Monthly Archives: June 2010

April 2010 Case-Shiller Home Price Index Boosted by Homebuyer Tax Credit

The April 2010 S&P/Case Shiller Home Price Index of 20 cities rose 3.8 percent, slightly above expectations of a gain of 3.4 percent. The gain in the non seasonally adjusted index was the first since September 2009.  However, it captures the last month of the federal homebuyer tax credit.

Seasonally adjusted, the month-over-month gain follows a drop in February and March.  Eighteen cities posted month-to-month increases in April, but price levels remain close to April 2009 lows. Miami and New York were the only two cities to post monthly drops, dropping 0.8 percent and 0.3 percent, respectively. New York posted a new relative index low. San Diego has now shown 12 consecutive months of positive returns. It is the only market that did not contract in the late winter months.

On a year-over-year basis, of the 20 cities surveyed, 11 had gains, led by San Francisco and San Diego. Las Vegas again led the declines, followed by Detroit. Phoenix saw a year-over-year gain of 5.4 percent, while Miami fell by .5 percent.

With the expiration of the homebuyer tax credit and no further government stimulus on the horizon, the housing industry will be left to its own natural supply/demand dynamic.  How the housing market reacts will have much to say about the overall economic conditions, including consumer spending and even the status of banks, which have likely priced in a housing recovery in the mortgage-backed securities still on their books.

For more on the Home Price Index, please click on the “Housing Statistics” page either on the menu bar on in the list in the left-side column.

Fed Member Concerned Over Further Expansion of Fed Balance Sheet

As fears that the economic recovery is faltering grow, there has been a call for Federal Reserve Board to use its own balance sheet to buy government bonds or mortgage debt to add liquidity to the markets (with the target federal funds rate already at zero, essentially, the Fed cannot lower rates so it must find other means of helping the economy—which is a big problem in and of itself).  Kevin Warsh, a member of the Federal Reserve Board, recently voiced concern about the central bank’s willingness to do so.

The idea has been considered as fear continues that the economic recovery will falter. “Any judgment to expand the balance sheet further should be subject to strict scrutiny,” Warsh said, as he outlined four lessons learned from the financial crisis. “I would want to be convinced that the incremental macroeconomic benefits outweighed the costs.”

At some point the butcher’s bill must be paid for the economic excesses of the 1980s and 1990s.  What we are finding is that the more we kick the can down the road with extremely low interest rates, quantitative easing, bailouts and government incentives to spend (like the “cash-for-clunkers” program and the two homebuyer tax credits), the worse the next crisis is.  Markets simply need to return to real long-term growth trend lines, and that means letting the current imbalances rebalance.  The problem, of course, is that we will all suffer to make that happen.  Delveraging of debt will cause some parts of the world to reenter recession, while others experience extremely low growth rates, below that necessary to create enough jobs as the population grows.  However, some pain in the short-term will make the long-term picture much brighter.  Once households, corporations and governments have reduced debt and saved more, they will all be in a position to spend more responsibly.  This is exactly what happened in the decades following the Great Depression.  Our current path of delaying pain only lays the groundwork for more intense crises in the future with no clear end to the mess.

G-20 Eases Timing of Tougher Banking Rules

World leaders, meeting at the Group of 20 nations (G-20) Summit in Toronto, agreed to give financial institutions more time than previously planned to adhere to tougher capital and liquidity rules. Mario Draghi, Chairman of the Financial Stability Board, said postponing deadlines for the rules is better than diluting them. “We’ll make sure that this new regulation and the pace of implementation is not going to cause either market disruption or hamper the recovery in any way,” Draghi said.

The G-20 also agreed during the weekend to reduce their deficits and take action to make their banking systems safer and more stable, but they likely will take different paths to reach those goals. The countries will strive to cut their deficits by at least half by 2013, according to a statement released by the G-20. The group also said banks will need to significantly raise their capital. “Honestly, this is more than I expected, because it is quite specific,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel said. “It’s a success that industrialised countries as a group accepted this.”

So much for the coordinated global effort to dig out from the deep recession spurred by the financial crisis of 2008.  Now, we will have to see what further imbalances may emerge as a result of the differing efforts of countries on the economic recovery.

For a .pdf of the full release from the G-20 Summit, please click the following link: G-20 Toronto Summit Declaration.

House-Senate Conference Committee Approves Financial Regulatory Reform Bill

A marathon negotiation session on Capitol Hill delivered a clearer picture of the financial-regulatory reform likely to emerge from Congress, with the conference committee approving the bill. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., accepted a compromise put forth by Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., that would allow banks to continue trading foreign exchange and interest-rate swaps, as well as instruments deemed as “hedging for the bank’s own risk.” The compromise would still force banks to spin off their trading of other derivatives. Democrats also came to an agreement on a modified version of the “Volcker rule” that would allow banks to invest 3% of their tangible equity in hedge funds and private-equity funds. The legislation will move to the full House and Senate for a vote.

Here are links to stories and key information on the bill:

Summary and Full Text of the Conference Bill [Latest Issue: 06-29-10]

New York Times

Reuters

Wall Street Journal

The Atlantic

U.S. Chamber of Commerce

House Financial Services Committee

Senate Banking Committee

SIFMA’s Summary of the Conference Agreements

Politicians Exacerbate Market Uncertainty

Whether it is the government debt crisis in Europe, proposed taxes on financial institutions or financial regulatory reform, politicians now have more effect, which has been generally negative, on equity markets than earnings and employment.  Markets have been running around in circles lately in large part due to the fact that politicians around the world do not seem to know what they are doing, but they act anyway.  The economic uncertainty brought on by the buffoonery of politicians is what markets fear most.  A study recently published at Voxeu.com highlights, using the European sovereign debt crisis, how politicians can turn a crisis into a panic.

Jacopo Carmassi, Researcher at Assonime and Fellow of the Wharton Financial Institutions Center, and Stefan Micossi, Director General of Assonime, have authored a study that tracks policy announcements from the start of the Eurozone crisis in December 2009, arguing that governments may have contributed to turmoil with their public display of confusion—ultimately undermining credibility.  While acknowledging the seriousness of the sovereign debt crisis in the European Union, the authors assert that politicians statements and self-serving interests added fuel to the fire, causing financial markets to dramatically increase the cost of insuring debt of nations like Greece.  That, in turn, nearly shut off credit to banks and businesses in Europe as the cost of overnight lending spiked.  Carmassi and Micossi note that the political bickering created “the impression that domestic political interests would take precedence over orderly management of the Greek debt crisis,”  and the political leaders “raised broader doubts on their ability to address fundamental economic divergences within the area, which are the real source of debt sustainability problems in the medium term.”

The authors point out that, once European leaders began to act in concert, first by establishing a $1 trillion bailout fund for sovereign debt, and most recently, by voting to disclose the results of European bank stress tests in July, market pressures eased.  “If Eurozone governments continue to show unity of purpose, and that they seriously intend to address underlying imbalances threatening the sustainability of the euro, there is hope that financial markets will relent and accept that the Eurozone is not about to crumble,” the authors conclude.

To read the full study, please click on the following link to Voxeu.org: How politicans excited financial markets’ attack on the Eurozone.