Is China Trying to Back its Currency With Metal?

Reddit

There’s talk of a recession from the Reserve Bank, down yonder way. And the Prime Minister has again promised the government is going to spend its way out this slump, or at least go broke trying. But we begin today’s Reckoning with the idea that Australia is a massive treasure trove of mineral wealth, which is the next best thing to money in an age of paper paupers.

A smattering of articles in recent weeks has highlighted the stockpiling of metals by the China State Reserves Bureau. The Bureau scarfed up 329,000 tonnes of copper in February and 375,000 tonnes in March. This buying has partly fuelled copper’s 47% rise year-to-date (it’s tied with lead for the biggest gain so far) and its 70% rise from a low of around $2,800 in December of 2008.

Couple this with additional stockpiling of metals like aluminium, nickel, zinc, and tin, and you could make a case that China is trying to back its currency with metal. After all, that would be consistent with the call in March by People’s Bank of China Governor Zhou Xiaochuan for a global reserve currency that was not the U.S. dollar. Also, a currency backed by a basket of commodities would certainly have more tangible value than a currency backed by a basket case of basket case currencies (yen, dollar, euro, Yuan).

But the story is probably simpler that a great global currency end game. Copper prices fell by 70% from their July 2008 high to their December lows. Trading depreciating U.S. dollars for copper at rock-bottom prices is a great trade. It’s especially great for a nation that plans to electrify itself (which takes a lot of copper) and be a world-leading producer in hybrid cars (which also takes a lot of copper…and a lot of rare earth metals, by the way).

So is China laying the foundation for a commodity currency backed by stockpiled metals and minerals? Probably not. It’s just stockpiling minerals and metals while prices are low. And to the extent that the move has anything to do with a currency, it’s not China’s currency. It’s the U.S. dollar.

The Chinese economic planners realise they have made themselves strategically vulnerable to dollar devaluation by owning so much long-term U.S. Treasury debt. The U.S. government is loading up on debt. It intends to pay it back with printed money. This classic devaluation punishes long-term bond holders whose principal is thrashed by inflation.

Besides, since Chinese companies (State-owned and otherwise) keep getting rebuffed trying to take equity stakes in foreign resource producers, it’s better to take the Jim Rogers approach and just by the stuff directly and not bother with Wayne Swan and FIRB.

Does any of this benefit Aussie resource producers? Well, yes. Chinese stockpiling of metals has lead to a seven percent rise in aluminium prices in the last month and a nearly twenty percent gain in much maligned zinc prices. As we showed in a Diggers and Drillers e-mail update two weeks ago, Aussie base metals producers have surfed the Chinese liquidity surge into commodities to double digit share-price gains.

Liquidity surfers beware!

The trade only makes sense for would-be stockpilers if prices on the Comex and the London Metals Exchange remain attractive (rock bottom). If speculators try to climb on board the stockpiling bandwagon, it’s going to make for a really volatile trading market. Copper for three-month delivery lost 3.6% in London trading on the LME. And on the Shanghai futures exchange it fell even further, down 5% in yesterday’s session.

My my my. Let’s think about this, shall we?

This situation isn’t exactly the same as the across-the-board rally in all asset classes that began in 2003 after Alan Greenspan cut U.S. short-term rates to 1% and left them there for awhile. But it is absolutely the same in one particular aspect: U.S. monetary and fiscal policy is fuelling inflation in certain asset classes, and probably not the asset classed policy makers intended.

In this case, the Fed’s quantitative easing policy is designed to drive-down borrowing costs and free up credit. What’s happening, though, is that U.S. creditors are abandoning the long-end of the yield curve of the bond market and flooding the short-end (when they aren’t bidding up commodities). Fewer creditors want to lend the U.S. government money for 30-years. More are willing to do it for 90 days, even if yields are low, just for the sake of having a liquid, near-cash investment in a still dodgy financial landscape.

You can see this vividly by looking at two-year charts showing the yields on 90-day T-Bills and 30-year Treasury bonds. Check them out below. Bloomberg reports that according to data from the U.S. Treasury Department, China bought $5.6 billion in bills in February and sold $964 million in longer-term notes. Its preferences are clearly changing. You’d expect the 90-day T-bill to again approach zero, and 30-year yields to rise. And in fact, that’s exactly what the chart shows.

90-Day T-Bill Rates Again Approach Zero

30-Year Rates Bounce as U.S. Creditors Factor in Inflation

These two charts are bad news for Uncle Sam and probably good news for Uncle Kevin. For the U.S., the shift in borrowing to shorter-term notes and bills makes future borrowing needs extremely interest rate sensitive. Every try rolling over a $1 trillion in debt when interest rates have doubled? And remember, future borrowing needs are massive, with the Congressional Budget Office predicting a deficit of $1.4 trillion next year and nearly $10 trillion by 2019.

If creditors aren’t willing to fund U.S. deficits, then the Fed will. And that means printing money. This has two effects. One, it drives up interest rates on longer-term bonds even more (making long-term financing expensive) and it accelerates the flight out of U.S. debt into tangible assets.

Either way, funding U.S. deficits with borrowing-whether its long- or short-term-is the prelude to dollar devaluation. The only way that money gets paid back is through money printing. There is a remote possibility that new taxes could cover the interest expense on U.S. debt. And in case you missed it last Friday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officially classified carbon-dioxide and several other so-called greenhouse gasses as threats to public health.

This reclassification gives the EPA authority to regulate threats to public health under the U.S. Clean Air Act. More likely is the passage of a bill in the U.S. Congress to institute a “cap-and-trade” system on carbon dioxide in which carbon dioxide “polluters” could bid for permits that allow them to emit a certain amount of CO2.

The folks in the Obama administration reckon a “cap-and-trade” regime on CO2 could generate anywhere from $500 billion to $1 trillion in new government “revenues.” And the best thing of all is that it won’t look like a tax increase. It’s a new regulation that imposes upon business the real cost of producing CO2 emissions.

If you think for a minute that those costs won’t be passed on to consumers, though, you are obviously brain dead and not reading this at the moment (RIP). Consumers will bear the brunt of a cap-and-trade system with higher energy costs. And that’s if the higher costs don’t put energy producers out of business altogether. After all, it’s not hard to imagine the government imposing a “cap-and-trade” system that raises production costs, but simultaneously capping retail electricity rates (howling voters freezing in their sub-prime prisons).

Do these people really hate coal that much?

You can see that all across the world, the effort to prop up asset values with more inflation is having a widening circle of negative unintended consequences. To keep all that borrowing from being immediately inflationary, governments are grubbing like addicts for new sources of “revenue” that don’t arouse the ire of the population. And they don’t seem to care if they wreck the economy in the process.

Which brings us to Uncle Kev. Australia’s future borrowing needs look small compared to Team America’s. Right now, the Aussie government reckons that the deficits as a percentage of GDP will be around 2% in the upcoming budget year and 3% in the year following. That doesn’t sound so bad, does it?

In the U.S., the CBO projects the 2009 Obama budget will produce a deficit 13.1% of U.S. GDP. Even under an optimistic scenario, the ratio only declines to 9.6% by 2010. The trouble with deficits is that they become part of the public debt. And the public debt as a percentage of GDP is already at 74% in the U.S. and climbing.

Granted, it’s been much higher in other countries (like Japan) and not led to a collapse deficit financing. But each country’s case is particular. And what we’d say here is that the long road to national debtor status begins with running annual deficits out of “necessity.” The real trouble with short-term deficits is that they add up, year after year, into long term debts.

Speaking just before Reserve Bank Governor Glenn Stevens confessed that Australia was in a recession, Kevin Rudd-in that tortured parlance that he has mastered-said, “The truth is this – the global economic recession makes it inevitable that we’ll have a recession in Australia which means that, as we frame the budget, we’re going to have to make even stronger our economic stimulus strategy because unemployment will rise even further.”

What on earth does that mean?

We think it means that Rudd is already laying the ground work for further transfer payments to Australians which he is going to call “stimulus” and which he is going to claim will help the country avoid recession. But that was the goal the first time around in December, and it didn’t seem to work then. So why try again?

Undoubtedly, the people in Canberra who are eager to borrow on your behalf and funnel the money to favoured constituencies will say that the “stimulus” made things less worse (as if a $900 cash payout makes up for the risk of losing your job). They will keep on stimulating until the Prime Minister’s poll numbers fall, at which point China will probably be blamed for something to distract the public’s attention. Or perhaps the issue will be immigration. Who knows?

Mind you, we’re not saying the Liberals look any better on this issue. Across the world, moron politicians on the Right and the Left are trying to spend their way out of a recession that was caused by too much spending. Only an idiot could embrace and defend that strategy. But then, we are talking about politicians here.

The danger here for Aussie investors is that increased government borrowing to finance transfer payments and backstop the commercial property sector will force up interest rates. Higher interest rates are bad for household borrowing, corporate borrowing, and anyone who has a lot of debt to service (which includes a lot of Aussie households).

The secret to any good lie, we remember reading somewhere, is that the number of people who find out the truth is smaller than the number of people who heard the lie once and believed it. Most people are lazy. We hear a good lie once and even if we don’t believe it, it sticks in our head. Say it enough and it begins to pass for truth, even if it’s absurd.

Australians keep getting told that government stimulus is the way to soften the effects of recession until the recovery takes hold (an event which keeps getting further and further away on the horizon). But this is a lie. The stimulus doesn’t solve any of the problems that face the economy. It just keeps people busy and distracted for awhile, while annual deficits and a rising debt (which must be financed by foreigners) become a fact of life in Australia.

The only upside to continued world-wide government ham-fistedness is that the monetary and fiscal insanity heighten the appeal of real assets. This represents tangible wealth for which there is a world-wide market. That’s why in the April edition of Diggers and Drillers we resume our look for smashed-down base metals stocks that have exposure to commodity price gains by way of proven reserves of various base and precious metals. It’s the best trade of the year so far. Just ask the Chinese.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

Dan Denning
Dan Denning examines the geopolitical and economic events that can affect your investments domestically. He raises the questions you need to answer, in order to survive financially in these turbulent times.
Reddit

Comments

  1. Something I considered recently when thinking about another Chinese resources boom (saving the doomed Australian economy, hooray?), is how much of a boom would be had? See I think there is a big difference between our resources boom driven by American consumers buying Chinese products, and a resources boom driven by Chinese wanting to get rid of US dollars.

    One of the main differences I think is that China may be alone in doing this. That means Japan, who is Australia’s biggest importer, will not be buying large amounts of resources, and in fact will probably be buying even less than it wants to due to price increases (due to Chinese demand).

    So we HAD a situation whereby South America, Australia, Africa and others were supplying raw materials to exporter countries, with a shortage of tankers/freighters. Now the situation (I think) is that the suppliers are only supplying one country (China), and there are many many tankers/freighters available, at currently cheap rates due to competition and low oil prices.

    So in the past where Australia had a competitive advantage (over Brazil for instance) because it was closer to China, that advantage has now been greatly reduced. Plus I doubt China needs the supply in a hurry, rather it just needs to spend the money in a hurry.

    So my point is that I don’t think Australia will have a resurgent resources ‘boom’ as such, possibly just a slight lifting of prices.

    Besides, China is in the drivers seat here. China has the power of negotiating resource contracts because it does not ‘need’ the supply, it only ‘wants’ it. It can choose different commodities to buy if one gives trouble (like a nickle contract for instance). Or just buy up the companies.

    Also, this is an opportunity to speculate on the role Tibet, and it’s resources (assumed?) have. I read somewhere they have iron ore and oil or gas. Not sure if it is true though. I doubt anything would stand between China and those resources.

    So I am bearish on the Australian economy being ‘revived’ by China. China was recently in a situation whereby it had to compete to IMPORT resources. Now I believe resource exporters will be in the position of having to strongly compete to EXPORT resources to China, in an effort to save their companies from the global slump.

    Those are my thoughts on the matter anyway. Anyone have any other ideas?

    Reply
  2. Yea that’s about spot on Pete.

    DR are correct about the use of the stimulus packages – they will not work as a proxy to supporting Aus manufacturing eg vouches, being that we have not enough manufacturing………

    China is building its energy and material base – a high energy materials per capital ratio is required for any sustainable manufacturing economy. The point is that Aus will always have a higher energy materials per capita ratio except we have no manufacturing to utilise it.

    Yes the Chinese are dumping (loaning) their US$ and purchasing Aus bonds and our energy and materials, we are going to be holding a lot of US$ treasury bonds/cash. When the US$ deflates the Chinese will be holding our Aus bonds and our material minerals and energy, and Aus will be holding toilet paper.

    Further China can then inflate their currency to make Aus debt worse.

    The world will look at Aus as a failed bt selfish state – Aus cannot buy its way out of this one – Aus cannot value add its work force with refugees or IT immigrants – Aus cannot train its population (trade training is deficient), provide adequate medical care, get them to work on time, or provide cheap housing.

    Aus are a net importer of food, Aus sells all its assets to pay for PS wage increases. Aus so called ‘industrials’ lacks adequate manufacturing to defend Aus in fact Aus defence is structured around the defence needs of the US.

    Aus cannot possible utilise its high energy materials per capita ratio the same as the aborigines couldn’t, 土地nullius place (Terra Nullius)the Chinese will say.

    Welcome to the world stimulus package, the relegating of the Aus Commonwealth to the state of NSW with Canberra, maybe Aus can negotiate Qld as well. Aus will have to give up the remaining states, of course we can clear our debt and maintain our high prices for property in the new Federation of Australia.

    How does it feel to be part of a ‘new world order’ brokered by the USA. Oh the environment……Forget the environment Aus has got one of the biggest environmental footprints on the planet per capita. In fact Aus will be able to achieve a lot more with less it certainly can’t achieve any less with more than its over allocated resources.

    Charles Norville
    April 23, 2009
    Reply
  3. Pete, another thing to take into account is that China has been very busy in Africa and they are not there because they like the wildlife. The Chinese have put a lot of money into projects in Africa and so Australia will find Chinese demand for commodities will be increasingly met by sources other than Australia.

    Reply
  4. $900 just to keep the masses feeling fine.It would be cheaper to send boxes of Prozac.

    Paul Frost
    April 23, 2009
    Reply
  5. Makes sense to be buying silver, gold, copper, lithium, renewables, nanotechnology for building control.

    Also, I don’t get the use of your talking marks apropos the below quote:
    There’s nothing “so-called” about GHGs.
    There’s nothing questionable about the use of pollution in terms of CO2e.

    Obama is talking about C&T (if Waxman Markey is implemented) CO2e revenue being put straight back into consumer’s pockets.

    C&T (or consumption or generation tax) is all about price signalling to
    a) put a ceiling on emissions and therefore make increasing emissions into a limited emissions allowance pool increasingly expensive in order to increase generation innovation and efficiency, and
    b) consumption awareness and increased efficiency and reduction in waste

    And there is nothing wrong with that.

    BAU coal/fossil use cannot continue.

    (maybe I misunderstood your use of quotation marks)

    Otherwise, carry on.

    Tim M
    Heresy Snowboarding

    ***

    several other so-called greenhouse gasses as threats to public health.

    This reclassification gives the EPA authority to regulate threats to public health under the U.S. Clean Air Act. More likely is the passage of a bill in the U.S. Congress to institute a “cap-and-trade” system on carbon dioxide in which carbon dioxide “polluters” could bid for permits that allow them to emit a certain amount of CO2.

    Reply
  6. Guys here is a decent Baltic exchange monitoring site for monitoring bulk shipping rates which tracks vs commodities etc.

    http://investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm

    I agree too with Greg on the Chinese exchanging USD reserves for commodities and commodities linked currencies but I want to think that through further.

    Commodities were floating on USD funny money for the past decade which was employed by US bankers to buy and bid the rest of the world’s asset prices up (remember the Chinese had a perfectly valid defence in fending off speculative USD originated Chinese local asset purchases and bidding up their prices and they “reacted” with controls that had the effect of also suppressing the Yuan). So up your nose with a rubber hose to those Americans accusing the Chinese of systemic exchange rate chicanery because it was an act of war by the Americans to try to sew inflation into the Chinese economy past the point that the central government could control their economy.

    Now to the effects of Hedge Funds and foreign bank branch lending. Remember that long climb of the AUD from well under 0.50 to the USD. Remember as the hedge fund redemptions forced the unwinding of the leveraged offshore positions and the commodity bubble burst there was a subsequent massive drought of USD liquidity in all the offshore markets as hedge funds and foreign bank branches had to buy back USD’s.

    Now the Chinese are switching reserves for commodities they are effectively selling USD’s but year on year they were buying thios level of commodities and more so it won’t be so obvious in the figures and the global USD pool is massive. The UST is creating so many USD’s and readying to buy its own and is getting into a sovereign version of the mezzanined debt market

    This is the point I have reached and have not kicked onto a conclusion.

    The IMF bemuses me. They only know the macro debt market, remain hyper focused on govt vs private speculative debt and have abaolutely no conception of the discretionary services & goods bubble other than what the trade accounts tell them. They have therefore a trade based modelling for their projection, and for US services they are just projecting from the 20% collapse of the import trade. They really don’t have a clue and never did have. Like a super sized McKibbin projection.

    The way I read it the best way to monitor the crash is the tax receipts for those countries that have bent themselves over for consumption and property asset inflation taxation. And hence -1.6% for Australia will prove ridiculously optimistic and like Dan said our commodity prices won’t save us except maybe in USD basis terms and that is where I go back to not having a conclusion yet.

    Reply
  7. Ross..thanks for that link, it is one of the best I have seen tracking the BDI.This chart tool from Bloomberg is also pretty good: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/cbuilder?ticker1=BDIY%3AIND

    Maybe some signs of life?

    Reply
  8. cheers Greg

    Reply
  9. No deposit, no interest – no repayments for 36 mths……..
    “Help save Australia’s economy and spend, spend, spend”
    Of course Harvey N aren’t the only ones trying to stave off the massive revaluation of values. The masses are beginning to stir; the dawning of the realisation that having worked all their lives for a cliched retirement of tropical sunsets, champagne, caviar, coke and condos has disappeared quicker than a dodgey bookmaker at the end of a race. I’ve been reading DR since 2005 and the majority of long term theories and opinions have been realised. There are more alarms ringing now than ever before. One might begin to think that the captains of crooked capitalism will have to replace the war on terrorism with the war on socialism. Yes – the depression will be blamed on the communists – ironically, I don’t think there are any of them left in the US Fed these days – a bit like the Weapons of Mass Distraction I suppose… Good headlines.

    Claytonator
    April 23, 2009
    Reply
  10. Nanotechnology? ……….will make the cost of labour irrelevant and that has got to be concern for – low energy materials per capita ratio – nations like China…..Aus has a massive ratio but is doing little with it, enter the global stimulus package that allows other nations eg China being the most competitive, to share what Aus will never be able to develop.

    Sure China Inc is stock piling Aus energy and materials and as DR states you don’t have to own the land just get a good price for the stuff – but really its just the thin edge of the wedge, and its not a naive ‘reds under the beds’ thing. The USA would play a role in negotiating the breaking up Aus but it all rests on the continuing cycle, bear rally what ever…….the decline of the US as the dominant power relegated to turn on its ally……..

    We are using the financial rules developed by western culture, they are failing and fast……CO2 economy is pathetic eg RE “The Great Global Warming Swindle”

    There is a positive side in the short term although in the long term I just think there are too many people in the world to provide for nanotechnology’s high energy material capita ratio. I am talking of evolution and I use the “Engines of Creation” by Eric Drexler as a reference on nanotechnology seek ref on ‘memes’.

    Charles Norville
    April 25, 2009
    Reply
  11. […] Copper was up too. It closed up 2.7% in New York trading. And hey, what’s this? In late April we reported that China’s State Reserves Bureau was stock-piling metals at low prices. Bloomberg reports today that, “China is stockpiling […]

    Reply
  12. […] one more point on the U.S. debt. It is now extremely interest rate sensitive, as we wrote here in April. Einhorn writes that, “The Treasury has dramatically shortened the duration of the government […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Letters will be edited for clarity, punctuation, spelling and length. Abusive or off-topic comments will not be posted. We will not post all comments.
If you would prefer to email the editor, you can do so by sending an email to letters@dailyreckoning.com.au