PPI and CPI

June 15th, 2016 1:51 pm

Via Stephen Stanley at Amherst Pierpont Securities:

The May headline PPI rose by 0.4% while the core component advanced by 0.3%, in both cases firmer than expected.  The bulk of the surprise came within the core and reflected, among other things, a 1.4% jump in wholesalers’ margins, which, as I have noted on multiple occasions, barely resembles a measure of inflation at all.  There were other sources of firmness (new motor vehicle prices were higher and hospital charges rose), but there were also elements of weakness (financial services, travel, and trucking freight).

The PPI results do not dictate many changes to my CPI forecast.  I am nudging down my estimate of energy prices in the CPI slightly to reflect a tamer-than-expected increase in natural gas costs in the PPI, but that is about it.  My CPI forecast calls for a 0.3% rise in the total and a 0.2% advance in the core, consistent with the consensus projections.  I would not be surprised to see the headline index round down to a 0.2% gain, as my numbers on an unrounded basis work out to a “low” 0.3% increase.  A noticeable seasonally adjusted rise in energy prices drives the headline estimate, while my core forecast reflects a largely trend-like performance.  Core services prices have firmed slightly and will continue to drive the aggregate, led by shelter costs.  Over time, core goods prices are likely to stabilize or tick up in the wake of the turnaround in import prices in recent months, but it is likely too early to see that effect by May.

The handful of PPI categories that translate directly to the PCE deflator were a mixed bag.  Used car margins surged, but doctors’ fees slipped, airfares declined, and financial services costs receded.  It feels like the spread between the core CPI and core PCE deflator may be relatively normal in May, but I will be able to say more after the CPI is released tomorrow.

Industrial Production

June 15th, 2016 1:50 pm

Via Stephen Stanley at Amherst Pierpont Securities:

Industrial production slid by 0.4% in May, a couple ticks worse than expected.  Factory output also declined by 0.4%, mainly due to a fall in motor vehicle output.  The employment figures had pointed to a small increase in factory production excluding autos, but the actual result was a 0.1% decline.  Mining output inched higher for the first month since August (oil and gas drilling has fallen so far that it is inevitably forming a bottom), while utility usage dropped by 1.0%, presumably reflecting cooler-than-usual temperatures in May.  Given that the decline in May industrial production seems to be driven mostly by a fall in the erratic motor vehicle sector (at a time when sales are solid) and utilities, I am not particularly worried by the weaker-than-projected results.  Broadly, with the bulk of the effects from a stronger dollar having worked their way through the system, the factory sector should be stabilizing.  On a year-over-year basis, manufacturing output is down 0.1%, awfully close to stable!  Meanwhile, after spending several months below the break-even mark, the ISM factory composite gauge has crept back above 50.  To be sure, a stable trend this year would be an improvement over the declines seen in 2015, but the manufacturing sector will almost certainly not be a significant source of strength for the broad economy any time soon.

Client Allocation to Corporates at Record Levels (Still)

June 15th, 2016 1:47 pm

Via Bloomberg:

IG CREDIT: Client Allocations to Corporates Stay at Record High
2016-06-15 16:57:04.393 GMT

By Robert Elson
(Bloomberg) — Client allocations to corporate bonds held
steady at record 36.4% in the latest SMR Money Manager Survey.

* “Corporate allocations have averaged 35.9% so far this
year, ranging from 35.5% to 36.4%”
* “Over the past five years, Corporate allocations have
averaged 34.2% of assets, ranging from 32.0% to 36.4%”
* This survey began at its all-time low of 19.1% in Aug. 1999

Some Corporate Bond Stuff

June 15th, 2016 7:21 am

Via Bloomberg:

IG CREDIT: Long Bonds Among Most Active Issues; Spreads Wider
2016-06-15 09:45:22.962 GMT

By Robert Elson
(Bloomberg) — Secondary IG trading ended with a Trace
count of $13.9b vs $10.5b Monday, $16.9b the previous Tuesday.
10-DMA $14.7b; 10-Tuesday moving avg $17b.

* 144a trading added $3.0b of IG volume vs $2.0b on Monday,
$4.6b last Tuesday

* The most active issues:
* GSK 1.50% 2017 was 1st with client buying 3x selling
* VZ 4.862% 2046 was next with client flows taking 81% of
volume
* WFC 4.40% 2046 was 3rd with client and affiliate trades
taking 99% of volume
* MYL 3.15% 2021 was most active 144a issue with client and
affiliate flows at 63% of volume; client buying 2.6x selling

* Bloomberg US IG Corporate Bond Index OAS at 160.2 vs 157.7
* 2016 high/low: 220.8, a new wide since Jan. 2012/150.8
* 2015 high/low: 182.1/129.6
* 2014 high/low: 144.7/102.3

* BofAML IG Master Index at +159 vs +157
* 2016 high/low: +221, the widest level since June
2012/+152
* 2015 high/low: +180/+129
* 2014 high/low: +151/+106, tightest spread since July
2007

* Standard & Poor’s Global Fixed Income Research IG Index at
+204 vs +203
* +262, the new wide going back to 2013, was seen
2/11/2016
* The widest spread recorded was +578 in Dec. 2008

* S&P HY spread at +653 vs +645; +947 seen Feb. 11 was the
widest spread since Oct. 2011
* All time wide was +1,754 in Dec. 2008

* Markit CDX.IG.26 5Y Index at 84.2 vs 81.6
* 73.0, its lowest level since August, was seen April 20
* 124.7, a new wide since June 2012 was seen Feb. 11
* 2014 high/low was 76.1/55.0, the low for 2014 and the
lowest level since Oct 2007

* Current market levels
* 2Y 0.738%
* 10Y 1.630%
* Dow futures +55
* Oil $47.87
* ¥en 106.27

* IG issuance totaled $2.05b Tuesday; June now stands at $58b
* May ended at a record $209.51b; stats and recap
* YTD IG issuance now $861b; YTD less SSAs $718b

What to Watch for Today

June 15th, 2016 7:19 am

Via Bloomberg:

WHAT TO WATCH:

* (All times New York)
* Economic Data
* 7:00am: MBA Mortgage Applications, June 10 (prior 9.3%)
* 8:30am: PPI Final Demand m/m, May, est. 0.3% (prior
0.2%)
* PPI Ex Food and Energy m/m, May, est. 0.1% (prior
0.1%)
* PPI Ex Food, Energy, Trade m/m, May, est. 0.1%
(prior 0.3%)
* PPI Final Demand y/y, May, est. -0.1% (prior 0%)
* PPI Ex Food and Energy y/y, May, est. 1% (prior
0.9%)
* PPI Ex Food, Energy, Trade y/y, May (prior 0.9%)
* 8:30am: Empire Manufacturing, June., est. -4.9 (prior
-9.02)
* 9:15am: Industrial Production m/m, May, est. -0.2%
(prior 0.7%)
* Capacity Utilization, May, est. 75.2% (prior 75.4%)
* Manufacturing (SIC) Production, May, est. -0.1%
(prior 0.3%)
* 4:00pm: Net Long-term TIC Flows, April (prior $78.1b)
* Central Banks
* 2:00pm: FOMC Rate Decision (Upper Bound), est. 0.5%
(prior 0.5%); (Lower Bound), est. 0.25% (prior 0.25%)
* 7:40pm: Bank of Canada’s Poloz speaks in Whitehorse,
Yukon Territory
* TBA: Bank of Japan Policy Rate (prior -0.1%)

FX

June 15th, 2016 7:15 am

Via Marc Chandler at Brown Brothers Harriman:

Four Developments Ahead of the FOMC Meeting

  • The FOMC meeting, with updated economic projections and a press conference, is the key event of the day
  • First, MSCI has chosen not to include China’s A shares in its emerging market indices
  • Second, there are no fresh developments on the UK referendum, and this is allowing sterling to bounce
  • Third, global capital markets are in a correction mode
  • Fourth, oil prices are softer following news of an unexpected US inventory build as estimated by API

The dollar is mostly softer against the majors.  Sterling and the antipodeans are outperforming while the Swedish krona and the Swiss franc are underperforming.  EM currencies are mostly firmer.  RUB, MXN, and ZAR are outperforming while PHP, RON, and TWD are underperforming.  MSCI Asia Pacific was up 0.2%, with the Nikkei rising 0.4%.  MSCI EM is up 0.5%, with Chinese markets up nearly 1.5% despite the disappointing MSCI decision.  Euro Stoxx 600 is up 1.3% near midday, while S&P futures are pointing to a lower open.  The 10-year UST yield is up 2 bp at 1.63%.  Commodity prices are mixed, with oil down 1.5% and copper up over 2%.

The FOMC meeting, with updated economic projections and a press conference, is the key event of the day, even though three other central banks meet over the next 24 hours.  There are four things investors should know before the FOMC meeting.    

First, MSCI has chosen not to include China’s A shares in its emerging market indices.  Several large banks had played up the chances and emphasized the reforms that have been announced since last August.  Of the 23 participants surveyed by Bloomberg, 10 expected the A shares to be included and another 8 thought it was too close to call.  

We were less sanguine, and MSCI spoke to our concerns.  Essentially the MSCI decision, which did not seem particularly close, was based on two main considerations.  First, more reforms are needed.  Second, more time is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of recently announced measures.  MSCI specifically cited the 20% monthly repatriation limit as a significant hurdle, which we think alone may have been a deal-breaker.  

A decision to include the A-shares appears to be at least another year away.  Note that Vanguard’s FTSE emerging market ETF includes A-shares.  Nevertheless, foreign investors have very little direct exposure to China’s onshore market.  Estimates, based on the quotas granted, suggest foreign investors have about $180 bln in onshore yuan assets, nearly evenly divided between equities and debt.  There is a slight bias toward the latter, which may reflect the preference of reserve managers.  

Chinese shares initially sold off on the news but quickly rebounded.  The Shanghai Composite finished 1.6% higher.  It is the second advancing sessions and the best two-day run this month.  Some suspect that officials supported the equity prices today.  

Second, there are no fresh developments on the UK referendum, and this is allowing sterling to bounce.  It is gaining for the only the third session in the past eight.  Sterling is the strongest of the major currencies today, gaining a little more than 0.5% against the US dollar to edge ahead of the Australian and New Zealand dollars.  Some who favor the UK to remain in the EU may have overstated their case by blaming the economic slowdown to Brexit fears.  The economy has been slowing gradually for a year, or more, and the most recent economic data has surprised on the upside.  

The better than expected industrial and manufacturing data has been followed by a favorable employment report today.  The ILO unemployment measure unexpectedly edged down to 5.0% from 5.1%.  The claimant count fell by four hundred, though the April figure was revised higher (to 6.4k from -2.4k).  The number of employed rose by 55k to 31.6 mln and the number of unemployed fell by 20k to 1.67 mln.  

Earnings are reported with an extra month lag but were stronger than expected.  In April, average weekly earnings were flat at 2.0%.  Many expected the pace to fall to 1.7%.  Excluding bonus payments, average weekly earnings rose 2.3% from a revised 2.2% (initially 2.1%).  The median expectations were for a 2.0% rate.  The 2.3% increase is the strongest since last September.  

Third, global capital markets are in a correction mode.  The MSCI Asia-Pacific Index posted a minor gain to snap a four-session decline.  The Dow Jones Stoxx 600 is up 1.4% near midday in London to break a six-session 7.5% drop.  It is in a broad advance today, with all sectors up more than 1% except energy.  Core bond yields are slightly firmer, while peripheral European bonds are seeing a 2-3 bp decline in 10-year benchmarks.  

In the foreign exchange market, the greenback is seeing yesterday’s gains against most of the majors trimmed.  The yen and Swiss franc are marginally lower on the day.  Still, the dollar is holding below the previous day’s high (~JPY106.42) for the third consecutive session.  However, thus far, the dollar is holding above the previous day’s low (~JPY105.63), also for the first time this week.  

Fourth, oil prices are softer following news of an unexpected US inventory build as estimated by API.  The official DOE estimate will be reported later today.  The July light sweet futures contract continues to flirt with the four-month uptrend.  After closing last week below the 20-day moving average, the contract has sent the first half of the week below it.  

Ahead of the FOMC meeting, the US reports producer prices, Empire State manufacturing survey (June), and industrial output.  After yesterday’s import price surprise, the risk to PPI is on the upside.  Industrial and manufacturing output may be softer after a 0.7 and 0.3% respective gains in April.  The Empire survey is expected to show modest improvement.  Note that the Atlanta Fed’s GDP tracker now shows Q2 GDP growing by 2.8% after yesterday’s data, up from 2.5%.  

While the FOMC is not expected to change rates today, the key to the markets’ response depends on two elements.  First, to what extent does the FOMC statement preclude a July move?  Second, do the Fed’s economic projections maintain the outlook for two hikes this year, which is suggested in its March forecasts?  In its data-dependency posture, we think the Fed must keep the door open to a July move.  We expect the dot plots to be consistent with two hikes this year, but suspect that next year’s four hikes may be trimmed.  

South Africa will report April retail sales, which are expected to rise 2.5% y/y vs. 2.8% in March.  Recent real sector data have been weak, even as price pressures have been rising.  Next SARB policy meeting is July 21, and we think it will be a tough decision.  It’s too early to make a call now but if rand weakness persists, the SARB will most likely restart the tightening cycle then after pausing at its last meeting May 19.  

Israel reports May CPI, which is expected to remain steady at -0.9% y/y.  Deflation persists, and this is well below the 1-3% target range.  For now, the central bank remains on hold, as it is hesitant to use unconventional measures.  Next policy meeting is June 27, and no change expected then.  Press reports suggest the central bank is concerned about the growth in household credit, which suggests reluctance in cutting rates further.  

Larry Summers on the Fed

June 14th, 2016 9:34 pm

Via the Washington Post:

Larry Summers: The Fed Is Making the Same Mistakes Over And Over Again
2016-06-14 19:31:53.923 GMT

By Lawrence H. Summers
June 14 (Washington Post) — As the Federal Reserve meets
today and tomorrow, I am increasingly convinced that while they
have been making reasonable tactical judgement, their current
strategy is ill adapted to the realities of the moment. Exuding
soundness is the task of policymakers. Provoking thought is the
task of academics. So here are some not-entirely-formed
reflections.
Japan’s essential macroeconomic problem is no longer lack
out output growth. Unemployment is low. Relative to its shrinking
labor force, output growth is adequate by contemporary standards.
Japan’s problem is that it seems incapable of achieving 2 percent
inflation. This makes it much harder to deal with debt problems
and leaves the Japanese with little spare powder if a recession
comes.
I am reluctantly coming to the conclusion that the United
States may be on a slow-motion trajectory toward a Japanese-style
chronic low inflationary, or even deflationary, outcome. A
corollary of this view is that the current hawkish inclination of
the Fed, with its chronic hope and belief that conditions will
soon permit interest rate increases, is misguided. The greater
danger is of too little, rather than too much, demand. A new Fed
paradigm is therefore in order.
Any consideration of macro policy has to begin with the fact
that the economy is now seven years into recovery and the next
recession is on at least the far horizon. While recession
certainly does not appear imminent, the annual probability of
recession for an economy that is not in the early stage of
recovery is at least 20 percent. The fact that underlying growth
is now only 2 percent, that the rest of the world has serious
problems, and that the U.S. has an unusual degree of political
uncertainty all tilt toward greater pessimism. With at least some
perceived possibility that a demagogue will be elected as
president or that policy will lurch left, I would guess that from
here the annual probability of recession is 25 percent to 30
percent.
This seems to me the only way to interpret the yield curve.
Markets anticipate only about .65 percentage point of increase in
short rates over the next three years. Whereas Fed officials’
projections suggest that rates will normalize at 3.3 percent, the
market thinks that even five years from now they will be about
1.25 percent.
Markets are thinking that recession will come at some point,
and when it does rates, will go to near zero. As a rough
calculation, if it is assumed rates will be raised twice a year
with continued growth, then markets’ .85 percentage
point estimate for the fed funds rate in December 2018 implies a
50 percent chance of recession by then.
So both history and markets are telling us that we are
facing a possible recession.
What does this mean? First, it implies that if the Fed is
serious — as it should be — about having a symmetric 2 percent
inflation target, then its near term target should be in excess
of 2 percent. Prior to the next recession — which will
presumably be deflationary — the Fed should want inflation to be
above its long term target.
The point can be put in one more way. The Fed’s dot
projections refer to a modal scenario of continued recovery. They
see inflation rising to 2 percent only in 2018. Why shouldn’t
they prefer a path with more demand, inflation at target sooner,
more stimulus as recession insurance, and a small margin of extra
inflation as a buffer against the next recession? Those who think
that raising rates somehow helps the economy prepare to be
counter-cyclical are confused. Given lags, raising rates now
would increase the chances of recession, along with the likely
severity. Raising inflation and inflation expectations best
prevents and alleviates recession.
There is the further point that the logic that led to the
adoption of the 2 percent inflation target years ago suggests
that it is too low now. As brought out in a famous colloquy
between Janet Yellen and Alan Greenspan, the case for a positive
inflation target balances the benefits of stable money with the
output cost of lowering inflation. Positive inflation, after all,
can be helpful — the periodic need to have negative real rates,
and inflation’s role in facilitating downward adjustment in real
wages given nominal rigidities.
All of the factors pointing toward a higher inflation target
have gained force in recent years. Regardless of whether they
believe in secular stagnation, almost everyone agrees that
neutral real rates have declined a full percentange point or
more. This means there will be more frequent need for negative
real rates. Slowing underlying wage growth means that there is
more pressure for downward adjustments that are facilitated by
inflation. Experience has proven that Yellen was correct to be
skeptical of the idea very low inflation rates would improve
productivity. And it is plausible that the error in price
indices has increased with the introduction of new categories of
innovative and often free products.
This means that if a two percent inflation target reflected
a proper balance when it first came into vogue decades ago, a
higher target is probably appropriate today. This is another
reason to allow inflation to rise above 2 percent.
Second, the theoretical consideration that the Fed should
not raise rates until inflation is clearly above target is
reinforced by the current data flow. Long term inflation
expectations are depressed and declining, as shown in TIPS
(inflation-indexed) government bonds, which I have adjusted to
the Fed’s preferred PCE price index. Note that expected inflation
is back near record low levels despite oil prices having risen
about 70 percent from their February levels.
The Fed has in the past counterbalanced declines in market
inflation expectation measures by pointing to the relative
stability in surveys-based measures. This argument is much harder
to make now that consumer expectations of inflation have broken
decisively below their all-time lows even as gas prices have been
rising.
There is of course the question of a possibly overheating
labor market as a source of future inflation. While last month’s
highly disappointing employment report was a jolt to most
observers, the Fed’s summary employment conditions index has been
flashing yellow since the beginning of the year. Declines in this
measure have presaged recession half of the time and uniformly
been followed by rate reductions rather than rate increases.
Embedded inflation expectations are low and declining.
Comprehensive measures of the labor market are deteriorating and
growth is at best mediocre. Meanwhile inflation is clearly below
where the Fed should want it. The right concern for the Fed now
should be to signal its commitment to accelerating growth and
avoiding a return to recession, even at some cost in terms of
other risks.
This is not the Fed’s policy posture. Watching the Fed over
the last year there is a Groundhog Day aspect. One senses they
really want to raise rates and achieve a more “normal” stance.
But at the same time they do not want to tighten when the
economy may be slowing or create financial turmoil. So they keep
holding out the prospect of future rate increases and then find
themselves unable to deliver. But they always revert to holding
out the prospect of rate increases soon, partly for internal
comity and partly to preserve optionality.
Over the last 12 months nominal GDP has risen at a rate of
only 3.3 percent. We hardly seem in danger of demand running
away. Today we learned that Germany has followed Japan into
negative 10 year rates. We are only one recession away from
joining the club. The Fed should be clear now that its priority
is not preventing a small step up in inflation, which in fact
should be welcomed, or returning interest rates to what would
have been normal to a world gone by.
Instead the Fed should focus on assuring adequate growth in
both real and nominal incomes going forward.

-0- Jun/14/2016 19:31 GMT

Credit Card Delinquencies on the Rise

June 14th, 2016 8:50 pm

Synchrony Financial (formerly GE Capital) announced today that it was seeing more delinquencies from credit card holders and was increasing charge offs to recognize that situation. The stock got whacked and credit card companies declined in sympathy.

I wonder if this is a one off for a first small hint of trouble at the consumer level.

Via Barron’s:

Uh Oh. Synchrony Financial Sees More Bad Loans…and That’s Bad News for Capital One, Discover Financial

Synchrony Financial (SYF) warned today that it’s seeing more bad debt than it had expected. Evercore ISI’s John Pancari and team explain why that’s bad news for shares of Capital One Financial (COF) and Discover Financial Services (DFS):

Synchrony Financial, a private label card company, is down 13.7% after it warned this morning that [net charge offs, or NCOs,] would increase 20-30bps over the next 12-months. Specifically, mgmt noted that consumers are having a harder time curing later stage delinquencies, resulting in higher NCOs. Accordingly, Synchrony expects “higher reserve builds” going forward. Bottom line: Synchrony’s warning should add to concerns about credit quality for subprime borrowers and credit cards. While Synchrony did not explicitly state that subprime credit is deteriorating, 28% of Synchrony’s portfolio is subprime.

Capital One and Discover are down 6.2% and 3.0%, respectively, in sympathy with the Synchrony news. As of March 31, 2016, Capital One’s combined subprime domestic credit card and auto loans total ~$49.7B, or 22% of of Capital One loans. This compares with subprime loan balances (credit card, personal, student) of ~15% for Discover. Specifically, 34% of Capital One’s domestic cards were subprime, versus 18% for Discover (domestic credit cards represent 37% of Capital One’s loans, versus 79% for Discover). Additionally, 49% of Capital One’s $43B auto loan book (19% of loans) are to subprime borrowers, though we note that Capital One has pulled back from deeper subprime auto lending in recent quarters. This compares to just 4% of personal and student loans that are subprime for Discover. Lastly, we note that Capital One is an active subprime lender, while Discover focuses in the prime space.

Capital One has previously guided to higher NCOs. Capital One expects credit card charge-offs of ~4% in FY16, and in the low 4%’s for FY17 as new credit card customers season. This compares to a 3.45% card NCO rate for FY15…

No update from Capital One. We spoke with mgmt today. While they did not provide an update, we note that Capital One will present tomorrow at an industry conference.

Discover Financial Services (BUY; $59 TP) indicated that they are not seeing signs of credit deterioration. Mgmt today spoke at a competitor conference and indicated that they do not see signs of credit deterioration. Specifically, they indicated that they are pleased with the credit performance of Discover’ card book, personal loans, and student loans.

Shares of Synchrony Financial have tumbled 15% to $25.90 at 2:36 p.;m. today, while Capital One Financial has dropped 7.1% to $64.12, and Discover Financial Service is off 3.9% at $53.34. I’m guessing American Express (AXP), which has dropped 4.5% to $60.79, is also being walloped by Synchrony’s bad news.

 

GDP Now

June 14th, 2016 11:44 am

The Atlanta Fed has increased its estimate of Q2 GDP to 2.8 percent from 2.5 percent.

Via the Atlanta FED:

Latest forecast: 2.8 percent — June 14, 2016

The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2016 is 2.8 percent on June 14, up from 2.5 percent on June 9. After this morning’s retail sales release from the U.S. Census Bureau, the forecast for second-quarter real personal consumption expenditures growth increased from 3.5 percent to 3.9 percent.

The next GDPNow update is Friday, June 17. Please see the “Release Dates” tab below for a full list of upcoming releases.

Long Note on Brexit

June 14th, 2016 11:27 am

Via Robert Sinche at Amherst Pierpont Securities:

The Bloomberg article below highlights some of the issues surrounding the implications of Brexit, although some of the quotes seem quite overstated. However, I think it is most important, in my view, that the Brexit vote is more about rejection of the status quo and the leadership of the “elites, a theme disquietly similar to what is playing out in the US this cycle. Many voters admit they do not really understand the details of the complex issues involved (doesn’t stop candidates in the US!), but they have a sense that all this free trade and open immigration somehow just hasn’t worked for many residents. The manufacturing sector in the UK is even worse than Japan in the last 20 years, with the latest reading on UK Industrial Output 5% below the level of output in 1995 (see chart). So without any understanding of what the counterfactual outcome might have been, it just seems the current set-up is not working, with the more recent concerns surrounding immigration and its implications for the domestic society, even more than the economy. In the Carter Administration, Budget Director Burt Lance was fond of saying “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Unfortunately, the political mood seems to be “it is broken…and something needs to change”. Since there is no general election, and no great admiration for the bureaucrats in Brussels anyway, the Brexit vote seems more about discontent than it does some rational economic analysis that the political leadership of both Conservation and Labour keep preaching to the voters. The issues are complicated and the voters may or may not believe the analysis, but above all they seem to distrust the status quo of the established leadership…of both parties. That also bodes poorly for US political leaders extolling the virtues of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the free-trade agreement with Asia, corporate tax cuts and regulatory reform that seem good policy at the macro level but tough to sell at the micro level. Enough pontification…

A few thoughts of a more substantive nature:

·         As noted in the article below, the UK would need to trigger EU Article 50 to withdraw from the EU, a process that could end up with negotiations that take up to 2 years, and could be extended by mutual agreement. Nothing happens quickly in the official EU, and it will be a very gradual process of extrication, implying limited immediate changes in trade flows and cross-border activity.

·         While the service sector will be the important one (recall Jamie Dimon speech), the UK accounts for only about 3% of world trade in goods, so the impact around the world is likely to be very limited in the near term.

·         In my view, most of the impact will come in the (over-) reaction of markets. As noted in Charts of the Day yesterday, net speculative short positions in the GBP appear to be approaching records levels, and after an initial drop it seems short-covering may support the GBP. As I have said before, I think buy orders for the GBP/USD at 1.35 could be a very good short-term trading strategy.

·         By most likely holding policy stable this week, the BoE would have some flexibility in the event of a Brexit vote. While the MPC of the BoE could cut rates somewhat, the weaker GBP is helping to ease overall monetary conditions and a weaker GBP could help boost domestic prices, so the BoE may hold most of its firepower until the economic data become clearer.

·         The ECB appears “on hold” until their September meeting and that is unlikely to change. Panicky moves by Central banks are unlikely to be helpful in the event of a Brexit vote, and MP leaders will likely say they are monitoring developments carefully…but no take immediate action. They would continue, of course, to provide emergency liquidity to the banking sector as needed.

·         It appears likely the BOJ also keeps policy stable at its meeting this week, keeping any flexibility they still do have (very limited, in my view) in the event that a Brexiot vote rattles global markets, creating a further risk-aversion bid for the JPY. Even in that event, I think the burden falls on the MOF, who would likely argue that “disorderly market conditions” would justify FX market intervention.

·         China – I doubt much policy action as they are focused on their own issues. If the statement by EU President Tusk (“I fear that Brexit could be the beginning of the end not only of the EU, but of the entire western political civilization.” really?) is repeated, in that the Chinese political leadership will likely take great interest.

·         All in all, a Brexit vote seems much more a political and markets issue than a real economic issue and markets appears to be discounting some of those outcomes in the run-up to the June 23 vote. That development may limit the damage after a vote to leave the EU.


Brexit’s First 100 Days Promise Chaos, Fear, Damage Limitation
2016-06-13 23:01:05.558 GMT

By Ian Wishart
(Bloomberg) — There’s no road map for European authorities facing the prospect of a British exit from their 28-nation union — by design. Officials in Brussels are under orders not to commit any scenarios to paper to avoid alarmist leaks, according to a senior official from one European government tasked with making preparations. Given the potential political and financial shockwaves surrounding a Brexit vote, it’s not clear a map would do much good. Global markets are already sputtering as anxiety mounts about the impact on the world economy. EU President Donald Tusk goes so far as to say that it could spell the end of “western political civilization itself.”

 


Tusk’s exaggeration highlights the task in self- preservation awaiting European officials as they confront the potential departure of a country from the EU — something that was inconceivable when the union was established. The mechanism for an exit was only written into law in 2009.

The first 24 hours

Before dawn on June 24, if an exit vote becomes clear, the EU’s top brass from Berlin to Brussels will be forced into damage control. In echoes of the Greek debt crisis, euro-area finance ministers may hold an emergency meeting as soon as that evening. Wild swings in the pound, more aggressive interventions by the Swiss National Bank and a ratcheting up of global instability rank as likely market reactions. Currency markets haven’t priced in the U.K.’s exit from the EU, so if it happens, “a crash is pretty likely,” Lothar Mentel, chief executive officer of Tatton Investment Management in London, said on Bloomberg Television. “We would have to brace ourselves for quite a rough awakening on that Friday.”

 

The political fallout may be even more fraught. Europe’s traditional counterweights, France and Germany, whose enmity the EU was set up to banish, will seek to gain some of the initiative. They are planning a response as early as June 24 that could include a commitment to deeper euro-area integration as well as a declaration that the EU dream remains alive, according to three people familiar with the plans. “The European Union will need to have a credible strategy,” said Guntram Wolff, of the Brussels-based policy group Bruegel. “To avoid a gradual disintegration of the EU, political leaders will need to strengthen the attractiveness of the EU and especially the Franco-German alliance.”

The first week

As the weekend begins and the reality dawns in the U.K. that it has voted to leave the world’s largest trading bloc, the rest of Europe will have their own questions to answer. Amid fears that a “Leave” vote could further fuel populist and anti-establishment sentiment throughout Europe, the EU’s leaders could choose to take the unprecedented step of calling an emergency summit without British representation as early as Saturday, June 25. The reason would be two-fold: send a message to Spanish voters who go to the polls June 26 that the EU remains strong; and to work out what to offer — or, more likely, what not to offer — the U.K. in areas such as free movement of people and access to the EU’s single market. There will be divisions to overcome even without the British. In France, where opinion polls say the euroskeptic National Front may make it through to the runoff in next year’s presidential elections, President Francois Hollande will have cause to show the electorate that leaving the bloc carries negative consequences. Other leaders, such as those of the
Netherlands and Denmark, where anti-EU feeling is also growing, may consider it more politically beneficial to offer support to Britain, their traditional ally.

 

Nations outside the euro area, especially those where anti- EU sentiment has been on the rise, such as Hungary, Poland and Sweden, could form a group of countries resisting any French and German attempts to move the EU in a more integrationist direction. With Britain’s exit, non-euro countries would lose their crucial partner — they would represent only 14 percent of the EU’s gross domestic product. David Cameron is scheduled to meet the other 27 EU leaders at a summit in Brussels the following week. It’s at this gathering that the prime minister is likely to trigger the EU’s Article 50 — the never-before-used law that catapults nations out of the club. That would set a deadline of two years — until the end of
June 2018, during which time the U.K. would have to negotiate its exit. Will Cameron want the U.K. to become like Norway or Iceland and maintain a close working relationship with the bloc as part of the European Economic Area? Or could there be another set-up that means the U.K. would have to trade with the EU under the World Trade Organization framework?

The first 100 days

EU chiefs fear the referendum will spark similar demands across the continent. With elections due in the Netherlands, France and Germany in 2017, there’s reason to discourage others from following the U.K.’s course, and this could weaken Britain’s hand in negotiations. It could also divert the EU’s attention away from other issues, including Greek finances, the refugee crisis and tackling instability in Ukraine, according to Michael Leigh, senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund. By this time, the political mist in the U.K. may be clearing. The EU could find itself dealing with another prime minister — someone like former London Mayor Boris Johnson, who supported Brexit and whom bookmakers have installed as the favorite to lead the Conservative Party. Whoever it is, the new British leader would probably have to extricate the U.K. from the EU while facing the prospect of a further referendum, on Scottish independence. The U.K. would start talks to renegotiate EU agreements in areas as diverse as fishing quotas, financial-services legislation and health and safety standards established over more than 50 years, simultaneously having to start negotiating its own trade deals with the rest of the world. Talks would also have to begin on the relocation of EU bodies headquartered in the U.K., such as the European Banking Authority. Each step of the way must be agreed upon by the EU’s other members and the European Parliament, a process lasting at least seven years and with no guarantee of success, EU President Tusk told Germany’s Bild newspaper.

 

“No one can predict the long-term consequences,” Tusk said in the interview. “I fear that Brexit could be the beginning of the end not only of the EU, but of the entire western political civilization.”

To contact the author of this story:
Ian Wishart inBrussels at [email protected]
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Alan Crawford at [email protected]
Eddie Buckle at [email protected]