Timing & trends

Bob Hoye: “Gravity Waves”


Signs Of The Times

“Fresh loans in China’s banking system evaporated to almost nothing from $160 bn in January.”

                                                                                                           – The Telegraph, March 10

“Commodities and equities slide amid broad risk aversion.”

                                                                                               – Financial Times, March 11

“Italy’s biggest bank posted a $21 bn fourth quarter loss as it set aside money for bad loans and wrote down goodwill from past acquisitions.”

                                                                                                     – Bloomberg, March 11

“China is studying the default risk to companies that use iron ore as collateral.”

                                                                                                     – Bloomberg, March 13

“A Whole New Inflationary Threat Is On The Horizon”

                                                                                             – Business Insider, March 10

“But if the Fed can pull it [QE] off, it will go down as one of the greatest discoveries of our time.”

                                                                                             – Business Insider, March 12

 

images….read all Bob’s take on the Stock Market, Currencies & commodites HERE

Interview: Peter Schiff & His Strategies

UnknownOn the potential for another financial crisis in the US

I’d bet that most International Man readers are familiar with Peter Schiff. He is a financial commentator and author, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and is known for accurately predicting the 2008 financial crisis.

He also has a very keen understanding of internationalization. Peter shares with me his strategies in this must-read discussion below that I am happy to bring exclusively toInternational Man readers. (If you are not already a member, you can join for free here.)

Nick Giambruno: Peter, do you see the potential for another financial crisis in the US playing out in the not-so-distant future?

Peter Schiff: Unfortunately, yes. I mean, how soon is very difficult to tell. In fact, right now you’ve got a high level of complacency. The stock markets are rallying to new highs, nominal highs. People seem to be convinced that the worst is behind us, that the central banks of the world have solved their problems by papering them over. But, you know, I don’t think they’ve solved anything. I think they’ve compounded the underlying problems that caused the last crisis, and so now the next crisis will be that much worse because of what the central banks did, in particular the Federal Reserve.

The Fed is right now trying to prop the economy up, the housing market up with cheap money, and it is operating under the delusion that one day it can take that cheap money away and the economy and the housing market will just sustain on their own, but that’s not possible. The Fed is building an economy that is completely dependent on that cheap money. And so if you take it away, the economy implodes, but if you don’t take it away, then it’s worse.

Nick Giambruno: So what measures do you see coming into place—things such as capital controls?

Peter Schiff: Well, certainly as currencies depreciate, governments look to try to find ways to stop the bleeding. What’s really is going on with inflation is that you have a huge transfer of wealth from savers and lenders to debtors, and of course the US government is the world’s biggest debtor, but a lot of American voters are in debt too.

If you’re a saver and you don’t want to watch your assets confiscated through the printing press, then you’re going to try to protect yourself. You might do that by moving your dollars abroad, converting them to foreign currencies, trying to get out of harm’s way, and that’s when you have the government potentially coming in with capital controls.

Putting taxes on foreign currency transactions or maybe outright prohibiting them altogether, that will make it more difficult for you or more expensive to take protective measures. I think we’ve already got the beginnings of capital controls in the United States. The government is making it very difficult for Americans to do business abroad. Many foreign financial institutions, banks, and even bullion depositories are refusing to do business with American citizens for fear of retaliation by the IRS or other government agencies.

Nick Giambruno: So what can Americans and others living under a desperate government do to minimize this risk?

Peter Schiff: Well, the first thing that you could do is minimize your purchasing power risk. So you don’t have to get your money into a foreign bank or foreign brokerage account to get out of the dollar. I help Americans diversify globally within a US account, but their portfolio consists of foreign assets, whether it’s foreign bonds, government bonds, corporate bonds, foreign stocks, dividend-paying stocks, commodities, or precious metals. These are all things that will protect purchasing power in an inflationary time period, and things that the federal government—the Federal Reserve—can’t levy the inflation tax on.

If you’re more worried about political risk—about the US government seizing your assets—then you want to take the next step. This is not just getting out of the dollar, but getting your money out of the country. But again, the US government is making that more difficult right now.

I know personally. I set up a foreign brokerage firm as a subsidiary of my foreign bank, which I also set up, called Euro Pacific Bank. I did this predominantly for foreigners who were having trouble investing with my US brokerage firm. The securities rules and regulations are now so onerous that it almost caused me to view any foreigner as a terrorist. So if somebody in Australia wanted to open up an account with me, there was so much paperwork involved that oftentimes they would just give up halfway through the process. So what I did is I set up this foreign bank so that I wouldn’t have to operate under those confines, so I can be more competitive to a foreign investor, but I can’t offer these services to Americans.

My foreign bank is no different than many other foreign banks. In order to really protect the privacy of my foreign customers, I can’t accept American customers. And if I accepted American customers, my compliance cost would be so high that I would have to charge my foreign customers more for transactions to try to stay in business. So to mitigate all that regulation and the potential of having to share all the information on my foreign clients with the US government, I’m just not taking American customers with my foreign bank.

Nick Giambruno: So Euro Pacific Bank, where is it headquartered and why did you choose that jurisdiction?

Peter Schiff: It’s in St Vincent and the Grenadines (the Caribbean). I did it for a number of reasons: it’s close to me, but also because of the banking laws. You have secrecy, privacy, and you have no tax. They’re not going to impose any income tax on my company as an offshore bank, they’re also not going to impose any taxes, any withholding taxes on my bank’s customers’ interest income or their capital gains. And no one is going to pierce the wall of secrecy. You’re going to have to go in to a St. Vincent’s court and get a local court order to get any information from my bank.

The bank is regulated, but it’s not nearly as onerous as the type of regulations that I would face trying to do this business from the United States. In fact, some of the things we’re doing offshore might be completely impossible because they would no longer be economically viable if I tried to do them in America, but I can do them offshore because the government doesn’t impose these artificial barriers.

(Editor’s Note: You can find out more about Euro Pacific Bank here.)

Nick Giambruno: Generally speaking, which countries are you particularly bullish on?

Peter Schiff: It’s kind of like a monetary or economic triage; I’m always looking around the world to see which countries are in the least bad shape, which countries are the least reckless and the least irresponsible. You really can’t find any one country that’s doing it perfectly. You just have to find the ones that are making the fewest mistakes.

And I think high on that list are Singapore and Hong Kong. Those markets are relatively free of regulation, free of taxation. I mean, it’s not nonexistent, but on a relative basis you have a lot more freedom there, and so you have a lot more prosperity there. You have much better economic fundamentals. And not just in those two places, but in Southeast Asia in general, in a lot of the emerging economies, you’ll find a lot less government and a lot more freedom. People are working harder, they’re saving, they’re producing, and they’re exporting. You don’t have these trade deficits, budget deficits, and you don’t have armies of people looking to retire on government entitlements. In Europe, we still like Switzerland even though they are making mistakes tying their currency to the euro. I think eventually they will change that policy. Scandinavia, we have been investors in Norway, we’ve been investors in Sweden. Also Australia and New Zealand have been longtime favorites. We’ve been investing down there or even closer to home in Canada. We do have some investments in South America. We’re diversifying around the world trying to get into the right countries, the right currencies, the right asset classes.

Nick Giambruno: On a different note, we’ve seen the number of US citizens renouncing their citizenship sharply increase. We have also seen high-profile people like Tina Turner and Eduardo Saverin give up their US citizenship. Would Tina be eligible to use Euro Pacific Bank?

Peter Schiff: Yes, once you renounce your US citizenship. The only people who can’t bank with me are American citizens, or green card holders. So once you are no longer an American citizen, as long as you don’t reside in the United States, then you are welcome at the bank.

I think a lot of people are doing this obviously for tax reasons, although they can’t necessarily claim it’s for tax reasons. You have to fill out a form if you want to renounce your citizenship—which, by the way, you can only get from a foreign embassy or consulate. Those forms used to be free. Now they’re $500 apiece. So think about that. If they can charge you $500 for that form, they could charge $5,000, they could charge $5,000,000. They could basically make it impossible for you to leave. And they’re trying to make it more difficult ever since Eduardo Saverin from Facebook went to Singapore. Now the government is trying to come up with all sorts of ways to punish Americans who try to give up their citizenship, and this really is the sign of a nation in decay. Fifty years ago, nobody would want to give up American citizenship. They would cherish it. The fact that so many people are paying tremendous amounts of money to get this albatross off their neck shows you how much times have changed, that an American passport is not an asset to be cherished but a liability that people are willing to pay to get rid of.

Nick Giambruno: And what about yourself? Do you believe you are adequately diversified internationally?

Peter Schiff: I think my investments are; I own a lot of foreign stocks. I have a lot of precious metals, I have a lot of mining shares. But I still live in the United States, so I’m obviously still vulnerable here. My family is here, so I haven’t done anything about a physical exit strategy. Although I do think I have financial resources that would afford me the ability to relocate, but I haven’t actually taken any steps other than setting up a foreign business. I have the foreign bank in the Caribbean. I have a brokerage firm Euro Pacific Canada, and so I’ve got offices up there. I’m also thinking about opening up an office in Singapore and trying to move more of my business—particularly my asset management business—to move it from the US. Not only because of favorable tax treatment outside the US, but because of the regulatory environment. If you want to be globally competitive, you need to be in an area where you can minimize these costs because if I have those costs and my competitors don’t, then I am at a disadvantage. And also because I think that over time people are going to be more and more hesitant about sending their money to the United States. So if I’m going to manage money, I might have to manage it offshore, because I think people will be worried about sending it here. They might be worried that the US government might take it.

If it ever gets really, really bad that you feel that you have to leave, by then it might be illegal to take any gold or silver out of the country. Right now you can take more than $10,000 worth of cash or cash equivalents—which would include gold bullion—out of the country as long as you tell the government that you’re taking it. And if you don’t tell them and they catch you, there’s a big fine and jail penalty. But one day it might not be the case. It might be that you are prohibited from taking any significant amount of money out of the country, and who knows what the penalty might be if they catch you. But if it’s already out of the country, then you don’t have to worry, because you’re leaving with nothing and the money is on the other side of the border waiting for you.

Nick Giambruno: So the idea is to preempt capital controls?

Peter Schiff: Yeah, well, you get out the window before they slam it shut. That’s the whole idea, and right now those windows are shutting all around as more and more offshore institutions are saying “no thank you” to an American customer. But the other reason that you want to act sooner too is if they impose exchange controls or fees on purchasing precious metals. They don’t ban them, but they have a big tax on the transaction or a big tax on the foreign exchange. If you want to buy Swiss francs, they can have a transaction tax. You want to get your money out of the dollar before those taxes are imposed, because if you wait until they’re imposed, then you can’t get as much money out, because a lot of it is being lost to taxes. In getting out of the dollar, you’re trying to avoid the inflation tax, but they’re hitting you with some other kind of tax in the process because that’s really what they are trying to do. A lot of people are worrying about the income tax or the estate tax and they go through elaborate means to try to minimize those taxes, but then they leave themselves vulnerable to what might be the biggest tax of all: and that’s the inflation tax. So you have to act to protect yourself before so many people are trying to protect themselves that the government makes it almost impossible to do so.

Editor’s Note: Internationalization is your ultimate insurance policy. Whether it’s with a second passport, offshore physical gold storage, or other measures, it is critically important that you dilute the amount of control the bureaucrats in your home country wield over you by diversifying your political risk. You can find Casey Research’s A-Z guide on internationalization by clicking here.

 

The article Peter Schiff Shares His Offshore Strategies was originally published atinternationalman.com.

Screen Shot 2014-03-26 at 1.16.04 PM“Connecting bright, ambitious young people with wealthy individuals who want to invest in their futures.”

The Dream Machine

The stated goal of Upstart is to connect bright, ambitious young people with wealthy individuals who want to invest in their futures — and, with any luck, help them achieve their dreams. “Upstart was founded to help people do what they were meant to do,” the company announced at its launch in August 2012. “Many talented college grads take jobs they’re not excited about, rather than following their true passions. Whether constrained by debt or just comforted by traditional career options, too many students take the perceived ‘safe path.’”

What makes human capital contracts unique is that the investment made is not in a particular company or idea, but in a person. After all, supporters argue, companies are no more than the product of the people who create them. So why not simplify the investment process? Why not treat the person as the startup — or, by Girouard’s clever inversion — the upstart?”

….continue reading A Group Of Investors Is Buying A Stake In The Next Generation Of Geniuses

 

Consensus For Deflation Means Inflation

Will Inflation Make A Comeback In 2014 When The Consensus Worries About Deflation

Two months ago, Incrementum Liechtenstein released its chartbook entitled “Monetary Tectonics” which illustrated the raging war between inflation and deflation in 40 charts. Meantime, the authors of the chartbook have launched the “Austrian Economics Golden Opportunities Fund,” a fund that takes investment positions based on the level of inflation. The key tool in their investment decisions is the “Incrementum Inflation Signal” (also referred to as the “monetary seismograph”), a continuing measurement of how much monetary inflation reaches the real economy based on a series of market-based indicators.

The Incrementum Inflation Signal started showing rising inflationary momentum after a period of 19 month of disinflation. Is Inflation making a comeback just as the consensus worries about deflation risk? That was the subject of Incrementum’s first Advisory Board in which much respected names have a seat, including James Rickards, Heinz Blasnik, Rahim Taghizadegan, and Zac Bharucha. The Board was led by Ronald Stoeferle, managing director of Incrementum Liechtenstein, and its partner, Mark Valek. This article summarizes Incrementum’s Advisory Board meeting. The full transcript is at the bottom of this article.

The direction of inflation is important in Incrementum’s Inflation Signal, not the absolute figure. At the moment, especially central bankers and mainstream economists are scared of deflation. Further easing by central bankers could be expected going forward. Related to the Fed’s policy, Rickards expects a pause in the taper by July and perhaps increased asset purchases later this year. “They tapered into weakness. They should have not tapered in December by their own metrics, specifically inflation, employment and a few other things. I expect the sequence as follows: I think they will taper another $10 billion in April, pause in June and July, and then probably increase asset purchases later in the year (maybe August or September). That should be bullish for equities but also signal to commodity investors that inflation is on the way, because it just says that the Fed will do whatever it takes to get inflation.”

In particular the commodity complex shows a significant divergence: industrial metals (especially copper) are weak while agriculturals are very strong, just like precious metals and aggregate commodities. Heinz Blasnik points to China for a better understanding of the industrial metals weakness. “Broad money supply in China (M2) is now growing at 13.2%. That is at the low end from the range of the post decade. M1 has actually collapsed to 1.5% growth from almost 40% in 2009. I think that is where the weakness of industrial metals is coming from. It’s definitely China, because money supply growth is declining and also bank-lending and total lending are declining. It actually seems that house prices are beginning to turn down as well.”

The interesting thing about this breakup in commodities is that “nobody” is talking about it. This seems very reminiscent of the commodities rally that started in 2000-2002.

Related to these inflationary signals, the usefulness of the CPI as a decision making tool is highly questionable. Ronald Stoeferle compares today’s situation with the 70ies when Paul Volcker had the mandate to kill inflation, which is in contrast to today’s central planners who are desperate to create inflation. Their comfort zone is the official CPI inflation rate between 1.5% – 2.5%. They will do whatever it takes to create this inflation.

CPI statistics are not used in Incrementum’s Inflation Signal; the inflation data are market based indicators. The usefulness of the CPI is highly questionable because it cannot measure anything. Central bankers, however, care about it. They would be willing to keep an even higher CPI of 2%.

Rickards believes the CPI will continue to be used by the Fed until such time as nominal rates are normalized, although he thinks we are years away from a normalization of nominal rates. “In other words: If you actually got the Fed-funds-rate to 2.5% – 4%, they would not use quantitative easing as a tool; they would use the policy rate and they would like very much to get back to that world. The problem is that they cannot get back to that world. For so long as the policy rate is zero, they will use quantitative easing. But here is the problem: The global problem in the world today is that we are in a depression. You can have growth in a depression. When you have growth in a depression it is not a recovery. That’s the difference between a depression and a recession. The reason why this is an important distinction is that depressions are structural. When you have a structural problem you need structural solutions. You cannot solve it with monetary solutions because it is not a monetary problem.”

Incrementum’s Advisory Board sees a lot of strength in the current gold price action. In addition, Zac Bharucha points to the recent “independence” in gold. “It has been a sort of risk on, risk off trade. A lot of people have bought gold a couple of years ago because of an Armageddon scenario. And the Fed has postponed Armageddon for now. So a lot of gold got liquidated, and there was great temptation to pile into the rallying stock market. But now you are getting gold at a big discount from where it was selling 3 years ago.” Some people could be looking at gold’s $700 decline from its highs and consider it as a (cheap) insurance.

Stoeferle believes the strength in gold miners provides a confirmation for the metals. Just two months ago, the consensus was $1300 for the end of 2014, which was in significantly different from Stoeferle’s target of $1480. Interestingly, the reversal in gold basically started when the Fed started tapering. “My view is that perhaps, in the last couple of months, the price of gold was already discounting tapering, and perhaps now it is kind of discounting the tapering of taper. So perhaps the gold price is already telling us that there is something boiling.”

The problem for gold, however, is the opportunity cost with all kinds of other assets which are more a beneficiary of this inflationary politics. It could be the main reason of falling gold prices. It even looks like as if the inflationary politics had a deflationary effect on the economy by sucking a lot of funds into financial assets and out of the real economy.

Is the stock market topping? Is it in a bubble? Following indicators raise a yellow flag.

  • The sentiment indicators in the US markets shows a very low cash in the mutual funds, just 3.3% cash, which is a historically very low level.
  • Sentiment of advisors sits at the highest level since the 87 crash. So sentiment-wise the market looks very stretched.
  • There is some of loss of participation in the stock markets but the breadth is still good in the US. Even if the market is turning, US leading stocks will still continue to outperform.

With the prospects of extremely low real interest rates in the foreseeable future, there are almost no profitable alternatives next to stocks, given the explosion in house prices and sky high bond prices. That is exactly what the Fed is aiming for. They want investors to go to long duration assets.

The advance since the 2009 low looks exactly like the bubble model from Sornette. The volatility declines more as the stock market goes higher. These are typical bubble characteristics.

According to Heinz Blasnik, domestic US money supply growth is the decisive factor for US stocks. “The latest year-on-year growth is +7.75% which is below the 10% of 2012. So it is slowing down. But 7.75% year-on-year money supply growth is still quite a lot historically. So we have this strange situation where we have got a market which is overbought, and has extremely bullish sentiment readings. Still the market is going up and the only explanation that I can come up with is that money supply growth is still strong enough to push stocks higher. But there is a limit somewhere. The problem is that we don’t know where that limit is. In 2007, it was 2.6% year-on-year growth. That was enough to burst the real estate bubble and the stock market bubble at the same time. I believe that this time around this demarcation is going to be higher. The reason for believing so is because the underlying economy is much weaker. I would expect that, if money supply growth fall to say 4,5% year-on-year growth, it would be a very big warning sign.”

broad money supply US 1988 2014

At the same time, velocity is going down as quickly as money supply is going up. So the question is not: “When does the money supply grow but rather when does velocity pick up?” When the velocity curve turns – that is the point when inflation comes in very rapidly. The problem is that this is a psychological threshold not a monetary threshold.

velocity money M1 1980 2014

When velocity turns, it means nominal GDP is beginning to rise, and that probably means prices for other goods are starting to go up.

In addition, the following chart shows that when money supply is expanding and the central bankers are printing a lot of money and suppress interest rates, then money is flying to higher orders of production stages of the economy. It results in more investments in capital, and fewer investments in consumer goods production. Shortly before recessions begin, this process starts to turn over.  Right now, it is kind of stalling out. Blasnik is not sure if that points to something meaningful, but if it were the case, it would tie in with the expectation that taper will produce later on this year much weaker economic numbers. This chart is supporting that contention (courtesy of www.acting-man.com)

ratio money supply vs capital investments 1946 2014

In closing, there is an important point to be made about Crimea’s potential impact to the financial and monetary system. Rickards sees another nail in the coffin of the role of the US dollar as a reserve currency. One should consider the following. President Obama has more or less anointed Iran as the regional hegemon in the Middle East. This is a stab in the back to Saudi Arabia which for several decades has supported the dollar by insisting that oil has to be priced in dollars. The quid pro quo is that the US would in fact insure the national security of Saudi Arabia. By backing Iran, the US has undermined the national security of Saudi Arabia and therefore Saudi Arabia has less reason to support the dollar.

At the same time, the US is about to impose financial sanctions to Russia. The Russians have reacted by saying they would not pay their dollar loans, and begin to dump US Treasury bills.

We already know what China is doing with gold. Saudi Arabia has less reason to hold dollars because of Iran. Russia has less reason to support the dollar because of the Ukraine.

This is financial warfare on a scale never seen before. Putting all this together, a large part of the world is working very hard to get out of the dollar system. That is going to be bad for the dollar, and it is going to be good for gold.

Time To Sell This Bull Market?

A conservative investor, a follower of Benjamin Graham’s & David Dodd’s philosophy that the better the bargain the lower the risk, summarizes what a lower risk investor should be doing in these markets.

When reading some might want to bear in mind that another very successful conservative investor Warren Buffett, has been quoted saying that if he never sold a single stock he’d bought he’d have made  more money than he has.

That said we all know it is very difficult to sit through a 30-40% decline and taking “some chips off the table” certainly opens the opportunity to reload at significantly lower prices. The author makes a detailed case below. For those in a hurry click HERE and scroll down for his conclusion – Editor Money Talks

Time To Sell This Bull Market?

Summary

  • The bull market is in the latter stage of the business cycle.
  • Certain indicators suggest an overheated market.
  • What to do during this time in a bull market.

“A bull market is like sex. It feels best just before it ends.” – Barton Briggs

With the S&P 500 near all-time highs, inquiring minds want to know whether this bull market is about to end or will there be more market gains to come?

761923 13956499607855 0

….continue reading HERE