iftttwall

Authored by Paul Schwennesen via the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER),

Denmark, according to The New York Times (NYT), is going ahead with its livestock “Burp Tax.” Though hotly contested, the Danish government has nevertheless finally settled on levying farmers 300 kroners (~$43) per ton for carbon dioxide emissions, ramping to $106 per ton by 2035. As is the case with many of these farm-targeted green interventions, the action is ludicrously ineffectual at addressing the trumped-up problem, while remarkably effective at further cementing state controls over economic production.

Part of the reason farms (and especially cows) are such fat targets for this kind of statist intervention is that, politically speaking, they are the perfect scapegoat.

It all seems so harmless, after all—so silly even—that serious-minded folk risk looking ridiculous if they object. Is it really so very draconian, goes the argument, to ask farmers to reduce their cow flatulence? The ever-so-reasonable request (enforceable by law, to be sure) glides under the radar in a scree of giggle-inducing copy that distracts readers to what is really afoot.

The NYT plays its part in this façade, relishing the chance to print “poop, farts, and burps” in the business section so that the regulation seems plucked from an impish children’s story rather than what it is: a deadly serious infringement on economic liberty.

Defenders of the scheme insist it is necessary to address the pressing issue of climate change. But even if we were to accept the lobby’s poorly understood climate science at face value, the claims would be dubious. Cows stand accused of emitting 5.6 metric tons in annual “CO2 equivalent” emissions. All this politically motivated tabulating and assessing completely ignores the other side of the ledger, the growing recognition that grazing livestock have a complex, largely offsetting (and quite probably net-positive) impact on overall carbon emissions. Nature, after all, doesn’t work in simple equations and we are woefully under-informed about the rich and inherently unmodelable world of stochastic ecology.

The NYT, by way of perspective, accounts for 16,979 metric tons of its own, meaning that it, as a single company, has the footprint of ten Danish dairies. What would readers of “All the News That’s Fit to Print” have to say about an annual tax of $730,000 a year, ramping to $1.8 million, being added to the newspaper stand price? Advocates of a free press might well ask why the government was using state power to make the newspaper of record less competitive.

But in any case, climate science and cow farts aren’t really the issue here. The issue is essentially about control, and who gets to occupy the commanding heights of a centrally managed economy.

“A tax on pollution has the aim to change behavior,” says Jeppe Bruss, the Danish “green transition” minister in an unguardedly candid moment. Government programs to change behavior are much easier to introduce slowly, and against somewhat laughable minority sectors like farming than against, say, the population at large. They do not seem eager, for instance, to levy additional burdens on average people’s heating and transport emissions, which combined dwarf the agricultural sector’s. The NYT says that livestock emissions are “becoming” the largest share of Denmark’s share of climate pollution which is another way of saying that it isn’t the largest share.

If beef and milk production indeed posed such an existential climate risk, then why not simply tax the consumers of beef and milk who, after all, are the real source of the production signal? The answer, of course, is obvious: no politician wants to be pegged as the one who raised the price of butter for average Danish grandmothers. Politically, it is far easier to go after the farmers, knowing full well that any cost burdens on farm production will be passed along to consumers anyway—only then it will be the farmers’ fault, not the government’s. It’s an old trick, a kind of regulatory-impact laundering scheme.

The success of the Danish strategy remains to be seen.

If examples from the Netherlands and New Zealand are any indication, the plan may well backfire, with frustrated farmers taking to the street and even grabbing back the reins of power.

It is a useful warning: allowing government the power to surgically tax and thereby “change behavior” of producers is the same as granting them economic planning privileges.

The Danish “Burp Tax” is a significant step toward the state ownership of the means of production, and as the history of centrally managed economies shows, it’s not likely to end well.

 

Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

Trump will begin his first 100 days with an emphasis on his economic plans.

His core economic team is already announced including Russell Vought as Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Jamieson Greer as U.S. Trade Representative, Kevin Hassett as Director of the National Economic Council, Scott Bessent as U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce.

Hassett and Bessent will form the core of this team with Greer taking the lead on tariffs and Vought taking the lead on budget deficits and fiscal policy.

Trump’s economic policy will be built around what are called the Three Arrows. That’s a name adopted by the new Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He took the name from the Three Arrows policy of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who announced them in 2012.

Abe’s arrows were monetary easing, fiscal stimulus and structural reforms to make Japan more competitive. Bessent’s arrows are different, but the basic idea of using government to help grow the economy in productive ways is the same.

Bessent’s plan is also called the “3–3–3” plan for reasons that are made clear below.

Growth at 3%+

Bessent’s first arrow is to achieve 3% annual real growth in the U.S. economy.

This may not sound like much, but it is. From 2009 to 2019 (basically the period from the end of the last financial crisis to the beginning of COVID), the U.S. grew at a rate of only 2.2% per year. Economists estimate that the potential growth of a mature developed economy such as the U.S. is about 3.2%.

That gap between 3.2% potential growth and 2.2% actual growth means trillions of dollars of lost wealth over time. From 1983 to 1986 during the Reagan years, the economy actually did grow at just over 5% per year.

Real growth during that three-year stretch was 16%. (Although this followed the severe recession of 1981-1982. Growth higher than potential is possible when labor and industrial slack from a prior recession is available). So, Bessent’s goal of 3% real growth is realistic given potential performance, past performance, and recent lagging growth.

The emphasis here is on “real” growth. This means growth without taking into account any inflation. If real growth is 3% and inflation is 2%, then nominal growth will be 5% (3% real + 2% inflation = 5% nominal).

Everyday Americans are properly focused on real growth because they don’t want to see their wage gains eaten up by inflation. Still, nominal growth is important when considering debt service since debt is nominal — you owe what you owe whether the real value is preserved or not.

Deficits Below 3% of GDP

Bessent’s second arrow is to keep annual deficits below 3% of GDP. When discussing debt, we are dealing with nominal amounts rather than real amounts. For example, if U.S. GDP is projected at $28 trillion for a given fiscal year, then the deficit for that year cannot exceed $840 billion under Bessent’s plan.

Note that this does not involve “paying off the national debt” or even running a small surplus. A deficit of $840 billion is huge. But the limitation of 3% of GDP is highly significant in terms of making the debt sustainable and maintaining confidence in the U.S. dollar and U.S. Treasury securities.

Before deciding that this is an easy target, it’s helpful to know that the U.S. deficit for fiscal year 2024 is $1.83 trillion. The deficit in fiscal year 2023 was $1.69 trillion. In short, Bessent’s goal of an $840 billion deficit represents a 54% reduction in the deficit from 2024 levels and a 50% reduction from 2023 levels. That’s a huge reduction in the deficit in one fiscal year.

Not all of this deficit reduction would have to come from spending cuts, although some of it could, especially if Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy identify enough government waste through their new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). It’s likely that Musk and Ramaswamy will easily identify wasteful spending. The hard part is getting it to stop.

The other way to cut the deficit is to grow the economy in such a way that government revenues grow with it. This does not mean tax rate increases. It does mean tax revenue increases from current or even reduced tax rates.

One ace-in-the-hole for Trump and Bessent will be tariffs. Those are not part of the Internal Revenue Code, but they do generate government revenues. The U.S. began tariffs in 1790, but the Internal Revenue Code did not come into being until 1913.

For 123 years, the U.S. government-funded itself mostly with tariffs, excise taxes, and borrowing without the benefit of income taxes. The U.S. currently imports over $3.5 trillion of goods per year. If only half were subject to tariffs of 10%, that would generate $175 billion of new revenue, which goes a long way to reaching Bessent’s deficit reduction goals.

Now the genius of the Three Arrows plan becomes clear. If nominal GDP growth is 5% (3% real + 2% inflation), and nominal deficits are kept to 3% of GDP, that means nominal growth is higher than the nominal deficit and the debt-to-GDP ratio is declining. That’s the key to sustainability.

America First’s Nick Fuentes says that an armed assassin attempted to take him out on Wednesday evening after he was doxxed.

“Last night an armed killer made an attempt on my life at my home, which was recently doxed on this platform,” Fuentes posted on X, adding that the assassin was armed with a pistol, a crossbow, and incendiary devices.

“He is now dead. I am okay!” Fuentes added.

According to police, the would-be assassin committed a triple homicide in southern Illinois early yesterday before he arrived at my doorstep with his pistol drawn, calling my name.

I am grateful to God that I am still alive today.

— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) December 19, 2024

Fuentes then wrote: “Tragically, the gunman broke into a neighbors home to evade police & killed two of their dogs,” adding “Doxing is not a game. This nihilistic lynch mob behavior must end before anyone else is killed.”

He also posted video of the suspect approaching his house.

The killer parked his car in front of my house and approached my door with his pistol drawn and what appears to be a crossbow. I was livestreaming at the time.

He rings the door bell, tries the doorknob and yells “yo Nick!” pic.twitter.com/5y1LF3Dv56

— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) December 19, 2024

Journalist Laura Loomer posted: “MTG’s intern is the person who doxxed Nick and is now being accused by many online of trying to get him murdered in screenshots leaked that suggest he sent out Nick’s full dox and also suggest he allegedly asked people to pay a visit to him at his home.”

MTG’s intern is the person who doxxed Nick and is now being accused by many online of trying to get him murdered in screenshots leaked that suggest he sent out Nick’s full dox and also suggest he allegedly asked people to pay a visit to him at his home.

There should be a…

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) December 20, 2024

Looks like one of MTG’s @mtgreenee interns (who lived with her at her own house in Rome, Georgia) is being accused of plotting and or participating in an assassination attempt.

Very disturbing behavior that warrants a criminal investigation. https://t.co/4gDGPs4mdj

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) December 20, 2024

Berwyn, Illinois PD put out a statement on Thursday shedding more light on the incident (via slightlyoffensive.com), which confirms that the suspect was linked to a triple homicide earlier in the day in Mahomet, Illinois, and that after running into a neighbor’s yard, he “disobeyed the officers’ verbal commands to stop and proceeded to shoot at police officers. Berwyn Police Officers returned fire and fatally struck the subject.”

Via SchiffGold.com,

Peter recently joined Anthony Scaramucci for an interview on Speak Up, a YouTube show hosted on the Wealthion channel. The duo discuss Jerome Powell’s recent statement, pointing out the dissonance between his assertions and reality. Peter also predicts a return to QE-like monetary policy, noting that a recent surge in long term interest rates will likely motivate inflationary policy in 2025.

Schiff begins by describing the surprising resilience of the current economic bubble, stressing that policymakers like Powell are not openly admitting their role in enabling it:

What surprised me, Anthony, is that the bubble has gotten so big without any adverse consequences. In fact, one of the questions that Powell got was, does the amount of debt impact your decisions on raising rates– which of course it does– but he lied and said, ‘Oh, no, no, no, we’re nowhere near there. I mean, we don’t even consider how much debt the US government has. We raise rates to whatever level we think is appropriate. We’re not in a position yet where the government has so much debt that interest rates are a significant factor.’

Peter recounts how the initial experiment with Quantitative Easing (QE) laid the foundation for perpetual debt expansion, defying his early predictions that the bubble would burst sooner:

But I’m surprised that, you know, from the launching of QE1, which, you know, when they first launched it, they didn’t call it QE1 because they all assumed it was going to be one and done. I was one of the few people that said, no, this is the beginning of a process that will never end. But we’ve now added $30 trillion of debt. 

He notes that while the dollar still appears stable next to other weak currencies, its underlying purchasing power continues to erode, raising serious long-term questions:

So the purchasing power of the dollar has gone down. But relative to the euro or the Japanese yen or other currencies, the dollar’s doing pretty well. And interest rates are still relatively low. You know, the government is paying four and a half percent on a 30 year treasury. That seems ridiculously low given the enormity of the debt and the probability that it’s going to get inflated away. So yeah, the bubble has gone on for a lot longer than I thought.

The mounting debt load, coupled with low savings and high interest rates, traps households in a system that few politicians dare to reform:

They’re paying record high interest rates on that debt on their credit card. And so they’re desperate for the situation to change. But unfortunately, none of the candidates, and I think Trump would be included, have the guts to actually do what’s needed. I mean, even though Trump has now got himself surrounded by Elon Musk … just based on what he did in his first term, and I don’t see a huge transformation. I think Trump said what he needed to say to get elected.

Printing money to fund deficits ultimately leads to inflation as citizens pay for government largesse at the grocery store and the gas pump:

And so if there’s a difference between what the government spends and what it collects, which in the United States, there’s a multi trillion dollar difference every year, the public has to pay for that one way or another. We don’t get all this government for free. And if we just print the money to cover the deficit, that doesn’t mean it’s a freebie. What happens is the value of all the money that already exists goes down, prices go up. And those additional prices, those price hikes, that’s how we pay for the bigger government. We pay for it through inflation and a reduction in the value of our money.

Peter concludes by warning that the Federal Reserve will likely resort to renewed intervention, further eroding the dollar’s integrity and boosting the long-term case for tangible assets like gold:

“I do think they’re going to restart the QE engine. Because I think that they’ve already lost control of the long end of the bond market. Because one of the forecasts that I made that I got right recently, I was saying that when the Fed cuts rates, that was going to be the bottom of the long term rates and that they would go up…

And that’s going to be very problematic for the Fed because it’s going to be harmful to the economy, to the housing market. And when we’re in a recession, or when the recession gets worse, I think the Fed is going to be pressured to try to lower long term rates.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A New York tax preparer, nicknamed The Magician, pleaded guilty to duping the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with fake returns filed on behalf of his clients for several years, according to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).

Rafael Alvarez, 61, was charged with one count of conspiring to defraud the United States and stealing government funds and one count of assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, according to a Dec. 17 statement from the agency.

“The charges arise from Alvarez’s orchestration of a decade-long, $145 million tax fraud scheme to file tens of thousands of federal individual income tax returns that included false information designed to fraudulently reduce the individuals’ tax burden.”

Alvarez pleaded guilty on Tuesday and, as part of the plea, agreed to pay the IRS $145 million in restitution. The tax preparer also forfeited more than $11.84 million he collected from his criminal actions.

The charges stem from Alvarez’s actions roughly between 2010 and 2020, when he was the CEO and owner of Bronx-based ATAX New York, LLC, a “high-volume tax preparation company.”

Alvarez and his employees submitted false information about customers on their tax returns, like fake business expenses, non-existent capital losses, and false itemized tax deductions. This enabled them to reduce the tax liability of ATAX customers and increase IRS refunds for the clients.

In total, roughly 90,000 federal income tax returns were prepared by ATAX.

“Alvarez was so consistent at falsifying ATAX customer tax returns that he became known to ATAX’s customers as ‘the Magician,’” the DOJ stated.

The count of conspiring to defraud the United States carries a potential maximum prison sentence of five years, and the false returns count carries a jail term of up to three years. Sentencing in the case is set for April 11.

“Today’s guilty plea, in one of the largest ever tax frauds by a return preparer, should serve as an important reminder to tax professionals that this Office will vigorously investigate and prosecute tax offenses,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Edward Y. Kim.

According to the IRS, anyone who assists or prepares federal tax returns for an individual in exchange for a payment must have a preparer tax identification number (PTIN). The PTIN must be renewed every year. As of Dec. 2, close to 850,000 people had current PTINs in the United States.

Fraud Cases

Multiple legal actions have been taken against fraudulent tax preparers over the past months.

In November, a tax preparer from Somerville, Massachusetts, was convicted of preparing false tax returns. Between 2012 and 2020, Yves Isidor, the defendant, prepared and filed over 1,200 tax returns for clients. He added false tax claims like non-existent medical and dental expenses and charity gifts.

The clients received refunds to which they were not entitled. During the trial, six taxpayers testified they had no idea that Isidor had added false items to their tax returns.

“When someone hires an individual to complete your tax returns, they have a right to expect honesty, professionalism, and integrity. Most importantly, you expect them to provide accurate information to the IRS,” said Acting United States Attorney Joshua S. Levy.

“Yves Isidor lied to his clients, who had no idea that he had improperly filed tax returns on their behalf until they were contacted by investigators and alerted to the false information in their returns. Tax fraud is not a victimless crime. We all suffer when people like Yves Isidor lie and cheat the tax system.”

Earlier in October, another tax preparer was sentenced to 24 months in federal prison, also for filing false income returns.

The defendant filed 83 federal returns over a roughly three-year period that contained fake items like business expenses, tips, and salaries. Most of the clients neither owned a business nor discussed any business expenses with the preparer.

In April last year, the IRS warned against unscrupulous tax preparers who seek to “tempt taxpayers into fraud” through various schemes while charging high fees.

Even if a taxpayer is duped into filing a return with false information by the preparer, “taxpayers are legally responsible for what’s on their return,” the agency said. The IRS recommends that people use reputable professionals to file returns.

“I told the European Union that they must make up their tremendous deficit with the United States by the large-scale purchase of our oil and gas. Otherwise, it is TARIFFS all the way!!!” President-elect Donald Trump warned early Friday morning on Truth Social. 

According to the Office of the US Trade Representative, the US trade deficit in goods and services with the EU totaled $131.3 billion in 2022. Following Trump’s presidential victory last month, the EU has been gearing up for a potential trade war with Trump. 

The good news is that the US has become the world’s largest crude oil producer and the top LNG exporter. As Brussels and Washington work aggressively to curtail Russia’s energy flows into Europe—whether crude oil, refined products, or NatGas—the US is well-positioned to fill the gap. 

Bloomberg noted that the euro traded slightly higher, up about .3% to $1.0398, amid signs that EU officials may increase energy imports from the US in 2025 to avoid a full-blown trade war and remain in Trump’s good graces.

In late November, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock told the Group of Seven conference in Italy that the EU is “well-prepared for the possibility that things will become different with a new US administration,” adding, “If the new US administration pursues an ‘America first’ policy in the sectors of climate or trade, then our response will be ‘Europe united.'”

The EU Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, said last month that US LNG has the potential to replace the bloc’s remaining imports of Russian LNG. 

“We still get a whole lot of LNG via Russia, from Russia,” von der Leyen said, adding, “And why not replace it with American LNG, which is cheaper, and brings down our energy prices.”

NEW: President of the European Union commission says they want to start buying oil from the United States and not Russia.

Trump wins the election and the world falls in line. Remarkable.

“We still get a lot of [liquified natural gas] from Russia, and why not replace it by… pic.twitter.com/E6OwSN6UrR

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 8, 2024

The US is already Europe’s largest provider of LNG, but imports from Russia remain number two. Brussels continues to search for new ways to curb Moscow’s energy flows into the continent, which will only suggest US energy supplies will be the eventual replacement. We commented earlier this week on the latest fiasco with Russian NatGas pumped into Ukraine, then Slovakia, which is set to be halted at the first of the year. 

Final Countdown: Slovakia Warns Of “Economic Damage” As Ukraine NatGas Transit Nears End https://t.co/YIMOHCx7uZ

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 18, 2024

However, Bloomberg pointed out, “The US doesn’t have much more capacity to increase shipments. And since LNG is sold through long-term contracts, adding shipments to Europe would require original buyers of the gas to agree to divert its shipments to Europe — but that wouldn’t boost the amount being exported by the US,” adding, “Over the longer term, more capacity will come on line with dozens of projects in the US currently in the works.” 

Authored by Andrew Chen via The Epoch Times,

Nearly half of Canadian manufacturers may freeze hiring or lay off workers if U.S. President-elect Donald Trump imposes 25 percent tariffs on all Canadian goods.

A survey of 300 manufacturers found that 48 percent are considering these moves in response to the proposed tariffs, according to data released Dec. 19 by Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters (CME).

Additionally, 46 percent are considering postponing or cancelling planned capital investments, while 49 percent say they may shift some production to the U.S. if the tariffs are implemented.

“Tariffs will endanger nearly $600 billion in exports to our largest trading partner, two-thirds of which are manufactured goods,” CME president and CEO Dennis Darby said in a press release.

“These findings show why we need an urgent and coordinated response from governments to protect manufacturing businesses, workers, and families.”

Failure to do so “will be devastating for our economy,” Darby said.

Trump threatened the 25 percent tariff against Canada, as well as Mexico, in a series of Truth Social posts on Nov. 25, saying the tariffs will come into effect unless the two countries address the issue of illegal immigration and illicit drugs entering the United States through their borders.

On Dec. 17, the federal government announced it would spend $1.3 billion over six years to bolster border security. The funding will support law enforcement agencies with the use of artificial intelligence and imaging tools to detect and intercept fentanyl and its precursor chemicals entering Canada.

The Canada Border Services Agency will train and deploy new canine teams to assist in drug interception, and Health Canada will establish a Canadian Drug Profiling Centre to support 2,000 investigations annually and expand capacity at regional labs.

The investment will also provide new tools for the RCMP, including a new Aerial Intelligence Task Force comprised of helicopters, drones, and mobile surveillance towers. Counter-drone technology will support RCMP officers and provide 24/7 surveillance between ports of entry, according to the government’s announcement.

Ottawa will improve information sharing with the United States and between different levels of government and law enforcement. This will help officials respond more effectively to illegal border crossings by enhancing real-time intelligence, tracking migration trends, and improving coordination.

The headline UMich Sentiment survey rose to its highest since April to end the year, thanks to a post-election surge in Current Conditions that more than dominated a dip in Expectations…

Source: Bloomberg

Inflation expectations were mixed with the short-term rising and longer-term falling post-election…

Source: Bloomberg

But breaking down inflation expectation by political party… it’s pretty easy to see which way The FOMC leans…

Source: Bloomberg

Overall, Republicans are significantly more confident than Democrats since the election…

Source: Bloomberg

UMich’s Director of Surveys, Joanne Hsu, notes that “Broadly speaking, consumers believe that the economy has improved considerably as inflation has slowed, but they do not feel that they are thriving; sentiment is currently about midway between the all-time low reached in June 2022 and pre-pandemic readings.”

Bitcoin is extending its tumble from record highs this morning, touching a $92,000 handle before bouncing back a little.

The downward momentum saw massive net outflows from ETFs (second largest daily net outflow on record)…

Source: Bloomberg

But while the net outflows were huge, we point out that IBIT (BlackRock’s market dominating ETF) saw ZERO outflows in BTC or ETH)…

BTC ETF flows were dominated by ARK and Fidelity…

ETH ETF flows…

But, amid the collapse, CoinTelegraph reports that the proportion of social posts about buying the crypto dip has surged to its highest level since April, as Bitcoin fell below the psychological $100,000 price level, according to recent data.

“With Bitcoin falling as low as $95.5K today, the ratio of crypto discussions that are about buying crypto’s dip has reached its highest level in over 8 months,” crypto analysis firm Santiment said in a Dec. 19 X post.

Highest social dominance score in 8 months

The social dominance score – mentions of “buying the dip” across social media platforms – hit 0.061 on Dec. 19, as Bitcoin had remained below $100,000 for about 12 hours at the time of publication.

It was the highest social dominance score since April 12, when Bitcoin’s price dropped below the $70,000 mark to just above $67,000, before falling to about $63,000 the following day.

It almost retested this score on Aug. 4, when Bitcoin dropped below $60,000 and slid toward $53,000 within the following 24 hours.

It may not be the perfect time to BTFD quite yet though as global liquidity is signaling a retracement in BTC prices in the short-term…

Meanwhile, data shows that search interest for the term “crypto” remains high but has dropped since the start of December.

According to Google Trends data from the past 12 months, global searches for “crypto” are at a score of 75 over the past seven days, down 25 points from a score of 100 at the beginning of December.

Finally, there are some buyers still as CoinTelegraph reports that El Salvador bought $1 million worth of Bitcoin a day after striking a $1.4 billion deal with the International Monetary Fund that stipulated limits on dealing with the cryptocurrency.

The country’s National Bitcoin Office wrote in a Dec. 19 X post that it had “transferred over a million dollars worth of Bitcoin to our Strategic Bitcoin Reserve,” with its website showing it had added 11 Bitcoin to its holdings.

The move broke its streak of adding “one Bitcoin per day” that President Nayib Bukele announced in November 2022 and brought the country’s holdings to 5,980.77 BTC, worth about $580 million with BTC trading at around $97,000.

National Bitcoin Office Director Stacy Herbert said in a Dec. 19 X post that El Salvador “will continue buying Bitcoin (at possibly an accelerated pace).”

On Dec. 18, Bukele’s government struck a financing agreement with the IMF, which asked the country to wind down some of its Bitcoin dealings to receive $1.4 billion from the global lender over the next 40 months. 

The IMF said that as part of the deal, El Salvador’s government-led Bitcoin activity, transactions and purchases would “be confined.”

The country also agreed to make private sector acceptance of Bitcoin voluntary, allow taxes to be paid only in US dollars and unwind government involvement in its Chivo crypto wallet.

A Bitcoin Office spokesperson told Cointelegraph at the time that it “will keep buying one Bitcoin a day (likely even more in the future), and we will not sell any of our current holdings,” adding that “Bitcoin continues to be our main strategy.”

Authored by James Gorrie via The Epoch Times,

After taking a six-month break from an 18-month gold-buying spree, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) resumed its policy of large gold purchases in November.

On Oct. 31, gold reached a record price of $2,790.15 an ounce. Although it fell 5 percent last month, it remains about 28 percent higher for the year.

What’s behind China’s gold fever?

Gold Value Fluctuations Don’t Matter to Beijing

Although the value of the PBOC’s gold portfolio is subject to fluctuating market prices, China’s central bank seems to be more concerned about acquiring as much gold as it can and less concerned about changing valuations. In fact, according to Bloomberg, by the end of August of this year, the PBOC’s gold holdings reached 2,165 tons or about 4 percent of its total foreign reserves. Not surprisingly, in 2023, China led the world’s financial institutions in gold acquisitions and may do so in 2025.

Domestic Demand: A Partial Cause of China’s Gold Fever

There are several explanations for why Beijing is pursuing a bold gold policy. Certainly, gold has long been a safe haven for investors, especially during economic uncertainty. Currently, several economic factors are projecting uncertainty worldwide, including in China, which is driving demand. The ongoing property sector meltdown, an unreliable stock market, lower consumer spending, missed GDP growth targets, and the falling value of the yuan are just a few—and the people know this.

What’s more, there aren’t many good places for the Chinese to invest at home, and capital controls make it difficult for most Chinese to take advantage of foreign opportunities. Given gold’s history as a reliable store of value, it’s attractive to all levels of investors, resulting in rising domestic demand. For all these reasons, the PBOC is seeking to meet the Chinese public’s demand for gold.

Global Events Drive Uncertainty

But Beijing’s gold-forward strategy involves more than simply meeting domestic demand. Conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, including the evolving situation in Syria, have led to a far less predictable international order. Today, the world is leaning more toward uncertainty than predictability, which typically leads to a rise in the demand for gold.

This has undoubtedly been a factor in driving gold prices higher, but it hasn’t had much impact on China’s acquisition plans, which have been in place for the past several years.

The Strategic Elements of Gold Acquisition

Global instability aside, the strategic goal behind Beijing’s gold policy is, at minimum, to reduce its reliance on the U.S. dollar. That would include protecting itself as much as possible from the punitive measures—such as trade sanctions, restrictions, and tariffs—that Washington often imposes upon its economic or geopolitical adversaries. Both China and Russia have been and are subject to sanctions and tariffs by the United States.

Even though the U.S. dollar’s prominence in the world has diminished in recent years, 64 percent of global debt, 54 percent of world trade, and about 59 percent of global foreign currency reserves are denominated in U.S. dollars—the nearest competitor is the euro, at 20 percent.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is correct to assume that more punitive economic policies from Washington will negatively affect China. These concerns have become especially acute, with President-elect Donald Trump set to return to the White House in January 2025. Trump has pledged to raise tariffs on Chinese goods and services and even add sanctions based on China’s behavior on trade and other factors.

A Gold-Backed Yuan to Compete With the Dollar?

However, Trump isn’t the key factor in Beijing’s gold policy. The CCP’s long-term strategy is to replace the United States as a global hegemon. To do so, it must replace the dollar with the yuan, regardless of who occupies the White House. China’s gold acquisitions play a major role in that ambitious plan. The thinking is that a gold-backed yuan would eventually make it more desirable than it is today.

That’s precisely why Beijing steadily replaced its U.S. dollar Treasury bond holdings with gold well before the 2024 election cycle. Shrinking China’s U.S. bond portfolio is the other half of Beijing’s dollar replacement strategy. Selling large amounts of bonds may lower market demand and encourage other nations to do the same.

To put it in perspective, in early 2022, China’s U.S. Treasury bond portfolio exceeded $1 trillion. By May 2024, it had decreased to $768.30 billion. That trend is likely to continue. At some point, China hopes that it will be able to shore up the value of the yuan to at least compete with the dollar on the world stage.

A Gold-Backed BRICS Currency to Counter Trump’s Policies?

As China continues to acquire gold, it accelerates its plan for de-dollarization. As a founding member of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) currency, China is the largest economic power in the group, which is significant. The BRICS currency agreement was formed to compete with the dollar in international trade via bilateral trade agreements between members that excluded the use of the dollar.

With the recent expansion of the BRICS group (BRICS-Plus), which now includes Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), their combined economies exceed 50 percent of the world’s GDP. Saudi Arabia received an invitation to join BRICS but has not yet formally done so. By contrast, the U.S. economy is about 27 percent of global GDP. What’s more, the total gold holdings of BRICS-Plus members is nearly 17 percent of all the gold in central banks worldwide. It’s also worth noting that along with China, Russia and India have also been steadily adding to their gold reserves over the years.

Clearly, the decision to expand BRICS membership gives the group much more influence globally, with greater advantages in economic power, gold reserves, market reach, and others.

Is it not reasonable to speculate that a gold-backed BRICS-Plus currency may be introduced to the world before too long—perhaps even as a response to the incoming Trump administration?

If there’s a better explanation for China’s massive appetite for gold, what might it be?

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.