The Most Important Chart For Albert Edwards

SocGen’s Albert Edwards, who refuses to pull a Hugh Hendry and to “stop looking at himself in the mirror“, remains one of the few coherent realists in a world where soaring nominal asset prices have managed to confuse virtually every pundit into believing central bank balance sheet and stock market expansion means an economic recovery. Today he shares the one chart which as he says “the importance of which we cannot emphasise enough”, and which he believes highlights the biggest risk equity investors – hypnotized by the Fed’s H.4.1 weekly statement and its weekly record high balance sheet – take when they put all their faith in the Bernanke/Yellen grand behavioral experiment.

From Albert Edwards:

One simple chart – the importance of which we cannot emphasise enough – is the divergence of commodity prices and the equity market during QE3 (see chart below). Why is this important? Because the market has firmly got it into its head that QE will always be good news for equities. So if the economy swoons (maybe due to excessive  monetary tightening either via tapering or a strong dollar), equities will look through any short-term disappointment as more QE will save the day. Investors see bad economic news as good news for equities.

I do believe this to be utter nonsense. For in the same way as investors believe, axiomatically that QE will drive up equity prices, they believed exactly the same thing of commodities until 2012. Commodities are a risk asset and benefited massively from QE1 and QE2, so why has QE3 had absolutely no effect on commodity prices? Exactly the same thing could happen to equities if a recession unfolds and profits plunge at the same time as the printing presses are running full pelt. Do not assume equities MUST benefit from QE.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1a7SKuq Tyler Durden

Guest Post: The Next Obamacare Crisis

Submitted by Alyene Senger via The National Interest,

After a botched rollout that was universally panned, it may seem like things are finally moving more smoothly for Obamacare. But 2014 and beyond promise more turbulence for consumers, with premium tax credits likely to be another crisis.

On January 1, Obamacare’s subsidized exchange coverage began. The Congressional Budget Office projects that exchange subsidies, both the premium tax credits and cost-sharing subsidies, will cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years, with up to 19 million people receiving federal subsidies to offset the cost of their exchange coverage in 2023.

Those who earn anywhere between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($11,490 to $45,960 for individuals and $23,550 to $94,200 for a family of four in 2013) and are not offered affordable and adequate coverage elsewhere will be eligible for Obamacare’s premium subsidies. These subsidies are applied on a sliding scale, with Americans in the lowest income level receiving the highest premium subsidy.

The credit can be claimed when filing the year’s taxes but it will more likely be used in advance as a way for consumers to lower their monthly premiums. But therein is the problem: The tax credits are tied to the enrollee’s monthly income. Thus, if a person’s income fluctuates, which happens more frequently than many realize, the subsidy amount will change from month to month. Thus, when it comes time to file taxes in April, the amount of subsidy received over the past year must be reconciled with the final calculation of the total subsidy for which the individual was eligible—based on actual income for the entire tax year.

So if you qualify for more subsidy help than you receive during the year, you’ll get a tax refund. But if you were given more subsidy than your income qualifies you for, you will be required to repay the excess subsidy.

However, repayment of the excess subsidy is capped for all those earning less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). For those who earn less than 200 percent of the FPL, an individual’s repayment is capped at $300 and family’s capped at $600. For those between 200 percent and 300 percent of the federal poverty level, an individual is capped at $750 and a family repayment is capped at $1,500. And for those who earn at least 300 percent of FPL but less than 400 percent, repayments are capped at $1,250 for an individual and $2,500 for a family.

Only Americans making more than 400 percent of the federal poverty level would be forced to repay all of an incorrectly calculated Obamacare subsidy.

And if subsidized Obamacare exchange enrollees don’t report any changes in their income throughout the year, they could be on the hook for potentially expensive repayments come tax time.

To that end, an analysis published in Health Affairs estimated the number of enrollees who might be subject to repayment and how much repayment would cost. Researchers found “that family income fluctuated greatly from one year to the next” for the American families eligible for Obamacare subsidies, with an expected “37.8 percent having large income increases, while 35.5 percent facing large decreases. Thirty percent of recipients were in families whose income increased more than 20 percent, and 18.9 percent had income increases of more than 40 percent.”

In addition, the authors found the median Obamacare repayment—if no income changes were reported and no adjustments were made to subsidy amounts over a year— would be $857.

Subsidy repayments are just one more headache that Americans don’t need when it comes to their health care. The issue is symptomatic of many problems that will plague the law in coming years. The Obamacare crisis is multifaceted and far from over.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1a7SJXs Tyler Durden

Puerto Rico Default “Likely”, FT Reports

The market just hit a fresh all time high today which means another major default must be just around the horizon. Sure enough, the FT reported moments ago that a Puerto Rico default “appears increasingly likely” and is why creditors are meeting with lawyers and bankruptcy specialists (most likely Miller Buckfire, fresh from its recent league table success with the Detroit bankruptcy) on Thursday in New York.  The FT cited a restructuring advisor, supposedly desperate to sign the engagement letter with creditors and to force the bankruptcy, who said that “the numbers are untenable” and “to issue new debt the yield would have to rise and where they can’t raise new money they will have to stop paying.”

The untenability of PR’s cash flows results from a “debt service burden that requires paying between $3.4bn and $3.8bn each year for the next four years. As doubts grow about the ability of the commonwealth to service that debt, the cost of doing so will inevitably rise.”

For Puerto Rico bonds, such an outcome would not be exactly a surprise, most recently trading at 61:

The rest of the story is largely known:

If Puerto Rico is forced to take that step, the effects will ripple through the entire $4tn municipal bond market. Because the debt is generally triple tax free, in a world of zero interest rates demand is high and it is distributed widely, including in funds that imply they have no exposure to Puerto Rico.

 

But yields have gone up nevertheless – and prices down – suggesting the markets are increasingly nervous about prospects for repayment. Estimates on how much of that debt is insured range from 25 per cent to 50 per cent of total issuance.

 

“Everyone thinks they can get out in time,” the restructuring adviser said.

 

Puerto Rico cannot really raise taxes much more, since the debt per capita is more than $14,000, while income per capita is almost $17,000, a ratio – at 83 per cent – that makes California, Illinois or New York – each at 6 per cent – models of prudence. Meanwhile, at 14 per cent, the unemployment rate is twice the national average.

What would make a Puerto Rico default more interesting is that as in the case of GM, political infighting would promptly take precedence over superpriority and waterfall payments. According to the FT, “any radical step, which the local government denies considering, would involve significant legal wrangling. Congress could step in and create an insolvency regime, lawyers say, since it has comprehensive jurisdiction, but that too would give rise to partisan fighting. The Democrats would say that pension claims have priority while the Republicans would uphold the priority of payments to bondholders, citing the constitutional sanctity of contracts.

Of course, since in the US a bond contract now is only worth the number of offsetting votes it would cost, nobody really knows what will happen. And so, we sit back and watch, as yet another muni quake appears set to hit the US, in the process obviously sending the S&P to higher, record highs.

In the meantime, keep an eye on bond insurers AGO and MBI which have taken on water in today’s session precisely due to concerns over what a Puerto Rico default would do to their equity.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1apdyIf Tyler Durden

Puerto Rico Default "Likely", FT Reports

The market just hit a fresh all time high today which means another major default must be just around the horizon. Sure enough, the FT reported moments ago that a Puerto Rico default “appears increasingly likely” and is why creditors are meeting with lawyers and bankruptcy specialists (most likely Miller Buckfire, fresh from its recent league table success with the Detroit bankruptcy) on Thursday in New York.  The FT cited a restructuring advisor, supposedly desperate to sign the engagement letter with creditors and to force the bankruptcy, who said that “the numbers are untenable” and “to issue new debt the yield would have to rise and where they can’t raise new money they will have to stop paying.”

The untenability of PR’s cash flows results from a “debt service burden that requires paying between $3.4bn and $3.8bn each year for the next four years. As doubts grow about the ability of the commonwealth to service that debt, the cost of doing so will inevitably rise.”

For Puerto Rico bonds, such an outcome would not be exactly a surprise, most recently trading at 61:

The rest of the story is largely known:

If Puerto Rico is forced to take that step, the effects will ripple through the entire $4tn municipal bond market. Because the debt is generally triple tax free, in a world of zero interest rates demand is high and it is distributed widely, including in funds that imply they have no exposure to Puerto Rico.

 

But yields have gone up nevertheless – and prices down – suggesting the markets are increasingly nervous about prospects for repayment. Estimates on how much of that debt is insured range from 25 per cent to 50 per cent of total issuance.

 

“Everyone thinks they can get out in time,” the restructuring adviser said.

 

Puerto Rico cannot really raise taxes much more, since the debt per capita is more than $14,000, while income per capita is almost $17,000, a ratio – at 83 per cent – that makes California, Illinois or New York – each at 6 per cent – models of prudence. Meanwhile, at 14 per cent, the unemployment rate is twice the national average.

What would make a Puerto Rico default more interesting is that as in the case of GM, political infighting would promptly take precedence over superpriority and waterfall payments. According to the FT, “any radical step, which the local government denies considering, would involve significant legal wrangling. Congress could step in and create an insolvency regime, lawyers say, since it has comprehensive jurisdiction, but that too would give rise to partisan fighting. The Democrats would say that pension claims have priority while the Republicans would uphold the priority of payments to bondholders, citing the constitutional sanctity of contracts.

Of course, since in the US a bond contract now is only worth the number of offsetting votes it would cost, nobody really knows what will happen. And so, we sit back and watch, as yet another muni quake appears set to hit the US, in the process obviously sending the S&P to higher, record highs.

In the meantime, keep an eye on bond insurers AGO and MBI which have taken on water in today’s session precisely due to concerns over what a Puerto Rico default would do to their equity.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1apdyIf Tyler Durden

China Eases Physical Gold Restrictions

As India continues its anti-gold stance (and does nothing but drive the undergound smuggling business), China is continuing its opening of the world’s biggest physical bullion market. As India’s Economic Times reports, China has granted licenses to import gold to two foreign banks for the first time. “China is actually increasing its transparency,” noted on analyst, allowing more banks to import gold could increase the supply of the metal into the country, easing local prices that are higher than in most Asian nations (premiums are currently about $15 an ounce over London prices, compared to less than $2 in Singapore and Hong Kong). They rose to a record high of $30 in April-May last year. “This is the first step that the regulators are taking to ensure that its [physical] gold futures contract in the free-trade zone can take off.”

 

Via Economic Times,

China has granted licences to import gold to two foreign banks for the first time, sources said, as moves to open the world’s biggest physical bullion market gather pace.

 

Allowing more banks to import gold could increase the supply of the metal into the country, easing local prices that are higher than in most Asian nations.

 

China’s gold imports more than doubled last year to over 1,000 tonnes – ousting India as the biggest buyer – as demand soared to unprecedented levels due to the first drop in international prices in 12 years

 

 

“China is actually increasing its transparency. I think there will possibly be further access to other banks as well,” said Cameron Alexander, manager of Asian precious metals demand at metals consultancy GFMS, which is owned by Thomson Reuters.

 

China faced a supply crunch early in 2013 when a sharp plunge in gold prices released pent up demand that eroded inventories at banks and jewellery sellers.

 

Premiums in China tend to be higher as supply is tighter than other parts of Asia due to the quota system and the limited number of import licences.

 

 

The granting of new licences is the latest in a string of steps by China to ease restrictions on bullion trading and boost market accessibility.

 

China approved its first gold-backed exchange-traded funds last year and extended trading hours on the futures exchange.

 

 

The move also comes as the SGE plans to launch gold futures in the city’s pilot free trade zone this year that would be open to foreign investors.

 

“China will need to allow more foreign players into the physical gold market if it’s planning to have foreign investors participate on its gold futures,” said one of the sources.

 

“This is the first step that the regulators are taking to ensure that its gold futures contract in the free-trade zone can take off.”


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1kCvicW Tyler Durden

Beige Book Saw “Moderate” Expansion Despite “Harsh Weather”, Ongoing Obamacare Concerns

The Beige Book may well be renamed the Boring Book due to the uniformity of its monthly pronouncements, but a few things stands out in a report that saw moderate expansion in the economy across most of the US:

  • the Fed said most districts reported increases in home sales… except we assume for San Francisco where home sales plunged to 6 year low,
  • the Fed sees “very few reports of staff cuts of plant closings”… which we guess ignores the December jobs reports where the least jobs were added since January 2011,
  • the Fed said nine districts reported an increase in retail spending… which is curious considering retail traffic plunged and the holiday spending season was the worst since 2009,
  • the Fed said almost half of district reported prices were stable… which probably means the Fed’s inflation benchmark is now well below 2%
  • and Finally, the Fed said eight district reported upward movement in wages…  which also is confusing considering real disposable income per capita just dropped into the negative.

Oh well: we suppose we will take the Fed’s word for it.

  • More interesting were the Fed’s prop mentions of cold weather and Obamacare. Here they are:
  • Richmond noted a general slowdown in retail spending in recent weeks and the Kansas City District cited lower than expected holiday sales, which retailers there attributed to a shorter selling season and harsh weather conditions.
  • Apparel sales were reportedly strong in Boston and Richmond, while Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Chicago indicated that cold-weather gear and winter items were selling well.
  • Contacts report that sales were hampered by harsh weather in late November into early December across much of New York State
  • In some regions of the [Cleveland] District, retailers experienced a tapering off as December progressed. They attributed the decline in part to persistently poor weather conditions.
  • A few sod and seed companies [in the Richmond district] reported a decline as a result of poor weather conditions.
  • Delays in holiday shipments to consumers were reportedly due to the shortened shopping season, higher than expected on-line sales, adverse weather conditions
  • [In Chicago] severe winter weather, while reducing store traffic in some locations, spurred sales of winter-related items
  • [In Kansas City] district retailers had expected higher levels and attributed the lower than expected sales to a shorter and slower holiday shopping season, and harsh weather conditions.
  • Some contacts cited poor weather, and continued fiscal and regulatory uncertainty as reasons for the December slowdown.
  • [In Dallas] construction-related manufacturers reported slow demand in early December due to poor weather, but business bounced back soon after.

And yet there was an increase in retail spending? Good to know.

As for Obamacare:

  • In regard to hiring and capital expenditure plans, firms continued to expand cautiously and will do so until the pace of growth strengthens and exhibits sustainability; in addition, they face ongoing uncertainty from implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
  • Hiring in the District continued to improve, despite lingering concerns about costs related to the Affordable Care Act and difficulty finding highly skilled workers
  • Demand was generally soft at hospitals and other healthcare organizations, and administrators reported that they expect decreasing utilization along with declining Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement under the Affordable Care Act.
  • Employers continued to express concern about potential cost increases related to the Affordable Care Act.
  • Outlooks were positive for the first part of 2014, but some contacts remained concerned about the impact of the Affordable Care Act on business.

In other words, no change.

Full Beige Book can be found here


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dtbJi3 Tyler Durden

Beige Book Saw "Moderate" Expansion Despite "Harsh Weather", Ongoing Obamacare Concerns

The Beige Book may well be renamed the Boring Book due to the uniformity of its monthly pronouncements, but a few things stands out in a report that saw moderate expansion in the economy across most of the US:

  • the Fed said most districts reported increases in home sales… except we assume for San Francisco where home sales plunged to 6 year low,
  • the Fed sees “very few reports of staff cuts of plant closings”… which we guess ignores the December jobs reports where the least jobs were added since January 2011,
  • the Fed said nine districts reported an increase in retail spending… which is curious considering retail traffic plunged and the holiday spending season was the worst since 2009,
  • the Fed said almost half of district reported prices were stable… which probably means the Fed’s inflation benchmark is now well below 2%
  • and Finally, the Fed said eight district reported upward movement in wages…  which also is confusing considering real disposable income per capita just dropped into the negative.

Oh well: we suppose we will take the Fed’s word for it.

  • More interesting were the Fed’s prop mentions of cold weather and Obamacare. Here they are:
  • Richmond noted a general slowdown in retail spending in recent weeks and the Kansas City District cited lower than expected holiday sales, which retailers there attributed to a shorter selling season and harsh weather conditions.
  • Apparel sales were reportedly strong in Boston and Richmond, while Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Chicago indicated that cold-weather gear and winter items were selling well.
  • Contacts report that sales were hampered by harsh weather in late November into early December across much of New York State
  • In some regions of the [Cleveland] District, retailers experienced a tapering off as December progressed. They attributed the decline in part to persistently poor weather conditions.
  • A few sod and seed companies [in the Richmond district] reported a decline as a result of poor weather conditions.
  • Delays in holiday shipments to consumers were reportedly due to the shortened shopping season, higher than expected on-line sales, adverse weather conditions
  • [In Chicago] severe winter weather, while reducing store traffic in some locations, spurred sales of winter-related items
  • [In Kansas City] district retailers had expected higher levels and attributed the lower than expected sales to a shorter and slower holiday shopping season, and harsh weather conditions.
  • Some contacts cited poor weather, and continued fiscal and regulatory uncertainty as reasons for the December slowdown.
  • [In Dallas] construction-related manufacturers reported slow demand in early December due to poor weather, but business bounced back soon after.

And yet there was an increase in retail spending? Good to know.

As for Obamacare:

  • In regard to hiring and capital expenditure plans, firms continued to expand cautiously and will do so until the pace of growth strengthens and exhibits sustainability; in addition, they face ongoing uncertainty from implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
  • Hiring in the District continued to improve, despite lingering concerns about costs related to the Affordable Care Act and difficulty finding highly skilled workers
  • Demand was generally soft at hospitals and other healthcare organizations, and administrators reported that they expect decreasing utilization along with declining Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement under the Affordable Care Act.
  • Employers continued to express concern about potential cost increases related to the Affordable Care Act.
  • Outlooks were positive for the first part of 2014, but some contacts remained concerned about the impact of the Affordable Care Act on business.

In other words, no change.

Full Beige Book can be found here


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dtbJi3 Tyler Durden

Step Aside Abe’s Deflation “Monster”; Meet LaGarde’s Deflation “Ogre”

What could be worse than a falling cost for things that the increasingly cash-strapped consumer desires? We are not entirely sure but Christine Lagarde is deathly afraid of it…

  • *LAGARDE SAYS RISING RISK OF DEFLATION MUST BE FOUGHT DECISIVELY
  • *LAGARDE URGES OFFICIALS TO `FORTIFY THE FEEBLE GLOBAL RECOVERY’
    *LAGARDE SAYS U.S. MUST AVOID EARLY WITHDRAWAL OF FED SUPPORT
  • *LAGARDE: JAPAN’S INITIAL BOOST FROM `ABENOMICS’ WEAKENING A BIT
  • *LAGARDE SAYS EURO-AREA MONETARY POLICY `COULD STILL DO MORE’

In other words, 5 years of debt monetization on an unprecedented scale were not enough! Get back to work Mr Draghi, Mrs Yellen, and Mr Kuroda.

 

Lagarde (via Bloomberg):

“The world could create more jobs before we would need to worry about the global inflation genie coming out of its bottle,” Lagarde said in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington.

 

If inflation is the genie, then deflation is the ogre that must be fought decisively,” she said.

 

She recommended that central banks in the most developed economies wait until “robust growth is firmly rooted” before ending unconventional monetary policies.

 

 

In the U.S. “it will be critical to avoid premature withdrawal of monetary support and to return to an orderly budget process, including by promptly removing the debt ceiling threat,” she said.

 

It seems its inflate-or-die – no matter what the damage (but weren’t we told that recovery is here?)


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dtbIKI Tyler Durden

Step Aside Abe's Deflation "Monster"; Meet LaGarde's Deflation "Ogre"

What could be worse than a falling cost for things that the increasingly cash-strapped consumer desires? We are not entirely sure but Christine Lagarde is deathly afraid of it…

  • *LAGARDE SAYS RISING RISK OF DEFLATION MUST BE FOUGHT DECISIVELY
  • *LAGARDE URGES OFFICIALS TO `FORTIFY THE FEEBLE GLOBAL RECOVERY’
    *LAGARDE SAYS U.S. MUST AVOID EARLY WITHDRAWAL OF FED SUPPORT
  • *LAGARDE: JAPAN’S INITIAL BOOST FROM `ABENOMICS’ WEAKENING A BIT
  • *LAGARDE SAYS EURO-AREA MONETARY POLICY `COULD STILL DO MORE’

In other words, 5 years of debt monetization on an unprecedented scale were not enough! Get back to work Mr Draghi, Mrs Yellen, and Mr Kuroda.

 

Lagarde (via Bloomberg):

“The world could create more jobs before we would need to worry about the global inflation genie coming out of its bottle,” Lagarde said in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington.

 

If inflation is the genie, then deflation is the ogre that must be fought decisively,” she said.

 

She recommended that central banks in the most developed economies wait until “robust growth is firmly rooted” before ending unconventional monetary policies.

 

 

In the U.S. “it will be critical to avoid premature withdrawal of monetary support and to return to an orderly budget process, including by promptly removing the debt ceiling threat,” she said.

 

It seems its inflate-or-die – no matter what the damage (but weren’t we told that recovery is here?)


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dtbIKI Tyler Durden

Tell The Fed How You Really Feel About Banks Trading Physical Commodities

Delighted by the Goldman Sachs et al commodity cartel hoarding aluminum inventory in one of their warehouses and pushing prices artificially higher? Happy that JPM is reprising the role of Enron (without admitting or denying it) and creating “schemes” with which to boost prices for end consumers (and have FERC furiously slap its wrist in response)? Ecstatic by that whole “precious metals” manipulation ‘thing‘ by assorted unnamed banks (aside from the London fix of course – that has now been confirmed)? Then take this opportunity to tell the Fed how happy you really feel.

Click on the link below for the full comment form.

Joking aside, here is why the Fed is issuing this proposal for public comment “Complementary Activities, Merchant Banking Activities, and Other Activities of Financial Holding Companies related to Physical Commodities

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) is issuing this advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) inviting public comment on various issues related to physical commodity activities conducted by financial holding companies and the restrictions imposed on these activities to ensure they are conducted in a safe and sound manner and consistent with applicable law. The Board is inviting public comment as part of a review of these activities for the reasons explained in the ANPR, including the unique and significant risks that physical commodities activities may pose to financial holding companies, their insured depository institution affiliates, and U.S. financial stability.

 

This advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) is designed to elicit views from the public on the risks and benefits of allowing FHCs to conduct physical commodity activities under the various provisions of the BHC Act, whether risks to the safety and soundness of a FHC and its affiliated insured depository institutions (IDIs) and to the financial system warrant Board action to impose limitations on the scope of authorized activities and/or the manner in which those activities are conducted, and if so, what those limits should be.

FT has more on why the Fed is conducting this request for comments:

The Federal Reserve cited recent disasters, including the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, as it sought comment on whether it should further limit banks in their physical commodities businesses. The regulator said on Tuesday it was examining whether to impose capital charges and increase insurance requirements on banks to restrict further their trading of physical commodities. In total, the Fed posed 24 questions in consideration of possible tougher restrictions.

 

The Fed asked questions about conflicts of interest, additional reporting requirements and further liquidity measures, among other issues. The deadline to comment is March 15. Banks can engage in the warehousing of physical commodities under rules governing complementary activities to bank operations, merchant banking regulations and a grandfather clause for bank holding companies. The grandfathering exemption applies to Goldman and Morgan Stanley to own assets such as oil tankers and power plants.

 

The Fed said it was studying the costs and other burdens to banks and to the public if it made such a move. It could go as far as eliminating the ability to engage in complementary commodities activities.

But it won’t. Here is your chance to ask why, as well as have all other questions (un)answered.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1iWh2rs Tyler Durden