indexed levels last seen during the Lehman collapse over five years ago!

 

Why is loan creation important? Because in traditional economics (not their “New Normal” equivalent, where central planning decides everything), loans – i.e., money created by commercial banks – ultimately leads to GDP growth. It also has a direct bearing on the steepness of the bond curve and thus, inflation expectations. Conversely, lack of loan creation ultimately means the government is forced to adjusted the definition of GDP to make it seem as if there is growth, or to rely on an inventory stockpiling boost to “growth” and all other recently seen gimmicks to force the conviction of “growth.”

There’s more. As the charts below show, there is a direct link between loan demand (and thus creation), and EPS growth, Industrial Production, Employment and CRE development. Obviously, the lower the loan creation, the worse all of these will look.

 

But how is it possible that banks continue to function in an environment in which there has been zero loan creation for the past 5 years? Simple: the banks’ excess deposits (a liability) has been pumped higher by about $2.5 trillion thanks to the Fed’s excess deposits:

 

… and instead of lending out reserves, which banks don’t do (for those still confused about this, read the following primer from S&P), banks instead use them as initial and maintenance margin for risk-chasing trades as JPM so kindly explained over a year ago.

… which is also why once excess deposit creation, i.e. “flow”, slows down, halts or is put in reverse, watch out below.

Furthermore, as long as the Fed creates reserves, and excess deposits, banks have no incentive to force loan creation.

In other words, as long as QE continues, and the Fed injects however many tens of billions into the commercial bank balance sheets each month, all talk of an economic recovery will be bullshit, simply because all of the Fed’s money makes it only into capital markets, resulting in asset inflation, but not into the economy, where it is up to commercial banks to create loans, and the resultant money that then leads to an increase in money velocity and ultimately, if allocated carefully, growth.

In the meantime, there will be no economic growth, period, as long as the loan creation in the top chart shown above refuses to move higher, and any talks of an economic recovery will be merely lies, propaganda and yes – more lies.

Charts: Barclays, JPM, Zero Hedge


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/_g2wSLUrGRg/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Gold & Silver Are Jumping And WTI Crude Breaks $100

As the 10Y broke solidly through 3.00% so precious metals began to move and after testing $20 in Silver overnight a few times, both gold and silver have just run stops through key levels and are jumping like Twitter (or Bitcoin) for a few minutes. WTI Crude has also just broke $100.

 

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/b6zuaGYYVD0/story01.htm Tyler Durden