China to Become the World's Largest Importer by 2014

Tweet

Helen H. Wang, Contributor Author, consultant and expert on China's middle class >

We have heard a lot about China becoming the world’s largest this and that. In 2009, when the world was in recession, China leapfrogged the U.S. to become the world’s largest auto market. In 2010, China overtook Germany as the world’s largest exporter. This year, China is likely to surpass Japan to become the world’s largest luxury goods market.

So, it shouldn’t be a surprise when The Economist predicts that China will become the world’s largest importer by 2014. Yet, many skeptics still doubt China’s potential to be a stronghold of the world economy.

Last month, I was on BBC World News to discuss the eurozone debt crisis and whether Chinese consumers can make a difference in the world economy.  My discussion partner Johathon Holslag from the Brussels Institute of Contemporary China Studies argued that Chinese consumption is still far below its production, and people should not be over optimistic about China rescuing the world economy. See the discussion video below:



Yes, official statistics show that consumption is only 34 percent of China’s GDP (compared to 70 percent in the U.S.). While the West’s economy is imbalanced with over-spending, the Chinese economy is imbalanced with under-consumption. However, this dynamic is changing. When I travel in China, I can clearly see the consumption boom in China’s large and small cities. Retail has been growing like a wildfire in recent years.



While it is not China’s role to save the world economy, it is in China’s best interest to balance its own economy toward domestic consumption. In so doing, China serves as a counter-balance of over-spending Western economies.  China may not want to bail out Italy or Greece, but China can provide opportunities for these troubled economies to get their own house in order.

As matter of fact, China has already helped. The Chinese middle class is creating enormous opportunities for Western companies selling into China. Europe’s exports to China have been growing steadily. Many Western brands are doing extremely well in China.

For example, Chinese consumers prefer to pay a premium price for furniture that is made in Italy. The UK-listed retailer Burberry has opened 60 stores in China and plans to have 100 stores in the near future. Western automakers, from Volkswagen to Bentley to General Motors, are enjoying huge success in China.

In the coming years, China’s economy may slow down a little, but will still grow at least at 7 or 8 percent. There are plenty of opportunities for Western companies to take advantage of China’s growing middle class. For companies that want to export to China, here are a few useful tips:

• Check out your local Chamber of Commerce or Export Assistance Center and familiarize yourselves with legal and regulatory issues in China. These facilities also have a lot of resources and services that can help you develop China market entry strategies and find the right business partners.
• Consider rebranding or repositioning your products in China. Remember, what works in your native country may not work in China. You really need to learn about Chinese culture, understand Chinese consumers, and adapt your products and services to the China market.
• For smaller brands, e-commerce is a great way to break into the China market without significant upfront cost. China’s ecommerce has been growing at 60 percent each year in recent years. More than 100 million Chinese shopped online last year. And China’s Internet users are expected to reach 750 million in 2015.

According to Credit Suisse, China will become the largest consumer market in the world by 2020. In the past, all the predictions about China have proved to be on the conservative side. With all its problems and potential crises, China somehow has managed to astonish the world again and again.

Newscribe : get free news in real time 

Can EU solve its own debt crisis?

Tweet

EU can solve its own crisis, no need for China to step in

By TEE LIN SAY linsay@thestar.com.my

SERI KEMBANGAN: China does not need to help in the eurozone debt crisis because Europe has enough money to solve the problem on its own, said Standard Chartered head of research (east global research) Nicholas Kwan.



“It is now politics that is getting in the way,” he said at a discussion on “Building Financial Hubs Rethinking the World of Money” at the 3rd World Chinese Economic Forum.

Kwan said people must not be misled to think that with China stepping in, the eurozone problem could be solved. Europe's economy is US$14 trillion (RM42 trillion), while China's US$3.26 trillion (RM9.78 trillion) in foreign reserves is only a quarter of that figure.

“To ask China to help would be to give China some limelight. Even if China were to help, they cannot expect China to help in a big way. If Germany is not interested to help, then why should China?”

Kwan said China had spent too much money investing, particularly in US treasuries, which were yielding a very low interest rate.

“I don't think China can cut down anytime soon in US treasuries, but they can do some passive diversification. Moving forward, they can reduce the proportion of new investments in the treasuries,” he said.

Kwan said that one good thing about the financial crisis was that every economy had a share in it. In the case of China, it had invested too much US dollars to a single huge borrower. “As everyone is affected, everybody has an interest for the world to recover,” he said.

IHS senior director and Asia-Pacific chief economist Rajiv Biswas said that growth for Europe in the medium term would be constrained at less than 2% but, at the same time, would not be negative.

Rajix expected moderately positive growth in the United States, with gross domestic product (GDP) expanding at an average of 2% over the next decade.

He said that much of China was moving in the middle-income group. “A large share of GDP to consumption will increase as a result of this. Moving forward, domestic consumption in China will become a lot more important,” he said.

Kwan added that previously, if growth in the United States and Europe were to stop, other economies would follow suit. However, this has now changed, especially in Asia and China, as the emerging economies are now able to create markets among themselves.



“While Asia would still be affected by the slowdown in the West, now they can offset some of the growth that is missing,” he said.

Tembusu Partners Pte Ltd chairman Andy Lim said the four sectors he liked in China were healthcare, resources, clean technology and education.

“When we invest in China, we never ask them to show us their books. We know it is of no use. What we first do is to spend time getting to know these entrepreneurs in the first 12 months. Secondly, we talk to their peers.

“Then thirdly and very importantly, we need to know what the entrepreneur's relationship with the local authorities are. This makes a huge difference to the bottomline. Finally, we look at their books,” said Lim.

Maybank Investment Bank Bhd director and head of dealing, equities, Lok Eng Hong said Malaysia recently made it as China's top 10 investment destinations. The top few destinations were Hong Kong, the United States, South Korea and Australia.

Chinese President Hu delivers speech at G20 Summit

Play Video

In French resort city of Cannes, Chinese President Hu Jintao has delivered a speech at the G20 Summit. He pointed out that some major economies are experiencing an economic slowdown, and some countries are facing acute sovereign debt problems. Hu called for greater attention and more concerted efforts to solve these problems.

In his speech, Hu Jintao pointed out that the world economy is facing instability and uncertainty and encountering growing risks and challenges. As the premier forum for international economic cooperation, the G20 must work to address the key problems, boost market confidence, defuse risks and meet challenges, and promote global economic growth and financial stability.

Hu also made five specific proposals. First, ensuring growth while paying attention to balance. He called on different countries to introduce new and strong measures to ensure that the fiscal and monetary policies are fully implemented and that funding is channeled into the real economy to boost production and employment.

Second, he urged pursuit of a win-win outcome through cooperation. Hu said world leaders should strengthen unity and send a strong signal of cooperation to the world so as to boost the confidence of the international community in global economic recovery and development.

Third, improve governance in the course of reform. Hu proposed that the world should advance the reform of the international monetary system in a steady manner and oppose trade and investment protectionism in order to build a fair, equitable and non-discriminatory international trading system.

Hu’s fourth proposal was to strive for progress through innovation. He urged innovative thinking, a system and mode for advancing economic and social development and to bring into full play the basic role of the market in resources allocation while avoiding blind pursuit of profit and malicious competition.

Finally, he called on promoting common prosperity through development. He said that as a developing country, China stands ready to promote mutual assistance with other developing countries and will work with them to advance durable peace and common prosperity.

To further help the least developed countries in their development endeavor, China will, in the context of South-South cooperation, give zero-tariff treatment to 97 percent of tariffed items exported to China from the least developed countries that have diplomatic ties with China.

This year marks the tenth anniversary of China’s accession to the WTO. In the past decade, China’s economy has made significant advances and its contributions to world economic growth. On the other hand, China is confronted with quite a few challenges in its efforts to maintain steady and fast growth. Hu said he was convinced that, through hard work and with the understanding and support of the international community, China’s economy has bright prospects. And continued steady and fast economic growth in China will serve the interest of global economic growth.

Hu calls for joint efforts to promote growth, financial stability
Chinese President Hu Jintao on Thursday urged the world's major economies to work together to promote growth and financial stability. "It is imperative that we stand on a higher plane, transcend differences on specific issues, move beyond short-term considerations, and jointly seek ways to overcome the crisis and sustain development," Hu told the Group of 20 (G20) summit here. <Full Story>

China makes more contributions to world economic growth: Hu
Chinese President Hu Jintao said Thursday that his country is making more contributions to world economic growth as its economy has made strides in the past decade. <Full story>

China pledges more help to other developing countries
Chinese President Hu Jintao said Thursday that his country will provide more help to other developing countries. <Full story>

Chinese President Hu's speech at G20 Summit in Cannes

China's Hu Says Europe Can Solve Crisis On Its Own


(RTTNews) - Chinese President Hu Jintao said on Thursday that Europe has the absolute "wisdom and ability" to solve its debt problems. 

After meeting French President Nicolas Sarkozy at Cannes ahead of the G20 meeting, he said that recent reform package agreed upon by EU leaders during last week's summit demonstrated Europe's determination and will to end the crisis.

According to a statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hu said that he expects the implementation of the reforms to solve all the difficulties currently facing the region, and help in its economic recovery.

by RTT Staff Writer

Related articles

• Eurozone seeks bailout funds from China Oct 29, 2011
• Q&A: Why China won't ride to Europe's rescue (cnn.com)
• China to Possibly Aid Europe and Invest in Financial Bailout (prweb.com)
• We can't cure Europe's malaise, says China (independent.co.uk) 

Towards a multi-polar international monetary system

Tweet

THINK ASIAN By ANDREW SHANG

IMF cannot create sufficient credit to help resolve growing financial crises 

MOST people think of the international monetary system as an architecturally designed system made in Bretton Woods at the end of the Second World War. This may be true for the international financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank, but the existing system is a messy legacy of rules, regulations and foreign exchange systems and institutions that facilitate trade and payments between countries.

Unlike a national monetary system, where there is one currency issued by the national central bank and national agencies responsible for financial stability, there is currently no global central bank, no global financial regulator and no global finance ministry. In short, we have global financial markets, but no global mechanism to deal with periodic crises, except through the (sporadic) consensus views of national policy-makers.

This was not a problem when the United States was the dominant power in the 1950s and 1960s. But this changed when the United States dropped the link to gold in 1971. From then on, the international monetary system was largely driven by decisions between the United States and Europe, which collectively owned the majority of the voting power in the IMF. Needless to say, the emerging markets had little say, since they were the major beneficiaries of aid and funding from the IMF and the World Bank.

In 1975, the Group of Six (G6) formally came into being, comprising the United States, UK, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, with Canada being added to form G7 the next year. Basically G7 leaders met regularly and decided most of the decisions for the international monetary system. The G7 accounted for roughly half of world GDP, but essentially ran the global financial system.

The grouping was only widened in 1997 when the heads of the United Nations, World Bank, IMF and WTO were invited to join the regular G7 meetings. In 1998, Russia was added to form G8, but with the outbreak of the Asian crisis, the need for more global representation let to the formation of G20 in 1999. The G20 collectively account for 80% of world GDP and two-thirds of the world population.



The reason why the international monetary system is not functioning smoothly is that decision-making lies in the hands of sovereign nations, not the global institutions. A unipolar system is alright as long as the dominant power is stable. This is not necessarily true in a multipolar system, because even obvious decisions cannot have consensus, because of different national interests.

If we keep on thinking about reforming the international monetary system in national terms, can we arrive at a more effective system in promoting global trade and payments and maintaining global financial stability?
For example, the debate over the role of the US dollar and the emergence of the renminbi is seen as threats to the status quo. This is understandable, but money and finance are not ends in themselves, but means to an end of global prosperity and stability.

The real question is what is the global financial system supposed to do, and what is the best way to achieve it?

In the immediate post-war period, there was a shortage of US dollars. Hence, the IMF was created to provide liquidity and foreign exchange reserves for the post-war reconstruction. The United States ran current account surpluses, held most of the world's gold reserves and everyone wanted dollars. Today, because of the Triffin Dilemma, the continuous US current account deficits gave rise to the Global Imbalance, thought to be the cause of the current crisis.

One theory goes something like this. East Asia went into crisis in the 1990s, built up large foreign exchange reserves and current account surpluses and these surplus savings reduced global interest rates and caused the advanced markets to lose monetary control. However, that is not the complete story. There is increasing awareness that the global shadow banking credit was pumping out leveraged liquidity that may have caused national monetary policies to lose effectiveness.

In other words, instead of shortage of global liquidity, we have too much liquidity sloshing around global financial markets, so much so that most central banks are debating how to prevent such liquidity creating asset bubbles, banking crises or over-appreciation of the exchange rate that haunted Japan and East Asia. You either deal with this through self-insurance, building up large exchange reserves, or you allow the IMF to become the provider of liquidity when you need it.

Most countries do not like IMF imposing stiff conditions and they discovered quickly that the IMF has no teeth when you are not a borrower.

This is the real dilemma of the current international monetary system. Do we seriously want a global institution to re-balance the global economy through carrots and sticks? If so, each nation would have to give up sovereign power to the IMF.

Currently, the IMF cannot fulfill the disciplinary role against the large shareholders nor can it create credit sufficiently to help resolve the growing financial crises. IMF resources are roughly US$400bil and it would have to be increased by a factor of five, before you have enough resources to deal with the European debt crisis. No single country nor group of countries can deal with such exponential growth of the global financial system, last measured as US$250 trillion in conventional financial assets and US$600 trillion in nominal value of derivatives.

In sum, there are structural issues on the global system to be thought through, before you consider the technical question whether surplus country currencies like the renminbi should be included into the SDR basket of currencies as the global reserve currency.

The reality is that no country will forever be in surplus, and sooner or later, deficit countries will have to borrow from the international pool of savings.

In the absence of a coherent global consensus on what to do, muddling through from crisis to crisis seems to be the likely way forward.

In short, don't expect the dollar dominated system to change a lot unless there is another systems crash.
● Andrew Sheng is president of the Fung Global Institute.

Euro fallout is bad news for world economy

Image via Wikipedia

Tweet

Global Trends By Martin Khor

The IMF-World Bank meetings last week confirmed the global economy has entered the ‘danger zone’ of a new downturn and possibly recession. This time it could be more serious and prolonged than the 2008-2009 recession. 

THE last two weeks have seen a clear downward shift in expectations on the global economy. The dominant view now is that the world has slipped into stagnation that may well become a recession.

Warnings that the economy had entered a “danger zone” generated the gloomy mood at the annual Washington gathering of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, as well as the G20 finance ministers’ meeting.

Prominent economists are predicting the new crisis will be more serious and prolonged than the 2008-09 recession.

If the United States and its sub-prime mortgage mess was the immediate cause of the last recession, the epicentre this time is the European debt crisis.

The eurozone’s GNP grew by only 0.2% in the second quarter, and the European Commission predicts the rates will be 0.2% and 0.1% in the third and fourth quarters.

As the domino effect of contagion hit one European country after another (rather like how Asian countries were affected in 1998-99), European leaders have scrambled for a solution.

But none has worked so far.

In the Greek debt tragedy, the government has had to announce one painful austerity measure after another, but its economic condition continues to worsen and the social protests and strikes indicate the approach of the political breaking point.



The costs of austerity are already being seen (by the public at least) to outweigh the benefits.

Several British newspapers last week reported a set of big measures to tackle the European crisis was reportedly being worked on by unnamed European officials.

The centrepiece is a Greek debt default with creditors repaid only 50%, and two measures to cushion that shock – an injection of fresh capital into European banks that would suffer big losses from the default, and the boosting of the European bailout fund from 400-plus billion euros to almost two trillion euros to enable hundreds of billions of euros in new credit to countries like Italy and Spain to prevent them from becoming new debt-crisis economies.

However, this leaked news of a big Plan B was not confirmed by any policy maker, so its status or even existence is unknown.

Instead, the news out of Washington last week was of continued paralysis in European policy.

Greece this week is facing a new crunch time – waiting to see if the European institutions and IMF will approve the next bailout instalment of US$8 billion to service loans that are coming due, and what would happen if they do not. Would it be time then to declare a default?

Meanwhile, the US has its own budget deficit tug-of-war between the President and Congress and between Republicans and Democrats.

What this means is that Europe and the US are not able to make use of the policies (massive increases in government spending, interest rate cuts and pumping of money into the economy) that pulled them quickly out from the last recession.

Moreover, the coordination of policy actions among developed countries (and several developing countries as well, that also undertook fiscal stimulus policies) that fought the last recession no longer seems to exist, at least for now.

Thus the new global slowdown or recession is likely to last longer than the short 2008-09 recession.

The developing countries should thus prepare to face serious problems that will soon land on them.

We can expect a sharp fall in their exports as demand declines in the major economies.

Commodity prices are expected to climb down; they have already started to do so.

There may be a reversal of capital flows, as foreign funds return to their countries of origin.

The currencies of several developing countries are already declining and it may be the start of sharper falls.

It’s beginning to look like 2008 all over again.

But this time the developing countries are starting this downturn in a weaker state than in 2008, since they have not yet fully recovered from the last shock.

And as the downturn proceeds, there will be fewer cushions to blunt the effects or to enable a rapid recovery.

It is also clear that there is an absence of a global economic governance system, in which the developing countries can also participate in.

All countries are affected when the global economy goes into a tail spin.

Once again, the developing countries are not responsible for the new downturn, but they will have to absorb the ill effects.

Yet there is no forum in which they can put forward their views on how to lessen the effects of the crisis on them and what the developed countries should do.

As the new crisis unfolds, there will be renewed calls for reforms to the international financial and economic system.

This time there should be a more serious reform process, otherwise more crises can only be expected in the future.

US loses AAA credit rating, why? Dollar sluggish, Trade in RMB!

Tweet

US loses AAA credit rating from Standard & Poor’s

 
The White House maintained silence in the immediate aftermath of S&P downgrade. — Photo by AFP

NEW YORK: The United States lost its top-notch AAA credit rating from Standard & Poor’s on Friday in an unprecedented reversal of fortune for the world’s largest economy.

S&P cut the long-term US credit rating by one notch to AA-plus on concerns about the government’s budget deficits and rising debt burden. The move is likely to raise borrowing costs eventually for the American government, companies and consumers.

“The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilise the government’s medium-term debt dynamics,” S&P said in a statement.

The decision follows a fierce political battle in Congress over cutting spending and raising taxes to reduce the government’s debt burden and allow its statutory borrowing limit to be raised.

On August 2, President Barack Obama signed legislation designed to reduce the fiscal deficit by $2.1 trillion over 10 years. But that was well short of the $4 trillion in savings S&P had called for as a good “down payment” on fixing America’s finances.

The White House maintained silence in the immediate aftermath of S&P downgrade.

The political gridlock in Washington and the failure to seriously address US long-term fiscal problems came against the backdrop of slowing US economic growth and led to the worst week in the US stock market in two years.

The S&P 500 stock index fell 10.8 per cent in the past 10 trading days on concerns that the US economy may head into another recession and because the European debt crisis has been growing worse as it spreads to Italy.

US Treasury bonds, once undisputedly seen as the safest security in the world, are now rated lower than bonds issued by countries such as Britain, Germany, France or Canada.

‘Daunting implications’

As the focus for investors shifted from the debate in Washington to the outlook for the global economy, even with the prospect of a downgrade, 30-year long bonds had their best week since December 2008 during the depth of the financial crisis.

Yields on 10-year notes, a benchmark for borrowing rates throughout the economy fell as far as 2.34 per cent on Friday — their lowest since October 2010 — also very low by historical standards.

“To some extent, I would expect when Tokyo opens on Sunday, that we will see an initial knee-jerk sell-off (in Treasuries) followed by a rally,” said Ian Lyngen, senior government bond strategist at CRT Capital Group in Stamford, Connecticut.

The outlook on the new US credit rating is “negative,” S&P said in a statement, a sign that another downgrade is possible in the next 12 to 18 months.

“The long-term implications are daunting. Short-term, Treasuries remain a premier safe-haven refuge,” said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank in Chicago.



Borrowing costs could rise

The impact of S&P’s move was tempered by a decision from Moody’s Investors Service earlier this week that confirmed, for now, the US Aaa rating. Fitch Ratings said it is still reviewing the rating and will issue its opinion by the end of the month.

“It’s not entirely unexpected. I believe it has already been partly priced into the dollar. We expect some further pressure on the US dollar, but a sharp sell-off is in our view unlikely,” said Vassili Serebriakov, currency strategist at Wells Fargo in New York.

“One of the reasons we don’t really think foreign investors will start selling US Treasuries aggressively is because there are still few alternatives to the US Treasury market in terms of depth and liquidity,” Serebriakov added.

S&P’s move is also likely to concern foreign creditors especially China, which holds more than $1 trillion of US debt. Beijing has repeatedly urged Washington to protect its US dollar investments by addressing its budget problem.

Obama administration officials grew increasingly frustrated with the rating agency through the debt limit debate and have accused S&P of changing the goal posts in its downgrade warnings, sources familiar with talks between the administration and the ratings firm have said.

The downgrade could add up to 0.7 of a percentage point to US Treasuries’ yields over time, increasing funding costs for public debt by some $100 billion, according to SIFMA, a US securities industry trade group.

S&P had placed the US credit rating on review for a possible downgrade on July 14 on concerns that Congress was not adequately addressing the government fiscal deficit of about $1.4 trillion this year, or about 9.0 per cent of gross domestic product, one of the highest since World War II.

The unprecedented downgrade of the nation’s AAA credit rating by a major ratings agency comes only 15 months before the next presidential election where the downgrade and the debt will be top issues for debate.

Bitter political battles remain over the ideologically fraught issues of spending cuts and tax reform.

The compromise reached by Republicans and Democrats this week calls for the creation of a bipartisan congressional committee to find $1.5 trillion of deficit cuts by late November, beyond the $917 billion already identified.

Why S&P downgrades US credit rating?

The credit rating agency Standard & Poor's on Friday cut the United States' credit rating to AA+ from AAA, citing three fundamental reasons for the downgrade, the first ever in US history.

Debt burden worry

According to S&P's judgment, the debt situation of the United States doesn't satisfy the requirement of an AAA rating.

S&P compared US debt with the other four countries with AAA ratings: Canada, France, Germany and Britain.

It estimated the five countries will have net general government debt to GDP ratios this year ranging from 34 percent of Canada to 80 percent of Britain, with the US debt burden at 74 percent.

S&P predicted the net public debt to GDP ratios will range between 30 percent of Canada and 83 percent of France, with the US debt burden at 79 percent.

Although the US ratio of net public debt to the GDP was not the highest among the five countries, the rating agency projected that the net public debt burden of the other four countries will begin to decline, either before or by 2015.

Fiscal plan "not enough"

On August 2, US President Barack Obama signed legislation designed to reduce the fiscal deficit by $2.1 trillion over 10 years.

However, according to S&P's calculations, a good "down payment" on fixing the country's finances would be at least $4 trillion.

"The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics," S&P said.

The rating agency believed the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicated that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlement, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process.

Lose faith on policy makers

S&P questioned US policy makers' eagerness to solve the debt problems by bipartisan efforts. Also, the rating agency blamed Democrats and Republicans for ignoring its earlier warnings.

On April 18, S&P assigned a negative outlook to US then-AAA rating, warning the debt ceiling should be raised to avoid a default. However, the action didn't draw much attention from policy makers who had decisive power to take quick measures.

The US debt would reach its ceiling of 14.3 trillion on August 2. If the debt ceiling was not raised, the United States would face an unprecedented default.

Through long, testy negotiations between the two parties in Congress, the plan was finally passed just before the August 2 deadline. However, patience and trust in US policy makers diminished as time went by.

"The effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned," S&P said.

Also, as the difficulties behind the debt problems still loom ahead, S&P worried that US policy makers could not react properly and effectively to the "government debt dynamics" any time soon, given their recent performance on dealing with the debt ceiling.

Related Reading

1. Chinese agency downgrades US credit rating


2. Chinese rating agency downgrades U.S. credit rating after debt limit increase


3. Chinese ratings agency Dagong puts U.S. on watch for downgrade

US loses AAA credit rating after S&P downgrade

One of the world's leading credit rating agencies, Standard & Poor's, has downgraded the United States' top-notch AAA rating for the first time ever. 

 

News of the downgrade ended a tumultuous week for US finances

 

S&P cut the long-term US rating by one notch to AA+ with a negative outlook, citing concerns about budget deficits.

The agency said the deficit reduction plan passed by the US Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

Correspondents say the  downgrade could erode investors' confidence in the world's largest economy.

It is already struggling with huge debts, unemployment of 9.1% and fears of a possible double-dip recession.

The downgrade is a major embarrassment for the administration of President Barack Obama and could raise the cost of US government borrowing.

This in turn could trickle down to higher interest rates for local governments and individuals.

Analysis - Robert Peston Business editor, BBC News

The US losing its AAA rating matters. It is a very loud statement that there has been an appreciable increase in the risk - which might still be tiny, but it exists - that the US might one day struggle to pay back all it owes. Another important certainty in the world of finance has gone.

Of course many will argue - and already have - that the record of ratings agencies such as Standard & Poor's of getting these things right in recent years has been lamentably poor.

Think of all the subprime CDO products rated AAA by S&P that turned out to be garbage.

But S&P, Moody's and Fitch (and particularly the first two) still have a privileged official position in the world of finance: they determine what collateral can be taken by central banks from commercial banks, when those central banks lend to commercial banks.

However, some analysts said with debt woes across much of the developed world, US debt remained an attractive option for investors.

The other two major credit rating agencies, Moody's and Fitch, said on Friday night they had no immediate plans to follow S&P in taking the US off their lists of risk-free borrowers.

'Flawed judgement'

Officials in Washington told US media that the agency's sums were deeply flawed.

Unnamed sources were quoted as saying that a treasury official had spotted a $2 trillion [£1.2 trillion] mistake in the agency's analysis.

"A judgment flawed by a $2tn error speaks for itself," a US treasury department spokesman said of the S&P analysis. He did not offer any immediate explanation.

John Chambers, chairman of S&P's sovereign ratings committee, told CNN that the US could have averted a downgrade if it had resolved its congressional stalemate earlier.

"The first thing it could have done is raise the debt ceiling in a timely matter so the debate would have been avoided to begin with," he said.

International reaction to the S&P move has been mixed.

China, the world's largest holder of US debt, had "every right now to demand the United States address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China's dollar assets," said a commentary in the official Xinhua news agency.

"International supervision over the issue of US dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country," the commentary said.

However, officials in Japan, South Korea and Australia have urged a calm response to the downgrade.

The S&P announcement comes after a week of turmoil on global stock markets, partly triggered by fears over the US economy's recovery and the eurozone crisis.

With a bill to raise the US debt ceiling finally passed, the US has managed to avoid the catastrophic effects of a debt default. Now the focus has moved to the underlying economy and whether GDP is about to stall.

S&P had threatened the downgrade if the US could not agree to cut its federal debt by at least $4tn over the next decade. 

Instead, the bill passed by Congress on Tuesday plans $2.1tn in savings over 10 years.

S&P said the Republicans and Democrats had only been able to agree "relatively modest savings", which fell "well short" of what had been envisaged.

The agency also noted that the legislation delegates the lion's share of savings to a bipartisan committee, which must report back to Congress in November on where the axe should fall.

The bill - which also raises the federal debt ceiling by up to $2.4tn, from $14.3tn, over a decade - was passed on Tuesday just hours before the expiry of a deadline to raise the US borrowing limit.

S&P ratings (selected)

• AAA: UK, France, Germany, Canada, Australia


• AA+: USA, Belgium, New Zealand


• AA-: Japan, China

Source: S&P

S&P said in its report issued late on Friday: "The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilise the government's medium-term debt dynamics.

"More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges."

The agency said it might lower the US long-term rating another notch to AA within the next two years if its deficit reduction measures were deemed inadequate.

S&P noted that the bill passed by Congress this week did not include new revenues - Republicans had staunchly opposed President Barack Obama's calls for tax rises to help pay off America's deficit.

The credit agency also noted that the legislation contained only minor policy changes to Medicare, an entitlement programme dear to Democrats.

"The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed," it added.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Moneychangers see sluggish trade in US dollar

By QISHIN TARIQ qishin.tariq@thestar.com.my
PETALING JAYA: Trade in the US dollar has been sluggish over the last week for moneychangers as customers “wait and see” which direction the currency will go.

“It has become a waiting game as people look for the best time to buy.

“Now, even trade in euros has slowed down,” said moneychanger Sahul Hamed, who operates the PJ Forex outlet at Bukit Bintang Plaza in Kuala Lumpur.

“With the current economic situation, customers are expecting the value to dip but are reluctant to buy when they feel it hasn't gone down by much.”

Anxious wait: The demand for US dollars could spike with a potential fall in the currency’s value following the downgrading of the US credit rating on Friday ->>

 

Moneychanger Jamil Akhbar Ali said there had been a dip in both sales and purchase of the US dollar despite the stable value of the currency over the last week.

“Most of our customers deal in Singapore and US dollars.

“While trade in the Singapore currency remains about the same, there are fewer people trading US dollars,” said the Petaling Jaya-based moneychanger.

Automotive engineer Meng Ng, 35, a Malaysian based in the United States for the last decade, said the exchange rate had not changed much since he last came to Malaysia four months ago.

“While the prices offered by moneychangers fluctuate slightly every day, on average the exchange rate has been pretty reasonable,” he said.

With the worsening US debt outlook and after US-based credit rating agency Standard & Poor's downgraded the US credit rating on Friday, speculation was rife that the US dollar would weaken considerably.

RAM Holdings Bhd group chief economist Dr Yeah Kim Leng said while the US currency would probably dip in the short term, he expected it to recover fairly quickly.

“When Japan's credit rating was downgraded from AAA status to AA+, its debt market was hardly affected with bond yields remaining relatively unchanged,” he said.

“The weakening US dollar would make imports from the country cheaper not only for large industries, but even for something as small as an online purchase.

“It's a double-edged sword though, as the US will lower its demand and import less when its economy is going through a soft patch.”

Trade in renminbi, says FMM

By YUEN MEIKENG  meikeng@thestar.com.my

 PETALING JAYA: Malaysia should consider trading in a different currency from the US dollar, such as the Chinese renminbi, to avoid being affected by the dollar's devaluation.

Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) president Tan Sri Mustafa Mansur said people had to accept the fact that China was poised to be the largest economy in the world.

“We also export a lot to China and our business with the country has grown substantially since the enforcement of the Asean-China Free Trade Agreement,” he said yesterday.

Mustafa said many countries, which traded using the US dollar, including Malaysia, would stand to lose out as its exports would have a lesser value following the currency's downgrading.

“Based on this situation, we might have to look into the possibility of trading in a different currency,” he said.

Mustafa said this when asked to comment on the United States losing its coveted top AAA credit rating and its impact in Malaysia.

It was reported that credit rating agency Standard & Poor's downgraded the nation's rating for the first time since the US won the top ranking in 1917.

Mustafa added that it was also better for Malaysia to trade in ringgit as this would distance the country from any risk of further downgrading of the US dollar.

He said other currencies, which could also replace the US dollar were dinar, dirham or the Japanese yen.

Related Stories:

Traders told to brace for US credit rating cut's impact
Nor Mohamed: European crisis won't hurt economy 

European choice: Greek bailout Mark II – it’s a default !

Tweet

WHAT ARE WE TO DO By TAN SRI LIN SEE-YAN

The European debt crisis has evolved rather quickly since my last column, “Greece is Bankrupt” (July 2). The European leadership was clearly in denial. The crisis has lurched from one “scare” to another. First, it was Greece, then Ireland, then Portugal; and then back to Greece. On each occasion, European politicians muddled through, dithering to buy time with half-baked solutions: more “kicking the can down the road.” By last week, predictably, the crisis came home to roost. Financial markets in desperation turned on Italy, the euro-zone's third largest economy, with the biggest sovereign debt market in Europe. It has 1.9 trillion euros of sovereign debt outstanding (120% of its GDP), three times as much as Greece, Ireland and Portugal combined.

Over the next two weeks the EU must come up with a second Greek bailout which could be as high as £107billion on top of the £98billion in rescue loans agreed for Greece in May 

The situation has become just too serious, if contagion was allowed to fully play out. It was a reality check; a time to act as it threatened both European integration and the global recovery. So, on July 21, an emergency summit of European leaders of the 17-nation euro-currency area agreed to a second Greek bailout (Mark II), comprising two key elements: (i) the debt exchange (holders of 135 billion euros in Greek debt maturing up to 2020 will voluntarily accept new bonds of up to 15 to 30 years); and (ii) new loans of 109 billion euros (through its bailout fund and the IMF). Overall, Greek debt would fall by 26 billion euros from its total outstanding of 350 billion euros. No big deal really.

Contagion: Italy and Spain

By mid-July, the Greek debt drama had become a full-blown euro-zone crisis. Policy makers' efforts to insulate other countries from a Greek default, notably Italy and Spain, have failed. Markets panicked because of disenchantment over sloppy European policy making. For the first time, I think, investors became aware of the chains of contagion and are only now beginning to really think about them.

The situation in Italy is serious. At US$262bil, total sovereign claims by international banks on Italy exceeded their combined sovereign exposures to Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain, which totalled US$226bil. European banks account for 90% of international banks' exposure to Italy and 84% of sovereign exposure, with French & German banks being the most exposed. Italy & Spain have together 6.3 trillion euros of public and private debt between them. Reflecting growing market unease, the yield on Italy's 10-year government bonds had risen to 5.6% on July 20, and Spain's, to 6%, against 2.76% on German comparable bunds, the widest spread ever in the euro era.

Italy and Spain face different challenges. Spain has a high budget deficit (9.2% of GDP in 2010, down from 11.1% in 2009) the target being to take it down to 6% in 2011 which assumes high implementation risks. Its debt to GDP ratio (at 64% in 2011) is lower than the average for the eurozone. The economy is only gradually recovering, led by exports. But Spain suffers from chronic unemployment (21%, with youth unemployment at 45%), weak productivity growth and a dysfunctional labour market.



It must also restructure its savings banks. Spain needs to continue with reforms; efforts to repair its economy are far from complete and risks remain considerable. Italy has a low budget deficit (4.6% of GDP) and hasn't had to prop-up its banks. But its economy has barely expanded in a decade, and its debt to GDP ratio of 119% in 2010 was second only to Greece. Italy suffers from sluggish growth, weak productivity and falling competitiveness. Its weaknesses reflect labour market rigidities and low efficiency. The main downside risk comes from turmoil in the eurozone periphery.

Another decade of stagnation also poses a major risk. But both Spain and Italy are not insolvent unlike Greece. The economies are not growing and need to be more competitive. The average maturity of their debt is a reasonable six to seven years. But the psychological damage already done to Europe's bond market cannot be readily undone.

The deal: Europeanisation of Greek debt 

The new bailout deal soughts to ring-fence Greece by declaring “Greece is in a uniquely grave situation in the eurozone. This is the reason why it requires an exceptional solution,” implying it's not to be repeated. Most don't believe it. But to its credit, the new deal cuts new ground in addition to bringing-in much needed extra cash - 109 billion euros, plus a contribution by private bondholders of up to 50 billion euros by mid-2014. For the first time, the new framework included solvent counterparties and adequate collateral. For investors, there is nothing like having Europe as the new counterparty instead of Greece. This europeanisation of the Greek debt lends some credibility to the programme. Other new features include: (i) reduction in interest rates to about 3.5% (4.5% to 5.8% now) and extension of maturities to 15 years (from 7 years), to be also offered to Ireland and Portugal; (ii) the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), its rescue vehicle, will be allowed to buy bonds in the secondary market, extend precautionary credit lines before States are shut-out of credit markets, and lend to help recapitalise banks; and (iii) buy collateral for use in the bond exchange, where investors are given four options to accept new bonds carrying differing risk profiles, worth less than their original holdings.

The IIF (Institute of International Finance), the industry trade group that negotiated for the banks, insurance funds and other investors, had estimated that one-half of the 135 billion euros to be exchanged will be for new bonds at 20% discount, giving a savings of 13.5 billion euros off the Greek debt load. Of the 109 billion euros from the new bailout (together with the IMF), 35 billion euros will be used to buy collateral to serve as insurance against the new bonds in exchange, while 20 billion euros will go to buy Greek debt at a discount in the secondary market and then retiring it, giving another savings of 12.6 billion euros on the Greek debt stock.

Impact of default

Once again, the evolving crisis was a step ahead of the politicians. There are fears that Italy and Spain could trip into double-dip recession as global growth falters, threatening the debt dynamics of both countries. This time the IMF weighed in with serious talk of contagion with widespread knock-on effects worldwide. Fear finally struck, forcing Germany and France to act, this time more seriously. The first reaction came from the credit rating agencies. Moody's downgraded Greece's rating three notches deeper into junk territory: to Ca, its second-lowest (from Caa1), short of a straight default. Similarly, Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor's have cut Greece's rating to CCC.

They have since downgraded it further. They are all expected to state Greece is in default when it begins to exchange its bonds in August for new, long-dated debt (up to 30 years) at a loss to investors (estimated at 21% of their bond holdings). The rating agencies would likely consider this debt exchange a “credit event”, but only for a limited period, I think. Greece's financial outlook thereafter will depend on whether the country would likely recover or default again. History is unkind: sovereigns that default often falters again.

What is also clear now is the new bailout would not do much to reduce Greece's huge stock of sovereign debt. At best, the fall in its debt stock will represent 12% of Greece's GDP. Over the medium term, Greece continues to face solvency challenges. Its stock of debt will still be well in excess of 130% of GDP and will face significant implementation risks to financial and economic reform. No doubt the latest bailout benefitted the entire eurozone by containing near-term contagion risks, which otherwise would engulf Europe. It did manage to provide for the time being, some confidence to investors in Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy that it's not going to be a downward spiral. But the latest wave of post-bailout warnings have reignited concerns of contagion risks and revived investor caution.

Still, the bailout doesn't address the very core fiscal problems across the eurozone. This is not a comprehensive solution. It shifted additional risks towards contributing members with stronger finances and their taxpayers as well as private investors, and reduces incentives for governments to keep their fiscal affairs under strict check. This worries the Germans as it weakens the foundation of currency union based on fiscal self-discipline. Moreover, the EFSF now given more authority to intervene pre-emptively before a state gets bankrupt, didn't get more funds.

German backlash appears to be also growing. While the market appears to be moving beyond solvency to looking at potential threat to the eurozone as a whole, the elements needed to fight systemic failure are not present. At best, the deal reflected a courageous effort but fell short of addressing underlying issues, leading to fears that Greece-like crisis situations could still flare-up, spreading this time deep into the eurozone's core.

Growing pains

The excitement of the bailout blanked out an even bigger challenge that could further destabilise the eurozone sluggish growth. The July Markit Purchasing Managers Index came in at 50.8, the lowest since August 2009 and close enough to the 50 mark that divides expansion from contraction. And, way below the consensus forecast. Both manufacturing and services slackened. Germany and France expanded at the slowest pace in two years in the face of a eurozone that's displaying signs it is already contracting. Looking ahead, earlier expectations of a 2H'11 pick-up now remains doubtful.Lower GDP growth will require fiscal stimulus to fix, at a time of growing fiscal consolidation which threatens a downward spiral. At this time, the eurozone needs policies to restart growth, especially around the periphery. Without growth, economic reform and budget restraints only exacerbate political backlash and social tensions. This makes it near impossible to restore debt sustainability. Germany may have to delay its austerity programme without becoming a fiscal drag. This trade-off between growth and austerity is real.

IMF studies show that cutting a country's budget deficit by 3% points of GDP would reduce real output growth by two percentage points and raise the unemployment rate by one percentage point. History suggests growth and austerity just do not mix. In practical terms, it is harder for politicians to stimulate growth than cut debt.

Reform takes time to yield results. And, markets are fickle. In the event the market switches focus from high-debt to low-growth economies, a crisis can easily evolve to enter a new phase one that could help businesses invest and employ rather than a pre-mature swing of the fiscal axe. Timing is critical. It now appears timely for the United States and Europe to shift priorities. They can't just wait forever to rein in their debts. Sure, they need credible plans over the medium term for deficit reduction. More austerity now won't get growth going. The surest way to build confidence is to get recovery onto a sustainable path only growth can do that. Without it, the risk of a double-dip recession increases. Latest warnings from the financial markets in Europe and Wall Street send the same message: get your acts together and grow. This needs statesmanship. The status quo is just not good enough anymore.

Former banker Dr Lin is a Harvard educated economist and a British chartered scientist who now spends time writing, teaching and promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome; email: starbizweek@thestar.com.my.

Stupid central banker tricks

Tweet

By Paul R. La Monica

The euro has rallied against the dollar despite worries about Greece as investors bet on ECB rate hikes. Click chart for more on currencies.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Greek debt crisis? What Greek debt crisis?

The European Central Bank is meeting this Thursday and is widely expected to raise interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point to 1.5%. That would be the second rate hike by the ECB this year.

Sure, the austerity vote in Greece is good news since it could mean the worst-case scenario fears about a euro meltdown may not be realized.

But this isn't the end to the difficulties in Greece. Doesn't it seem just a bit odd that the ECB is contemplating more tightening at a time when there are still legitimate worries about the problems spreading to Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain? Moody's downgraded Portugal's debt to junk status on Tuesday.

The sovereign debt woes could be disastrous news for banks in France and Germany -- the two big euro zone nations that actually have somewhat healthy economies.

But the ECB, unlike the Federal Reserve in the U.S., only has one mandate: inflation. (The Fed is charged with watching prices as well as employment.)

And even though commodity prices have come back from their peaks earlier this year, they are still somewhat alarmingly high. Crude oil, for example, has crept back above $95 a barrel. So that may be all that ECB president Jean-Claude Trichet needs to justify bumping rates up a bit.

Still, will the move backfire?

Another ECB rate hike would further widen the gap between interest rates in the euro zone and here in the United States. (They've been near zero since December 2008.) The general rule of thumb in the land of paper money is that the higher the interest rates are, the stronger the currency.

Europe cited as scariest risk to economy

But that's a problem from an inflation standpoint. With oil and many other commodities denominated in dollars, the weaker the greenback gets, the more likely it is for commodity prices to go higher.

"An ECB rate hike means a higher euro going forward," said Brian Gendreau, market strategist with Financial Network Investment Corp., a Segunda, Calif.-based advisory firm.

"It seems paradoxical that Europe, with its very serious problems, has a currency that's strong and rising but that's a reality. That means the trading bias is in favor of a lower dollar and higher oil prices," Gendreau added.

It makes you wonder if David Letterman needs to expand his stupid tricks franchise and create one specifically for central bankers.

Other currency experts wondered if the ECB should just leave well enough alone since crude prices have pulled back in the past few months after surging due to Arab Spring-inspired supply disruption fears.



"I don't think the ECB would be doing the right thing with a rate hike. Oil prices are high but inflation pressures have abated quite a bit," said Kathy Lien, director of currency research for foreign exchange brokerage GFT in Jersey City.

Lien said the ECB needs to pay more attention to slow growth in Europe -- even if it's not officially one of that central bank's particular mandates.

"Price stability is the top priority but the more important question is should the ECB be doing this during a fragile point of negotiations with Greece?" she said. "Raising rates makes financing more difficult for people in Europe."

What makes matters more vexing is the fact that it's not as if the ECB won't have other opportunities to raise rates soon if inflation does in fact pick up.

The ECB will meet again on August 4 and has another meeting scheduled for September 8. Wouldn't it be more judicious to wait for at least another month or two to see how the situation in Greece plays out before rushing to raise rates again?



"I am a little puzzled by why the ECB seems so intent on raising interest rates right now. It's not going to ease any of the problems in the peripheral euro countries," Gendreau said.

Still, some think that the ECB rate hike may be a non-event. That's because the euro has already rallied against the dollar this year despite all the negative headlines about Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc.

"The speculation about a rate hike has been in the cards for a couple of months," said Ian Naismith, co-manager of The Currency Strategies Fund (FOREX), a Sarasota-Fla. Based mutual fund specializing in foreign exchange investments.

Naismith pointed out that just because the ECB is likely to raise rates on Thursday does not mean that this is the beginning of a long cycle of rate hikes. The key is going to be whether Trichet signals that he's still worried about inflation and that more rate increases are on the way.

"Nothing is etched in stone," Naismith said.

Let's hope so. The ECB does seem strangely hell bent on rate hikes even though Europe is still in the midst of major financial upheaval.

But the last thing Greece, other troubled European nations and the rest of the world for that matter, need is for the ECB to make matters worse with ill-timed policy decisions.

Newscribe : get free news in real time
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica. Other than Time Warner, the parent of CNNMoney, and Abbott Laboratories, La Monica does not own positions in any individual stocks.