Interest rates and inflation vs reality

Interest rates and inflation vs reality

With inflation once again taking centre stage in the financial media, speculation is rife that central banks will have to respond. Conventional wisdom says the way to do that is to raise interest rates, the theory being that it moderates demand which feeds through to reduced prices. This playbook comes largely from how the US Federal Reserve dealt with the worst inflationary period of the modern era, at the end of the 1970s.

The narrative is that “Tall Paul” Volcker, the US Fed Chairman who stood 6’8”, crushed the US’s 14% inflation rate of 1980 by driving interest rates to a record high of 20%, throwing the economy into a savage recession. While he became one of the most hated men in America, by 1982 inflation averaged just 3.8% for the year. The message was clear: raising interest rates kills inflation.

Or does it? If interest rates are that powerful, how come central banks failed to increase inflation by keeping them super low for the past 10 years? There is an alternative view about inflation that begins with the premise that modern economies are incredibly complex; so complex in fact that to suggest using one single tool, the overnight cash rate, to control it is fanciful. To explore this view, it helps to have some context: a quick overview of the 1970s oil crisis.

Crude oil prices (log scale)
Crude oil prices (log scale)

In the 1960s the US was largely self-sufficient for oil, and prices were kept super stable by the Texas Railroad Commission setting quotas. However, in October 1973, when the US was more dependent on foreign oil than it had ever been, especially from Saudi Arabia, OPEC declared an oil embargo against those countries that had supported Israel in the Yom Kippur War. The oil price just about tripled from US$3.60 per barrel to more than US$10 per barrel only six months later.

Oil, of course, is completely woven into modern economies, from transport, to energy production, to forming critical components of an almost endless list of manufactured products. Prices started to rise across almost all goods as producers passed on the higher input costs at each stage of production, and US inflation rates went with them, rising from an annual rate of 3.4% in 1972, to 8.7% in 1973, to 12.3% in 1974.

US annual inflation rate
US annual inflation rate

By the time Jimmy Carter was elected president in 1976, oil was trading at $13.90 per barrel and  US oil imports had shot up 65% annually since 1973 to be 48% of total consumption. In 1976 the nation was consuming one-quarter of all of OPEC’s production and was woefully wasteful in its energy use, with consumption per capita 2.3 times the average for nations in the European Economic Community and 2.6 times Japan’s.

Adding to the general inflationary pressures was the US$ index (DXY, which is a weighted measure of the US$ against its major trading partners) fell from 115 in 1971 to 80 in 1977 after the US abandoned the gold standard. That meant all imports cost 30% more over that six-year period, on top of the oil price rise.

US DOLLAR INDEX 1967-2015
US dollar index 1967-2015

Then in 1978 the Iranian revolution prompted a strike at the nationalized oil refinery, reducing production from 6 million barrels per day to 1.5 million. While that only represented about 4% of global supply, the oil price jumped again to $39.50 by 1980. All told, the oil price had risen 1000% in seven years and the inflation rate hit a post-war high in 1979.

What followed, however, was a classic combination of market and regulatory responses that brought about a remarkable reversal in oil prices thanks to tectonic shifts in both supply and demand.

In 1978, Carter deregulated oil and gas prices, which prompted an increase in oil exploration and led to a huge increase in the domestic supply of energy over the following years. By the time Carter left office in 1980, foreign oil had fallen to be 40% of US consumption, a reduction equivalent to 1.8 million barrels per day, oil inventories had risen sharply and there was a surplus of gas. Then between 1980 and 1985, domestic US production increased by almost 1 million barrels a day, while imports of crude oil and petroleum products declined from 8.2 to 4.5 million barrels a day.

On the demand side, automobile fuel economy standards were introduced in 1975 that required a doubling of efficiency by 1985, and stories abounded of households yanking out their old oil burning heaters to switch to gas, which was in surplus. All in all, by 1986 the oil price had fallen more than 70% to $10.40 per barrel, aided in part by a resurgent US$ that doubled in value between 1980 to 1985.

Not surprisingly, the alternative view about how the record level of inflation in the 1970s was crushed by the mid-1980s revolves around the real world effects of a huge rise in the most critical commodity, followed by a huge decline.

While suggesting the single act of raising interest rates solved the inflation problem is an appealingly simple solution, and it may indeed have contributed, when you account for the incredible complexity of a modern economy, it shouldn’t be surprising there would be a lot more to it. Not all price increases are going to be effectively resolved by increasing the cost of money.

Professor Stephanie Kelton of Stonybrook University, a recognised advocate of MMT, puts it this way: if the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was to be struck down, depriving many people of health insurance and allowing insurers to price based on pre-existing conditions, it’s estimated health insurance premiums would rise by up to 30%. If that happened, it would show up in the inflation numbers. How would raising interest rates reduce that kind of inflation? Reducing people’s access to money or credit won’t drive down health costs. However, regulating the cost of health insurance would, or the cost of drugs and medical care.

In the context of our current elevated rate of inflation, much has been made of the 10-fold rise in the cost of shipping containers. Already though, there are ways that is being addressed:

  • The port of Los Angeles recently allowed containers to be stacked four high instead of two, freeing up space for ships to empty their cargo
  • Up to 70% of container space is fresh air and new software packages using AI are available to guide companies on the most efficient way to pack their goods
  • Astonishingly, container contracts are currently unenforceable, simply changing that would increase certainty for companies
  • There is a website being developed to establish a ‘secondary market’ so that companies that have spare container space can put it on the market

These are practical ways of reducing pricing pressures that simply raising interest rates, which can only change the price of money, could not achieve.

The conventional view that the way to fight inflation is by central banks increasing interest rates arguably stems from a misinterpretation of correlation and causation dating back to the 1980s. Interest rates undoubtedly have a role to play in managing a modern economy, especially with respect to house prices where a high proportion of transactions rely on borrowing money. As for the rest of this very complex economy, a better approach could be to see them as part of the solution.

Want to discuss your investment strategy with a specialist? Call us today.

Headwinds for Australian shares

Headwinds for Australian shares

The eighteen months from the end of March 2020 to September 2021 will go down as one of the most astonishing periods for the Australian share market. The ASX200 Accumulation Index jumped more than 50 per cent, taking pretty much everyone by surprise after expectations had been hammered by the wholesale closure of the global economy.

The 2021 financial year saw Australian companies report 27 per cent earnings growth, the best in more than 30 years, albeit bouncing off a low prior year comparison. After companies slashed dividends the previous year, cash holdings surged to a record $211 billion and dividends bounced back ferociously, almost doubling year over year.

Record iron ore prices underwrote spectacular dividends from the big miners; banks were awash in capital with a surging housing market and record low funding costs, and retailers reported record years as households spent up on tech and home improvements. There’s no question, the last 18 months have been very good to Australian share investors.

However, investors should be wary of presuming the Australian economy will continue to show the same resilience. There are at least three identifiable headwinds that warrant keeping a careful eye on.

The first, and by far the most influential, is the dramatic reduction in federal government support for the economy, particularly while the two most populous states have been hobbled by lockdowns.

In 2020, federal government programs such as JobKeeper and the JobSeeker supplement saw the injection of $251 billion into the economy. By contrast, between 1 June to 23 August of this year, Deloitte Access Economics calculated it injected just $3 billion.

JobKeeper alone injected an average of $1.7 billion per week and peaked at $2.5 billion. As of 23 August, the new federal COVID Disaster Payment was averaging only $217 million per week. Many businesses and workers will receive a fraction of the financial support they got last year, if they get any.

Household savings are still much higher than pre-COVID levels at almost 10 per cent, and there is every chance there will be a surge of spending when lockdowns finally end, but it’s unlikely to be the spending spree we saw last financial year and understandably much of it may be spent on doing things, rather than buying more stuff.

A second headwind might come from the red-hot housing sector. One of Australia’s highest rated economists, Tim Toohey of Yarra Capital Management, points out the federal government’s HomeBuilder program was wildly successful, with single home building approvals jumping more than 30 per cent to a record high.

At the same time state governments were offering other incentives to home buyers and the big banks were given access to $200 billion in super cheap funding. The result: the housing market has rocketed.

However, those housing approvals are simply drawing demand forward, creating a spike now with an inevitable trough on the other side, which Toohey points out will be exacerbated by immigration stopping dead. Toohey’s base case is 150,000 excess dwellings by 2023 and an inevitable slowing of the important housing construction sector.

The third headwind could come from China, where the regulatory upheaval from Xi’s common prosperity dictums is having a profound impact, especially on the real estate sector, which accounts for 17 per cent of the country’s GDP. Purely for context (as opposed to drama), at the height of the Japanese and US real estate bubbles the sector accounted for about 7 per cent of each country’s GDP.

It’s unclear how the Chinese government will deal with the fallout from excessive debt levels of companies like Evergrande, and autocratic governments can do things politically accountable governments can’t, but it’s possible the property sector will need to undergo comprehensive restructuring which will reduce activity. The significance being China accounts for three times the value of exports compared to our second largest trading partner, Japan.

It is entirely possible these three headwinds will be more than offset by the ongoing circulation of last year’s unprecedented fiscal injection and the unleashing of animal spirits when lockdowns are finally lifted and the urge to spend those accumulated savings takes hold. However, as always it pays to be mindful those headwinds don’t knock you off course.

Want to discuss your investment strategy with a specialist? Call us today.

Investors on tenterhooks over inflation

Investors on tenterhooks over inflation

A frustrated US President Harry Truman apparently pleaded for someone to find him a one-handed economist, so he wouldn’t constantly be told “on the other hand”. Right now, inflation is at the centre of ongoing debate among economists with opposing views that are critical for financial markets.

Why is it critical? It’s a broadly accepted tenet of financial markets that low inflation supports higher asset valuations, such as higher PE (price to earnings) ratios. Likewise, the lower inflation is, the lower long-term bond yields are, which means the discount rate used to calculate a discounted cash flow (DCF) valuation is lower, which results in higher asset valuations.

Low inflation has provided a powerful tailwind to the post-GFC bull market in global equities. The Australian ‘core’ inflation measure, which strips out the effect of the more volatile prices like food and energy, peaked at about 4.8 per cent in 2008 and trended down to 1.1 per cent in 2020. In the US, core CPI has varied around 2 per cent for most of the post-GFC period, while in Europe it’s been around 1 per cent.

Financial markets are concerned that a meaningful rise in inflation will force central banks to raise interest rates, which will flip the story to a serious headwind. The potential PE de-rating would hit the higher priced tech stocks especially hard, meaning the US share market would be particularly vulnerable. And as the old saying goes about America sneezing…

So why the concern now? Inflation measures around the world have spiked this year. Australia’s headline CPI rate jumped from 1.1 per cent in the March quarter, to 3.8 per cent in June, and in the US the CPI leaped from 1.7 per cent in February to a 13-year high of 5.4 per cent in July. While the respective core rates were lower, nevertheless they too saw a substantial jump.

What has economists divided though, is whether this spike is transitory and inflation will drop back down, as the central banks argue, or structural and so will continue to rise.

On the one hand, the transitory camp argues that because prices collapsed after multiple countries locked down between March and June last year, it was always going to look like a huge increase this year after those same prices had largely recovered.

An excellent example of this is the oil price. Over the year to Australia’s June 2021 CPI figure, the oil price increased 200 per cent, from $25 per barrel to $75. Automotive fuel prices rose 27 per cent over that same period, which, by itself, added about 1 per cent to the overall 3.8 per cent increase in the CPI. If fuel prices stay the same for the next 12 months, and nothing else changes, inflation should drop back to 2.8%.

Likewise, May saw the largest year on year increase in the US CPI since 1992, but three categories that comprise about 5 per cent of the core CPI drove 50 per cent of the monthly increase, and they were all associated with transport and mainly reflected used car prices jumping by almost 50 per cent over the year.

Proponents of the transitory view point to the 10-year government bond yield, which, at 1.25 per cent, shows the financial markets are sanguine about the prospects of higher inflation. Sceptics argue that simply reflects the heavy involvement of central banks.

On the other hand, the economists arguing inflationary pressures are likely to persist point to the sweeping changes many companies are making to supply chains as they prioritise security of supply over cost, undermining the disinflationary effects of globalisation. Also, rising wage pressures, more so in the US than Australia, will increase aggregate demand and could force companies to increase prices. Finally, some argue once the acceptance of rising prices is entrenched, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Inflation is awesomely complex and there is no cogent, complete model for it. Research by Ulrike Malmendier, Professor of Economics at Berkeley, shows peoples’ inflationary expectations are shaped by their lifetime experiences, regardless of their level of expertise. So those economists that lived through the stagflation of the 1970s might therefore be expected to be more cautious than those who didn’t. Smart investors will be well advised to watch carefully for inflation, but as usual, it’s likely the markets will pick it up well before we do.

What you need to know from the 2021-22 Federal Budget

What you need to know from the 2021-22 Federal Budget

As Scott Morrison kept reminding us this morning, ‘we are fighting the pandemic’ and so the Federal Budget focuses on key spending to drive Australia’s economic recovery.

This is a Budget promoting economic growth and employment. While you will have those who continue to have major concerns over government debt and the continued spending, could it be that we are seeing a ‘new’ way of thinking when it comes to debt? My colleague, James Weir, wrote a paper explaining this with Modern Monetary Theory (“MMT”), suggesting maybe the focus on debt is unwarranted?

So here are the simply the main features of the 2021-2022 Budget;

Personal Income Tax

Low and middle income tax offset

This will be extended to 2021-2022 providing a reduction in tax of up to $1,080 to low and middle income earners.

Superannuation

Federal Budget - Superannuation

Removing the work test

This is actually a significant change. Individuals aged 67 to 74 years will be able to make non-concessional super contributions, or salary sacrifice super contributions without meeting the work test.

However, in order to make personal deductible contributions, you will still need to meet the work test.

Downsizer contributions

The charges announced in the Budget from that article include reducing the eligibility age for 65 to 60 years of age. This scheme allows a one-off contribution of $300,000 per person from the proceeds of the sale of their home.

To learn more about downsizer contributions and how it can work for you check out my blog here.

SMSF residency restrictions

From 1 July 2022, the Government will extend the central control test from 2 years to 5 years and remove the active member test.

Super guarantee threshold

The $450 per month minimum income threshold under which employers are not required to make a super contribution for employees will be removed 1 July 2022.

First Home Buyer Scheme (FHBS)

From 1 July 2022, the Government will increase the amount of voluntary contributions to $50,000 which may be released for the purchase of a first home.

Family Support

Family Home Guarantee

The Government has introduced the Family Home Guarantee to support single parents with dependants buying a home. This is regardless of whether they are a first home buyer or a previous owner-occupier. From 1 July 2021, 10,000 guarantees will be made available over four years to eligible single parents with a deposit of as little as 2%, subject to an individual’s ability to service a loan.

The Government is also providing a further 10,000 places under the New Home Guarantee in 2021/22. This is specifically for first home buyers seeking to build a new home or purchase a newly built home with a deposit of as little as 5%.

Increasing childcare subsidy (CCS)

To ease the cost of childcare and encourage a return to the workforce, from 1 July 2022 the Government proposes to provide a higher level of CCS to families with more than one child under age 6 in childcare. The level of subsidy will increase by an extra 30% to a maximum subsidy of 95% for the second and subsequent children. For example, currently a family may receive a 50% subsidy on childcare costs for each child if family income is between $174,390 and $253,680. Under the proposal, the family would receive a CCS of 50% of costs for their first child and 80% for their second and subsequent children. The annual CCS cap of $10,560 for families earning between $189,390 and $353,660 will also be removed.

Social Security

Pension Loan Scheme

The Government has announced added flexibility by allowing up to two lump sum advances in any 12 month period up to 50% of the annual pension.

The Government will also not claim back any more than the sale price of the house used to guarantee the payment.

Aged Care

The Government has announced a $17.7b investment in aged care reform over the next 5 years which will cover:

  • Additional Home Care Packages
  • Greater access to respite care services
  • A new funding model for residential aged care
  • A new Refundable Accommodation Deposit (RAD) support loan program.

Business Support

COVID Package

The Government will extend until 30 June 2023 the instant write-off of depreciable assets as well as the ability for qualifying companies to claim back tax paid in prior years from 2018-2019 where tax losses occur until the end of the 2022-2023 financial year.