Showing posts with label IIP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IIP. Show all posts

Saturday, June 6, 2015

World Excess Capacity Slows Corporate Recovery



Introduction

   The Economic Survey 2014-15 said that, India has reached a sweet spot – rare in the history of nations - is in which it could finally be launched on a double digit medium-term growth trajectory.” It also stated that,”in the short run, growth will receive a boost from lower oil prices,..”  Every Investment analysts of repute and every analyst who has written a newspaper article or commented on TV, agrees that India has benefited greatly from recent changes in global economic environment.  Further an over whelming majority of India analysts also agree that this is the major reason for a transformation of India’s external position (CAD) and the dramatic decline in inflation. This article shows that this is only one side of the external coin.  The other negative side effect of the same external environment is the prolonged U shaped bottom that we observe in the Index of industrial production for manufacturing and the fluctuating fortunes of the corporate sector. 

   It is true that global oil and other commodity prices, collapsed in 2014. It is also true that the collapse of oil prices and related refined products and manufactures based on them have had very positive effect on the current account deficit and the Fiscal deficit. Contrary to popular analysis, the CPI inflation for Fuel in lighting actually accelerated during 2014-15 from 1.6% in October-December 2013 to 2.3% in Jan-March 2015. Worse, the same global fundamentals that led to the collapse of global commodity prices have had a deleterious effect on the World  economy and the Indian corporate sector since the global crisis of 2008.

External Dynamics

   The story starts with world trade and GDP growth boom in the 2000s. This boom, almost a bubble in some respects, was exploded by the Global Financial crisis of 2008, leaving in its wake large excess capacities in the tradeable sectors of the World economy.  World GDP growth, which averaged 3.1% to 3.2% during the 10-15 years ending 2008, collapsed to 2.0% in the following seven years to 2015. The nature of the bubble is better captured by the growth in world trade imports of goods and services. Rate of growth of World imports accelerated from an average of 5.8% per year in 1999-2003 to 7.8% per year in 2004-2008 and then collapsed to 3% per year during 2009-2013.  World gross fixed investment grew at an average rate of 5.4% during 2003-2007, more than double the average growth of 2.5% during the previous five years, before collapsing. As in most recessions in the west, the globalized corporate sector tightened its belt and  improved efficiency in the next few years, preserving its profitability, and  even increasing it in some countries for a couple of years. The globalized parts of the Indian corporates sector did the same.

     The corrective World-wide fiscal stimulus and monetary easing that followed the seizing of Global financial system at the end of 2008, led to a quick recovery in the developing and emerging market economies.  But it had some effects that weren’t necessarily beneficial for all countries. This was partly due to short term focus and mistiming of policies. Many developed countries switched from a relaxed fiscal policy to a tightening one from 2010, instead of correcting the weak demand excess capacity problem in tradeable goods and services.  This put an extra burden on Developed country Central banks at a time when monetary policy was already constrained by near zero interest rates. The commodity boom/bubble revived quickly after a temporary collapse at the end of 2008, and  continued for several years beyond the World GDP & trade growth slowdown. It was finally pricked in 2014, as a credible announcement of an end to the US Feds Quantitative Easing (QE) laid the grounds for its collapse.

     Some large emerging economies compounded the global excess capacity problem by continued investments through large risky injections of policy directed credit or expansionary fiscal policy or a fusion of both.  For instance the rate of growth of China’s gross fixed investment declined only marginally from 13.4% per year during 2002 to 2007 to 12% per year during 2008 to 2013, while overall world GFCF collapsed from 4.6% to 1.8%. Consequently, the excess capacity in tradeable goods and services did not reduce and worsened for some products. This low demand and excess capacity meant low or non-existent opportunities for private capital in developed countries, driving it into commodity markets and keeping commodity prices booming.

Global Excess Capacity

  The negative effects of the global demand deficit and excess capacity have affected different countries to different degree. The export oriented economies of China, East and South East Asia have been most severely affected.  India, which has an export neutral economy, has been less affected overall. But India is a dual economy with a substantial part of its corporate sector globalized. A sub-index for this globalized sector, derived from the Index of Industrial production (IIP) for manufacturing, was in the last quarter of 2014, still below its level in the first quarter of 2011. Its average growth rate during the last four years was -0.3%, compared to an average growth rate of 3.1% for the non-globalized IIP sub index and 6.7% for the IIP for electricity.  Part of the corporate sector and most of the non-corporate economy remains relatively isolated from the global cross-currents as suggested by the robust growth of electricity supply. The Motor vehicles sector, which is somewhat shielded from the global pressures, has also bottomed out and shows signs of recovery despite the negative effect of rising real rates of interest during 2014-15. The recovery of growth of private consumption (5.2%, 6.2%, 7.1%), gross fixed investment (-0.3%, 3.0%, 4.1%) and GDP (5.1%, 6.9%, 7.1%) in 2012-3, 2013-4 and 2014-5, shown by the new GDP series, is therefore consistent with the dual nature of the Indian economy.

    One implication of the negative effect of the external environment on the corporate sector is the slower recovery in tax revenues. The corporate sector contributes tax revenues, not just directly as corporate income tax, but also through the income taxes paid by its employees and excise taxes collected by it (organized sector is important source of both). This negative revenue effect of the external recession has offset some of the positive effect of reduction in oil related subsidies on the fiscal deficit.

Net Effect

    The external environment has therefore had both a positive and negative effect on the Indian economy.  The negative effects of the global recession were felt immediately from the start of the global crises, but were masked by the temporary bubble created in India in 2010-11, through directed credit to PPP infrastructure contractors. These re-emerged with the pricking of the local Indian bubble.  The positive effects of global recession on global commodity prices were delayed by global monetary expansion, but emerged in 2013-14 with the prospective end of US QE. Further the negative effects on the globalized sector have been magnified whenever the rupee appreciated in real effective exchange rate (REER 36 country) terms: Thus between September 2013 to April 2015 the REER appreciated by 11.4%, with the inevitable consequence on recovery 

    On balance therefore, the net effect of external factors on the Indian economy during 2014-15, has been clearly positive on the Current Account, mildly positive on the Fiscal Account and negative on corporate growth.  The net overall effect is therefore positive, but much smaller than analysts have assumed so far.

Conclusion

  Projections of Global growth by multilateral institutions like the IMF and the World Bank have proved since 2010 to be overoptimistic. They have been repeatedly revised downwards, as they have been most recently for 2015 and 2016. Interestingly, the IMF projections were always a little pessimistic for India and therefore turned out closer to actuals(old GDP series) than Government’s more optimistic forecasts for 2011 to 2013. Looking forward the slow recovery projected for the USA and EU will also mean slower recovery for India’s globalized corporate sector.[i] This does not mean, Indian macro-managers can do nothing about it.
     A combination of looser monetary policy, a tighter fiscal policy with greater shift of fiscal expenditure from subsidies & consumption to infrastructure investment and a quick solution of the bankruptcy-bad loan problem can accelerate recovery of corporate investment, and accelerate overall growth.


Post Script (15/8/15)

    A series of recent developments in China have exposed the extent of growth slowdown in China, previously hidden by the careful control that the CCP exercises over information.  This means that in the short term the external environment will become more negative for India.  
    A number of reports have appeared over the past few years about empty apartment complexes and even empty cities in China. This and other indicators such as growth in electricity consumption, led several analysts (including us) to conclude that China’s actual growth was likely a per cent point below the officials numbers released by the Government i.e. around 6%. Recent developments suggest that the growth numbers, going forward, could be much lower, by about 1 to 2% below even this estimate of 6%, i.e. 4-5%.  More seriously the panic reaction revealed by the use of draconian control methods to prop up the stock market in June and the shock devaluation in August suggest that the Communist Party (CCP) may have lost its ability to manage the economy and maintain a growth rate of around 6% (a much wanted soft landing). Consequently the probability of a decline in Chinese growth rate to 4-5% (feared hard landing) has now increased to 30%, from less than 10% in May this year.
    Indian policy can minimize the adverse short term development s of Chinese hard landing by ensuring that the “Real effective exchange rate(36 country)” of the rupee does not appreciate (repeat not).  Temporary measures to control any potential dumping by Chinese firms during the next year or so would also be justified, but these must be withdrawn once the immediate threat has passed.
    In the medium-long term the reduction in profitability of investment, beginning to be revealed in the worsening profitability of foreign (FDI) firms operating in China, will also become visible in State and party controlled enterprises. With lower investible surpluses these State & party controlled firms will be forced to cut down their investment, and stop creating capacity that adds to global excess capacity in traded goods, particularly manufacturing.  Over time this will help reduce excess capacity globally and benefit India and other countries suffering from an imbalance between effective global demand and subsidized capacity creation by China.  In particular the globalized Indian corporate sector, producing standardize products such as metals and basic chemicals will benefit in the medium term.
 
----------
A version of this article appeared on the Editorial page of the Indian Express, under the banner, “Inside, Outside, “ on June 6th ,  2015,  http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/inside-outside-4/ .


[i] Japanese growth has much less impact on Indian growth and Chinese growth has almost no impact on Indian growth. Chinese over investment in tradeable manufacturing will however, continue to have a negative impact on Indian manufacturing, whether China grows fast or slow.

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Inflation & Monetary Policy 2015-16



Introduction

   This note takes stock of inflation and monetary policy during the last few years and draws implications for future. The most important conclusion is the need for a 1 to 2% reduction in the repo rate during the current  year.

Inflation

          Inflation as measured by the Private Consumption deflator (PFCE) is projected by the CSO in  2014-15 to be 5.4 per cent , down 3.1 per cent from 2013-14 and 4 per cent points from 2012-13.  It is likely to fall by another per cent point to 4.5% in 2015-16. Average annual CPI inflation mirrors this decline, with a 3 per cent fall between 2013-4 and 2014-15. The CPI rise to 5.4% in February (from 3.3% in November 2014) is largely due to effect of unseasonal rains on seasonal vegetables. The marginal decline in CPI inflation in March to 5.2 per cent supports this conclusion. The effect of

Monetary Tightening

          With a nominal Repo rate of 7.5%, Real repo rate (using PFCE inflation) was 2.5% in 2014-15. The reduction of the nominal Repo rate from an average 7.9% in 2013-14 has been too small to keep the real rate from rising from a negative -0.9% in 2013-14 to 2.5% during 2014-15. This represents a sharp 3.4% point tightening of monetary policy at a time when inflation has fallen sharply. The tightening is equally sharp if we use average CPI inflation to derive the real repo rate, which has increased from -1.9% in 2013-14 to 1.7% in 2014-15
        Even though the economy is growing at a little over 7.4 per cent as per the new GDP data with base 2011-12, this is not true of the organized sector of the economy, which is growing at a much lower rate. High real interest rates are choking off recovery of interest sensitive consumer durable sectors like automobiles and housing and also of real estate in general.  Lower interest rates are critical to faster recovery of these sectors. One indication of this is the fact that the index of motor vehicle production in 2014-15 averaged 12% lower than it did in 2011-12. GDP from (Value added in) the Construction sector in 2014-15 is projected to be only 2.5 per cent higher than it was three years earlier in 2011-12.
    

    As the labor intensive real estate, housing and construction sectors uses a lot of rural migrant labor, the poor performance of these sectors is partly responsible for the documented slowdown in rural wage growth. This, along with a slowdown in agricultural growth can also be linked to the reported softening of rural demand after several years of firm demand. It should therefore be no surprise that demand for industries such as cement and steel supplying inputs to these two sectors are also in the doldrums.

Rupee Appreciation

     The Indian rupee has appreciated by almost 10% in real effective exchange rate terms (REER36 country index). This represents an additional tightening of the monetary policy.  The timing of current and capital account liberalization should be modulated to minimize the appreciation of the exchange rate.  A faster reduction on controls on capital outflows and reduction in import protection can help moderate the appreciation of the rupee and certainly needs to be part of the policy mix.  
     However the real interest rate interest differential with global rates has been rising and is now too high. It is drawing in excessive short term capital flow and leading to real appreciation of the rupee. If there is no change in nominal rates, the ratio of short term (ST)  to medium-long term (MLT) capital inflows is likely to worsen .
      The rupee appreciation is adversely affecting demand for the globally connected, globally competitive parts of the corporate sector (worsening the demand-supply balance), which seems to be operating at 60% to 70% capacity utilization and delaying recovery of fixed investment and the upturn in the corporate investment cycle. This consists of two parts: One the Metals & Mining: With Coal and mining policy being sorted out through transparent auctions, corporate metals and mining sector is likely to recover, followed by fixed investment in the sector. Two, the rest of the globally connected corporate sector.  In this case a correction of the appreciation will lead to faster recovery of demand, profits, ROE , sustaining the shift from debt to equity initiated by the fall in real interest rates. Fixed investment revival will follow with a lag.


      The delayed recovery in the globally connected & competitive (GC&C) sector also adversely effects the recovery in excise and corporate tax collections, which are collected mostly from the large, organsed corporate sector. Consequently both the corporate cycle and the tax revenue cycle(post global financial crisis)  are lagging GDP growth recovery compared to the normal recovery cycle (pre GFC).

       A rise in US interest rates will reverse some of the rising real interest differential, but that is still more than 6 months away. The profit expectation, ROE and risk profile of the globalized part of India’s corporate sector will worsen in 6-9 months if nothing is done to reverse the appreciation.

Infrastructure

    Legacy problems in infrastructure, created partly by overoptimistic demand projections and partly by government directed lending by Public Sector Banks (without resolving difficult policy & regulatory issues) have not been resolved as quickly as necessary for speedy recovery of this sector.  They therefore continue to delay PSB (NPA) and corporate infrastructure revival in sectors such as highways. However, Central Government’s expenditure plans have begun a revival in power and railways sub-sectors.  This, along with reforms in other sectors, will also have a positive effect on corporates and banks with non-performing assets in other infrastructure sectors. 

   An obvious implication of the corporate problems outlined above is that the Banking sectors appetite for lending to these sectors is adversely affected.

Expectation Effects

     As a decline in repo-rates gives rise to expectations of debt asset price appreciation that will be reversed after the asset price appreciation, it is not sustainable after interest rates fall. Such expectations argue for sharper, quicker reductions in repo rates rather than in small steps over a long time period.

Inflation & Monetary Policy in 2015-16

  In projecting  inflation for 2015-16,  two factors are significant. First core, non-food, non-fuel inflation in March was 4.4 per cent, which was also the average of the last four months. Core (non-food, non-fuel) WPI inflation in March was even lower at -2.5%. It is reasonable to expect the gap between the two to close, particularly given decelerating inflation in transport, real estate and wages which are relevant elements between wholesale and retail markets. Thus we are already in 2015, well on the way to the 2018 inflation target of 4 per cent, at least as far as core inflation is concerned. Food inflation is currently running at around 6.1% in the CPI, but is much lower at 4.4% in the WPI, indicating that CPI food inflation is headed lower. If government focuses on agricultural reform and as promised in the budget, NITI can develop a consensus among the States, food inflation below 6% in January 2016 and 4% in 2018 is feasible. There is large gap between the CPI (4.5%) and WPI (-10.5%) on fuel inflation, because the complex system of price controls, administered prices and subsidies. However, even if there is some rise in global oil prices during the year, CPI fuel inflation is unlikely to exceed 6%. Thus total CPI inflation is likely to be between 5 and 5.5 per cent.
     Inflation as measured by the private consumption deflator or by average CPI inflation is therefore projected to decline further by about 1 per cent point. If the nominal repo rate remains unchanged, the real repo rate will increase further to 3.1% in private consumption deflator terms and to 2.1% in CPI terms. Such a tight monetary policy has not been seen since high growth year of 2007-8 when CPIIW inflation averaged 6.2% and global inflation pressures were high. Even if the nominal repo rate is reduced to an average of 6.5% for the year 2015-16, the real repo rate will be 1.1 per cent in terms of average CPI inflation and 2.1 per cent in terms of PFCE inflation, more than enough to keep pushing inflation towards the 4% target for 2017. Thus a reduction in the nominal repo rate is urgently required.

Transmission

   The argument of weak transmission of repo rate movement applies to both rate rises and rate reductions. If transmission of monetary policy signals like the repo rate is weak, a merely signaling of a change in intentions by the central bank can have little or no effect on market interest rates. The central bank may therefore need to make larger changes in the repo rate to have the same effect as in countries where markets are well integrated and efficient.
     It is also sometimes argued that monetary transmission is asymmetric in the Indian system, where ¾ of the assets are controlled by government owned banks.  To the extent that these banks are in turn controlled by risk-averse appointees of the government, part of whose time is spent on trying to minimize government pressure on lending to sub-sectors with high policy or regulatory risk and/or inefficient and failing borrowers (cronies), this has some validity.  In this situation, jaw boning by the Central bank in co-operation with the Government can be a valid instrument for correcting the asymmetry. Beyond this, it suggests that larger changes in repo rates would be required when lowering rates than when raising rates, thus introducing a down ward bias in rates.  
        Historical data indicates that as far as monetary policy managers are concerned, positive inflation surprises have historically predominated over negative ones and consequently the real repo rate has averaged a negative -2.5% or so since 2004. A balancing of these two factors suggests that a 4 per cent nominal  repo rate would be appropriate when inflation is projected to be at the long term target of 4 per cent (+/- 2%), with upward(downward) revision of repo rates if inflation surprises are positive(negative).

Conclusion

    A zero average real repo rate seems to be an appropriate long term target for the RBI, while shooting for a minimum one percent point reduction in the real repo rate for 2015-16. If inflation declines below the conservative projection of 5 to 5.5 in this note, a larger reduction in the nominal repo rate would be warranted.

----------

A shorter version of this post appeared earlier in ET blogs at  http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/PolicyAnalysis/why-a-reduction-in-the-nominal-repo-rate-is-urgently-required/