FINANCIAL REVIEW

War, Inversions, and Climate

Sinclair Noe — September 23, 2014

0 0 

   

Financial Review

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 13:16 — 6.1MB)

DOW – 116 = 17,055
SPX – 11 = 1982
NA – 19 = 4508
10 YR YLD – .03 = 2.53%
OIL + .06 = 91.62
GOLD + 8.10 = 1223.90
SILV + .05 = 17.88

First up: war. You’ve probably heard by now that the US launched several airstrikes against ISIS targets inside Syria and, separately, in potentially averting an imminent threat to the homeland from an al Qaeda group called Khorasan. Many of the targets were in and around Raqqa, Syria, believed to be an ISIS stronghold. Several Arab nations took part in the US-led operation: Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. A spokesman for the Pentagon said they are still assessing the effectiveness of the bombing campaign but the Pentagon believes they were “successful in hitting what we were aiming at.”

The airstrikes against Khorasan was in response to threats, however officials so far have provided no details about the terrorists’ planned attack or the credibility of the intelligence they had on it. A Pentagon spokesman said “the individuals plotting and planning it were eliminated.”

The Syrian government says the US told it of plans to carry out airstrikes. The State Department immediately denied that it gave prior notification. Reuters reports Iranian officials were informed of the airstrikes in advance, but not specific targets. Meanwhile, the Israeli military said that it had shot down a Syrian fighter jet that had “infiltrated into Israeli airspace,” the first such incident in at least a quarter of a century. It is thought that the jet wandered into Israeli airspace accidentally. Maybe, but it also illustrates the possibility of unintended entanglements coming out of the conflict.

In economic news: manufacturing activity is near a 4-1/2 year high in September and factory employment is up, but housing prices were sluggish in July.

Financial data firm Markit said its preliminary or “flash” factory purchasing managers index came in at 57.9, unchanged from August when it touched its highest level since April 2010. A reading above 50 indicates expansion. Manufacturing activity in the third quarter was the strongest since Markit started tracking it in mid-2007. Factory jobs rose for a second straight month, and new orders held steady above 60 for the third time in the last 4 months.

The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia said its new general activity index for non-manufacturing firms in the mid-Atlantic region jumped sharply. The increase in activity reflected more new orders, sales and full-time hiring. Service sector employees also worked longer hours, while firms increased their capital spending.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency said home prices increased 0.1% in July, and 4.4% in the 12 months through July, the smallest gain since September 2012.

Further data showed euro zone business activity in September was the weakest this year, while factory activity in China picked up only slightly.

The Treasury Department today announced new rules to crack down on corporate tax inversions. The idea behind inversions is that a US business merges with or is acquired by a foreign company in a country with a lower tax rate; by redomiciling, or moving their headquarters to the lower tax rate country, they can lower their tax bill, even if they keep most of their business in the US. Obama applauded the Treasury for taking steps to reverse the trend of companies seeking to “exploit this loophole” to avoid paying their fair share in taxes. Yet he said he was still calling on Congress to pursue broader tax reform that would reduce the corporate tax rate, close loopholes and make the tax code simpler.

The new rules will mean little for companies that have already inverted, but for at least 10 companies in the midst of completing such deals, and for those considering inversions, the impact will be significant. Most pending deals could become more costly for the buyers, such as AbbVie, and its $54 billion deal to acquire Ireland’s Shire, as well as Medtronic and its $42 billion takeover of Covidien. Neither of these transactions, the biggest of the year, was expected to fall apart completely, partly because paying a break-up fee to walk away would likely be even more costly. AbbVie would have to pay Shire a $1.6 billion penalty if it were to renege on their merger agreement. Medtronic has a contract that lets it or Covidien walk away from their deal if the US Congress changes tax law. The Treasury’s new rules fall short of that, so a break-up fee likely would loom in this case, too, if the merger were called off. Burger King said it will proceed with its $11 billion deal with Canada’s Tim Hortons, stressing that the transaction was not about tax benefits.

There are also some new rules unveiled by the Treasury today, and some of these tax evasion schemes have names that sound like they came right off the playground. One rule will prevent inverted companies from using “hopscotch” loans that allow them to avoid dividend taxes when tapping tax-deferred foreign profits. Another rule will bar inverters from gaining access to offshore profits by using “decontrolling” strategies that restructure foreign units so they are no longer US-controlled. The Treasury is also tightening limits on the levels of ownership that the former US investors can have in an inverted company for it to qualify for foreign tax treatment under US law, a move that will make it harder to do the deals. And then there’s the “spinversion” which is a partial inversion where the US company transfers some of its assets to a newly formed foreign corporation. That corporation is then spun off to public shareholders. New rules would treat the spun-off company as a domestic corporation.

Ultimately, this is an issue that will require legislative action, but for now, it will be more difficult for companies to skip out on their tax obligations by moving offshore; more difficult but not impossible. I suspect there are a lot of tax attorneys working overtime today.

The United Nations Climate Summit kicked off today in New York. The summit was convened to lay the groundwork for nations to sign a binding emissions treaty late next year during climate negotiations in Paris. In speeches delivered at the summit, diplomats from 120 countries laid out a series of new, nonbinding climate commitments. Here is an overview of what world leaders have pledged so far: President Obama delivered an address at the summit this afternoon where he announced an executive order requiring federal agencies to take climate change into account when doling out dollars for international aid and investment abroad. The US has previously pledged to curb emissions 17% from 2005 levels by 2020.

The EU unveiled a new commitment to slash greenhouse-gas emissions 40% from 1990 levels by 2030. British Prime Minister David Cameron said that the U.K. is on track to cut emissions by 80% by 2050. Cameron did not, however, announce any new targets not already agreed to by the country. China’s Vice Premier repeated China’s previously stated goal of cutting carbon emissions by 40 to 45% from 2005 levels by 2020. Iceland said that it aims to power its economy entirely with clean energy, but did not set a date. Mexico announced that it aims to generate more than one third of its electricity from zero-emissions sources by 2018. Costa Rica will be powered purely from clean energy by 2016. And a whole bunch of countries pledged hundreds of million to the Green Climate Fund.

Sounds familiar, right? But maybe this time will be different, and the reason is because this time it might actually pay to go green. All things considered, the cost of curbing carbon emissions may be considerably cheaper than earlier estimates had suggested. For all the fears that climate change mitigation would put the brakes on growth, it might actually enhance it.

Last week, an international commission published the “New Climate Economy” report concludes that efficient investments could deliver at least half of the emission cuts needed by 2030 to keep global temperatures in check. And they could do so while delivering extra economic gains on the side. Side benefits include things like lower health costs.

And it looks like corporations are getting on the climate change bandwagon. Tim Cook, CEO of Apple was in New York, and he said: “The long-term consequences of not addressing climate are huge,” he said. “I don’t think anyone can overstate that.” Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt announced Google would stop funding the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, claiming the Council had been “literally lying” about the reality of climate change. Schmidt said: “The company has a very strong view that we should make decisions in politics based on facts — what a shock,” said Schmidt. “And the facts of climate change are not in question anymore. Everyone understands climate change is occurring and the people who oppose it are really hurting our children and our grandchildren and making the world a much worse place. And so we should not be aligned with such people — they’re just, they’re just literally lying.”

The basics of climate change have been understood for a long time, don’t seem to be budging much and yet remain challenged by many non-specialists. What’s significant then, in such a public debate, is who acknowledges those basics, as much as what is said. That’s why it was news when former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson called for a carbon tax, when the Rockefellers, the first family of oil pulled out of oil sands or, the head of the world’s largest company by market cap endorses a brand new climate and business initiative by showing up and saying absolutely anything at all. Tim Cook also challenged the still-common fallacy that good business and environmentalism are mutually exclusive. “Too many people believe you can do this or that,” he said. “If you innovate and you set the bar high you will find a way to do both.”

The World Bank yesterday released a list of 73 countries and more than 1,000 companies that support a price on carbon dioxide pollution. Apple, which now powers 73% of its facilities with renewable energy and has raised its environmental profile, was not among the signatories.

Friday, August 08, 2014 - Rocky Relations

Financial Review with Sinclair Noe

DOW + 185 = 16,553
SPX + 22 = 1931
NAS+ 35 = 4370
10 YR YLD - .01 = 2.41%
OIL + .01 = 97.35
GOLD – 3.90 = 1310.10
SILV - .03 = 20.02

The S&P and Dow both posted their best day since March. For the week, the Dow rose 0.4%, the S&P 500 gained 0.3%, and the Nasdaq rose 0.4%.

The Pentagon says US warplanes have dropped bombs on an ISIS artillery position in northern Iraq, near Erbil, the Kurdish regional capital. US military planes have also carried out air drops of food and water to displaced refugees. Last night, President Obama announced the plan for assisting Iraqi religious refugees stranded on a hilltop in northern Iraq, and also authorizing limited airstrikes to protect US personnel in Erbil. The air strike is the first time the US has been directly involved in a military operation in Iraq since American troops withdrew in late 2011. No time limit has been set for air strikes.

In very short order, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, ISIS, captured one-third of Syria and about one-quarter of Iraq, and they continue to expand their frontiers. Just to put it in perspective, they now control a land mass larger than Great Britain, with a population bigger than Denmark. In northern Syria some 5,000 ISIS fighters are using tanks and artillery captured from the Iraqi army in Mosul to besiege half a million Kurds on the Turkish border. ISIS has also built a huge war chest by looting Iraqi banks of perhaps half a billion dollars, making ISIS the world's richest terrorist organization, by some estimates. And they have been gathering weapons, US weapons left behind by the Iraq army.

ISIS now controls most of Syria’s oil and gas production. In northern Iraq, ISIS now controls a 750 megawatt dam near the city of Mosul. The Mosul Dam is considered one of the most dangerous dams in the world; it was poorly constructed, leaks constantly, and requires near constant maintenance to avoid collapse. In addition to controlling the electric output of the dam, the militant group now has a real weapon of mass destruction, capable of extreme destruction along the Tigris River, including possibly flooding Baghdad under 15 feet of water.

The Iraq army shows no signs of recovering from its earlier defeats and has failed to launch a single successful counter-attack. The only large-scale counter-attack launched by the regular army and the newly raised Shia militia was a disastrous foray into Tikrit on 15 July that was ambushed and defeated with heavy losses. There is no sign that the dysfunctional nature of the Iraqi army has changed. Iraqi politicians have gone on playing political games as they move, ever-so-slowly, towards replacing the discredited prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki.

Iraq’s Shia majority seems to believe the present situation is not as dangerous as it looks. They argue that Iraq’s Sunnis have risen in revolt and ISIS fighters are only the shock troops of an uprising provoked by the anti-Sunni policies and actions of Maliki. Once he is replaced, as is almost certain, Baghdad will offer the Sunnis a new power-sharing agreement with regional autonomy similar to that enjoyed by the Kurds. Despite all signs to the contrary, Shia at all levels are putting faith in this myth.

The foster parents of ISIS and the other Sunni jihadi movements in Iraq and Syria are Saudi Arabia, the Gulf monarchies and Turkey. The rise of ISIS was crucially supported by outside Sunni powers. It’s unlikely the Sunni community as a whole in Iraq would have lined up behind Isis without the support Saudi Arabia gave directly or indirectly to many Sunni movements. The same is true of Syria. The Saudis now seem fearful of the monster they helped create, and they have pulled support from the jihadi opposition, but it may be too late. For the US, Britain and the Western powers, it makes for rocky relations with major oil suppliers. And then, to complicate matters further, Israel and Gaza resumed throwing bombs at each other after a nearly 3-day ceasefire.

You may remember that oil prices had spiked to $108 a barrel in June, but then ISIS failed to attack Baghdad, and ISIS did little that threatened oil infrastructure affecting deliveries outside Iraq, and oil prices slipped. The price at the pump is down 15 cents a gallon since July 4^th; down 35 cents per gallon since mid-June. And now that the US has re-entered the battle, it is widely anticipated that the craziness in Iraq will be defeated and oil prices will stabilize, but it would be foolish not to expect ISIS to retaliate against US aerial attacks.

In economic news today:
Wholesale inventories grew by 0.3% in June, while sales increased 0.2%.

Productivity in the second quarter increased 2.5%, compared with a revised 4.5% drop in the first quarter. Cold weather in the first quarter hurt output, but workers produced more in the spring, proving that 90% of the difference is just showing up. Unit-labor costs increased 0.6% in the second quarter, and inflation adjusted hourly wages were up just 0.1%.

White House economic officials say the labor market is about 80% back to the level before the financial crisis, an indication the economy is steadily healing. It just doesn’t feel that way for many Americans. As the US economy recovers, hirings increase and people are encouraged to look for jobs again; at least that’s how things are supposed to work.  Instead, the ratio of the adult population with jobs, or looking for one; what’s called the labor force participation rate, has been falling, standing at 62.9% in July 2014. This represents a 3 percentage point decline since the financial crisis and the lowest rate since 1978. Gains in participation rates between 1960 and 2000 were largely driven by sweeping social changes such as the post-war baby boom and the entry of women into the work force, but in the past 7 years half of those gains have been reversed; the equivalent of 7.5 million workers have been lost from the US labor force.

The shrinking pool of workers in the job market is due in part to demographic shifts as the boomer generation moves into retirement, but today the International Monetary Fund, the IMF said more needs to be done to strengthen the labor market, raise wages, and bring people back into the labor force. The IMF says up to one third of the post-2007 decline in participation rates is reversible and we need to look at economic policies to turn things around. Suggestions include better job training, employment search assistance programs, affordable child care, and immigration reform.

The Federal Reserve has released a nationwide survey, the first of its kind, designed to get a better understanding of how households view their own financial situation and economic well-being. The short answer is “not so good”. Just 30% of survey respondents described themselves as better off than they were in 2008, with 34% saying they were doing about the same and 34% saying they were worse off. Some 77% of respondents said they either didn't expect a raise in the next 12 months or expected their income to decline. About 30% of Americans said their household income for 2012 was lower than what they'd expect in a normal year.

About 40 million Americans have student loan debt totaling more than $1.3 trillion, and only 40% of them think the education was worth the cost. Some 35% of survey respondents who are paying back student loans said they had to cut spending by "a little" over the past year to keep up with their student debt payments, and another 11% said they had to cut back their spending by "a lot." One finding of the survey is that debt can affect your health. Some 44% of Americans with student debt said they avoided medical treatment because they couldn't afford it, while only 30% of Americans without student loans said the same thing.

Almost half the participants said they were not saving any portion of their income, and roughly one-fifth said they're spending more money than they are currently taking in. Only 39% of people reported having a rainy-day savings fund that would cover at least three months of expenses. A combined 25% of households who told the Fed they'd had savings prior to 2008 reported having used up "all" or "nearly all" of their savings as a result of the recession. And just 48% of people said they would be able to completely cover a $400 hypothetical emergency expense without selling something or borrowing money. Just under a third of non-retired households reported having no retirement savings or pension, including just under 20% of households aged 55 to 64. A quarter of the respondents said they had done no retirement planning at all.  Of those who have given some thought to retirement planning and plan to retire at some point, 25% didn’t know how they will pay their expenses in retirement.

Next week’s economic calendar includes a look at July retail sales on Wednesday. The recent drop in gas prices may actually dampen the real outlook for retail sales. On Tuesday we’ll get a look at the strength of the labor market in the JOLT report, the Job Openings and Labor Turnover survey measures workers who are quitting their jobs; the thinking is that when workers are confident about their job prospects they’re more willing to jump ship. The quit rate has edged up in the past couple of years but is still well below the rates posted in the last expansion. Another measure of strength in the labor market is hiring activity among small businesses. On Tuesday, we’ll get the Small Business Optimism survey. In June, 26% of small businesses surveyed said they had at least one job opening they could not fill.  On Thursday, the New York Fed will release its second-quarter Household Debt and Credit Report. The New York Fed reported that in the first quarter, households increased their total borrowings (including mortgages, credit cards, student loans and auto loans) for the third quarter in a row, led by gains in mortgages and student loan debt.

Friday, June 27, 2014 - Biscuits on the Table

Financial Review with Sinclair Noe

DOW + 5 = 16,851
SPX + 3 = 1960
NAS + 18 = 4397
10 YR YLD  + .01 = 2.53%
OIL - .10 = 105.74
GOLD – 1.80 = 1316.10
SILV - .25 = 20.97

The major stock indices traded lower for most of the day, and only in the final minutes turned to positive territory. For the week, the Dow slipped 0.6 percent and the S&P 500 declined 0.1 percent, while the Nasdaq gained 0.7 percent. Volume spike today as the Russell Indices were reconstituted.

The Russell Indices are compiled by Russell Investments. The Russell 3000 is an index of the 3000 largest stocks in the US. The Russell 2000 is the 2000 smallest stocks in the Russell 3000. Once a year, the Russell indices are reconstituted, to reflect changes such as acquisitions, bankruptcies, or just changes in the size of the companies listed in the index. The reconstitution probably explains the increase in volume and the last minute increase in prices today.

Some things we need to know heading into the weekend; including Ukraine, Iraq, and Argentina. We’ll start with the situation in Ukraine. The European Union signed a free-trade pact with Ukraine today and warned it could impose more sanctions on Moscow unless pro-Russian rebels act to wind down the crisis in the east of the country by Monday. Georgia and Moldova signed similar deals, holding out the prospect of deep economic integration and unfettered access to the EU's 500 million citizens, but alarming Moscow which is concerned about losing influence over former Soviet republics.

EU leaders meeting in Brussels demanded that, by Monday, Ukrainian rebels agree to ceasefire verification arrangements, return border checkpoints to Kiev authorities, free hostages and launch serious talks on implementing Ukrainian president Poroshenko's peace plan.

EU leaders said they were ready to meet again at any time to adopt significant sanctions on Russia. Diplomats said they could target new people and companies with asset freezes as early as next week. More than 60 names are already on the list. Although it has drawn up a list of hard-hitting economic sanctions against Russia, the EU is still hesitating over deploying them because of fears among some member states of antagonizing their major energy supplier.

Meanwhile, leaders of the European Union's 28 member states voted on the next president of the European Commission, which serves as the EU's executive branch. The president sets the policy agenda, enforces rules and represents Europe abroad. They elected Jean Claude Junker on a 26-2 vote. The losing votes belonged to the United Kingdom and Hungary, and they really have a strong dislike for Junker; so much so that they may try to exit the EU. That probably won’t happen, but there is talk of an “in or out” referendum for the Brits.

A funny thing is happening in Iraq. The US is lining up support for Iraq from Iran and Syria. And the bombing has apparently started, but we’re still trying to figure out who is throwing the bombs. The first aerial bombing took place Monday or Tuesday, apparently carried out by the Syrian Air Force, acting at the behest of the Iranian government in support of the Iraqi government, which the US government supports, but only if the Iraqi’s purge the government of all the goofs who messed up over the past 10 years or so.

Which is to say, the war in Iraq is escalating. Already, the war involves Iraq, Syria, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, ISIS or ISIL if you prefer, Israel, Lebanon, and of course the US. The Pentagon denied reports of US drone strikes along the Iraq-Syria border after reports by BBC of drone bombings. The Murdoch Street Journal reports Syrian airstrikes. Unidentified bombers have reportedly launched an air strike on ISIS positions in northern Iraq. Iraqi television has claimed they are US planes, but the Pentagon has denied responsibility.

US planes were identified by Iraqi television, but the Saudi Al-Arabiya network claims that the raid was carried out by Syria. Meanwhile, Iranian Special Forces sent in to help protect Baghdad and a few select holy sites, along with surveillance drones. And Israel has bombed Syria in retaliation for an attack from Syria that killed Israeli civilians in the Golan Heights.

And so with all this going on, the Pentagon admitted yesterday that armed US drones are now flying over Iraq, equipped with Hellfire missiles, deployed from a base in Kuwait, in addition to unarmed surveillance flights by drones and manned aircraft, and supplemented by US military advisers on the ground.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon says the United States has opened a "joint operations center" in Baghdad, boosting the total number of US service members to 500. And the New York Times reports that Iraqi government officials are saying that the US is planning to send more than 1,000 private security guards to Iraq to protect US troops, which amounts to far more than the US government has previous acknowledged.

For years Iraq has been a major oil producer; it kept Saddam in business all those years; back then Iraq produced about 2.5 million barrels a day; recently output has increased to more than 3 million barrels, and it’s estimated that production could easily top 6 million barrels. In a country of about 30 million, there should be enough natural resources for profound prosperity, but that is not the case. In recent years, none of this oil wealth trickled down to the grassroots, especially in Sunni areas of the country where signs of reconstruction, economic development, restored services, or jobs were hard to find. Instead, the vast new revenues disappeared into the recesses of a corrupt government, and from there – who knows?

So here’s where Iraqi oil, or the lack of its revenues at least, comes into play. Communities across Iraq, especially in embittered Sunni areas, began demanding funding for reconstruction, often backed by local and provincial governments. In response, the Maliki government relentlessly refused to allocate any oil revenues for such projects, choosing instead to denounce such demands as efforts to divert funds from more urgent budgetary imperatives. That included tens of billions of dollars needed to purchase military supplies including, in 2011, 18 F-16 jets from the United States for $4 billion. In a rare moment of ironic insight, Time magazine concluded its coverage of the F-16 purchase with this comment: “The good news is the deal will likely keep Lockheed’s F-16 plant in Fort Worth running perhaps a year longer. The bad news is that only 70% of Iraqis have access to clean water, and only 25% have clean sanitation.”

My grandmother used say, as long as we’ve got biscuits on the table, nobody should go hungry. I guess they never heard that saying in Iraq.

Nothing in today's complex world has a single cause, but you have to think that a major reason for all this is the oil.

Argentina is in trouble. They have until Monday to pay a group of hedge fund managers over $1.3 billion on defaulted bonds. If they don’t pay, they risk default. If it goes into default, investors lose faith in Argentina’s capacity to pay, interest rates on its bonds surge, and the country is forced to print money to pay creditors, the economy could collapse.

Then again, if Argentina does pay this group of hedge fund managers over $1.3 billion worth of bonds by July 30, it opens itself up to lawsuits from other investors who also own those bonds, lawsuits that could cost the country up to $15 billion. That's over half the money it has in its central bank.

The story goes back to 2001, when Argentina was going through a financial crisis. Argentina issued bonds, and they defaulted on those bonds. After the default, hedge fund manager Paul Singer and some other hedge funds swooped in to buy the defaulted bonds for pennies on the peso. They knew they were buying defaulted bonds, but the idea was that things might improve or there might be a deal negotiated; that’s what usually happens, debt issuers restructure debt, and negotiate with creditors to pay less. Creditors usually take the deal because it is better to get something rather than nothing. Most of Argentina’s creditors have decided to accept 70 cents on the dollar.

But Paul Singer is demanding 100% face value of the bonds. And if he is not paid, there is a clause that says no other creditors can be paid. And if Argentina pays the full amount to Singer, the other creditors will likely not be satisfied with a 70% haircut. And the reason Argentina is in this jam is because Singer sued, and it went all the way to the US Supreme Court, and the Supremes sided with the hedge funds, and let stand a district court ruling.

The Supreme Court has been busy handing down decisions this week; and we will likely get a couple more decisions on Monday; I guess they don’t hand down decisions on Friday, and opt instead for an early happy hour. Anyway, the decisions of the past week were downright strange for one reason; several were unanimous. Wednesday, the court decided Riley v. California, which unanimously held that police cannot search the cellphones of people they arrest without a warrant. On Thursday, the court handed down two of its major opinions of this year: National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, about the president's recess appointment power and McCullen v. Coakley, about abortion clinic buffer zones.

You will recall that the court is split ideologically, with 5 justices leaning right and 4 justices leaning left, so it’s a little surprising to see the twain meet. Unanimity is rare; a fractured court is the norm, and yet, we had three unanimous decisions among people who are inclined to disagree; and at a time when the House of Representatives is suing the president and people from one side can’t have a civil conversation with someone from the other side. Maybe this is an example of the rule of law being more important than politics. Before we declare a victory for compromise, maybe there’s a little more to how the court arrived at unanimity.

Even when the court agrees on a ruling, it can divide over the reasoning and even how the rule should be applied. In other words they take very different paths to arrive at the same place. It is possible that a 5-4 decision is not an indication of a polarized court. You have to read the decisions behind the vote. And conversely, a unanimous decision can mask deep divisions that appear down the road.