In this section
Offers for readers
The comment stream
Recent comments
- 1 of 19015
- ››
Editors choice
- 1 of 274
- ››
Finance sector jobs
Sought after opportunity to move to one of the most beautiful westernised countries in the...more
Australia
You will be reporting into the head of Corporate Finance and work in liaison with the gene...more
Australia
Bloomberg Tradebook is a global agency broker offering innovative trading algorithms and s...more
Australia
Bloomberg News seeks an experienced Corporate Finance Reporter in our Sydney office to cov...more
Australia

The news stream
Latest news
Most commented
- A plan for Auckland's housing crisis 80
- Thursday's Top 10 with NZ Mint 48
- Bank CEO defends bank profits 37
- 90 seconds at 9 am with BNZ 33
- Wednesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint 28
- 90 seconds at 9 am with BNZ 23
- Floating mortgage share hits record 61% 19
- Barfoots says strongest Jan in 4 yrs 17
- Why Labour is fine with some foreign buyers 11
- Govt courts Chinese investment 7
Most viewed
Interest on Twitter
Opinion: Why New Zealand (and the RBNZ) should embrace higher long term interest rates
By Bernard Hickey Reserve Bank Governor Alan Bollard railed yesterday morning against a pesky increase in longer term wholesale interest rates, saying they were "unwarranted and inconsistent with the monetary policy outlook." His obvious but unstated concern was that the associated rise in mortgage rates might derail the economic recovery he was banking on for later this year. "As indicated in our March Statement, we are projecting interest rates to remain at relatively low levels for an extended period," he added. He appeared to be directing the markets to move their rates into line with his forecasts before someone gets sent to the naughty chair. I'm being a bit rude, but that appeared to be the tone of the statement. It was an exasperated and almost plaintive statement. And a tad pointless. There is no naughty chair for long term interest rates. His only obvious tool to move interest rates is the Official Cash Rate and that can only influence short term rates directly. His comments and the direction of the OCR can influence sentiment in the long term, but that is as much because of the Reserve Bank's forecasts for the economy rather than the OCR itself. He has another nuclear powered tool he hasn't used before that I'll talk about later.
Supply and demand The sharp jump in wholesale interest rates started on March 12 because Bollard, rightly, indicated he couldn't cut the OCR too much further because international investors wouldn't let us. Back then he also pointed out the Reserve Bank had forecast a relatively quick economic rebound in late 2009 and early 2010 that would push GDP growth over 4%. I think the Reserve Bank is being too optimistic for economic growth, but the markets took the bank at its word and priced in the risks by starting to put up longer term wholesale rates, and therefore longer term mortgage rates.
Another big reason for the big jump in wholesale rates was a rush by many home owners who were floating to fix their mortgages long, believing that long term fixed would start rising after almost a year of falling. I said in my Brother in Law's guide on March 13 that floating borrowers should go short for the cheapest rate now, but those who want to fix should look to fix soon. I have since firmed that up to say borrowers who want fixed rates should fix now. There was about NZ$15 billion of mortgages that switched from fixed to floating between September last year and March, according to Westpac in a research note, meaning the wall of borrowing that has to be financed in the wholesale market by banks is enormous if everyone raced for the fixed door at the same time. The effect on interest rates was magnified by there being a lack of supply on the other side of the door. During the global credit boom from 2003 to early 2008 there would have been plenty of foreign banks and investors willing to lend our banks the money through the swaps market. But that easy money has gone, as well as some of the 'market maker' intermediaries who helped build volume in the market from their bases in Sydney. The exit of the some of the foreign owned banks from this market has had a substantial impact. This partly explained why the 5 year swap rate rose from 4% to over 5% in the last three weeks. Full interactive charts are below and here (for bookmarking). The point of this detail about why long term interest rates rose is to reiterate that they are determined by supply and demand, not by Reserve Bank edict. Although to be fair to Bollard in his statement, he wasn't issuing an edict, more of a frustrated waft of advice. Embrace high interest rates Sometimes it's worth standing back and asking why the market is sending such price signals. New Zealand has a very effective set of automatic stabilisers that have served us reasonably well over the last couple of years. The rise in the New Zealand dollar from 2005 to 2008 helped soften the inflationary impact of a fast growing economy and a commodity price boom. The fall in the New Zealand dollar through late 2008 has softened the impact of a commodity price slump on export returns and increased the cost of imports at a time when we need to reduce our current account deficit. Long term interest rates are another one of these automatic stabilisers. When demand for capital and funds to spend or invest is high those rates tend to rise. When supply of those funds from overseas investors is weak then the fixed interest yields or rates rise (fixed interest price falls) to make it more attractive for foreigners to invest. This price signal is a crucial one for the economy. Essentially the price signals from two of our main automatic stabilisers, long term interest rates and the exchange rate, are telling us what we all need to know. Most of us know we need to know it. Some guess we need to know and others are in denial. But there is nothing so definite and motivating as a price signal. International investors, Mum and Dad depositors, financial institutions and the big soup of influencers that make up a market are telling New Zealanders to rebalance away from borrowing and consuming and towards saving and investing in productive assets. The pressures of a current account deficit running at 9% of GDP and a net foreign debt close to 95% of GDP are pushing up long term interest rates. The global shortage of easy lending across borders and the prospect of higher inflation in years to come because of heavy money printing and government bond issuance is also driving the market. Higher deposit rates will encourage Mums and Dads to spend less and save more. This means there is more money around to lend to business and others wanting to invest in productive assets. A lower currency is discouraging the importing of consumer goods and encouraging exports. It's also encouraging investing in assets that produce both exports, and goods that are import substitutes. Twin deficits The twin effect of high interest rates and a low currency is to encourage more foreign lending to New Zealand, to encourage more local saving, to discourage local spending and to encourage investing in export production. The end result, we should hope, is a lower current account deficit and a lower net foreign debt. Higher long term interest rates also discourage governments from running very big budget deficits. The problem with automatic stabilisers is that they can often be painful in the short term. Politicians hate them. The process of rebalancing our economy will be painful. Some people in consumer-focused and debt-driven industries, like retailing and residential property, will lose their jobs. GDP will fall for a time. That is already happening. My main point then is to say this adjustment must be allowed to happen. Alan Bollard may not like the impact on the economy in the short term and how it makes his optimistic forecasts look, but this is the signal the market is sending. We have a savings and debt problem. We need a long recession to fix it. There is no easy way out and the market is not wrong. The nuclear powered option I mentioned above is for Bollard to print money by buying back government and other bonds, therefore forcing down long term mortgage rates. This is exactly what the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve are doing right now. Bollard himself was sceptical about either the need for such a 'quantitative easing' or the potential success of it when he spoke at length in the MPS press conference on March 12 about it. He even warned MPs in his session at the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on March 12 of the 'very nasty' inflation problem likely to come from the money printing globally. He was right to be sceptical about quantitative easing and I doubt he would resort to it. If he did, all bets are off. I believe it would collapse the currency and actually not reduce long term interest rates that much as foreign investors rushed to the exits guided by a credit rating downgrade, and Mum and Dad depositors demanded higher interest rates. Here's a great interactive chart on wholesale interest rates.
"Higher deposit rates will encourage
"Higher deposit rates will encourage Mums and Dads to spend less and save more."
But deposit rates in NZ haven't risen to the same degree as mortgage rates over the past 3-4 weeks have they?
My understanding is that ANZ/National paid offshore investors 7.5% in that recent capital raising, but the best rate they are offering local savers is 5.25% for a 2 year term? And their 4-5 year terms are even lower for local savers.
Something seems amiss.
Kate, You make a good
Kate,
You make a good point. BNZ is offering 6% for 5 years and Raboplus is offering 6.25% for 5 years, but the others have low rates. http://www.interest.co.nz/term2.asp?30
They might be surprised how much retail money would flood in if they offered 7.5%. I bet they could match their US$1 bln at 7.5% in a few weeks with an offer like that.
But it's all a bit zero sum game. They'd be taking if off each other, finance companies and corporate bond issuers. NZ needed 'outside' money to keep paying the interest bill on its foreign debts. Although a higher interest rate for retail depositors may encourage more saving, which would mean it wasn't a zero sum game.
The banks should all be increasing their term deposit rates for retail investors.
The government guarantee is distorting it. I think they will all work out they need to hike rates soon to get the money they need.
cheers
Bernard
You are on the button
You are on the button Bernard ,lets hope the 'Peoples Bank' or affectionally known as KiwiBank reads your logic.
Jill The problem for Kiwibank
Jill
The problem for Kiwibank is that it is short of capital now to back any big new lending.
They blew it all in the December quarter when they dominated the market.
The government would have to stump up with more, which I doubt they'll do.
cheers
Bernard
“Higher deposit rates will encourage
"Higher deposit rates will encourage Mums and Dads to spend less and save more."
Higher mortgage rates simply prevent homeowners from paying back principal. Debt reduction requires low rates to create the cash flow required.
Higher deposit rates increase the incomes of depositers (ie. pensioners with no mortgage debt) which encourages spending on themselves and their families. Low rates encourage those depositers to cut personal expenditure.
It's a bit less simplistic
It's a bit less simplistic than that Joe. Our kids sold their family homes when deposit, as well as mortage, rates started their last climb - and rented. Put the capital gain in the bank at +7% and waited for the house price crash, whilst earning a good rate of interest on savings. Renting even got cheaper over the period.
Now that interest on savings isn't that flash - they're back out looking to buy - planning to spend less on the next house but not needing to compromise lifestyle. If the deposit rates go back over 7% again, they'll likely stay renting as it makes sense financially.
So it's not just pensioners who amend their borrowing/savings habits based on what bank's are doing with deposit accounts locally.
Bernard thank you for the
Bernard thank you for the voice of reason and sensible point of view, hopefully it will penetrate our politicians thinking. MONEY PRINTING IS NO OPTION, it is a "road to hell" as a European politician recently so rightly stated. Coming myself from Europe and remembering the stories of my parents and grandparents who have lived through the 1930 depression and the currency devaluation after World War II it is a horrifying thought that the presently ongoing "monetary easing" in many countries will be a direct way to hyperinflation and debauching of a currency, and as a final consequence the insolvency of sovereign states finances. Mass poverty and political riots and violent acts are the result.
Tightening the belt and saving is painful, but in the long run less painful than "stimulus" with worthless paper money which just prolongs the time for the necessary adjustment of debt bubbles.
Are you getting rewarded xtra
Are you getting rewarded xtra for this type of articles or it's just part of service?
Bernard, Thanks for the quality
Bernard,
Thanks for the quality Austrian perspective. I came to the same supply and demand conclusion as well. Water seeks its own level regardless of whether we believe sea level is rising or falling. It seems Alan Bollard's comments fly in the face of the Prime Minister's WSJ interview. I'm surprised National have not released an official retort.
Jerry, We're an equal opportunity
Jerry,
We're an equal opportunity news and opinion service.
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/04/02/banks-attacked-...
cheers
Bernard
Can someone help a financial
Can someone help a financial newbie: if the RB prints money, I would think this 'devalues' the currency, and hence the long term interest rates would rise as the banks want more money back in the future to cover both the loan/risk AND the fact the future repayments will be worth less (ie inflation).
However Bernard said the opposite, so I guess I dont understand something here.
Can someone help me out?
[financial newbie, i read this site each day to try and get a handle on stuff but most is still flying over my head at the moment :)]
"Jerry Says: April 2nd, 2009
"Jerry Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Are you getting rewarded xtra for this type of articles or it's just part of service?"
What are you asking ?
"Joe says
Higher mortgage rates simply prevent homeowners from paying back principal. "
I would be interested to find out who actually pays back principal anyway. BH, are there any stats on the types of mortgages taken out ? EG - Table, reducing..whatever.I would think that most people with table pay masses of interest for many years , then the principal starts to kick in late in the payment schedule way down the years.
I have paid off (or nearly paid off) 3 houses using Westpacs P&I mortgages over the years. So although the payments are higher initially, I owned a little more of the house after each payment and I felt like I was getting somewhere. If i had a bit extra cash I could lump it on as well. Only problem was it was usually floating rate, but it worked for me. Bank didn't really encourage it as I was paying them less interest over the life of the mortgage.
AndyC: Bernard did note that
AndyC: Bernard did note that QE would be unlikely to lower long term rates once the initial shock had worn off.
The problem here is that the RB wants to see long rates lower but only has the OCR to play with (at the moment). One can sense their frustration.
I don't think QE would work either. The market is unreliable and doesn't always respond in a predictable manner.
Possibly they could start their own retail lending service and lend new money at whatever rate they choose and at the same time raise reserve requirements from the banks so as to restrain the amount they could lend.
Of course they could always pump new capital into Kiwibank and do the same.
If not we can expect the banks to continue to price as they see fit.
The banks are desperately making
The banks are desperately making as much margin as possible to attempt to cover all the losses that are looming once our housing bubble really collapses.
Meanwhile, it is only wise to NOT attempt to inflate that bubble any more with low interest rates. We have the example of what has happened to all the other nations that have tried that, we have no excuse for making the same mistake. Better just take our lumps now, not put them off and make them bigger and harder for later.
"The twin effect of high
"The twin effect of high interest rates and a low currency is to encourage more foreign lending to New Zealand, to encourage more local saving, to discourage local spending and to encourage investing in export production. The end result, we should hope, is a lower current account deficit and a lower net foreign debt."
Bernard could you help me out here. How do you achieve a "low currency" when you have "high interest rates"?
Why doesn't the government come
Why doesn't the government come to the party, and stop taxing interest on savings ? Some incentive to be prudent and save. After all, they take more than their fair share of our industriousness through taxes. Surely the few pennies we finally scrape together ought to be ours to do with as we see fit.
Perhaps Alan Bollard has forgotten
Perhaps Alan Bollard has forgotten what happened to Iceland ?
When you are a debtor nation, you pay what the lenders want.
Who is going to 'bail' us out ?
Or should we prepare ourselves to go cap in hand to the IMF before its too late ?
Does anyone think we have an 'entitlement' to cheap credit ?
If its too expensive , don't BORROW !
No one is putting a gun to your head !
Bernard - So who's wrong?
Bernard - So who's wrong? You or Bollard and the market?
"Back then he also pointed out the Reserve Bank had forecast a relatively quick economic rebound in late 2009 and early 2010 that would push GDP growth over 4%. I think the Reserve Bank is being too optimistic for economic growth, but the markets took the bank at its word and priced in the risks by starting to put up longer term wholesale rate"
AND LATER "There is no easy way out and the market is not wrong."
Also, as per Neil C's comment, how do you 'achieve a "low currency" when you have "high interest rates"'?
Roger, Removing tax from earned
Roger,
Removing tax from earned interest is a fair proposal.
Scott/Neil,
When you have a low currency and high interest rates it suggests your currency and credit rating is going down the swannee...........it's not a desirable position to be in.
yes raf a bit like
yes raf a bit like Iceland you mean. I'm just a bit surprised that Bernard would suggest that as a way forward for our economy.
Personally I think the choice is high interest rates + high dollar vs low interest rates + low dollar. I struggle to see how the first of these could give us any hope of avoiding an economic meltdown.
"Higher deposit rates will encourage
"Higher deposit rates will encourage Mums and Dads to spend less and save more"
Does it mean that Kiwis saved more then anyone else in the world over last 2-5 years, as we had worlds highest interest rates?
I somehow doubt it.
This whole thread just shows
This whole thread just shows nobody has a clue what the future holds - just go with the flow - nothing you can do as an individual will make any difference
Roger Thompson Says: April 2nd,
Roger Thompson Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:46 pm
"Why doesn't the government come to the party, and stop taxing interest on savings ? Some incentive to be prudent and save. After all, they take more than their fair share of our industriousness through taxes. Surely the few pennies we finally scrape together ought to be ours to do with as we see fit."
HEAR, HEAR. I have been saying this on blogs for years. It is just soooo absurd that politicians need to devise elaborate subsidised schemes to make people save money, when this disincentive remains extant.
Scott, Many thanks. The market
Scott,
Many thanks.
The market is not wrong about long term interest rates rising. But the reasons are not necessarily local or connected to the strength of the local economy. It's all about money printing and borrowing offshore (and here) I think Bollard is wrong about the economy rebounding quickly and I think the markets are right about higher long term interest rates.
We can have high interest rates and a low currency if (as raf mentioned) foreign investors lose confidence in your credit rating. Quite possible.
cheers
Bernard
When anybody has control of
When anybody has control of the credit creation mechanism, it is all about whether the created credit enters circulation by productive means, and anyone loaning credit forward must keep a tangible connection between credit issued and the sustainable resources available to be converted into currency to enable the issued loans to be paid back. Created credit can be issued in a none inflationary manner, it simply comes down to the integrity of those who have control of the created credit mechanism.
NZ has the sovereign right in existing legislation to bring into creation our own debt free money base, and spent into circulation in a productive manner, keeping a connection between available sustainable resources and money supply there is no reason why we can't distribute our own money supply through our own KiwiBank.
The only reason so far is the number of people succumbing to the threats of sanctions by those who currently steal two thirds of our resources and our efforts by way of tribute on loans that they write into existance out of freshair.
I almost forgot to add
I almost forgot to add we and many nations have successfully done just that in the past causing well less inflation and a lot more equal opportunity than the current rort.
http://socialcreditorbust.blog.co.nz/successful%20alternatives/
Bernard displays courage one minute, the next he is back to being a opposum frozen in the headlights of the on coming truck.
Iain - given what you
Iain - given what you have said above, what impediments do you see for the implementaion of the suggestions made here?
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/04/02/banks-attacked-...
Just as importantly how could they be dealt with so we might see the better outcomes described?
Thank you Less Rudd, I
Thank you Less Rudd,
I am buggered if I know how I missed one of the threads that came as close to cutting this thing to the bone than any.
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/04/02/banks-attacked-...
I added this in comment;
How did I miss this thread?
John Kelly summed it up for me.
We have not had true change of government in this country since we were put into receivership by the private central banker scam in 1961. Kiwibank, pushed for by Social Credit influence within the Alliance Party, was a desperate grasp at a chance of freedom.
We have the sovereign right by already existing legislation to fund our own monetary base via created credit distributed by our own KiwiBank;
2) The Minister may borrow money from any person, organisation, or government (either within or outside New Zealand).
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0044/latest/DLM162733.html
if you read all of my thirteen years worth of collected supporting evidence here;
http://socialcreditorbust.blog.co.nz/
then come and tell me I am wrong, but you better have very good counter evidence to prove it.
I would like to add
I would like to add that when we were put into receivership in 1961 in order that our debtors refinance us we had imposed upon us under a Structural Adjustment Program an administration behind the doplomatic curtain. It was said that this administration would help us to trade our way out of our current account crisis, but instead, all it has done, via locally recruited co-operatives, by a process known as Strategic Deficit, is trade us into further crisis to ensure a continueing flow of our wealth and resources to them and their corporate multinational subsidiaries.
Iain - thanks for your
Iain - thanks for your answer above. It's been suggested to me that is does seem odd that Kiwibank are not doing the obvious in their role as a sovereign bank and raising capital in the most obvious way to support NZ businesses, especially now. Also seems odd we can be donnating to the IMF and yet not provide capital to our own sovereign bank? Still maybe they should have got in quick before ANZ with a:
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/03/27/anz-raises-us1-...
Anyway at least Kiwibank hasn't got the likes of an ING millstone around it's neck. However, they can't think it's so bad an asset having made provision in accounts to buy back the shares. You'd think if an asset caused you such a loss you'd not want to retain it. I guess it must be useful for something.
Bernard, Alex - in you opinion what is useful about this kind of thing, for banks?
Les Rudd
Invited Member
New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association.