Modi the Margaret Thatcher of India?

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday named right-leaning economist Arvind Panagariya to run his new Policy Commission, hammering a final nail into the coffin of socialist planning that defined the first 67 years of independent India.

Panagariya, a professor at Columbia University in New York, will head a bench of thinkers comprising fellow free-market ideologue Bibek Debroy and a former top government scientist who designed a nuclear-capable ballistic missile.

The Indian-born economist’s calls to roll back the state have influenced Modi’s outlook and drawn comparisons, which he rejects, with Margaret Thatcher’s attack on labour regulations and state industry in 1980s Britain.

India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, adopted socialism to industrialise India after independence in 1947, a route that was later partly abandoned as India fell behind giant neighbour China’s rapid economic growth.

But the legacy of central planning survived a round of liberalising reforms in the 1990s in the form of 5-year plans drawn up by a Soviet-influenced planning commission.

India’s growth has hit its longest trough since the 1980s over the past two years, a cycle blamed by private economists on a lack of structural reforms to revive investment and create jobs and infrastructure.

Panagariya said that he did not support a Thatcherite agenda, saying India should give markets a freer rein but that it still needed growth in social spending in a country that has about a third of the world’s extremely poor.

Panagariya has previously advocated a loosening of fiscal deficit targets that he said were stifling growth to allow for more capital spending.

That view is shared by Arvind Subramanian, another heavyweight economist brought in last year.   In a December economic report Subramanian advocated higher infrastructure spending by the government to kick-start stagnant private investment.

Their views could be influential as Finance Minister Arun Jaitley prepares his first full budget, to be presented in parliament in February.

Panagariya, Subramanian and Debroy were vocal critics of Jaitley’s first budget. Their appointment suggests that Modi also wants a more radical finance bill this year.

Modi scrapped the 65-year-old Planning Commission in the New Year, replacing it with a body he said would do more to involve the regions.

India

 

Is Opposing Antonio Weiss a Worthy Battle?

Those nomination of Antonio Weiss to a treasury post has gotten ex tell burned democrats up in arms.  Elizabeth Warren is protesting his nomination.  While having the fox guard the chicken coop is a legitimate question for someone who has spent his career in investment banking,

Bloomberg View suggests suspicions are misplaced.  “The undersecretary for domestic policy oversees capital markets, financial institutions, consumer protections and not-insignificant matters like the national debt. For the last couple of decades, as an investment banker at Lazard in the U.S. and France, Weiss has been in the middle of complex financial deals involving businesses, banks, hedge funds and foreign governments. This is exactly the kind of real-world decision-making experience that will come in handy when interest rates finally start going up again — as they’re expected to this year — and the markets get jittery.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren may legitimately be leery after Congress weakened the Dodd-Frank financial reform law.  But this is probably  case of oveerkill.  Let’s focus on putting teeth in regulations that are on the books, empowering community banks, and splitting off high risk banking operations from tax payer backup.

Antonio Weiss and Elizabeth Warren

Nobelist Stiglitz Blocked from SEC

Dave Michaels reports:  The Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz who called for a tax on high-frequency trading, has been blocked from a government panel that will advise regulators on issues facing U.S. equity markets.

Democratic Commissioner Luis Aguilar had pushed for Stiglitz, who has said high-frequency trading isn’t good for financial markets and should be curbed, possibly through a tax.

“I think they may not have felt comfortable with somebody who was not in one way or another owned by the industry,” Stiglitz said in a phone interview.

White said Jan. 3 that she will announce the members of the advisory market-structure committee in the coming days — six months after she first proposed the idea together with a blueprint for renewed market oversight. Each of the five commissioners — two Democrats, two Republicans and White, an independent — was allowed to nominate one person to the panel. The commission then had to come to agreement on the final list, which is expected to have more than 15 members.

Stiglitz, 71, wasn’t the only nominee that sparked wrangling. Earlier in the process, SEC Commissioner Michael Piwowar, a Republican, opposed the involvement of TIAA-CREF Chief Executive Officer Roger Ferguson.  Ferguson, whose firm manages hundreds of billions of dollars in retirement savings, is a former Federal Reserve vice chairman. He is married to former SEC Commissioner Annette Nazareth, who now advises some of Wall Street’s biggest banks on regulatory issues.

The panel is expected to include representatives of Wall Street brokerage firms and academic researchers. IEX Corp. Chief Executive Officer Brad Katsuyama and former Senator Ted Kaufman of Delaware are expected to be named to the panel, two people with knowledge of the matter said.

Katsuyama started the IEX trading platform with the aim of leveling the playing field for investors by curbing the pace of buying and selling — eliminating opportunities for the fastest firms to trade in front of slower ones. He has said the government should consider forcing greater transparency of trading venues’ operations.

High-frequency trading, which uses computer algorithms to buy and sell large numbers of shares in fractions of a second, accounts for more than 50 percent of U.S. trading volume.

The dust-up over Stiglitz is emblematic of the frequent conflict among commissioners that has slowed progress on regulatory policy and enforcement matters under White. A recent case against Bank of America Corp. was stalled for three months as commissioners, divided along political lines, fought over additional penalties that could have expelled the bank from the profitable business of raising money for private companies.

A former chief economist of the World Bank  Stiglitz argued in an April speech that high-frequency trading can make markets less efficient while driving other investors to cloak their orders by placing them away from exchanges using dark pools, leading to less transparency.

High Speed Trading

US Budget Under Magnifying Glass of Macroeconomics?

The US House of Representatives on Tuesday adopted a controversial rule to require macroeconomic scoring on major legislation in the new Congress, which opponents say will politicize impartial budget analyses.

The provision, part of the rules package that the House considers at the start of every new Congress, passed largely along party lines by a vote of 234-172. Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) voted “present.”  So-called “dynamic scoring” typically offers a more favorable view of cutting taxes, which is part of why Republicans support the method.

GOP lawmakers argued that emphasizing macroeconomic scoring, which factors in economy-wide impacts like the rates of inflation and employment, simply provided a more comprehensive assessment of a bill’s impact on the federal budget.

“It doesn’t game the system at all. All we’re trying to do is make certain that members of Congress have more information upon which to be able to make decisions,” said incoming House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.)

But Democrats suggested that the scoring method would exaggerate the impact of tax cuts and politicize the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

“Republicans today are extending their embrace of voodoo economics by wrapping their arms around voodoo scorekeeping. Again, it’s not about more information, but it’s able to cook the books to implement their long-held discredited notion that tax cuts pay for themselves,” said Rep. Sandy Levin (D-Mich.), the top Democrat on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.

Price dismissed Democrats’ claims that the macroeconomic analyses would be too speculative.

“This is craziness,” Price said. “All economic projections, all, static, dynamic, all of them, have a level of uncertainty.”

Democrats also objected to a provision in the rules package that doesn’t allow the chamber’s six non-voting delegates to cast floor votes in certain circumstances. Delegates have been allowed to cast votes on amendments when the House is in a state known as the Committee of the Whole under Democratic majorities.

US Budget

US Community Banks Supported?

President Obama has nominated a community banker to the board of the Federal Reserve.  This nomination met with favorable comments from Senator Sherrod Brown, Fed board chair Janet Yellen and Frank Keating. It maybe time to take community banking functions away from the big banks, or me at least give them a ,choice between community baking sand investment banking.  Clearly a bank like JP Morgan Chase which only make 20 percent of its money on these functions would prefer to be an investment bank.   Goldman Sachs’ Richard Ramsden today suggests that the JPMorgan Chase that Jamie Dimon has taken years building would be worth more in pieces.  Can a break up be far behind?

The problem wirh break up of course is that the 80 percent of JP Morgan Chase’s acitivities that fall outside community banking might not be covered by tax payer dollars.  At any rate, they should not be.

An interesting side note:  Small banks benefit from regulation.  Is the flip side of this statement also true?

Dimon

Goldman Hints JPMorgan Chase Breakup

JP Morgan Chase’s parts are probably worth more to investors than the whole after regulators proposed tougher rules penalizing firms for size and complexity, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

JPMorgan could unlock value by splitting its four main businesses or dividing into consumer and institutional companies, Goldman Sachs analysts led by Richard Ramsden wrote today in a research note. Units of New York-based JPMorgan trade at a discount of 20 percent or more to stand-alone peers, they wrote.

“Our analysis suggests that a breakup into two or four parts could unlock value in most scenarios, although the range of outcomes we assessed is wide, at 5 percent to 25 percent potential upside,” the analysts wrote.

The move would reverse much of Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon’s work since taking over JPMorgan in 2006. Under Dimon, 58, the firm grew to become the largest U.S. lender by assets and the world’s biggest investment bank after acquiring ailing firms during the 2008 financial crisis.

Dimon has said the firm’s size creates opportunities to cross-sell products and better serve clients.

“Each of our four major businesses operates at good economies of scale and gets significant additional advantages from the other businesses,” Dimon wrote in a letter to shareholders last year. “This is one of the key reasons we have maintained good financial performance.”

The logic of a breakup would rely on the consumer business, commercial bank, investment bank and asset management unit being valued closer to so-called pure-play financial companies, the Goldman Sachs analysts wrote. The parts probably could operate with lower capital levels as stand-alone firms, resulting in higher returns on equity, they wrote.

The maneuver would risk some of the $6 billion profit JPMorgan says it makes tied to synergies between businesses, though a split into halves would preserve much of those benefits, the analysts wrote.

The Federal Reserve laid out a plan last month that may require JPMorgan to add more than $20 billion to its capital by 2019. The rules could get even stricter, prompting banks to consider new business models, the Goldman Sachs analysts wrote.

JP Morgan Chase Breakup

 

Poppy Growing and Heroin Addiction up in Afghanistan

A fascinating interview with Kirk Meyer, former Director of the Afghan Threat Finance Cell, suggests why.  Meyer reports:  The Taliban were collecting taxes on opium in the south. They were going to mirabs, who were the local officials who managed the water supplies in the villages. The mirabs knew which farmers were growing opium, and could estimate the size of their operations by the amount of water they used. The Taliban would have the mirabs calculate the amount of tax owed to the Taliban by individual opium farmers, and then also use the mirabs to collect the tax, which was paid in opium.

I went to a lot of meetings about crop substitution and eradication, but the problem with that approach is in the way the opium system works in Afghanistan. The opium farmers are given credit by opium brokers at the beginning of the growing season. This debt can be repaid only with opium. These opium brokers act like the company stores in the old coal-mining towns in the United States, where miners always had debt so they could never get out. Until they got their wages, they were always being paid in goods, and they could never leave because they owed rent on the house and money for groceries. Well, that was what would happen with the opium farmers. The opium brokers would loan the farmers money at the beginning of the season, and the only way the farmers were permitted to pay it back was in opium. Let’s say a farmer won the lottery or had some other financial windfall; he couldn’t go and give the opium broker money for his debt. The debt had to be paid in opium. So when the Karzai government eradicated opium or tried to substitute crops, it often worked against the individual farmers who owed debt in opium, and possibly made them into Taliban supporters.

I remember one farmer I interviewed who told me that when the government came and eradicated his crop, he couldn’t pay the opium broker, and so his father gave the farmer’s four-year-old daughter to the opium broker, who was some 72-year-old man, to try and settle the claim. Anyway, these young ATFC analysts came up with the idea that the military should focus on the mirabs and their relationship with the Taliban. We should wait until the mirabs gathered the opium owed to the Taliban for taxes, and at that point, conduct military and/or law enforcement operations, because then the farmers would be out of the equation. I believe that was the innovative thinking we should have been using to deal with Taliban funding through the drug trade.

You would have to monitor, either through legal wiretaps or other means, the phones of the mirabs, or recruit the mirabs as informants. By doing that, you should also be able to identify the Taliban members involved in the tax collection. This way, you could intercept the Taliban when they came to pick up the stockpiled opium from the mirabs.

Here is the December report of the US Senate Committee.  2014-12-23 Afghanistan Report Final

 

Will Plummeting Oil Prices Cramp ISIS?

America will have a tough time defeating the brutal jihadists of Islamic State (IS).  IS is one of the best-financed terrorist organisations in the world, except for state-backed ones. There is no credible estimate of the group’s net worth,  It is known to pay its fighters around $400 a month, which is more than Syrian rebel groups or the Iraqi government offer. It appears to have no trouble purchasing weaponry, either on the black market or from corrupt officials or militias. And it runs services  across the areas it controls, paying schoolteachers and providing for the poor and widowed. So where does it get all its cash from?

Without this wealth, IS, the latest evolution of al-Qaeda in Iraq, could not have expanded so rapidly. It announced itself in its current form in March 2013 when it expanded into Syria from Iraq.  By June 2013 it had taken control of Raqqa, a city in Syria, and in June 2014 it took over Mosul, Iraq’s second city. By then in control of an area that is home to 6m-8m people, it declared a caliphate at the end of that month. Fighters have flocked to join the group. By September 2014 it was estimated to have 30,000 men (and some women, in a female police force), including 15,000 foreign fighters.

Unlike other terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda in Iraq, IS largely funds itself rather than relying on rich supporters.  Although IS receives donations, especially from Gulf-based financiers, they are a relatively insignificant contributor to its coffers. Instead the bulk of its money comes from oil revenues from fields under its control in western Iraq and eastern Syria. American officials estimated that it was making $2m a day from oil before air strikes started, but in December an official said the strikes, some of which have been against oil facilities in Syria, meant the group’s oil revenues had “significantly” dropped. Controlling so much land also helps IS make money from extortion and taxing people in the areas it controls. Like other jihadist groups, it has learned that kidnapping can be profitable. IS earned at least $20m last year from ransoms paid for hostages, including several French and Spanish journalists.

The group cannot be defeated without cutting off its funds. That is why the coalition says it aims to attack the sources of its revenue as well as stopping the group from advancing militarily. America and its allies have carried out air strikes on IS-controlled oil refineries in Syria. America and Britain, which have a strict policy against paying ransoms for hostages, are pressuring European countries to stop paying up.  Several countries have applied sanctions against IS leaders as well as those known to raise funds for the group. But officials are keen to emphasise it will be a long fight. For now, IS still seems to be able to pay for everything it needs.

ISIS and Oil

The High Road in Scotland: Wind

According to new numbers published by WWF Scotland this week, wind turbines generated enough electricity in October to power 3,045,000 homes in the U.K. — more than enough for all the homes in Scotland.

Referring to it as a “bumper month” for renewable energy, WWF Scotland’s director Lang Banks said in a statement that “while nuclear power plants were being forced to shut because of cracks, Scotland’s wind and sunshine were quietly and cleanly helping to keep the lights on in homes across the country.”

Based on figures provided by WeatherEnergy, part of the European EnergizAIR project, the data also showed that for those homes fitted with solar panels, there was enough sunshine to meet around 40 percent of the electricity needs of an average home.

Wind energy has been thriving in the U.K. in recent months. In August the U.K set a new record for wind power generation, with wind accounting for seventeen percent of national demand. This came around the time that EDF Energy announced it was temporarily shutting down four of its U.K. reactors, or around a quarter of its total nuclear generating capacity, due to longevity issues. The four EDF reactors under investigation were commissioned in 1983 and are officially scheduled to be taken out of service in 2019.

Even for the U.K., Scotland is a green energy leader. As of September, the country got 29.8 percent of its electricity from renewables, 34.4 percent from nuclear, and only 34.4 percent from fossil fuels. Scotland hopes to generate the equivalent of 100 percent of its electricity from renewables by 2020 and to export non-renewable production from conventional power plants to countries like England.

In the first quarter of this year, Scotland generated a record 6,678 gigawatt-hours of renewable electricity, according to government figures, an increase of 55.9 percent from a year before. Wind generation in the first quarter of 2014 was also at a record high level of 4,214 GWh, up 4 percent year over year.

According to the government, as of March of this year Scotland had 6.8 gigawatts of installed renewable electricity generation capacity, with an additional 6.5 gigawatts of capacity either under construction or consented, the majority of which is expected to come from onshore wind generation. Including projects in the planning stages, this figure totals 20.5 gigawatts.

Scotland’s largest wind farm is also the U.K.’s largest. Whitelee Windfarm near Glasgow has a 539 megawatt capacity, and generates enough electricity to power just under 300,000 homes.

Wind Farms in Scotland

Xi and Li: Growth Slowing, Service Industries Growing, Urbanization

Kerry Brown writes:  China new ideology is Xiism. Xi’s power could be seen through his control over Party messaging.

Xi’s power could also be seen in a more brutally political way in the ongoing anti-corruption campaign, which finally reached former Politburo Standing Committee member, Zhou Yongkang, who was formally expelled from the Party and indicted for ‘corruption and fornication.’   This showed Xi was willing to take on powerful vested interests and deal with the consequences.Public approval of Xi’s corruption campaign was high, leading to a whole new mode of behaviour by officials. And the Fourth Plenum held in October 2014 produced a lengthy disquisition on strengthening ‘rule of law with socialist characteristics’ which also appealed to the all-important Chinese middle class whose interest is in stronger property rights, a more predictable legal environment and a sense that the government was listening.

Xi’s colleague, Premier Li Keqiang visited the UK, India and other countries during the year, but his profile was low. It seems that the real manager of China’s slowing economy was Liu He, who Xi regards as one of his most trusted advisors.

Both Xi and Li remained consistent on one issue: China’s growth rate is now set at below 7.5 per cent and the Chinese people have to live in a world where double-digit GDP growth is a thing of the past. The main focus now is on creating an economy that is service sector orientated, that consumes more, that is more urban, and that is less driven by investment than it has been in the past.

Xi spearheaded a diplomatic offensive, visiting countries in Latin America, Africa, South Asia and then, in November, attending the G20 summit in Brisbane, visiting Canberra and travelling to New Zealand and Fiji. In Brussels in late March he articulated the concept of the EU and China being ‘civilisational partners’. But he also managed to come up with the New Silk Road mantra, which covered a land and maritime link. And he embraced a Russia ostracised by Europe and America.

Even with the US, Xi was able to produce a major environment protocol with his American counterpart. He also announced with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott final details of a Free Trade Agreement, and supported an Asia-wide free trade zone concept, the FTAAP.  A tepid rapprochement was made with Japan in November.

After its initial support for the Hong Kong government’s proposals for how elections for the Chief Executive in 2017 might be run, it largely kept out of direct dealings with the protests in the city. On Taiwan, too, Xi continued to be a mixture of pushy and supportive of incumbent President Ma Jing-jeou.

Ironically, perhaps the one area where Xi seemed to be bereft of new ideas was North Korea, which he dealt with largely by ignoring it.

In one area XI remained consistent with its predecessors: human rights lawyers and dissidents were ruthlessly dealt with: IIlham Tohti, a Beijing-based Uighur academic received a life sentence. Academics, intellectuals and people from the artistic sphere were given strict instructions on what was proscribed.

.Xi and Li Team