What's new

Japan’s Impending Monetary Exhaustion – OpEd

艹艹艹

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jul 7, 2016
Messages
5,149
Reaction score
0
Country
China
Location
China
Japan’s Impending Monetary Exhaustion – OpEd

BYDAN STEINBOCKSEPTEMBER 24, 2016


Recently, Japan’s second quarter GDP growth was revised up to 0.7 percent, after four consecutive quarters of stagnation. But don’t set your hopes too high.

More than three years ago, the conservative caution of the Bank of Japan (BOJ) Governor Masaaki Shirakawa faded into history as his successor Haruhiko Kuroda pledged to do “whatever it takes” to achieve the 2 percent inflation target. Yet, today inflation remains close to zero and Japan’s stock market is down 13 percent.

Irrespective of the outcome of its recent meeting, the BOJ can only postpone the inevitable. Nevertheless, cyclical fluctuations in Japan or elsewhere will in no way mitigate secular challenges.

Failure of monetary gamble
Under Kuroda, the BOJ has boosted quantitative and qualitative easing with negative interest rate policy. Base money and the central bank’s holdings of Japanese government bonds (JGBs) each have swollen to almost ¥400 trillion ($3.9 trillion), which is now 80 percent of the country’s GDP, and they continue to expand at a pace of¥80 trillion ($780 billion) annually.

What Kuroda is doing would be comparable to Fed chief Janet Yellen boosting base money and the Fed’s treasuries up to $14.9 trillion, while easing at $3 trillion per year, with no specific limit in sight. In Washington, that would mean an economic kamikaze and political suicide. Until recently, Japan was a different story.

Now divisions are spreading in the BOJ. Kuroda’s fractured majority is sticking with the original plan of large-scale JGBS and negative rates to boost growth and inflation. However, some advocate greater flexibility – ¥70 trillion to ¥90 trillion per year – in purchases, hoping that would make a difference. In contrast, skeptics would like to curb the BOJ’s purchases, even at the risk of perceptions of tightening, rising yen and plunging markets.

Nonetheless, all three seem to believe that Japan’s fortunes can be reversed by monetary policies alone and that these policies are not part of the problem.

Failure of Abenomics
In December 2013, when the Liberal Democratic Party returned to leadership with Abe as its minister, the LDP campaigned on renewed fiscal stimulus, aggressive monetary easing from the BOJ, structural reforms to boost competitiveness and eventual fiscal consolidation. The devaluation of the yen, critical to Japanese exporters, was the tacit denominator of the proposed changes.

In addition to a huge liquidity risk, Tokyo took another risk in timing, as I argued then. It sought to implement the fiscal stimulus in 2013, while fiscal consolidation would follow. Obviously, unease increased in 2014. As Abe went ahead with the sales tax hike that spring, the recovery was too fragile for consolidation. Instead of strong expansion, Japan slid into recession and began its third lost decade.

Ironically, the yen continues to rise, thanks to stagnation in the West and the dated perception that yen remains a safe haven currency.

Last summer, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) finally acknowledged Abenomics is not working. “The targets for growth, inflation, and the primary balance remain out of reach under current policies,” it reported. As Tokyo’s policy authorities recognized the risks, they have delayed the proposed consumption tax hike, adopted new structural reforms and a negative interest policy.

Yet, outlook remains weak with real GDP growth less than 1 percent until early 2020s. Meanwhile, time is running out.

Hitting the ceiling
If the BOJ will continue to purchase JGB debt, it will own almost half of all JGPs outstanding by fall 2017. That would leave another half the JGBs available for the BOJ to buy. Yet, banks need some JGBs for collateral, while insurers must have their long-term JGBs. So a year ago, even the IMF had to conclude that the BOJ would hit its JGB purchase ceiling “sometime in 2017 or 2018.”

Now there is the additional challenge of the flat yield curve. After the BOJ’s negative rates in January, the JGB curve has flattened drastically. Coupled with low rates, persistently flatter yield curves are likely to weaken financial intermediation and penalize banks, insurers and pension funds, reducing their risk-taking.

Worse, Kuroda’s monetary gamble does not only involve bond markets, but equities as well. Under its stimulus plan, the BOJ buys 3 trillion yen ($29 billion) of exchange-traded funds (ETF) annually. In spring, these purchases made it a top-10 holder in about 90 percent of all Japanese stocks, according to Bloomberg data. In late July the BOJ doubled its ETF buys to 6 trillion yen ($59 billion) per year.

It could become the No 1 shareholder in some 40 Nikkei 225 companies by early 2018.

In the next few years, the BOJ could not only own most of the Japanese bond market, but virtually most Japanese stocks; even as Japan’s gross debt will exceed 250 percent of its GDP. It is a disastrous path.

The selloff twist
Usually, political opposition can undermine failed economic policies. Yet, Japan’s main opposition Democratic Party has been struggling since it lost to Abe in 2012. In turn, Emperor Akihito has even sought to abdicate the throne in his lifetime to prevent Abe from reviving the pre-war Imperial Japan.
If countervailing forces linger in domestic economy and politics, even internationally, market volatility is a different story.

Since the summer, Japan has been suffering from a bond tantrum as its sovereign debt has had its worst rout in a decade. Some expect the BOJ next to pursue a reverse “Operation Twist.” It could sell long-end bonds, while buying the short-end to make the easing more sustainable over time. But as trillions in long-dated JGBs continue to carry negative yields, an abrupt withdrawal from the long-end could roil the market.

Japan remains the world’s third-largest economy and the second-largest debt market. Moreover, correlations among major markets have increased significantly since 2008. A perceived policy reversal could unleash a dramatic selloff in JGBs, while global fixed-income markets would not remain immune.
If that selloff will not ensue in the fall or 2017-18, it will only grow into a more devastating market tsunami over time.

A slightly shorter original version was released by South China Morning Post on September 21, 2016


http://www.eurasiareview.com/24092016-japans-impending-monetary-exhaustion-oped/
 
Japan still one of the richest countries in the world, with or without monetary problems. Japan is still better than any EU countries. The unemployment rate is 3.7% in Japan.

When people write stuff about a country's debt, most do not truly understand debt. IN most cases, everything is black and white, like how Americans view things. When they hear the word "debt" it's an automatic bad word. In a layman analogy, Japan is a like multi billionaire with a billion in debt. He can handle it because hist asset to debt ration is 3 to 1. India, indonesia, malaysia, vietnam have lower debt than Japan so does that mean these other countries economy is better than Japan? Or have a higher living standard than Japan? :enjoy:

Ask people around the where they prefer to live from the countries listed? The answer is obvious.
 
Japan still one of the richest countries in the world, with or without monetary problems. Japan is still better than any EU countries. The unemployment rate is 3.7% in Japan.

When people write stuff about a country's debt, most do not truly understand debt. IN most cases, everything is black and white, like how Americans view things. When they hear the word "debt" it's an automatic bad word. In a layman analogy, Japan is a like multi billionaire with a billion in debt. He can handle it because hist asset to debt ration is 3 to 1. India, indonesia, malaysia, vietnam have lower debt than Japan so does that mean these other countries economy is better than Japan? Or have a higher living standard than Japan? :enjoy:

Ask people around the where they prefer to live from the countries listed? The answer is obvious.


Bro, can I ask something @Jlaw @jkroo @Shotgunner51 @AndrewJin

@hoangsa74 @gambit @Providence @Hamartia Antidote


Can you give me little explanation about the difference of Japan and America Debt's Problem?
What is the difference between their Debt problem?

Thanks bro :-)
 
Last edited:
Bro, can I ask something @Jlaw @jkroo @Shotgunner51 @AndrewJin

@hoangsa74 @gambit @Providence @Hamartia Antidote


Can you give me little explanation about the difference of Japan and America Debt's Problem?
What is the difference between their Debt problem?

Thanks bro :-)


Before going into details of various countries, let's clarify the concept, what is "debt"? On macro-economic scale, these three are the mostly commonly mentioned subjects, and they are ENTIRELY different things:
  • National Debt: This is the debt owned by national (federal) governments, creditors could be domestic or foreign. When government spend more than they collect (tax receipt), they raise debts to finance this fiscal deficit.
  • External/International Position: The authoritative term is NIIP as per IMF (latest version of BoP Manual 6). In simple language, as nations trade (commodities, services and capital) there will be surplus or deficit in their BoP accounts (current account, capital account), resulting in owning assets abroad, or owing liabilities to the foreign world. When a nation owns more assets in than owing liabilities to the foreign world, it's a creditor nation, otherwise it's a debtor nation.
  • Domestic Credit to Private Sector: amount of financial resources provided to the private sector by financial corporations, such as through loans, purchases of non-equity securities, and trade credits and other accounts receivable, that establish a claim for repayment. This is the "debt market" mentioned in OP.
I wish the above help you grasp an idea on what are "debts". About performance of each country in these counts, I will scramble some data and post my comment later, thanks!
 
Last edited:
Japan still one of the richest countries in the world, with or without monetary problems. Japan is still better than any EU countries. The unemployment rate is 3.7% in Japan.

When people write stuff about a country's debt, most do not truly understand debt. IN most cases, everything is black and white, like how Americans view things. When they hear the word "debt" it's an automatic bad word. In a layman analogy, Japan is a like multi billionaire with a billion in debt. He can handle it because hist asset to debt ration is 3 to 1. India, indonesia, malaysia, vietnam have lower debt than Japan so does that mean these other countries economy is better than Japan? Or have a higher living standard than Japan? :enjoy:

Ask people around the where they prefer to live from the countries listed? The answer is obvious.

Japan shouldn't be worried about growth, their population is in decline which means even when GDP is not increasing, there is actually growth in GDP per capita. Printing money to spurt growth is digging oneself into a hole where there wasn't one. But debt in this case is bad since its not an investment for the future, its just creating inflation for the purpose of creating inflation. If only they can take a lesson from the Scandinavian and enjoy the high living standard with a stable economy and not concerned about growth, they are actually fine. If however the ambition is to be a global power, then thing will only get worse.
 
@Daniel808

Now we have talked about what are "debts" in post #4, let's respond to your earlier question about how Japan and US fare in these counts (I add China to the list):
  • National Debt: In terms of absolute amount, US national debt is far bigger than any other nation. As a percentage of GDP (by Dec 2015), Japan was 229.2%, US was 104.17%. Comparatively speaking, China was only a modest 43.9%. On top of the difference in debt levels, creditor structures are also very different, national debts of Japan and China are almost entirely held domestically (own citizens, institutions), while a significant proportion of US national debt was held by foreign creditors.
  • External/International Position: US is a debtor nation, while Japan (so is China) are exactly opposite. Since 1910's till decades after second world war, for 70 years US has been the world's largest creditor nation, until Reagan times, and nowadays the largest debtor nation (staggering -$8.0428T at end March 2016, sinking at a break-neck speed of $1.8T per year). Japan overtook US as the world's largest creditor in late 1980's, and hold the title for 25 years till today. After 2 decades of accumulating trade surpluses, China Mainland (excluding NIIP of Taiwan, Hong Kong) has become the only "developing country" among world's major creditor nations.
Untitled.png


Note: Some nations do not report NIIP as per IMF BPM6, e.g. KSA, which reports Net Foreign Asserts, the amount was $554 billion (Aug 2016), that ranks KSA about the same as Singapore and Netherlands.
  • Domestic Credit to Private Sector: As percentage of GDP, Japan was 194.3%, US was 190.4%, China was 155.3%. Both US and Japan have far more developed financial markets, which are further fueled by low interests rate in recent years. China has a tightly regulated, under-developed debt market, I believe there's a lot of upside to grow (and re-balance from SOE heavy to POE centric) given the extraordinary high Gross National Saving rate (as % of GDP, tied with Singapore as second highest in the world, only trails behind Qatar; way too high at this stage of development).
Sources:
 
Last edited:
Thanks so much for your explanation, bro @Shotgunner51 :-)
Really Informative.

National Debt: In terms of absolute amount, US national debt is far bigger than any other nation. As a percentage of GDP (by Dec 2015), Japan was 229.2%, US was 104.17%. Comparatively speaking, China was only a modest 43.9%. On top of the difference in debt levels, creditor structures are also very different, national debts of Japan and China are almost entirely held domestically (own citizens, institutions), while a significant proportion of US national debt was held by foreign creditors.


By the way, it is true bro? @Shotgunner51
it's more Dangerous if Majority of your National Debt is held by Foreign Creditors (US), other than held domestically by their own Citizens (China, and Japan)

@hoangsa74 @Hamartia Antidote @gambit @Providence
 
Thanks so much for your explanation, bro @Shotgunner51 :-)
Really Informative.

National Debt: In terms of absolute amount, US national debt is far bigger than any other nation. As a percentage of GDP (by Dec 2015), Japan was 229.2%, US was 104.17%. Comparatively speaking, China was only a modest 43.9%. On top of the difference in debt levels, creditor structures are also very different, national debts of Japan and China are almost entirely held domestically (own citizens, institutions), while a significant proportion of US national debt was held by foreign creditors.


By the way, it is true bro? @Shotgunner51
it's more Dangerous if Majority of your National Debt is held by Foreign Creditors (US), other than held domestically by their own Citizens (China, and Japan)

@hoangsa74 @Hamartia Antidote @gambit @Providence

Thanks. US national debt stands at approx 106% of its GDP which is around 19trillion USD as of Sep 2016.

The top holder by far is U.S. citizens and American entities, such as state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, and the Federal Reserve. Together they own the vast majority -- 67.5% -- of the debt.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2016/opds022016.pdf

Foreign nations only hold 32.5% of the total.

http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

160510133535-americas-debt-780x439.jpg


32.5% of debt held by foreign entities is not a big deal at all considering that US financial markets is the most developed in the world with no country even close to it.

It's not more dangerous if the debt is held by foreign entities. It's more dangerous if it is held by a single foreign entity !

Japan has a whopping 220% of GDP as debt and BOJ has more than 90% of the debt on it's balance sheet. What it means for Japan is, in case Abenomics (which technically is not even a theory of it's own) fail, the debt can still be repaid as a perpetual bond held by japanese citizens.

Thanks. US national debt stands at approx 106% of its GDP which is around 19trillion USD as of Sep 2016.

The top holder by far is U.S. citizens and American entities, such as state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, and the Federal Reserve. Together they own the vast majority -- 67.5% -- of the debt.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2016/opds022016.pdf

Foreign nations only hold 32.5% of the total.

http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

160510133535-americas-debt-780x439.jpg


32.5% of debt held by foreign entities is not a big deal at all considering that US financial markets is the most developed in the world with no country even close to it.

It's not more dangerous if the debt is held by foreign entities. It's more dangerous if it is held by a single foreign entity !

Japan has a whopping 220% of GDP as debt and BOJ has more than 90% of the debt on it's balance sheet. What it means for Japan is, in case Abenomics (which technically is not even a theory of it's own) fail, the debt can still be repaid as a perpetual bond held by japanese citizens.

The situation in china is very different. Most investors in chinese debt market are retail investors rather than financial institutions as in US and Japan.
So when US markets crashed, you would have heard of millions of unemployed youths however when chinese markets sent just a wee bit south, there were mass suicides committed.

So whatever the debt levels are in different markets, "which one is worst" entails different consequences for each of them.
 

Back
Top Bottom