January 2025 2.9% CPI: Food Security Emergency and the Vicious Cycle of Interventionism

  

The advocates of public control cannot do without inflation. They need it in order to finance their policy of reckless spending and of lavishly subsidizing and bribing the voters—Ludwig von Mises 

In this issue

January 2025 2.9% CPI: Food Security Emergency and the Vicious Cycle of Interventionism

I. Introduction

II. January 2025 2.9% CPI: Key Highlights

III. The Government’s Convenient Attribution Bias: The Typhoon Fallacy

IV. Baseline Changes: Engineering GDP Growth

V. The Falling Rice Prices: Why the Food Emergency Security?

VI. The Rice Ceiling Trap: A Self-Inflicted Supply Crisis and the Vicious Cycle of Interventionism

VII. Treasury Markets Are Already Telegraphing Inflation Risk

VIII. The Contradiction: Why a Food Security Emergency Amid Falling Prices?

IX. 2024 Fiscal Snapshot: Rising Debt, the Trade-Off for 5.6% GDP

X. Mounting Risks of Philippine Peso Devaluation and Inflation Risks 

January 2025 2.9% CPI: Food Security Emergency and the Vicious Cycle of Interventionism

I. Introduction 

·         January’s CPI provided a temporary breather against the looming risk of an inflation rebound.

·         Despite falling rice prices, authorities pushed forward with a Food Security Emergency—one in a series of interventions aimed at suppressing CPI in the short term.

·         Meanwhile, rising domestic and external debt, coupled with declining foreign reserves (GIR), amplify risks of peso devaluation and feeding the inflation cycle.

II. January 2025 2.9% CPI: Key Highlights 

Businessworld, February 6, 2025: HEADLINE INFLATION remained steady in January as lower utility costs offset a spike in food prices, preliminary data from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) showed. It also settled within the 2.5%-3.3% forecast from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). The January print was also slightly higher than the 2.8% median estimate in a BusinessWorld poll of 16 analysts... Core inflation, which discounts volatile prices of food and fuel, settled at 2.6% during the month — slower than 2.8% in December and 3.8% a year ago…On the other hand, rice inflation contracted to 2.3% in January from the 0.8% clip in December and 22.6% jump a year prior. (bold added) 

Nota Bene: As of January, the BSP has yet to release data on bank lending, liquidity conditions, and its central bank survey. This leaves us with the January CPI—interpreted through the lens of what the government intends to highlight: supply-driven inflation!

Figure 1 

Momentum: January’s data suggests stalling momentum in the year-over-year (YoY) change for both headline and core CPI. 

However, a trend analysis of the month-over-month (MoM) change reveals that while headline CPI remains above the upper boundary of its trend line, core CPI remains rangebound, albeit slightly lower than recent highs. (Figure 1, topmost image)

Bottoming Phase? These MoM rates suggest a bottoming phase. It remains uncertain whether this will remain rangebound or break to the upside, requiring further confirmation.

Uptrend of the Third Wave of the Inflation Cycle Intact. Nonetheless, the broader uptrend in the 10-year headline and core CPI remains intact. In fact, MoM trends reinforce the case for a bottoming—a potential launching pad.

It's important to remember that this CPI backdrop occurs amidst the BSP's pursuit of easy money policies since the second half of 2024. This is coupled with a series of all-time highs in bank credit expansion and a near-record unemployment rate in December 2024. (Figure 1, middle and lowest charts)

Figure 2

Level vs. Rate of Change. It is a misimpression to state that January's CPI is at the same level as December's. While the rate of change may be the same, the level is definitively not.

The Philippine Statistics Authority's (PSA) nominal prices determine the level, whereas the CPI figures represent the base-effect represented in percentages. (Figure 2, topmost graph)

The nominal rates also reveal the cumulative effects of the CPI. Even if growth rates stall or decrease (slow), the continued increase in general prices persists.

This leads to sustained hardship, especially for those living on the margins.

III. The Government’s Convenient Attribution Bias: The Typhoon Fallacy

Authorities often employ self-serving attribution bias—crediting successes to internal factors while attributing failures to external ones—to explain economic phenomena. For instance, they attribute recent food price increases to 'typhoons/weather disturbances' or diseases like African Swine Fever.

The Philippines experiences an average of 20 typhoons annually. If the establishment's logic were consistently true, food prices should be perpetually elevated.

A review of the 10 worst typhoons to hit the country—events that, according to the establishment narrative, should have triggered inflation surges—shows little correlation with CPI spikes. In fact, food CPI exhibited a downtrend in seven of the nine years when these devastating typhoons occurred (the other two took place in 2020). (Figure 2, middle pane)

But, of course, the vulnerable public is expected to accept the official narrative without question—because the echo chamber insists on it!

IV. Baseline Changes: Engineering GDP Growth

Policymakers are always seeking ways to justify their free-lunch economic policies. 

Now, they are signaling a change in the baseline rates of the most sensitive data—particularly the CPI and the GDP—starting in 2026.

Inquirer.net, February 6, 2025: The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) will change again the base year used to calculate inflation and gross domestic product (GDP) so that key data could better capture the latest economic conditions.

This adjustment, while technical in nature, conveniently offers a tool for reshaping inflation narratives, making future price pressures appear more benign.

Well, if history serves as a guide, "could better capture the latest economic conditions" often implies adjusting baseline rates to lower the CPI. Comparing the CPI with an overlap of the 2006 and 2018 baselines reveals a significant difference, with the 2018 baseline showing a markedly lower CPI. (Figure 2, lowest diagram)

The BSP still publishes data series from 2000, 2006, 2012, and 2018.

Fundamentally, a high Nominal GDP (NGDP) when calculated against a reduced CPI (as a deflator or implicit price index) results in a HIGHER headline GDP! Voilà! A statistical boom! 

Will the Philippine government achieve its coveted "middle-income status" economy by inflating its statistics? 

V. The Falling Rice Prices: Why the Food Emergency Security?

Authorities also claim that "rice inflation contracted to 2.3% in January from the 0.8% clip in December." 

If this is the case, why the sudden need for a Food Emergency Security (FES) program, which includes light-handed price controls (a maximum Suggested Retail Price) and the release of the National Food Authority’s "buffer rice" or reserves?

Figure 3

If anything, these interventions have temporarily suppressed CPI in the short term. 

In any case, here is a timeline of political interventions in the food and agricultural industry, which should serve as template. 

February 15, 2019: GMA News: Duterte signs rice tariffication bill into law

March 11, 2020: DTI: Nationwide price freeze on basic necessities in effect amid COVID-19 emergency 

February 2, 2021: Inquirer: DA: Price ceiling on pork, chicken products to start on Feb. 8

April 8, 2021: Portcalls: Duterte signs EO lowering tariff for pork imports 

June 1 2024: DTI: DTI secures voluntary price freeze commitments for more basic necessities 

However, as history shows, the insidious effects of distortive policies surface over time. Intervention begets more intervention, as authorities scramble to manage the unintended consequences of their previous actions. Consequently, food CPI remains under pressure. (Figure 3, topmost graph)

Ironically, the easing of interventions may have contributed to the decline in CPI from the end of 2022 to mid-2024. 

VI. The Rice Ceiling Trap: A Self-Inflicted Supply Crisis and the Vicious Cycle of Interventionism 

Price ceilings create artificial demand spikes. With buffer stocks being released into the market, their rapid depletion seems inevitable. This means authorities will soon have to replenish reserves—betting that global rice prices remain stable. (Figure 3, middle window)

But even if global rice prices decline, large-scale stockpiling would exacerbate the twin deficits (fiscal and trade deficits). The agricultural sector reported near milestone trade deficit in Q3 2024. (Figure 3, lowest image)

This, in turn, would put additional pressure on the USD-PHP exchange rate, where further peso depreciation would translate into higher import costs, which would help feed into the current inflation cycle.

And now, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is considering imposing FES on pork prices as well!

It appears authorities believe they can override market dynamics and economic laws through sheer force of policy. But history has shown time and again that such attempts only lead to greater imbalances—necessitating even more interventions in an endless loop of self-inflicted crises.

Good luck to the believers!

VII. Treasury Markets Are Already Telegraphing Inflation Risk

The Philippine Treasury markets are already reflecting this narrative.

Figure 4

The yield curve continues to fall, leading to a bull steepening—a clear signal that the BSP is likely to cut rates. (Figure 4, topmost graph)

While this may provide short-term relief, it also carries risks: looser monetary policy could reignite inflationary pressures while signaling heightened economic uncertainty. 

VIII. The Contradiction: Why a Food Security Emergency Amid Falling Prices? 

If rice prices are declining and core CPI is slowing, why are authorities aggressively pushing a Food Emergency Security (FES) program? 

The short answer: they want their free lunches to continue. 

Whether through subsidies, price controls, or other interventionist policies, they are ensuring a steady flow of populist measures. 

By the way, the National mid-term Election is in May! 

Importantly, this push signifies a calculated move to secure easier access to cheap credit—leveraging monetary easing to sustain economic illusions. 

IX. 2024 Fiscal Snapshot: Rising Debt, the Trade-Off for 5.6% GDP 

The Bureau of the Treasury (BTr) has yet to release its cash operations report for February 28, limiting our full-year assessment of fiscal health. 

Still, while public debt eased slightly from Php 16.09 trillion in November to Php 16.05 trillion in December, total 2024 public debt closed at an all-time high. 

While the consensus was previously pleased that a slowing deficit had led to a decrease in net debt increases, 2024 experienced "a 9.8% or Php 1.44 trillion increase from the end-2023 level."  (Figure 4, middle chart)

The Bureau of Treasury (BTr) further reported that the "corresponding debt-to-GDP ratio of 60.7% was slightly above the 60.6% revised Medium-Term Fiscal Framework estimate, on account of the lower-than-expected full-year real GDP growth outcome of 5.6%" (Figure 4, lowest diagram)

Yet, this debt increase came despite a supposedly “restrained” deficit—largely due to (potential) record government spending in 2024. 

Put simply, the Php 1.44 trillion debt increase was the trade-off for achieving 5.6% GDP growth. 

There is a cost to everything. 

Yet, the full cost of debt servicing has yet to be published. 

Crucially, this 5.6% GDP growth was artificially fueled by: 

-BSP’s easy money policies,

-Record public spending,

-All-time high public debt,

-Historic bank credit expansion, and

-Near full employment.

Any reversal of these factors—or even a partial pullback—could WIDEN the fiscal deficit to new highs and PUSH debt-to-GDP further upward. 

There is more.

X. Mounting Risks of Philippine Peso Devaluation and Inflation Risks

Figure 5

External debt jumped 11.4% in 2024, reaching an all-time high of Php 5.12 trillion. 

Its share of total debt rose for the third consecutive year, now at 31.9%—partly due to peso depreciation but mostly from fresh borrowings totaling Php 401.7 billion. (Figure 5, topmost chart)

Meanwhile, BSP’s January 2025 Gross International Reserves (GIR) shrank by $3.24 billion—its steepest decline since September 2022. This was largely due to their defense of the Philippine peso, even though USD/PHP barely hit 59. (Figure 5, middle pane)

The BSP appears to have adjusted its intervention ceiling or their "upper band" to around 58.7. 

Falling GIR is a price to pay for the USD/PHP peg. (discussed last January)

And remember, 'ample reserves' have barely slowed the USDPHP's juggernaut. (Figure 5, lowest chart)

The BSP also revealed another reason for the GIR decline was a "drawdown on the national government’s (NG) deposits with the BSP to pay off its foreign currency debt obligations." 

Adding another layer of irony, the Philippine government raised $2.25 billion and €1 billion on January 24th. These fresh funds may temporarily boost February’s GIR, reflecting the National Government’s deposits with the BSP. 

Going forward, the government will require even more foreign exchange to service its external debt over time. This suggests continued reliance on foreign borrowing—expanding the BTr’s outstanding FX debt stock and increasing the risk of further peso depreciation. 

With growing dollar scarcity, the BSP’s need to refinance public debt, and the rising FX debt appetite of elite institutions, the government and central bank path-dependence on liquidity injections via easy money and fiscal stimulus have only deepened. 

This, in turn, heightens inflation risks—potentially fueling the third wave of the present inflation cycle. 

Take heed.

Philippine PSEi 30’s Crash: Worst January Performance Since 2008 and Asia’s Laggard — A Liquidity-Driven Meltdown?

The stock market's job is to always make you feel like you are missing out on something. The stock market's job is to always make you feel like you should be doing something. The stock market's job is to get you to do the wrong thing at the wrong time—Ian Cassel

In this issue 

Philippine PSEi 30’s Crash: Worst January Performance Since 2008 and Asia’s Laggard — A Liquidity-Driven Meltdown?

I. A Lowly Voice in the Wilderness

II. January as Template for 2025 Performance

III. Double Top Pattern?

IV. Was The Selloff Driven By Escalating Liquidity Strains? San Miguel: The Canary in the Coal Mine?

V. Price Distortions from the Changes in PSE’s Membership Amplified the Market’s Volatility

VI. Summary and Conclusion

Philippine PSEi 30’s Crash: Worst January Performance Since 2008 and Asia’s Laggard — A Liquidity-Driven Meltdown?

The Philippine equity benchmark plummeted 10.2% in January, making it the worst performer in Asia. It was also the largest loss in the history of January since 2008. Could escalating liquidity strains be the driving force?

I. A Lowly Voice in the Wilderness 

First, the appetizer. 

Let’s revisit a few quotes from our previous posts when everyone was predicting a new bull market for the PSEi 30, with expectations of it reaching 7,500 in October. (bold and italics original) 

In the backdrop of lethargic volume, concentrated activities, and a rising share of foreign participation, a continuation of global de-risking and deleveraging translates to more liquidations here and abroad, which could expose many skeletons in the closet of the Philippine financial system. August 4, 2024 

...

The public has been largely unaware of the buildup of risks associated with pumping the PSEi 30, driven by a significant concentration in trading activities and market internals 

The market breadth exhibits that since only a few or a select number of issues have benefited from this liquidity-driven shindig, the invested public has likely been confused by the dismal returns of their portfolios and the cheerleading of media and the establishment. September 15, 2024

... 

Bottom line: The levels reached by the PSEi 30 and its outsized returns attained over a few months barely support general market activities, which remain heavily concentrated on the actions of the national team and volatile foreign fund flows.  

Instead, the present melt-up represents an onrush of speculative fervor driven by the BSP’s stealth liquidity easing measures, even before their rate cut. Moreover, real economic activities hardly support this melt-up. October 7, 2024 

...

Given the current global and domestic economic imbalances, the Year of the Snake may again usher in another period of heightened risk and potential volatility. January 19, 2025 

Next, the main course.

II. January as Template for 2025 Performance

The Philippines' main equity benchmark, the PSEi 30, plunged by 4.01% on the last trading day of January, dragging its weekly return to -6.9%, marking its fourth consecutive week of decline.

Figure 1

For the month, the PSEi 30 suffered a 10.2% loss Month on Month (MoM), its most significant monthly decline since the 12.8% crash in September 2022. Annually, it was down by 11.8%.

January is supposed to be the best month for the PSE, rising 9 times in 13 years, with an average return of 0.94%, including 2025.

Yet, returns have been declining both monthly and annually for the past decade and so. (Figure 1, upper window) 

True to the volatility of the Snake Year, 2025's 10.2% plunge on January 10 was the worst since 2008, during the Great Financial Crisis, which resulted in a 48% decline and the lowest PSEi 30 level since 2012. (Figure 1, lower image) 

Yet, if history were to rhyme, and if January’s performance serves as a template for 2025, it wouldn’t be surprising if the PSEi 30 faces a substantial setback.

Figure 2

As a result of this week’s thrashing, the Philippine PSEi 30 was the worst-performing Asian bourse. Ten of 19 national indices were down, one remained unchanged, with average returns at -0.41%. (Figure 2, topmost graph)

For January, with 10 of 19 national indices down and a YTD change of -0.5%, the Philippine PSEi 30 was the region's laggard. (Figure 2, middle chart)

Major ASEAN bourses, such as Thailand’s SET and Malaysia’s KLCI, were the weakest links in both weekly and monthly outcomes. (Figure 2, lowest diagram)

Could these be emerging signs of an Asian Financial Crisis 2.0?

III. Double Top Pattern? 

This week’s meltdown breached two minor support levels and now seems poised to challenge the October 2022 low.

Figure 3

From a technical analysis standpoint, the PSEi 30 is facing the potential of a 'double top' pattern, where a breakdown below the October low could lead to a retest of the March 2020 level. (Figure 3, upper image)

The panic selling suggests that a significant oversold rebound might be imminent, though the durability of this recovery could be suspect.

IV. Was The Selloff Driven By Escalating Liquidity Strains? San Miguel: The Canary in the Coal Mine?

Mainstream explanations for the selloff have often been influenced by the availability bias or "when people overweight new information or recent events" (Investopedia)

Could the recent sell-offs be attributed to the substantial shortfall in Q4 and 2024 GDP (a development we had anticipated)? 

Was it influenced by Trump's tariff threats or the Federal Reserve's pause in their easing cycle? 

Or might domestic politics play a role? Specifically, the threat by the BBM administration to shut down the government if the Supreme Court rules in favor of appellants challenging the constitutionality of their controversial budget, or the impending Food Emergency Security measure on rice, set to be implemented on February 4, 2025. 

Our best guess is that while these factors might have some influence, a more critical driver of the market turmoil could be the escalating pressures on financial liquidity. 

Unlike the 2022 episode, where inflation and rising interest rates were significant factors, the current scenario mirrors the dynamics of the pandemic recession—where the PSEi 30 declines despite monetary easing aimed at combating a recession. (Figure 3, lower graph)

Currently, the GDP growth rate has been decelerating.

Figure 4

Moreover, bank liquidity has been worsening as of November, due to investments in Held-to-Maturity (HTM) assets and undisclosed Non-Performing Loans (NPLs). The cash-to-deposits and liquid assets-to-deposits ratios have been on a long-term downtrend, with the former at its lowest level in over a decade. (Figure 4, topmost graph) 

As a reminder, the BSP cut official rates in August, October, and December. It also reduced RRR rates in October, while the aggregate fiscal spending in 11-months reached all-time highs (ATHs), signaling massive stimulus. 

Contrary to mainstream expectations, the BSP’s accommodative monetary policy has led to an increase in Treasury bond yields rather than a decrease. (Figure 4, middle image) 

This rise is influenced not only by the Federal Reserve's policies but also by domestic inflation, which has been incrementally rising. 

Additionally, the yield curve for local Treasuries has steepened significantly, indicating heightened inflation risks. (Figure 4, lowest chart) 

Lastly, San Miguel’s deviation from the recent market uptrend might have served as the canary in the coal mine, signaling potential broader market distress. 

Also from last October 7, 2024 

Finally, SMC share prices continue to move diametrically opposite to the sizzling hot PSEi 30. (Figure 7, lowest graph)  

What gives? Will SMC’s debt breach the Php 1.5 trillion barrier in Q3?    

Have SMC’s larger shareholders been pricing in developing liquidity concerns? If so, why are bank shares skyrocketing, when some of them are SMC’s biggest creditors?

Figure 5

San Miguel’s share price was one of the biggest casualties, diving below the panic levels of March 2020.  (Figure 5, upper window) 

Its market capitalization plunged to Php 155 billion while grappling with a debt of Php 1.477 trillion. Falling equity and rising debt—what could go wrong? 

Could there be domestic funds facing liquidity constraints, forced to raise cash quickly by selling at any price?  And has this liquidation exacerbated San Miguel’s financial dilemma?

V. Price Distortions from the Changes in PSE’s Membership Amplified the Market’s Volatility

Lastly, the reconstitution of the PSEi 30 has contributed to market volatility.

The inclusion of AREIT and China Banking Corporation (CBC), which will replace Wilcon (WLCON) and Nickel Asia (NIKL) effective February 4, 2025, resulted in steep declines for the outgoing stocks: WLCON fell 10.16%, and NIKL plummeted 30.2%. (Figure 5, lower graph)

Meanwhile, funds tracking the PSEi 30 rotated into CBC (+33.81%) and AREIT (+4.74%).

Figure 6

Fundamentals hardly explain the irrational share price behavior of the affected firms. 

CBC’s parabolic move has turned it into a meme stock or crypto, even as the share prices of its peers have tumbled.

In the meantime, it also doesn't explain the sharp drop in NIKL's price. Although nickel prices have been on a downtrend, they have not collapsed. (Figure 6 topmost pane)

Shares of competitors FNI and MARC were down 1.96% and 8.96%, respectively, WoW. (Figure 6, middle graph)

In short, the PSE's proclivity to chase top performers while discarding laggards has only amplified the price distortions within the PSEi 30. 

VI. Summary and Conclusion

The January 2025 meltdown has brought to light the deteriorating fundamentals underlying the Philippine financial markets and economy. 

This crisis is not isolated to the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) but also resonates with some ASEAN counterparts. Could this be emerging signs of Asian Crisis 2.0? 

If historical trends of January and the volatility associated with the Year of the Snake are to repeat themselves, and if the double top pattern materializes, this suggests a significant deficit or loss for the PSEi 30 by the end of 2025. 

Could the recent turmoil in the PSEi 30 be indicative of escalating liquidity pressures among domestic fund managers? 

If this is the case, future stress could manifest in the treasury market and influence the US dollar-Philippine peso exchange rate $USDPHP. 

Certainly, given that the PSEi 30 has become heavily oversold, a notable rebound might be anticipated. However, this scenario presents not an opportunity for accumulation but rather for liquidation. 

Unless one is an expert in scalping, short-term trades involve significant risks (Figure 6, lowest chart)

Remember, cash remains the best defense against a bear market—whether through foreign exchange (FX) accounts or Treasury bills (T-bills).

___ 

Disclosure: The author holds a small position in NIKL as of the time of writing.

Has the Philippine Government Won Its Battle Against Inflation? SWS Self-Poverty Survey Disagrees, Unveiling Its Hidden Messages

There is no escape from debt. Paying for the government’s fictitious promises in paper money will result in a constantly depreciating currency, thereby impoverishing those who earn a wage or have savings. Inflation is the hidden tax, and it is very convenient for governments because they always blame shops or businesses and present themselves as the solution by printing even more currency. Governments want more inflation to reduce the impact of the enormous debt and unfunded liabilities in real terms. They know they can’t tax you more, so they will tax you indirectly by destroying the purchasing power of the currency they issue—Daniel Lacalle

 In this issue

Has the Philippine Government Won Its Battle Against Inflation? SWS Self-Poverty Survey Disagrees, Unveiling Its Hidden Messages

I. Unveiling the Likely Hidden Messages Behind the Declaration of Victory Over Inflation

II. Treasury Curve was Spot On about Inflation, Short-Term Treasury Yields Plunge! Will the BSP Cut by 50 bps?

III. Supply-Side Disinflation? Despite Strong Credit Growth, Manufacturing Remains in the Doldrums, as Reflected by PPI Deflation and Output Sluggishness

IV. Supply-Side Disinflation? Lethargic Consumer Imports and July FDI Reflect Frail Capital Goods Imports

V. Demand-Side Disinflation? September CPI Plunged Despite Vigorous August Consumer Bank Lending, Liquidity Growth Dived

VI. Disinflation with Employment at Near Historic Highs Backed by a Credit Boom? Slower Deficit Spending Puts Pressure on Liquidity Strains

VII. SWS’s Self-Rated Poverty Survey versus the Government’s CPI 

Has the Philippine Government Won Its Battle Against Inflation? SWS Self-Poverty Survey Disagrees: Unveiling Its Hidden Messages

A Philippine media outlet proclaimed that the Philippine government won its battle against inflation, while a private survey contradicted this view. Who's right?

I. Unveiling the Likely Hidden Messages Behind the Declaration of Victory Over Inflation

Figure 1 

Two interesting headlines that hallmark this week’s conflicting message on inflation. 

Inquirer.net, October 7, 2024: The Philippines may now declare victory in its long and painful fight against inflation after price growth last month eased to a four-year low, helping create the perfect economic condition for gradual interest rate cuts…The BSP is now at a point where it has to undo its most forceful tightening actions in two decades, which had sent the benchmark rate to its highest level in 17 years to tame stubbornly high inflation. Cutting borrowing costs is necessary amid market predictions that the economy may grow below the government’s target for this year after consumption showed signs of weakening…Moving forward, Governor Eli Remolona Jr. said the central bank would take “baby steps” until the key rate falls to 4.5 percent by the end of 2025, suggesting that monetary authorities would unlikely resort to jumbo cuts that may stir up market fears that the economy is headed for a hard landing. (bold mine)

SWS.org.ph, October 9, 2024: The national Social Weather Survey of September 14-23, 2024, found 59% of Filipino families rating themselves as Mahirap or Poor, 13% rating themselves as Borderline (by placing themselves on a line dividing Poor and Not Poor), and 28% rating themselves as Hindi Mahirap or Not Poor. The September 2024 percentage of Self-Rated Poor families rose by 1 point from 58% in June 2024, following a significant 12-point rise from 46% in March 2024. This was the highest percentage of Self-Rated Poor families since June 2008. The estimated numbers of Self-Rated Poor families were 16.3 million in September 2024 and 16.0 million in June 2024. The percentage of respondent households rating themselves as poor was applied to the Philippine Statistics Authority medium-population projections for 2024 to arrive at the estimated numbers of Self-Rated Poor families… The September 2024 survey found the percentage of Borderline families at 13%, up by 1 point from the record low 12% in June 2024 following an 18-point decline from 30% in March 2024… As of September 2024, the percentage of Not Poor families was at 28%, 2 points below the record high 30% in June 2024. (bold mine)

First and foremost, what does "declare victory in its long and painful fight against inflation" mean? (Figure 1, upper tweet)

The Philippine CPI posted two straight months of DEFLATION (statistical price decreases) in September (-0.37%) and October (-0.19%) 2015; yet, the media and establishment experts barely made such a brazen pronouncement until now.

Yes, Q3 2024 statistical inflation of 3.2% has dropped to its 9-year support level, but this doesn’t mean that the inflation cycle has been broken.

Figure 2 

In Q3 2015, the CPI slipped into deflation at -0.1%, which prompted banks to accelerate their net claims on central government (NCoCG) or indirect QE. Ironically, this germinated the current inflation cycle, which is now on its ninth-year.  (Figure 2 upper image)

Despite its recent decline, given that the CPI has remained on an uptrend since 2015 and appears to have settled at the support levels, what assurances does the establishment hold that it won’t be subject to a third wave?

Second, the September CPI of 1.9% doesn’t translate to the evisceration of inflation; it only means that GENERAL prices have risen at REDUCED rates (or have dropped to within the BSP’s target), but they are still RISING!

In fact, BSP data tell us that even in the context of the understated inflation rate, over 99% of the purchasing power of the peso has been eroded since 1957! How is that for "declaring victory over inflation"? (Figure 2, lower chart)

On the other hand, while authorities and media bask in this pretentious statistical feat, a private sector survey tell us a different story: slower inflation has exposed the persistent and growing burden of a lower standard of living! (More on this below.) (Figure 1, lower tweet)

Third, "declaring victory over inflation" was NEVER a goal of the BSP’s monetary policy anchored on inflation targeting.

From the BSP: The primary objective of the BSP's monetary policy is “to promote price stability conducive to a balanced and sustainable growth of the economy” (Republic Act 7653). The adoption of inflation targeting framework of monetary policy in January 2002 is aimed at achieving this objective. Inflation targeting is focused mainly on achieving a low and stable inflation, supportive of the economy’s growth objective. This approach entails the announcement of an explicit inflation target that the BSP promises to achieve over a given time period. (bold mine)

There is no defined quantification or qualification of "low and stable inflation" because statistical inflation has always been a subjective measure, arbitrarily defined by the BSP.

That said, the goal of the politics behind inflation targeting has been to keep the inflation "genie" confined within the boundaries of the BSP’s proverbial "lamp."

That’s because inflation, as a hidden tax, benefits the government most.

However, the inflation genie has been set loose, or has gone beyond its bounds, marking the difference between the previous era and today.

In this way, the BSP can be conservatively said to have been "asleep at the wheel."

At worst, and unbeknownst to the public, the BSP’s policies have unleashed the inflation genie!

Or, although authorities continue to push the narrative of supply-side-driven inflation to shift the blame onto the private sector, the current inflation cycle signify an unintended consequence of their policies!

Yet, has anyone among the array of establishment experts, including those in government, been correct in predicting the incumbent inflation cycle? 

Fourth, the CPI is just a statistic. While its intent is to approximate changes in general prices, it neither reveals the full accuracy nor explains the causes of those changes. 

The fact is that inflation statistics are misleading.

My inflation rate and yours are different.  This is because of dynamic individual spending habits and ever-changing preferences that vary not only over time but also differs across individuals. 

Is it not the averaging a Netflix subscription and rice an exercise of apples-to-oranges comparison?  If so, would this not be applied to the CPI? 

Or, not only is the weighted averaging of goods and services across different groups of people a flawed metric, but people’s spending preferences are constantly changing! 

How accurate is an inflation rate derived from averaging the spending patterns of billionaires with those of the bottom 30%? 

Even on a personal level, my preferences are always changing. If I prefer sautéed prawns with bread this moment, adobo with rice later, and only sinigang for tomorrow, how could the inputs used to create these meals be accurately averaged? How would this apply to a population of 110 million people? 

Furthermore, because the CPI is a politically sensitive statistic—created and calculated by politically sensitive institutions—it is prone not only to errors (in assumptions, inputs, etc.) but also to political biases. 

For instance, changing the base year of the CPI can lead to different outcomes. If I’m not mistaken, using the now-defunct 2006 base would produce a much higher CPI today than the current 2018 base. 

Since the CPI is used as a primary benchmark for the market’s pricing of interest rates, wouldn’t the government—as the biggest borrowers—have the incentive or motivation to suppress it to influence the cost of borrowing? 

Fifth, what happened to journalism? 

Isn’t journalism about "seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues"? 

When media outlets use ambiguous qualifications like " declare victory against inflation" to describe the "perfect economic condition for gradual interest rate cuts" intended to support "consumption (which) showed signs of weakening," could this not signify cheerleading or an advocacy for a biased policy stance? For whose benefit? 

Might this be seen as advancing the interests of vested groups, particularly the primary beneficiary, the government and the politically connected elites? How is this different from propaganda, misinformation, or disinformation? 

Importantly, if an alleged news article makes an economic generalization, why would it lack narratives supported by economic logic? 

Or, are low rates a GUARANTEE of an INCREASE in consumption? How so, and based on what theory and evidence? 

Why cite partisan and non-sequitur explanations from "establishment experts" whose principal-agent problems have hardly been laid bare to the public? 

Have media outlets distilled such insights or selected statements for print that only promote their biases? I’ve seen this happen (personally) before, which is why I refuse interviews. 

Sixth, if media pronouncements reflect exuded marketplace confidence, could such article/s signify a manifestation of the magazine/headline cover indicator or express an extreme state of sentiment? 

Or have the media’s declarations echoed the "overconfidence" stemming from recent euphoria over the price spikes in Philippine assets (stocks, bonds, and the peso)? 

Seventh and lastly, could this be related to the upcoming elections? 

Will declaring 'victory in its long and painful fight against inflation' be part of the campaign to promote the electoral chances of the administration’s national slate in the 2025 midterm elections? 

Ultimately, the establishment's obsession has been to promote a regime of easy money, using the declaration of triumph over inflation as justification. 

As the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises once explained 

The popularity of inflation and credit expansion, the ultimate source of the repeated attempts to render people prosperous by credit expansion, and thus the cause of the cyclical fluctuations of business, manifests itself clearly in the customary terminology. The boom is called good business, prosperity, and upswing. Its unavoidable aftermath, the readjustment of conditions to the real data of the market, is called crisis, slump, bad business, depression. People rebel against the insight that the disturbing element is to be seen in the malinvestment and the overconsumption of the boom period and that such an artificially induced boom is doomed. They are looking for the philosophers' stone to make it last (Mises, 2019)  

II. Treasury Curve was Spot On about Inflation, Short-Term Treasury Yields Plunge! Will the BSP Cut by 50 bps? 

While the headline CPI plummeted from 3.3% in August to 1.9% in September—its lowest monthly rate since May 2020—excluding food and energy, the core CPI slipped to 2.4%, signifying 17 of 18 months of decline (one unchanged) since peaking at 8% in March 2023. 

Before that, we showed how changes in the Philippine yield curve have accurately predicted the CPI slump. 

despite the 4.4% CPI bump in July (and Q2 6.3% GDP), the Philippine treasury market continues to defy inflationary expectations by maintaining a deep inversion of the curve’s belly, which again signals slower inflation, upcoming BSP cuts, and increased financial and economic uncertainty. (Prudent Investor, August 2024) 

… 

Moreover, the curious take is that despite all the massive stimulus, the belly’s inversion in the Philippine treasury market has only deepened at the close of August.  

This does not suggest a build-up of price pressures or a strong rebound in the private sector. On the other hand, rising short-term rates indicate intensifying liquidity issues.   

In the end, while Marcos-nomics stimulus seems to have reaccelerated liquidity, a resurgence of inflation is likely to exacerbate "stagflationary" pressures and increase the likelihood of a bust in the Philippines’ credit bubble. (Prudent Investor, September 2024) 

Volatility has crescendoed in the Philippine treasury curve.

Figure 3

The present slope exhibits an astounding collapse in short-term rates (STIR), manifesting institutional market expectations of substantial cuts in BSP rates. Will the BSP cut by 50 bps this October? (Figure 3, upper graph) 

Yet, the curve’s magnified volatility has been incredible: following the gradual transition from flat to an inverted curve, then swiftly to a bullish steepening, and next to the current abrupt regression to a partial belly inversion—even with the plunge in STIR—how could this not be conducive to the rising risks of stagflation?

III. Supply-Side Disinflation? Despite Strong Credit Growth, Manufacturing Remains in the Doldrums, as Reflected by PPI Deflation and Output Sluggishness 

While we perceive government statistics with cynicism, we still use them because almost every financial market participant does.

Instead of focusing on the potential factors for the drop, the mainstream fixates on the prospective policy easing by the BSP.

Could the plunge in inflation have been a supply-side phenomenon marked by a glut?

In a word: Barely.

Manufacturing value grew by 2.9% in June, 6.45% in July, and 1.78% in August, while volume was up by 3.2%, 6.9%, and 2.8% over the same period.

Meanwhile, despite strong Universal Commercial Bank (UCB) loan growth to this sector—rising by 8.9%, 9.5%, and 9.8%—the Producer Price Index (PPI) deflated by -0.2%, -0.4%, and -1%. (Figure 3, lower chart)

Here’s the question: Why has robust credit growth not been reflected in output performance?

Worse yet, why is the deflation in the PPI escalating? PPI defined by the Philippine Statistics Authority, "measures the average change over time in the prices of products or commodities produced by domestic manufactures and sold at factory gate prices."

Where has all the credit money generated gone?

Has it been diverted to real estate or other undeclared allocations? Or has it been used for refinancing existing liabilities?

IV. Supply-Side Disinflation? Lethargic Consumer Imports and July FDI Reflect Frail Capital Goods Imports

If manufacturing growth has been unimpressive or sluggish, the situation is even worse for imports.

Imports in USD posted a 7.3% YoY contraction in June, then rose by 7.3% in July and 1.8% in August.

Converted to average pesos, imports were down by 2.63% YoY in June, surged by 14.3% in July, and grew by 4.6% in August, with the last month’s growth reflecting revaluation effects from a strong peso.

Figure 4

Here’s the thing: Consumer goods USD imports contracted by 7.3% in June, increased by 3.1% in July, and remained unchanged in August. (Figure 4, topmost pane)

Meanwhile, capital goods imports shrank by 8.8% in June but surged by 9.5% and 9.6% in the next two months. A substantial segment of the YoY changes reflects base effects. (Figure 4, middle diagram)

Nonetheless, the growth in capital goods imports partly reflected foreign direct investment (FDI).

The prosaic July FDI growth of 5.5% YoY (7.5% year-to-date) resonated with mediocre import growth. (Figure 4, lowest graph)

Yet, debt accounted for 74.3% of total FDI inflows and 63.5% of year-to-date FDI inflows. How much of this represent actual investments?

Still, why is the growth rate of FDIs declining?

Importantly, where are the investment pledges from the US-NATO allies?

V. Demand-Side Disinflation? September CPI Plunged Despite Vigorous August Consumer Bank Lending, Liquidity Growth Dived

Was the CPI slump a function of demand?

In short, yes!

We should put into context the seismic transformation of the Philippine banking system, with its recent focus on consumer loans coming at the expense of the supply side.

Figure 5

Universal Commercial (UC) bank consumer lending slowed from 24.3% year-over-year (YoY) in July to 23.7% in August, marking its slowest pace since November 2023. (Figure 5, topmost chart)

Consumer loan growth was strong across all segments in August: credit cards +27.44%, auto loans +19.3%, salary loans +16.4%, and others +26.8%.

Meanwhile, production loans continue to accelerate, expanding from 8.8% in July to 9.4% YoY in August, primarily in the real estate and trade sectors.

Overall, UC bank lending grew from 10.4% to 10.9% in August (Figure 4, second to the highest graph)

Despite mainstream claims of "restrictiveness" or "tightness" due to elevated rates, UC Bank's loan growth has been on an uptrend. Still, the CPI continues its downward trajectory!

Worse yet, despite this, financial liquidity plummeted in August.

M3 growth, which was 7.3% in July, dived to 5.5% in August. Incredible.

Incidentally, the yield curve inversion reflected this!

Once again, what happened to all the record money creation by the banking system and the BSP? Why the black hole?

VI. Disinflation with Employment at Near Historic Highs Backed by a Credit Boom? Slower Deficit Spending Puts Pressure on Liquidity Strains

Why could this be happening when employment rates are near all-time highs?

It was 96% last August, only a smidgen lower than the 96.9% record set last December 2023. (Figure 5, second to the lowest window)

Could it be that, aside from trade, government jobs were the primary source of growth in August? (Figure 5, lowest image)

Or could it also have been that employment growth has been mostly about low-quality labor? Alternatively, could the employment data also have been embellished?

Figure 6

Moreover, as we previously noted, because Philippine public spending has slowed, the fiscal deficit slightly "narrowed" year-to-date (YTD) as of August. Public spending has tracked the CPI over the long-term. (Figure 6, topmost diagram) 

As a result, aided by the strong peso, public debt marginally weakened in August.

Moreover, has the stalling growth in system leverage (UC bank credit + public debt) contributed to the demand pressures reflected in the CPI? (Figure 6, second to the highest graph)

Consequently, net claims on the central government (NCoCG) by banks and the BSP plateaued or consolidated. (Figure 6, second to the lowest chart)

Or, aside from the BSP, liquidity injections channeled through banks have slowed slightly.

This, combined with a stealth rise in bank non-performing loans (NPLs) and elevated levels of held-to-maturity assets (HTMs), has contributed to the liquidity squeeze.

And this has occurred despite the record nominal bank credit expansion and historically high employment rates. The plunge in September’s CPI might reflect a downturn in public and private demand, possibly worsened by mounting signs of a liquidity shortfall.

VII. SWS’s Self-Rated Poverty Survey versus the Government’s CPI 

Things don’t happen in a vacuum.

The BSP suddenly announced a massive reduction of the banking system’s reserve requirement ratio (RRR) on September 20th, obviously in response to such developments. The adjustment takes effect on October 25.

The PSA’s September CPI data exhibits a broad-based decline in price growth. While food prices had the biggest influence on the CPI’s significant downside volatility, slowing aggregate demand reflected the diminishing pace of price increases across most sectors. (Figure 6, lowest image)

All these factors point to the SWS Q3 data indicating an increase in self-rated poverty, which not only highlights the decline in living standards for a significant majority of families but also emphasizes the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots.

As a caveat, survey-based statistics are vulnerable to errors and biases; the SWS is no exception.

Though the proclivity to massage data for political goals is higher for the government, we can’t discount its influence on private sector pollsters either.

In any case, we suspect that a phone call from the office of the political higher-ups may compel conflicting surveys to align as one.

____

References 

Ludwig von Mises, The Boom Is Worse than the Bust, November 30, 2018 Mises.org 

Prudent Investor, The Philippines' July 4.4% CPI: Stagflation Remains a Primary Political, Economic, and Financial Risk August 12, 2024

 

Prudent Investor, Philippine Government’s July Deficit "Narrowed" from Changes in VAT Reporting Schedule, Raised USD 2.5 Billion Plus $500 Million Climate Financing September 1, 2024