Showing posts with label india. Show all posts
Showing posts with label india. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

The Search for a Reserve Currency

By Gregory R. Copley
OilPrice.com
Monday, April 19, 2010

http://www.oilprice.com/article-the-search-for-a-reserve-currency-288.html

Currency, like all forms of abstract value, is based on trust. And trust itself is based - except among the most naïve - on experience, and the repetitive demonstration of fidelity, whether positive or negative. At present, the US dollar, which had experienced a gradual rise during the 20th Century to the position gained well into the Cold War of being the trading world’s reserve currency. It had the mass, in terms of volumes of available currency; it had the backing of an indisputably wealthy national asset base to move away from the gold standard; it had stable governmental backing.

All of that is evaporating. Not, in absolute terms, as far as the mass of currency available, because that has dramatically expanded in recent years, and particularly during the past year of the Administration of Pres. Barack Obama. Not in the underlying asset valuation of the US economy, but it has begun to erode as the productive capability of the US to extract that value diminishes due to excess governmental interference and anti-business practices. It is far to say that other countries, from Nigeria to Russia, have vast untapped underlying asset value. That they did not create global reserve currencies from their naira and ruble was due to governance failures.

However, as we are witnessing, good governance as an essential component of currency value and the trust in that currency, can transform overnight, just as we witnessed the post-World War II collapse of sterling, and, now, the shakiness of trust in the US dollar (despite the reality that, at $14.2-trillion in value in 2008, is the world's largest). The age of the US dollar as the global reserve currency is not yet over, but it is threatened, and the trend toward a flight from the dollar (despite occasional returns to it) is evident. At present, however, the dollar is shored up because in many respects there is nothing of its stature ready to replace it. This leads to the essential question:

Are we entering a period in which we may have no global reserve currency?

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has been searching for safe-havens for its holdings of foreign earnings. The US dollar has slipped in its esteem, with some short-term benefits, perhaps for US exports, but with perilous long-term consequences. As a result, and whilst attempting to preserve the intrinsic value of its currency holdings, the PRC has been gradually scaling back its holdings in US currencies or US dollar-denominated instruments.

Where can the PRC go with its hoard? It looked at euro investments, at Canadian and Australian dollar holdings, and so on. The Australian and Canadian economic bases — at just under a trillion US dollar GDP for Australia, and about $1.4-trillion GDP for Canada — are insufficiently large to hold much in the way of PRC investments. Nonetheless, these economies have benefited from the PRC dilemma. The euro, however, is, like the US dollar, suffering from a loss of credibility, and unless some profound action is taken the euro may dramatically diminish in credibility, severely hampering the loose confederal structure of the European Union, preventing it from becoming the federal state of Europe to which some (mostly unelected) aspire.

We are, then, faced with a situation in which we may find a world without a standby currency, when, for a period after World War II, it had a couple: the US dollar and the pound sterling. It could have had more — the German mark and the Japanese yen — of the parent states of those currencies had been in a position to build a global base of trust. Now we are left in territory unfamiliar to all those now living, other than for the interregna of the World Wars.

Read the rest of the article.


Gregory R. Copley is the Editor of GIS/Defense & Foreign Affairs.

For further reading:
"Euro's reserve standing may be hit by Greek crisis", Mike Dolan, Reuters, April 7, 2010
"China Said to Consider Yuan Trading Versus Ruble, Won", Bloomberg, April 7, 2010

Monday, December 28, 2009

Asia Central Bankers Say It with Gold

By David Roman
The Wall Street Journal
Monday, December 28, 2009

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704718204574616280863871104.html

Strong dollar equals falling gold price, right?

Except, perhaps, when Asia's central bankers are involved.

Three-quarters of the region's $5 trillion in foreign-exchange holdings are parked in U.S. dollars. A desire to diversify away from the greenback, though, has become evident. The dollar's share in reserve accumulation dropped to less than 30% in the third quarter, Barclays Capital estimates.

Admittedly, knowing exactly what is in central bank reserves takes guesswork, but analysts think most diversification in 2009 favored the euro.

Recently gold has turned up as a second alternative. The Reserve Bank of India stirred markets when it revealed it purchased 200 tons of gold from the International Monetary Fund in October, increasing gold's share of central bank reserves to 6.4% from 3.6%.

Even if other central banks don't start making large purchases like India's, they will likely remain a substantial buyer as reserves continue to pile up. In the 12 months through November, the banks added around $800 billion to their foreign-exchange holdings, a side effect of their efforts to slow the appreciation of local currencies.

China, which has seen its reserves rise by more than 50% in the past two years to about $2.3 trillion, has bought 450 tons of gold during the period, Merrill Lynch estimates. That is a substantial chunk in a market where annual turnover is about 3,800 metric tons. Accumulation of reserves by Asia's central banks will likely continue as long as strong regional growth and high interest rates continue to attract foreign investors.

A shift in portfolios, like India's, would only add to this, and there is scope for this to happen. Gold accounts for around 2% of reserves in emerging markets, Merrill Lynch calculates. That compares with a 10% average globally, and more than half of all holdings in the case of the U.S. Federal Reserve, and France's and Germany's central banks.

Asia's central bankers will move slowly, particularly with gold prices still above $1,000 an ounce. But a shift toward the global average would mean more buying -- regardless of what the dollar does.

Friday, November 6, 2009

Developing Countries Grabbing Up Gold

By Dan Weil
NewsMax.com
Thursday, November 5, 2009

http://moneynews.newsmax.com/streettalk/china_india_gold_buys/2009/11/05/282070.html

Gold purchases by emerging market nations have combined with inflation fears to send the precious metal to record highs.

The latest emerging market acquisition news was India’s agreement to buy 200 million metric tons of gold from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for $6.7 billion. That amounts to half of what the IMF has put up for sale.

Already in April, China revealed that it almost doubled its gold reserves — to 1,054 metric tons from 600 tons in 2003.

And traders tell the Financial Times that more purchases are coming from emerging market central banks as they seek safe haven investments after the financial crisis.

Source: Deutsche Bank, "Global Commodities Daily", Michael Lewis, 4 November 2009

The central banks are expected to buy gold from the IMF to diversify their reserves away from the dollar. Analysts see China, Russia and Middle East sovereign wealth funds as likely purchasers.

China’s gold reserves now account for only about 1.6 percent of its total foreign reserves, despite recent purchases, far below the global average of 10.5 percent.

India’s acquisition means that governments as a whole may be net buyers of gold this year for the first time since 1998. That would mostly come from IMF sales.

"Central banks in India and China will be happy to accumulate gold at these levels. I will not be surprised to see even some Southeast Asian banks buying gold," Aaron Smith, Asia head of the $1.65 billion Superfund, told Reuters.

For further reading:
"Gold comfort", The Hindu Business Line, November 6, 2009
"Sri Lanka central bank buying gold to diversify reserves", Reuters, November 5, 2009

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

India Beats China to Walk Away With 200 Tonnes of IMF Gold

By Dan Denning
The Daily Reckoning Australia
Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/india-beats-china-to-walk-away-with-200-tonnes-of-imf-gold/2009/11/04/

Well how about that! India pipped China at the post to walk away with 200 tonnes of IMF gold. Granted, India had to pay US$6.8 billion for the yellow metal. But with China steadily accumulating gold as a reserve asset (at the household AND central bank level), everyone thought China has this one in the bag. Not so!

Something more than meets the eye is going on here. The IMF sale was part of a plan to unload 403.3 tonnes of gold. It's halfway there, and will use the proceeds to fund itself and loans to the developing world (or perhaps Britain and America when they go broke). But what else is going on?

In the past, larges sales of gold - mostly by European central banks - swamped the gold price and kept it in check. The European CBs either felt like they had too much gold doing too little work on the balance sheet. Or, they were manipulating the price of gold down by increasing the supply to the market whenever the gold price began rendering its verdict on global fiscal and monetary policy.

India's central bank is now the proud owner of 557 tonnes of gold. That gives it the tenth largest gold holdings among central banks. But it probably isn't finished. Gold makes up just six percent of India's foreign exchange reserves. There's plenty of room for that to grow.

But don't forget China. China has $2.3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves. But 70% of those - or $1.6 trillion - are in U.S. dollars. It owns over just a 1,000 tonnes of gold. That makes up less than 2% of China's reserves and makes China the seventh largest holder of above ground gold. In fact the gold exchange traded fund (NYSE:GLD) owns more gold than China. France, Italy, the IMF, Germany, and the United States round out top five (from fifth to first).


What this tells you is that China could double (and then double again) its gold reserves and gold would still make up less than 10% of its total forex reserves. Compare that to 66% in Italy, 69% in Germany, 70% in France, and 77% in the U.S., according to official numbers. So what's the big deal?

There will always be a threat that European Central Banks release gold supply on to the market. In fact, European central banks just renewed a five-year agreement (including the IMF) to sell down a maximum of 400 tonnes of gold per year from their holdings. They've agreed to this to disgorge their gold in an orderly fashion.

But it would not surprise us to see the Europeans fail to sell the gold they're allowed to sell under the agreement. Our old desk mate in London, Adrian Ash (now with Bullion Vault) is at the London Bullion Market Association's annual meeting in Edinburgh. Word from UBS analyst John Reade, also at the meeting, is that European Central Bank official Paul Mercier reckons that official holders of gold will, "no longer be net sellers of gold."

As we predicted earlier this year, the European central banks would rather hoard their gold than sell it in a rising market. There may be a price at which they do sell it, in order to pay down sovereign debts. But psychologically, the fact that central banks want to own gold and not sell it is pretty important.

Also, it shows you how the balance of economic power in the world has shifted East. True, the European banks can still dump gold on to the market to drown the price. But between the ETFs, central bank buyers in India and China, and the average man on the street in Beijing, Mumbai, and elsewhere, there are more buyers of gold now than sellers.

And if we were right yesterday that the GFC is slowly morphing into a sovereign debt crisis, then the case for gold is that much stronger. This explains why gold futures were up by nearly 3% overnight and old yeller hit a new high at US$1,084.90.

The only worry? So many hedge fund managers and pundits are singing the same tune: long gold and short U.S. Treasuries. As we mentioned yesterday, the bond bubble could go on much longer than anyone expects. And when so many people agree on something, none of them are usually right. As a contrarian, you'd be worried about becoming a victim right about now.

But yes, in the long term, the end of the Super Cycle in fiat money results in the remonetisation of gold. That is what you're seeing now. And it's probably what you'll see for a few more years. It also ought to benefit other precious metals, and of course, precious metals shares.

For further reading:
"Get It India", Greg Peel, November 4, 2009
"The significance of the IMF-RBI gold sales", Tim Iacono, November 04, 2009
"Golden sale heralds economic force", Andy Hoffman, The Globe and Mail, November 4, 2009
"Why is India Buying IMF Gold?", Reuters, November 3, 2009
"IMF Sells Gold to India, First Sale in Nine Years", Bloomberg, November 3, 2009

Sunday, October 11, 2009

The Explosive Dynamics of the Gold and Silver Markets

By Adrian Douglas
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee
Saturday, October 10, 2009

http://www.gata.org/node/7887

This week gold closed above $1,000 per ounce for the fourth consecutive week and made another all-time weekly high close. But the top-callers have come out in their droves declaring that gold is in a bubble that is about to burst and that because the recession has been declared as over there is no reason to hold such a safe-haven asset.

All that is nonsense and I will explain why. The dynamics unfolding in the gold and silver markets are nothing short of explosive.

The dynamics are different for gold and silver so I will start by discussing gold.

Gold is a unique substance. It is about the only thing on the planet that is bought and stored and never consumed. Almost all the gold ever mined still exists above ground. The purpose of gold is to act as a store of wealth. This singularity of gold makes it susceptible to a scam that was first perpetrated by goldsmiths in the 16th century. The goldsmiths realized that customers would buy gold and leave it for safekeeping in their vault. This meant that they could show the same gold bar to many customers and sell it many times over. This was the early form of fractional reserve banking, where banks retain only a fraction of the money on deposit, gambling that no more than 10 percent of the money will ever be called upon to be paid out.

This scam is at the center of modern gold market manipulation. Paper substitutes for gold are sold, instead of real gold, through derivatives, futures, pooled accounts, exchange-traded funds, gold certificates, etc. I estimate that each ounce of gold has been effectively sold 20 times over or more. To maintain this Ponzi scheme, some real gold is required, because some investors or jewelers demand to take possession of real gold. For the scam to be sustained there must always be plentiful physical gold for those who want it.

This physical supply has been met from mine supply and central bank leasing and selling.

The market is in effect a giant inverted pyramid with a huge paper gold market being supported above a small amount of physical gold at the tip of the inverted pyramid. The scam can continue until there are indications of a shortage of physical gold. If the 20 or so so claimants of each ounce of real gold demand their gold, there is the potential for a squeeze such as never been seen before.

To lend support to the idea that all the gold in the world has been sold several times over I cite the case of Morgan Stanley, which was sued in 2005 for selling imaginary precious metals to its customers. The firm had the audacity to charge storage fees for metal that didn't exist. Morgan Stanley settled the suit out of court but no criminal charges were ever filed against the firm. If Morgan Stanley was doing this, you can bet that it is the tip of the iceberg.

As further evidence just look at the monster over-the-counter derivatives market. Standing at approximately $1,000 trillion, it is multiples of the liquidated value of all the assets and currency in the world. Clearly derivatives must be selling some sort of claims to assets that cannot be fulfilled because there are not enough underlying assets.

The price discovery of gold has been achieved almost exclusively through the shuffling of paper gold promises between investors and bullion banks on the New York Commodities Exchange with very little real gold ever changing hands. But the situation is changing. Some big entities are now demanding physical gold. These entities are almost certainly countries, not individuals, such as China, Russia, India, Venezuela, Iran, and the Gulf states, to name but a few. This demand for real gold, instead of paper substitutes, is putting a strain on the gold market.

Paul Walker, CEO of the metal consultancy GFMS, recently said the price of gold was going up because of "large lumpy transactions in a market with a degree of illiquidity." Roughly translated, this means that there are large demands for physical metal that the market is struggling to meet. That is a cartel apologist's limp-wristed reference to the explosive dynamics I am defining.

The supply that feeds the bottom of the inverted pyramid to support the gold price suppression via a paper market is drying up. Mine supply has been declining for almost a decade and this year central banks became net buyers of gold for the first time in 20 years. The stress in the physical market is starting to show to those who are paying attention.

For example, the London PM fix of the gold price is coming in at historic highs day after day, the contango in the futures market has contracted dramatically, and the U.S. mint is routinely suspending production due to shortages of metal. But most importantly we are seeing astute investors display a growing preference for real bullion. A couple of months ago Greenlight Capital, the large hedge fund, switched $500 million of investment in the exchange-traded gold fund GLD to physical gold bullion. The supposed gold holding of GLD has not grown to a record high despite a record high gold price.

Apparently Germany has asked that its sovereign gold held by the New York Federal Reserve Bank be returned to Germany. Hong Kong has requested the same of the Bank of England, which stores Hong Kong's gold.

Robert Fisk, a respected journalist for Britain's Independent newspaper, reported this week that the Arab oil-producing states, Japan, Russia, and China have been holding secret talks to replace the dollar as the international reserve currency and as an accounting unit for the oil trade. The Independent reports that the basket of currencies they propose instead of the dollar would include gold.

If gold is going to regain its monetary role, you can understand why those in the know want real bullion. There are some significant signs that a run on the bank of the anti-gold cartel for physical gold is commencing.

Meanwhile most investors and analysts are focused only on the net short position of the commercial traders on the Comex, which has reached a record level and has in the past signaled the onset of a major correction. But such market observers are watching only a side show of the main event. The main event is all about a growing tightness in supplies of gold in the physical market.

I don't think the commercial net short position of 800 tonnes is that important. What is important is that the world's stockpile of 140,000 tonnes of gold may have been sold several times over. In all likelihood half of the supposed 30,000 tonnes of central bank stockpiles have been sold at least 20 times over. The gold short position could well be 300,000 tonnes (15,000 times 20) against a total world inventory of only 140,000 tonnes, much of which is not available to the market.

Could there be a more bullish scenario for gold?

If you think that such business practices could not be tolerated, I can hold up the example of the airlines, which regularly and knowingly oversell the seats on their flights, expecting that not all passengers will show up. Bullion bankers oversell their inventory of gold knowing that only 10 percent of customers will ever ask for it, just as the goldsmiths figured.

One cannot discuss the gold market in isolation, as it is linked to the U.S. dollar and Treasury debt. The major impetus behind the suppression of the gold market was to maintain a strong dollar despite massive overissuance of the currency. This has allowed the United States to live beyond its means because the rest of the world accepts the funny money as payment for goods and services. In a study he did when he was a professor of economics at Harvard titled "Gibson's Paradox and the Gold Standard," former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers showed that in a free market gold and real interest rates move inversely to each other. But since 1995 the United States has had low gold prices and low interest rates. In the absence of a gold standard this could have been achieved only by surreptitiously fixing the gold price through market manipulation. This was the essence of the "strong dollar policy" of Robert Rubin, the mechanism of which was never explained to the public.

The dynamics of the silver market are different. About 90 percent of silver production is used for industrial applications. Only 10 percent is purchased for investment. Clearly paper substitutes for silver cannot be used in industrial processes. The investment market is suppressed by paper silver substitutes as described above with respect to the gold market. It is this market, specifically the Comex futures exchange, that controls the price of silver.

The very low price of silver over the last 30 years has encouraged large holders of silver to dishoard it. After all, who wants to pay costly storage fees for something that is of low and declining value and bulky to store? This dishoarding has filled the gap between silver production and industrial demand, which runs at more than 200 million ounces annually.

Much of the investment demand has been met with paper substitutes and scams that are variations on the one that was perpetrated by Morgan Stanley. Because of the suppression of the price of silver it has been uneconomic to recycle most industrially used silver, with the exception of silver used in photography. This has meant that most industrially used silver finds its way into landfills. All the above-ground silver is now less than 1 billion ounces. Considering that the exchange-traded fund SLV alone claims to have more than 250 million ounces of silver, it is reasonable to estimate that investors have been sold something of the order of 5 billion ounces of silver. But how much is supported by real metal?

If the same ounce of silver has been sold 20 times over, as with my estimate in gold, then only 250 million ounces of investment silver bullion exist. This means that 4.75 billion ounces of silver could potentially be demanded in a market where only 1 billion ounces of stockpile exist and mining supply is already oversubscribed to the tune of 200 million ounces annually. One can probably add to this picture that investors who cannot easily find physical gold will come looking to buy physical silver. What is even more bullish is that the industrial users will not sit idly by watching a manic silver grab. They will join in the fray because they cannot remain in business unless they have silver inventory. They will try to stockpile silver at a time of acute shortage.

So the dynamics of the gold and silver markets are wildly bullish. This is no longer about whether the commercials will knock down the price by selling more contracts short. This is about a lot of market participants who have been content to hold precious metal paper substitutes but who now increasingly will want to own real bullion. This has been happening slowly but will gather pace. Because in the last 30 years most investors have trusted the brokers, dealers, and bullion banks to have the metals that have been sold, there has been no "run on the bank." This is changing. Many indications point to significant supply stress building.

Why are the entities that hold the largest short positions on the planet custodians of the bullion depositories for the largest ETFs? That's like putting a sex offender in charge of the day care center or Bernie Madoff in charge of your company pension fund.

The argument against holding physical bullion yourself has always been the risk it might get stolen while in your possession. But the risk of holding bullion substitutes is that it already has been stolen or never existed.

The precious metals market is now akin to a game of musical chairs with perhaps only one chair for every 20 players. It might be prudent to follow in the footsteps of Germany, Hong Kong, China, and Greenlight Capital and get your chair before the music stops.

If the physical markets for precious metals lock up due to shortages, then the short squeeze will be of epic proportions; it will be something to tell your grandchildren about. It will be a far better story for your grandchildren if you are on the right side of the trade.

Adrian Douglas is a member of GATA's Board of Directors and editor of the Market Force Analysis letter. Reprinted with permission.

For further reading:
"The Game Changer?", Ted Butler, July 14, 2009
"Did the ECB Save COMEX from Gold Default?", Avery Goodman, April 2, 2009
"The Future of Gold", Naufal Sanaullah, January 26, 2009
"The Manipulation of Gold Prices", James Conrad, December 4, 2008

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

The Demise of the Dollar

By Robert Fisk
The Independent
Tuesday, October 6, 2009

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175.html

In a graphic illustration of the new world order, Arab states have launched secret moves with China, Russia, and France to stop using the U.S. currency for oil trading.

In the most profound financial change in recent Middle East history, Gulf Arabs are planning -- along with China, Russia, Japan, and France -- to end dollar dealings for oil, moving instead to a basket of currencies including the Japanese yen and Chinese yuan, the euro, gold, and a new, unified currency planned for nations in the Gulf Co-Operation Council, including Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and Qatar.

Secret meetings have already been held by finance ministers and central bank governors in Russia, China, Japan, and Brazil to work on the scheme, which will mean that oil will no longer be priced in dollars.

The plans, confirmed to The Independent by both Gulf Arab and Chinese banking sources in Hong Kong, may help to explain the sudden rise in gold prices, but it also augurs an extraordinary transition from dollar markets within nine years.

The Americans, who are aware the meetings have taken place -- although they have not discovered the details -- are sure to fight this international cabal, which will include hitherto loyal allies Japan and the Gulf Arabs. Against the background to these currency meetings, Sun Bigan, China's former special envoy to the Middle East, has warned there is a risk of deepening divisions between China and the U.S. over influence and oil in the Middle East. "Bilateral quarrels and clashes are unavoidable," he told the Asia and Africa Review. "We cannot lower vigilance against hostility in the Middle East over energy interests and security."

This sounds like a dangerous prediction of a future economic war between the U.S. and China over Middle East oil -- yet again turning the region's conflicts into a battle for great power supremacy. China uses more oil incrementally than the U.S. because its growth is less energy-efficient.

The transitional currency in the move away from dollars, according to Chinese banking sources, may well be gold. An indication of the huge amounts involved can be gained from the wealth of Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar, which together hold an estimated $2.1 trillion in dollar reserves.

The decline of American economic power linked to the current global recession was implicitly acknowledged by the World Bank president Robert Zoellick. "One of the legacies of this crisis may be a recognition of changed economic power relations," he said in Istanbul ahead of meetings this week of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. But it is China's extraordinary new financial power -- along with past anger among oil-producing and oil-consuming nations at America's power to interfere in the international financial system -- which has prompted the latest discussions involving the Gulf states.

Brazil has shown interest in collaborating in non-dollar oil payments, along with India. Indeed, China appears to be the most enthusiastic of all the financial powers involved, not least because of its enormous trade with the Middle East.

China imports 60 per cent of its oil, much of it from the Middle East and Russia. The Chinese have oil production concessions in Iraq -- blocked by the US until this year -- and since 2008 have held an $8 billion agreement with Iran to develop refining capacity and gas resources. China has oil deals in Sudan (where it has substituted for U.S. interests) and has been negotiating for oil concessions with Libya, where all such contracts are joint ventures.

Furthermore, Chinese exports to the region now account for no fewer than 10 per cent of the imports of every country in the Middle East, including a huge range of products from cars to weapon systems, food, clothes, and even dolls. In a clear sign of China's growing financial muscle, the president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, yesterday pleaded with Beijing to let the yuan appreciate against a sliding dollar and, by extension, loosen China's reliance on U.S. monetary policy, to help rebalance the world economy and ease upward pressure on the euro.

Ever since the Bretton Woods agreements -- the accords after the Second World War which bequeathed the architecture for the modern international financial system -- America's trading partners have been left to cope with the impact of Washington's control and, in more recent years, the hegemony of the dollar as the dominant global reserve currency.

The Chinese believe, for example, that the Americans persuaded Britain to stay out of the euro in order to prevent an earlier move away from the dollar. But Chinese banking sources say their discussions have gone too far to be blocked now. "The Russians will eventually bring in the rouble to the basket of currencies," a prominent Hong Kong broker told The Independent. "The Brits are stuck in the middle and will come into the euro. They have no choice because they won't be able to use the U.S. dollar."

Chinese financial sources believe President Barack Obama is too busy fixing the U.S. economy to concentrate on the extraordinary implications of the transition from the dollar in nine years' time. The current deadline for the currency transition is 2018.

The U.S. discussed the trend briefly at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh; the Chinese Central Bank governor and other officials have been worrying aloud about the dollar for years. Their problem is that much of their national wealth is tied up in dollar assets.

"These plans will change the face of international financial transactions," one Chinese banker said. "America and Britain must be very worried. You will know how worried by the thunder of denials this news will generate."

Iran announced late last month that its foreign currency reserves would henceforth be held in euros rather than dollars. Bankers remember, of course, what happened to the last Middle East oil producer to sell its oil in euros rather than dollars. A few months after Saddam Hussein trumpeted his decision, the Americans and British invaded Iraq.

For further reading:
"China calls time on dollar hegemony", The Telegraph, October 6, 2009
"The end of the dollar spells the rise of a new order", The Independent, October 6, 2009
"Saudi Bank Governor Denies Talks to Replace Dollar", Bloomberg, October 6, 2009
"Plans to Move Away from Dollar Pricing of Oil", naked capitalism, October 5, 2009
"The End of Dollar Hegemony", Ron Paul, February 15, 2006

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

China Buys First IMF Bonds, Moves away from US Dollar Reserves

Business Intelligence Middle East
Friday, September 4, 2009

http://www.bi-me.com/main.php?id=40013&t=1&c=33&cg=4&mset=

DUBAI -- China has agreed to buy the first International Monetary Fund bonds for about US$50 billion, the IMF said.

IMF managing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn and the deputy governor of the People's Bank of China, Yi Gang, signed the agreement Wednesday at IMF headquarters in Washington, the multilateral institution said.

Under the agreement, the Chinese central bank "would purchase up to SDR 32 billion (around US$50 billion) in IMF notes," it said.

SDRs are defined in terms of a basket of major currencies used in international trade and finance. The currencies in the basket are 44% US dollars, 34% euros, 11% Japanese yens and 11% pounds sterling.

SDRs are used as a unit of account by the IMF and other international organizations, that is calculated daily and which members can convert into other currencies.

"The note purchase agreement is the first in the history of the fund," the 186-nation institution said.

The IMF executive board approved the plan to issue notes to governments on 1 July.

China will use yuan, not dollars, to buy the IMF-issued bonds, it was revealed on Friday.The expectation had been that China would use dollars to buy the bonds.

The purchase price of each IMF bond should be paid "by transfer of the SDR equivalent amount of Chinese Renminbi to the account of the Fund", the agreement, which was signed earlier this week, stipulated.

A Chinese central bank official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said it was not clear how the bond purchase would be implemented in practice. One possibility is that the use of yuan is purely a question of accounting convenience.

The IMF might sell the yuan directly back to the Chinese central bank for dollars, hence allowing Beijing to diversify its foreign exchange reserves, said Zhang Bin, an analyst at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a key government think-tank.

The issuance of bonds is an unprecedented step to boost IMF resources as the institution struggles to provide financing to help member nations cope with the global financial and economic crises.

"The agreement offers China a safe investment instrument. It will also boost the fund's capacity to help its membership -- particularly the developing and emerging market countries -- weather the global financial crisis, and facilitate an early recovery of the global economy," the IMF said.

The global economy is beginning to pull out of the worst recession since World War II, according to the institution, but recovery is expected to be sluggish and financial systems remain fragile.

China, whose dynamic economy is expected to lead the global economy out of recession, has been seeking greater representation at the IMF to reflect its rising economic might.

The IMF currently has to raise money by issuing bonds. It has a shortfall of funds due to the financial crisis, yet has to financially support some countries, said Zeng Gang, director of the Department of the Banking Industry of the China Institute of Finance and Banking.

He added that China's holdings of the IMF bond would help give it greater saying and influence in the IMF.

Besides this, holding the bond provides a relatively secure investment, given the risk of depreciation in holding the US dollar.

Since the US dollar holds a smaller proportion than the combination of the other three currencies, holding the IMF bond is safer than US dollar assets.

However, the bond is unlikely to act as the main investment product for China's huge foreign exchange reserves, because the total issue of the bond is only one-tenth of the T-bonds issued by America, and the bond buyer has to bear some exchange risk and interest rate risk, according to market analysts.

Some analysts argue that this bond is more close to debt, as private investors cannot participate and the bond cannot not be traded on a secondary market, which means the investors have to face some liquidity risks.

Brazil, Russia and India -- the other three countries that make up what is known collectively as the BRIC countries -- are seen as potential buyers of IMF bonds and are also in the vanguard of developing countries' drive for greater representation in international bodies.

A deal for Russia to buy up to US$10 billion of IMF should be concluded by September, a senior Russian government official said in early July.

Brazil is also in the market for US$10 billion worth of new IMF bonds.

Any bid by China to expand its formal influence at the IMF is likely to encounter resistance, especially from Europe, which has traditionally provided the fund's managing director.

Chinese think-tank economists said the purchase symbolised the country's "very first step" toward increasing its say in reshaping global financial institutions amid the financial crisis.

The bonds also allow China to diversify its massive holdings of foreign reserves, giving it an alternative to purchasing US State bonds. And it will give the IMF the resources it needs to help other countries battle through the global crisis.

China holds US$2.13 trillion in foreign exchange reserves, the world's largest stockpile, and economists reckon that about two-thirds are invested in dollar-denominated assets.

For further reading:
"China to use yuan, not dollars, for IMF bond buy", Reuters, September 4, 2009
"China to buy $50 billion of first IMF bonds", Associated Press, September 3, 2009