Bond Market Distress: Updated


I’ve been telling people privately to watch the bond market for about a week now. Since last Thursday, we’ve seen a very sharp, fast drop in prices for medium and long-term US Treasury securities, which (in consequence) increases yields. The yield of the 10-year note, which is a critical indicator for mortgage rates, has leapt up above 3.70%, from below 3% just a few weeks ago, and from 2% at the beginning of the year. The yield curve is now steeper than it’s been in decades.

I was wary of saying too much in public because there are indications that some of the plunge in note and bond values was due to technical market factors. The move was echoed somewhat by a fall in the dollar, but gold and oil have been relatively quiet. Corporate bonds have been on fire, with raging demand from a variety of buyers, and swap spreads are compressing rapidly.

The stock market finally got the news yesterday (falling 2%), about the same time as the mainstream press. In general, whenever you see headlines about arcane financial issues, start by assuming the opposite.

The market this morning is showing mild improvement, as it has each day this week in early trading, with yields on midcurve notes and the long bond down about five basis points or so. Yesterday was full of drama, however, as prices for mortgage-related assets (MBS and agency debt) suddenly plunged even after the Treasury completed a decently-received issue of new 5-year notes.

What is happening, in a nutshell, is that…

…market participants have become concerned that the Fed will not be able to keep mortgage rates low. In a highly technical trade, these investors expect that the “duration” of mortgage-backed paper will extend as rates rise, and they hedge against this by selling massive amounts of the 10-year Treasury note. That selling drops the price of the T-note, which raises rates further, which triggers the cycle all over again.

The fact that this technical trading is going on suggests that the market may stabilize for a while at the current much-lower levels. But many people are now starting to chatter about the larger implications of the episode, some of which are political.

The marketplace is full of talk that the Fed will have to really go to the mattresses to support lower interest rates. It reminds me just a little bit of the challenge that George Soros and others made to the Bank of England back in 1992, which tried to support the value of sterling, against the market.

It seems clear enough that the market for medium and long-dated Treasury debt wants to be a lot lower. In other words, investors want much higher interest rates in return for lending their money to We The Taxpayers. But if interest rates go too high, it’s going to choke off whatever hopes anyone had of an economic recovery.

See, now you thought that recovery is coming because of porkulus. After all, that’s what the President says. But in reality, it’s because the Fed has been holding interest rates down. Silly you.

But the Fed only has direct control over the very shortest-term interest rates, the ones on overnight interbank lending (”Fed funds”). How can the Fed hold down the medium and longer-term rates that are critical for economic growth? By doing something they haven’t done since before the Korean War: they’re wading into the market to buy up that debt directly (”quantitative easing”). And they’ve also been buying the mortgage-backed securities and related debt which are now getting decimated.

So far, the Fed has announced plans to do about $1 trillion in such monetizations this year, with $300 billion of that for Treasury debt. The market has apparently decided to play chicken with the Fed. Some people are saying they’re going to need to create trillions more dollars in monetization.

The chatter is very, very sour. As usual, the stock market is insane, always looking for, and finding, a reason to go up. But capital-markets people are looking at the finances of the United States, and saying: “Oh no, baby, this won’t work, what you’re doing. Come up with something better.”

We’re soon going to find out exactly what are the limits of monetary policy at the zero interest-rate bound. The fundamental tension is between an economy that is still suffering from deflationary effects as consumption and investment shrink, and the need of the US Treasury to keep borrowing like crazy to support Barack Obama’s addiction to spending your money.

If things get bad and interest rates head upward permanently despite the Fed’s efforts, the Treasury will finally face a choice that looks a lot like discipline: they will either have to scale back the ambitions of the Federal government, or they’ll have to raise taxes heavily.

UPDATE: As of 10:45am ET, the 10-year note and 30-year bond are sharply higher, with yields down about 8 or 9 basis points. Keep your eyes on the Treasury’s 7-year note auction. Results should be announced shortly after 1:00pm ET.

Category: ,

RSS feed | Trackback URI

21 Comments Leave a comment

TBT

Redbirdfan Thursday, May 28th at 9:01AM EDT (link)

Excellent comments. I’ve been expecting this since Dec and shorted long term treasuries via TBT. That has been a very nice trade for me and I’ll continue to hold it.

 

And on that note Francis

mbecker908 Thursday, May 28th at 9:02AM EDT (link)

my retail mortgage rates, which change on a daily basis and we occasionally have a mid-day change as well, changed for the worse FOUR times yesterday. By late in the day my secondary market group wouldn’t lock a rate. We’ll see what happens today.

CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

 

Great Post

MSU_Charles Thursday, May 28th at 9:26AM EDT (link)

“they will either have to scale back the ambitions of the Federal government, or they’ll have to raise taxes heavily.”

Anyone wish to bet which one the Obama administration will choose?

No need to bet

Francis Cianfrocca Thursday, May 28th at 9:33AM EDT (link)

Why do you think they prompted their friends at the Washington Post to write a major story in praise of a VAT?

Actually there is no option for a bet....

antisocial Thursday, May 28th at 9:41AM EDT (link)

We know the route is taxes….

Taxes are ready to go sky high :-)

No you can’t - Moe Lane
——————————
The Emperor has no clothes!!!
——————————
Republicans who lost the Crap-and-Raid fight in the House -
Mary Bomo Mac (CA-45)
Mike Castle (DE)
Mark Kirk (IL-10)
Frank A. LoBiondo (NJ-02)
Chris Smith (NJ-04)
Leonard Lance (NJ-07)
John M. McHugh (NY-23)
Dave Reichert (WA-08)

I'm Counter-Betting...

IJB Thursday, May 28th at 11:02AM EDT (link)

…That they try to skyrocket taxes, face major public opposition, FAIL, and then have to scale back their programs.

That’s the usual script for Democrat administrations.

 
 

regarding a VAT...

Aziz Poonawalla Thursday, May 28th at 11:12AM EDT (link)

Francis,

Nowadays I’m mostly a lurker (and a liberal with nothing to hide) here but your posts always lure me here from my feedreader.

I’d like to see your thoughts on a VAT. I am thinking of the japanese-style subtraction VAT instead of the European model, and coupled with reductions in corporate tax rates, repeal of the AMT, etc. I laid out my thinking at my own site and would like to see your thoughts. Can you envision a policy that does include a VAT, and are there arguments you’d make in favor of one?

incidentally, when the heck are you going to get on twitter? you need t be writing your own blog, and piping that into the Twitterverse. If you email me I can walk you through the process in 5min flat.


City of Brass: principled pragmatism at the maghrib of one age, the fajr of another

 
 
 

I am banking on option B

jeffreywturner Thursday, May 28th at 9:33AM EDT (link)

“If things get bad and interest rates head upward permanently despite the Fed’s efforts, the Treasury will finally face a choice that looks a lot like discipline: they will either have to scale back the ambitions of the Federal government, or they’ll have to raise taxes heavily.”

I think it is pretty safe to say that the course they will take will be to raise taxes substantially rather than cut spending, at least with the current crop of DC politicians. The thing is, if they need to generate an additional $2 trillion, they will have to raise taxes by a significantly higher amount than $2 trillion in order to make up for the negative impact that the tax hike will have on growth, and thereby, tax revenues. To get that amount, not only would they have to let Bush’s tax cuts expire and let the marginal rate for the “evil” rich people (who obviously didn’t earn their wealth according to Obama) return to 40%, they would have to probably increase them well beyond that, and expand the higher rates down into the “middle class” because their simply aren’t enough of the “evil” rich people to foot the bill.

“Life is too short, can’t we all just eat pork and kill some terrorists?”

Let's carry that further.

Flagstaff Friday, May 29th at 8:56PM EDT (link)

The thing is, if they need to generate an additional $2 trillion, they will have to raise taxes by a significantly higher amount than $2 trillion in order to make up for the negative impact that the tax hike will have on growth, and thereby, tax revenues.

There is a real probability that it will be impossible to raise an additional $10 trillion in tax revenues over the short run, no matter what rates are increased to. And over the next ten years, that is the expected shortfall, not $2 trillion. The whole “recovery” plan is being implemented precisely backwards.

Knowledge of the planned permanent increase in long-term government spending immediately hurt the economy. Expectations of major changes in the rate of either deflation or inflation create self-fulfilling increases in either/both. Whether we are still in deflation or not, it’s very reasonable to expect that a major round of inflation will be the result of massive government spending and borrowing. The government will attempt to reduce the deficit by increasing tax rates, which will in turn depress the economy even more. Stagflation is a reasonable expectation. And tax revenues, which are what pay the government’s bills (not tax rates), will go down, not up.

Had the process started with a significant, permanent tax rate cut, bringing them all, including business taxes, down to a uniform tax rate (around 15% let’s say), and had there been no massive spending program set in motion, the effect would have been immediate and positive. Americans would have known that the government would be starting a program of fiscal responsibility. There would be no particular need for people to cut back their spending out of fear of the future. There would not be pressure towards a recessionary environment.

Not only that, but the fact of reduced taxes for most or all taxpayers would mean more economic activity, more profits, more employment, more investment, and more savings. We wouldn’t be talking about deficits for as far as the eye can see, nor about mortgaging our children’s futures to pay for new programs we can live without. And we wouldn’t be losing jobs at a modern record pace.

Since the goverment has no way to generate wealth, it can only pay its bills by taking wealth from others (taxes), or by printing money (inflation). The government will choose to do both. Because the debt service will be larger than anything we’ve experienced before, the government will also become a worse and worse credit risk. If tax rates go too high, economic activity will be pushed down to depression levels. The alternative is to print the money as needed, which will result in higher interest rates, adding even more to the national debt as old Treasuries are payed off by issuing new ones at higher rates.

I won’t be surprised to see interest rates skyrocket at some point in time; maybe not next year, but eventually. That will drive down the value of existing bonds, while the stock market is likely stagnating, and the value of the dollar goes into the tank.

The shame is, it can all be avoided by just reducing both tax rates and government spending. Instead, we’re gong in the opposite direction.

Pluto, the Ninth Planet - Forever!

 
 

prices

alexg Thursday, May 28th at 9:37AM EDT (link)

I’ve been anticipating this as well - my concern is when this actually hits product prices… And how long it’s going to last. I think this is the part in my life when I start paying everything to the government and figure out how to get even tighter with my money (not sure how the wife is going to stretch a buck any further, but I’m excited to see how she does it…). Oh, and bust my ass even harder at work, of course (selling soon to be inflated product to businesses that can’t afford anything at deflated prices… much less inflated ones).

Thank you for the uplifting news, but it’s reality, and this is when conservatives show what we’re made of.

Inflation and deflation

Francis Cianfrocca Thursday, May 28th at 10:16AM EDT (link)

The Fed is walking on a knife edge with regard to inflation. You don’t see the effects in consumer prices yet (except in a few areas), because final demand is way down in the US. As I always say, inflation isn’t too many dollars, it’s too many dollars chasing too few goods. If demand is impaired, there’s no price pressure.

The reality in the private-sector economy still is deflation. But it’s really wacked-out for the Fed to be printing trillions of dollars to fight it. At some point, those extra dollars will have to get sterilized, or else we really will see some inflation that you won’t have any trouble recognizing.

The trigger for that could be a real private-sector recovery that increases the demand for credit and pushes up interest rates. Or it could come from investors deciding that Obama really doesn’t deserve his AAA credit rating. Or it could be both.

The Fed is taking all of this very seriously indeed. They have tools at the ready for sterilizing inflation should it appear. What we don’t yet know is: A) will they work? and B) will they kill the economy even if they do work?

The answer to B is actually pretty obvious

The_Gadfly Thursday, May 28th at 2:17PM EDT (link)

Even Reagan didn’t get away without a recession before the recovery he and the rest of the conservative team (Kemp, Gingrich, Armey, et al) initiated when they came into office.

So they will hurt the economy. And since the economy is already on life support, yeah, they’ll pretty much kill it. But hey, ya can’t make an omlette without breaking a few eggs and you should never waste a good crisis. So I’m not certain that isn’t what The Big 0 is aiming for.

We’ve been called racists enough now that it shouldn’t bother us any more.

-AChance, http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/03/what-men-may-do-we-have-done/#comment-24463

If NY23 was a beat down for Conservatives, what do you call what happened to Progressives in NJ and VA?

inspired by ColdWarrior, http://www.redstate.com/hooah_mac/2009/11/04/ny-23-the-agony-of-defeat-not-so-much/#comment-156

 
 
 

Actually, I expect to see the corporate bond market crash too,

jeffreywturner Thursday, May 28th at 9:38AM EDT (link)

Particularly depending on how this issue with the GM bondholders pans out. I hope they stick to their guns and tell the UAW (ie: the DNC) to shove it, because think of the precedent it will set and how many investors will be willing to lend money to companies if they see that the government can simply come in and tell them their bonds are almost worthless and they have to take whatever tiiny ownership interest the government sees fit in exchange for them while the labor union takes over the company.

“Life is too short, can’t we all just eat pork and kill some terrorists?”

That's already happening

Francis Cianfrocca Thursday, May 28th at 10:18AM EDT (link)

I just read a report which analyzed bond yields (both IG and HY, iirc) of corporations and industries that are heavily unionized. Apparently these companies are paying nearly a 1000 basis-point premium for debt, compared to companies that are relatively union-free.

Report

MSU_Charles Thursday, May 28th at 10:43AM EDT (link)

Francis,

Is there a link to this report? I might have my students read it.

Here's a link to a news story

Francis Cianfrocca Thursday, May 28th at 10:49AM EDT (link)

http://www.reuters.com/article/americasDealsNews/idUSTRE54P68K20090526

The actual report is behind a pay wall. I was wrong, the research only applies to the HY market.

Corporate bonds are looking good again today, as they have been.

 
 
 

I don't really see it killing economy

Raven Thursday, May 28th at 12:42PM EDT (link)

I see it killing unions.

If lenders won’t give money to unionized companies, then only non-union companies will get money. If only non-union companies get money, then union companies will die. And the unions won’t be allowed into the other companies.

Short term, it would be painful. Long term… Well, bye-bye SEIU and UAW…

“Unlike cruel liberty that requires you to stand and take responsibility for your choices, kind tyranny requires only that you kneel and surrender your choices.”

Hooray for those bond trends...

alexg Thursday, May 28th at 5:54PM EDT (link)

I work in an industry that is run by entrenched unions, with entrepreneural non-unions constantly “crashing the party.” If this bond trend continues, it would surely start to create some increased opportunities to those shops. HOWEVER, I tend to think that the power is going to overwhelm the economics, and SEIU/UAW will be empowered to take money where it cannot be earned. Confiscatory taxation, government intervention, and so on…

 
 
 

On a Completely Self-Centered Note, Francis...

ATLconservative Thursday, May 28th at 10:48AM EDT (link)

What do you think the rough timeline is of mortgage rates really heading north? Will we see the 10-year yield fluctuate for awhile before rising long-term?

I think it’s decision time for me and mine…

 

Any chance

Joe_Cor Thursday, May 28th at 12:09PM EDT (link)

this could put a damper on socialized health care? A silver lining, perhaps, if the VAT doesn’t materialize?

 

That level of monetization...

Raven Thursday, May 28th at 12:40PM EDT (link)

It means huge levels of Inflation, doesn’t it?

“Unlike cruel liberty that requires you to stand and take responsibility for your choices, kind tyranny requires only that you kneel and surrender your choices.”

 

Leave a Comment

 

Be respectful, or be banned. No Profanity.