Falling retail sales and freight activity: Cause for concern?

The rally in bellwether transport stock Fedex was short-lived and it is once again testing primary support at $164. Declining 13-week Twiggs Momentum, below zero, warns of a primary down-trend. Breach of support would confirm, suggesting a broad slow-down in US economic activity.

Fedex

The Freight Transportation Services Index reinforces this, declining since late 2014.

Freight Transportation Services Index

But the LoDI Index contradicts, continuing its climb.

LoDI Index

The LoDI Index uses linear regression analysis to combine cargo volume data from rail, barge, air, and truck transit, along with various economic factors. The resulting indicator is designed to predict upcoming changes in the level of logistics and distribution activity in the US and is represented by a value between 1 and 100. An index at or above 50 represents a healthy level of activity in the industry.

Growth in retail trade (excluding Motor Vehicles, Gasoline and Spares) also declined for the last two quarters but remains above core CPI.

Retail Trade ex-Gasoline, Motor Vehicles and Spares

On a positive note, however, light motor vehicle sales are climbing.

Light Motor Vehicle Sales

New building permits for private housing retreated in July but the trend remains upwards and new housing starts are increasing.

Housing Starts and Building Permits

Overall construction spending is also rising.

Construction Spending

Solid growth in spending on durables suggests further employment increases. This makes me reasonably confident that retail sales and freight/transport activity will recover. All the same, it would pay to keep a weather eye on Fedex and the transport indices.

[August 19th – This post was updated for Fedex and today’s release on Housing Permits and New Building Starts]

Anat Admati: Regulatory reform effort is an unfocused, complex mess

Telling it like it is. Anat Admati is Finance and Economics Professor at Stanford GSB and coauthor of The Bankers’ New Clothes.

Anat Admati

The financial system is not serving society well right now, certainly not as well as it can. It is a drag on the economy. Finance is fraught with governance problems. Free markets don’t solve these problems. Effective laws and regulation are essential.

……the regulatory reform effort is an unfocused, complex mess, both in design and in implementation. Some regulations end up as wasteful charades. They provide full employment and revolving opportunities for numerous lawyers, consultants, and regulators without producing enough benefits for society to justify the costs. Some of the complaints from the industry about these regulations have merit. In this category I put living wills, stress tests, risk weights, TLACs/cocos/bailinable debt (whatever the term for today), and liquidity coverage ratio. I am also concerned that, as implemented, central clearing of derivatives does not reduce, and may even increase, the concentration of dangerous risk. In all these contexts we see the pretense of action, the illusion of “science,” a false sense of safety, over-optimistic assessments of progress, and counterproductive distortions [emphasis added].

Lost in this mess are simpler, more straightforward regulations that would counter the incentives for recklessness and bring enormous benefits to society by making the system safer and healthier, as well as reducing unnecessary, unproductive risk that is a key source of system fragility, and the many distortions……..

Banks are not acting in society’s interests but their own. Not even primarily in the interests of shareholders but those of senior management. And they are doing their best to frustrate, obfuscate and capture regulators.

Finance is about money and power. Money and power can corrupt. So unlike in the airline business, in finance it is possible for the industry, regulators and politicians, to harm and endanger, to spin narratives and cover up the harm, and to be willfully blind, without any accountability. DoJ and the SEC must do their job, but they can’t deal with nonsense and capture.

So the biggest challenge in regulation is political. The details hardly matter if there is no political will. Unfortunately, most politicians put other objectives ahead of having a stable and healthy financial system. Ordinary people, meanwhile, may not be aware of what is going on or get confused by the spin. Not enough people understand why regulation is essential and what type of regulation makes sense.

What can be done? Here are some concrete ideas. First, increasing the pay of regulators may reduce revolving door incentives. Second, effective regulators might be industry veterans who are not inclined to go back. Third, we must try to reduce the role of money in politics.

To fix this, we need to break the feedback loop between Wall Street and government — the revolving door between regulators and the financial sector and between lobbyists and elected representatives. Otherwise the system will remain hijacked to enrich a few at the expense of the many.

Read more at Making Financial Regulations Work for Society: Comments by Anat Admati | Finance and Society INET Conference

CBA, ANZ, NAB and Westpac: The incredible shrinking big four banks | afr.com

Great article by Chris Joye:

Welcome to the world of that beautiful $140 billion behemoth, the Commonwealth Bank, which has inverted the axiom that there is a trade-off between risk and return. Years ago I highlighted a perversion embedded at the heart of our financial system: the supposedly lowest (highest) risk banks were producing the highest (lowest) returns. Normally it works the other way around.

…..contrary to some optimistic reports, the capital-raising game has only just begun.

The terrific news for shareholders is that this belated deleveraging will transform the majors into some of the safest banks in the world, which will be able to comfortably withstand a 1991-style recession, exacerbated by a 20 per cent decline in house prices.

In the past I have been critical of APRA’s failure to properly police Australia’s vastly-undercapitalized banking system but must now give them credit for their leadership towards creating a world-class system that will be able to withstand serious endogenous or exogenous economic shocks.

Shareholders face lower returns from reduced leverage but will benefit from improved valuations due to lower risk premiums and stronger, more stable, long-term growth.

Read more at CBA, ANZ, NAB and Westpac: The incredible shrinking big four banks | afr.com.

Dollar strengthens on low inflation

Core CPI continues to hover below the Fed’s 2.0% target, while plunging oil prices keep the broad index close to zero. Core CPI is likely to weaken as the beneficial effect of lower energy costs flows through to all sectors of the economy.

CPI and Core CPI

We often read of the threat of impending deflation — which may well occur. But one needs to differentiate between deflation caused by a surge in aggregate supply, as in the present situation, and a fall in aggregate demand as in 2008. The former may well act as a stimulus to the global economy, while the latter threatens a negative feedback loop between income and consumption which can lead to substantial falls in output.

Low inflation takes pressure off the Fed to raise interest rates but we can expect the first increment later this year. 10-Year Treasury yields respected the rising trendline and support at 2.10%, suggesting another test of 2.50%.

10-Year Treasury Yields

The higher trough on the Dollar Index indicates buying pressure and breakout above 98 would signal another test of 100. In the longer term, breakout above 100 would signal resumption of the primary up-trend but is likely to meet push-back from the Fed as a higher dollar would hurt both exporters and domestic producers competing against imports.

Dollar Index

China: Deja vu all over again

The Shanghai Composite today found support at 3500 today after plunging more than 8% on Monday. The large divergence on 13-week Twiggs Money Flow continues to warn of selling pressure.

Shanghai Composite Index

* Target calculation: 4000 – ( 5000 – 4000 ) = 3000

Japan’s Lost Decade

From Wikipedia:

The Japanese asset price bubble….. was an economic bubble in Japan from 1986 to 1991 in which real estate and stock market prices were greatly inflated. The bubble was characterized by rapid acceleration of asset prices and overheated economic activity, as well as an uncontrolled money supply and credit expansion. More specifically, over-confidence and speculation regarding asset and stock prices had been closely associated with excessive monetary easing policy at the time.

By August 1990, the Nikkei stock index had plummeted to half its peak by the time of the fifth monetary tightening by the Bank of Japan (BOJ)…..the economy’s decline continued for more than a decade. This decline resulted in a huge accumulation of non-performing assets loans (NPL), causing difficulties for many financial institutions. The bursting of the Japanese asset price bubble contributed to what many call the Lost Decade.

“…uncontrolled money supply and credit expansion….overheated stock market and real estate bubble.” Sound familiar? It should. We are witnessing a re-run but this time in China. Wait, there’s more…..

…..At the end of August 1987, the BOJ signaled the possibility of tightening the monetary policy, but decided to delay the decision in view of economic uncertainty related to Black Monday (October 19, 1987) in the US.

…..BOJ reluctance to tighten the monetary policy was in spite of the fact that the economy went into expansion in the second half of 1987. The Japanese economy had just recovered from the “endaka recession” ….. closely linked to the Plaza Accord of September 1985, which led to the strong appreciation of the Japanese yen.

…..in order to overcome the “endaka” recession and stimulate the local economy, an aggressive fiscal policy was adopted, mainly through expansion of public investment. Simultaneously, the BOJ declared that curbing the yen’s appreciation was a “national priority”……

Global stock market crash leads to prolonged monetary easing…… aggressive expansion of public investment to stimulate the domestic economy…..central bank efforts to curb appreciation of the currency. We all know how this ends. We’ve seen the movie before.

It’s like deja-vu, all over again. ~ Yogi Berra

Chinese Manufacturing Activity Falls in July – The New York Times

From Reuters:

BEIJING — China’s factory sector contracted by the most in 15 months in July as shrinking orders depressed output, a preliminary private survey showed on Friday, a worse-than-expected result that should reinforce bets the struggling Chinese economy will get more stimulus.

The flash Caixin/Markit China Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) dropped to 48.2, the lowest reading since April last year and a fifth straight month below 50, the level which separates contraction from expansion.

Read more at Chinese Manufacturing Activity Falls in July – The New York Times.

APRA confirms further capital adequacy measures

From Robin Christie:

The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has confirmed that the country’s largest banks will face increased capital adequacy requirements for residential mortgage exposures – and hasn’t ruled out further rises.

The regulator made it clear yesterday that the new rules would be an interim measure based on the Financial System Inquiry’s (FSI) recommendations – and that it was keenly awaiting guidance from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision before making any further changes.

The new measures, which come into effect on 1 July 2016, mandate that authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs) that are accredited to use the internal ratings-based (IRB) approach to credit risk must increase their average risk weight on Australian residential mortgage exposures to at least 25 per cent. According to APRA, the current average risk weight figure sits at around 16 per cent….

This is a welcome first step. Increases in bank capital will improve economic stability. Even at 25 percent, however, a capital ratio of 10% would mean that banks are holding 2.5 percent capital against residential mortgages. Further increases over time will be necessary.

Read more at APRA hints at further capital adequacy measures.

Why negative gearing is not a fair tax policy

Interesting view from Antony Ting, Associate Professor at University of Sydney:

Is negative gearing in accordance with well-established tax rules? A fundamental principle in the tax law is that a taxpayer should be able to deduct expenses only if the expenses have been incurred to generate assessable income.

This is why an employee can only deduct expenses that are sufficiently related to work. For example, a funeral director at tropical Queensland would be able to deduct the cost of his black jacket (but not his black trousers) because the ATO believes that no rational person – except a funeral director – would wear a black jacket in such a hot place.

Should mortgage interest on an investment property be deductible? Investment properties generate two kinds of income: rental income and capital gains (if any). As capital gains on investment property can enjoy a 50% tax discount if the property has been held for at least a year, strictly speaking only 50% of the interest expenses related to the capital gain should be deductible.

……Many countries resolve this issue by quarantining losses on investment properties. It means that losses generated from negative gearing cannot be used to offset against other sources of income, for example, salaries or business income. Instead, the losses can be carried forward to future years to offset against income from the investment properties.

Quarantining losses seems fairer than limiting deductibility of losses to the 50% discount normally available on capital gains. But the situation gets more complicated when the property is sold. Can accumulated losses never be deducted against gains on other assets or should they be offset against any capital gain made on disposal of the property? And if the result is a net capital loss should this be allowed to be offset against gains on other properties? We need a system that is fundamentally fair.

Read more at Why negative gearing is not a fair tax policy.

China’s Debt-to-GDP Ratio Just Climbed to a Record High – Bloomberg Business

From Ye Xie and Belinda Cao at Bloomberg:

While China’s economic expansion beat analysts’ forecasts in the second quarter, the country’s debt levels increased at an even faster pace.

Outstanding loans for companies and households stood at a record 207 percent of gross domestic product at the end of June, up from 125 percent in 2008, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Read more at China's Debt-to-GDP Ratio Just Climbed to a Record High – Bloomberg Business.

China’s stock market falling off a cliff: Why, and why care? | Alicia García-Herrero at Bruegel.org

Great insight from Alicia García-Herrero:

….The need for Chinese corporations and banks to avail themselves of fresh equity cannot be underestimated. On the one hand, corporate debt has grown sixfold from 2005 levels. On the other hand, Chinese banks are not only heavily exposed to these corporates, being still their main source of financing, but also to local governments whose huge borrowing from banks is starting to be restructured. To make a long story short, China’s governments needed a bull stock market to transfer part of the cost of cleaning up its corporates’ and banks’ balance sheets from the state to private investors, including foreigners. The PBoC danced to the Government’s tune, easing monetary policy since November last year. This was done through several interest rate cuts and by lowering the liquidity ratio requirements. The problem with all of this liquidity is that it only fueled additional leveraging, including for gambling on the stock market…..

The sudden collapse of the Chinese stock market had two triggers. First, the was a wave of profit taking after the Shanghai benchmark index broke through 5 000 in early June and doubts emerged about further easing from the PBoC. At that very same moment, China’s securities regulator announced measures to cool down the market, which amounted to banning brokerage firms from providing unregulated margin funding to investors. This was more of a shock to the system than one might imagine, as margin financing in China is much larger than in other stock markets.

Japan had zombie banks, looks like China could end up with a zombie stock market.

Read more at China's stock market falling off a cliff: Why, and why care? | Alicia García-Herrero at Bruegel.org.