US Financial Crisis: It Ain’t Over Until The Fat Lady Sings!

``For speculative and especially for Ponzi finance units a rise in interest rates can transform a positive net worth into a negative net worth. If solvency matters for the continued normal functioning of an economy, then large increases and wild swings in interest rates will affect the behavior of an economy with large proportions of speculative and Ponzi finance.” Hyman Minsky, Inflation Recession and Economic Policy

Price signals have a powerful psychological impact. The recent upsurge in global stock markets has been heralded by many as an end to the crisis.

We beg to differ.

In contrast, we think that this is a lull before the storm for the US.

Further, we think that this appears to be seminal phase to an even more severe crisis in the future; one that will deal with a possibility of combined bubbles of private and public sector debt in the face of outsized inflation!

Figure 4: IMF: Global Financial Stability Report (2007)

As you can see in Figure 4, for most of 2009 the reset schedule for subprime mortgages have indeed been at a diminishing pace. Hence, the seeming moratorium in the market turmoil as these subprime resets ease.

However, renewed pressures on foreclosures will likely be felt or experienced later this year as Option adjustable rate and Alt-A mortgage resets mount and is expected to accelerate and culminate by 2011!

Burning Platform’s James Quinn gives us the details (bold highlights mine), ``There are over 4 million homes for sale in the U.S. today. This is about one year’s worth of inventory at current sales levels. You can be sure that another one million people would love to sell their homes, but haven’t put their homes on the market. The shills touting their investments on CNBC every day fail to mention the approaching tsunami of Alt-A mortgage resets that will get under way in 2010 and not peak until 2013. These Alt-A mortgages are already defaulting at a 20% rate today. There are $2.4 trillion Alt-A loans outstanding. Alt-A mortgages are characterized by borrowers with less than full documentation, lower credit scores, higher loan-to-values, and more investment properties.

``There are more than 2 million Alt-A loans in the U.S. 28 percent of these loans are held by investors who don’t live in the properties they own. That includes interest-only home loans and pay-option adjustable rate mortgages. Option ARMs allow borrowers to pay less than they owe, with the rest added to the principal of the loan. When the debt exceeds a pre-set amount, or after a pre- determined time period has passed, the loan requires a bigger monthly payment.”

And yes, the US economic system will be envisaged with more bouts of deflation….

McKinsey Quarterly estimates that some $2 trillion worth of losses has yet to be recognized.

About half of these losses will be accounted for the US financial system, see Figure 5.

Figure 5: McKinsey Quarterly: $3.12 trillion of losses from 2007-2010

Let me quote the McKinsey Quarterly in What’s Next For US Banks (bold emphasis mine),

``While 2008 was the year for taking losses on broker–dealers, this year and next will be the years for taking losses on assets subject to hold-to-maturity accounting. These are the losses that show up in stress tests, in which regulators make assumptions about how the economy will perform and calculate the resulting loan losses under various economic outcomes. For example, credit card losses are highly correlated with unemployment. By projecting unemployment rising to a certain level, stress testing can then project the attendant credit losses.

``McKinsey research estimates that total credit losses on US-originated debt from mid-2007 through the end of 2010 will probably be in the range of $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion, given the severity of the current recession (Exhibit 2). Some $1 trillion of these losses has already been realized. Since US banks hold about half of US-originated debt, the US banking and securities industry will incur about $750 billion to $1 trillion of the remaining $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion of projected losses on this debt, which includes residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, credit card losses, and high-yield/leveraged debt. These numbers are in the same range as those of the US government, which calculated a $600 billion high-end estimate of credit losses for the 19 largest institutions.”

So despite the declaration by Mr. Ben Bernanke in the US Congress last week that, ``The Federal Reserve will not monetise the debt” and even warned of the burgeoining deficits (Financial Times), we believe that Mr. Bernanke isn’t being forthright.

He wasn’t even trying to be funny.

The fact that the US Federal Reserve earmarked $1.25 trillion to acquire $750 billion of agency mortgage backed securities and $300 billion in longer term treasury securities belies Mr. Bernanke’s statement.

Moreover, the Wall Street Journal reports that the ``Fed has purchased $156.5 billion of government bonds” and ``has bought $555.9 billion of mortgage securities.” (see figure 6)

In short, the Mr. Bernanke hasn’t only been talking, he has been nearly exhausting its allocation for Quantitative Easing (QE) or effectively monetizing debt!

Figure 6: WSJ: Fed to Keep Lid on Bond Buys

So we can’t easily buy into cacophonous signals shown by the Fed that they are having second thoughts on buying more of the above government securities. As the WSJ reports, ``Fed officials have become more confident recently that they have stabilized the economy and set the stage for recovery. But divisions are brewing within the Fed over whether it should do more to speed the healing, pause, or start pulling back to avoid an outbreak of inflation.”

Just wait until the pressures from Alt-A and Option adjustable resets, combined with strains from the commercial mortgages, credit cards and auto and leveraged loans escalates, then all these appearances of jawboning against inflation will be moot.

This means that more episodes of systemic deflation should translate to even more inflation from the US government via Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve and Tim Geithner’s US Treasury!

Global Inflation Transmission From Quantitative Easing

I might like to also add that perhaps the US dollar reserves recently harvested by the BRICs, as earlier noted, could have been proceeds from US Federal Reserves purchases of Long term Treasuries and Agency backed mortgages than from export revenues or portfolio inflows, both of which while exhibiting some signs of improvements are less likely to have contributed to such material reserve accumulation.

Foreigners own a substantial segment of US treasuries as much as it owns mortgage debt backed by the Agencies. As of 2007, according to Yale Global’s Ashok Bardhan and Dwight Jaffee, ``Foreign ownership of US Agency securities, bonds and mortgage-backed securities (MBS) issued or backed by agencies such as Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac totaled just under $1.5 trillion. While the absolute amounts may be large, it’s the share held by foreign investors of total US securities outstanding that conveys the significance of these global financial flows.”

So even while foreigners have been selling agency debt prior to the Fed QE program, the recent activities could have opened the window for more accelerated liquidations on the part of Emerging Market central banks on their portfolio holdings of US mortgage securities backed by Federal Agencies.

And part of these proceeds could have been recycled into short term US T-bills.

AND as the Federal Reserve prints money to buy US securities held by foreigners, this could, effectively, serve as transmission channels for many of the global monetary inflation taking place, aside from, of course, the collective national fiscal spending being undertaken worldwide.

So it matters less that the current account balances have been improving due to reduced consumption and rising savings, since the inflationary mechanism appears to be retransmitted via the financial claims channel into the world.

And perhaps part of the outperformance by emerging markets could have been driven by such inflationary leakages.

And more of this could be in play see figure 7.

Figure 7: Casey Room: Rapidly Expanding Government Debt

And perhaps too, Mssrs. Bernanke and Geithner could be tacitly rooting for Emerging markets and Asia to miraculously pull the US out of the doldrums which implies even more QE!

Conclusion

The main issue is if US government liability issuances to fund the US deficit spending programs would eclipse the ability by the world or by US savers to finance these. Then the US will either be faced with massively inflating or defaulting.

Don’t forget that aside from rescue packages and the prospective entitlement (Social Security, and Medicare) strains, President Obama has ambitious health, environment, infrastructure, education and energy programs that could equally pose as additional pressures to US taxpayers.

Hence the recent overtures by BRICs to fund the IMF (WSJ) instead of recycling spare reserves into the US could be another proverbial “writing on the wall”.

Lastly, it isn’t total borrowing that should be THE concern, as some observers opine as necessary.

The last boom saw household and financial sector borrowing explode, which brought the world economy to the brink of a collapse through its unraveling.

This was in spite of US Federal debt not being in play.

The crux of the issue is if the present debt load incurred by either the private sector or by government or both can be paid for by the economy operating under a new environment characterized by higher tax rates, vastly increased regulations, lesser degree of a free markets and a hefty politicization of the economy.

As Hyman Minsky wrote in Finance and Profits: The Changing Nature of American Business Cycles, 1980 ``Three financial postures for firms, households, and government units can be differentiated by the relation between the contractual payment commitments due to their liabilities and their primary cash flows. These financial postures are hedge, speculative, and ‘Ponzi.’ The stability of an economy’s financial structure depends upon the mix of financial postures. For any given regime of financial institutions and government interventions the greater the weight of hedge financing in the economy the greater the stability of the economy whereas an increasing weight of speculative and Ponzi financing indicates an increasing susceptibility of the economy to financial instability.” (bold highlight mine)

Hence if the deficit spending programs equates to another form of “Ponzi financing” then financial instability is to be expected in the fullness of time.

So it ain’t over until the fat lady sings!