More stories

  • in

    Australia regulator launches review into how pension funds value unlisted assets

    SYDNEY (Reuters) -An Australian regulator is reviewing how pension funds value unlisted assets, ranging from private equity to office towers, as part of a long-term push to limit risks within the illiquid holdings popular in the A$2.5 trillion ($1.7 trillion) sector.The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) requested information from multiple pension funds in late 2023 as part of the review into unlisted asset valuation governance, according to a previously unreported November 2023 letter seen by Reuters.The review is part of a broader focus on system-wide risk and covers commercial property, private equity and credit as well as potential liquidity risks associated with exposure to unlisted assets, the letter showed.APRA declined to comment on the review. The A$160 billion Aware Super, Australia’s third largest fund, said it had received a request for information relating to a review of unlisted asset valuations. AustralianSuper, the largest fund, also said it had received an information request.Unlisted assets, ranging from wind farms and warehouses to private company shares, are popular in the pension sector and holdings can reach as high as 40% of all assets in some funds.The review reflects long-standing concerns at APRA about how the sector prices these assets which rarely trade. A 2021 review found revaluation frameworks were “typically inadequate”. New standards were introduced last July, including quarterly asset valuations. However, a September study into how pension funds valued private equity stakes in Australian technology startup Canva found that while the majority of governance practices were appropriate, “several areas required improvement”.Funds need to provide information about how they value unlisted assets, in particular the board’s role in the process, according to a source familiar with the request who declined to be named as they were not authorised to speak with media.($1 = 1.5198 Australian dollars) More

  • in

    US IRS wants to simplify tax notices to reduce anxiety, boost compliance

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Internal Revenue Service on Tuesday said it was redesigning hundreds of types of notices mailed to taxpayers to make them simpler, clearer, and understandable in the hopes that this will help improve compliance and reduce taxpayer anxiety.The IRS and the U.S. Treasury rolled out the “Simple Notice Initiative” with 31 redesigned notices for the 2024 tax filing season, which starts on Monday. WHY IT’S IMPORTANTThe changes are part of the IRS’ modernization drive using $80 billion in new funding over a decade, an amount that will be reduced by about $20 billion under a bipartisan top-line spending agreement.The agency wants to show continued progress after changes that aided the 2023 tax filing season, including the hiring of 5,000 additional staff to answer phones, new scanning technology that speeded the processing of paper returns, and a focus on wealthy individuals that had failed to file returns.KEY QUOTE: “When a letter arrives in the mail from the IRS, we all catch our breath. So given the initial apprehension, it’s really important for us to get the information clear and understandable to help taxpayers,” IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel told reporters.”If it’s not about an unpaid tax bill, we need to mark it clearly as ‘this is not a bill.’ If it’s just a question about a tax return, we need to mark it clearly as ‘this is not an audit,'” Werfel added.BY THE NUMBERS The IRS sent a redesigned 5071C notice, which guards against the filing of fraudulent returns and asks taxpayers to verify their identity, to 60,000 taxpayers, stating more clearly what steps needed to be taken immediately.It said there was a 16% reduction in taxpayers who phoned the IRS as their first action, and a 6% increase in taxpayers who verified their identity online, freeing up staff for other tasks.By the 2025 filing season, the IRS said it will redesign up to 200 individual income tax notices that make up 90% of the total notices sent to individual taxpayers. More

  • in

    Boeing CEO to meet with senators after 737 MAX 9 grounding -sources

    (Reuters) – Boeing (NYSE:BA) CEO Dave Calhoun will be on Capitol Hill this week to meet with senators in the aftermath of the 737 MAX 9 grounding following the mid-air emergency landing of a new Alaska Airlines jet, sources told Reuters.Calhoun is set to meet with Senators Ted Cruz, a Republican, and Mark Warner, a Democrat, among others. More

  • in

    Column-Foreign central banks think twice on U.S. Treasuries: McGeever

    ORLANDO, Florida (Reuters) – If foreign investors en masse are gorging on U.S. Treasuries, central banks may be beginning to lose their appetite. Official U.S. flows data show that overseas private sector investors – banks, asset managers, insurance funds, pension funds, retail investors – are loading up on Treasuries while the official sector’s holdings are flat-lining at best.As long as this active or de facto retreat from central banks is more of a whimper than a bang, the $26 trillion U.S. government bond market should be relatively unaffected. One group of buyers is simply replacing another.But it may come with a price – a rising ‘term premium.’ That’s the amorphous amount of compensation investors demand for buying long-dated bonds instead of rolling over bills. It is the premium for unquantifiable risks in the future beyond current assumptions on the long-term path of inflation or policy rates.Price-sensitive buyers with more of an eye on generating returns may not always be as reliable as price-insensitive buyers perhaps more concerned with capital preservation, liquidity and cautious reserve management goals. Foreign central banks and the U.S. Federal Reserve were the two price-insensitive buyers and holders of Treasuries for many years, and their huge demand helped explain why term premium went negative even as U.S. borrowing rocketed.But both are now backing away – the Fed is reducing its balance sheet and foreign central banks are no longer buying in as large size. Indeed, there are signs they are actively selling.The latest U.S. Treasury International Capital (TIC) data show that overseas investors held a near-record $6.68 trillion of U.S. Treasury notes and bonds in November, but within that, central banks’ stash was near its smallest since 2011. When adjusted for valuation effects – namely the ebb and flow of bond prices and the dollar’s exchange rate – official sector holdings fell by $49 billion in November. That was the biggest decline since September, 2022 and the fourth reduction in five months.Total foreign holdings, meanwhile, rose by almost $60 billion on a valuation-adjusted basis, indicating that overseas private sector investors hoovered up $110 billion. In the first 11 months of last year, total foreign holdings fell only once.Fed and Treasury data for the first 11 months of last year show that on a valuation-adjusted basis, overseas investors’ Treasury notes and bonds holdings rose by $428.4 billion. Of that, central banks accounted for only $31.9 billion.Yields of between 4.5% and 5% for the world’s most liquid – and yes, safest – security, depending on the maturity, are attractive, so it is perhaps little surprise that the private sector’s interest has been piqued. Torsten Slok, chief economist and partner at Apollo Global Management (NYSE:APO), notes that foreign private sector holdings now outstrip foreign official sector holdings for the first time in about a quarter of a century. “With the Fed raising rates and the dollar going up, yield-insensitive central banks have been selling Treasuries to limit the weakening of their domestic currencies, and yield-sensitive foreign private investors have been buying Treasuries to benefit from higher yields and a rising dollar,” Slok noted last month.That may change this year if the Fed cuts rates, yields fall and the dollar weakens. But if the same dynamics play out in the euro zone, Britain and elsewhere in the G10 currency world, perhaps not.Right now, foreign central banks’ holdings are down to around $3.4 trillion, and their collective footprint in the overall U.S. Treasuries market has rarely been smaller. Their share of outstanding bonds is just 14%, down from 25% before the pandemic and a record 40% in 2008.There’s little to suggest this trend is about to change any time soon. (The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.) (By Jamie McGeever; Editing by Andrea Ricci) More

  • in

    Climate Change Takes Center Stage in Economics

    With climate change affecting everything from household finances to electric grids, the profession is increasingly focused on how society can mitigate carbon emissions and cope with their impact.A major economics conference this month included papers on wind turbine manufacturing, wildfire smoke and the stability of electricity grids.From left: Joe Buglewicz for The New York Times; Earl Wilson/The New York Times; Zack Wittman for The New York TimesIn early January in San Antonio, dozens of Ph.D. economists packed into a small windowless room in the recesses of a Grand Hyatt to hear brand-new research on the hottest topic of their annual conference: how climate change is affecting everything.The papers in this session focused on the impact of natural disasters on mortgage risk, railway safety and even payday loans. Some attendees had to stand in the back, as the seats had already been filled. It wasn’t an anomaly.Nearly every block of time at the Allied Social Science Associations conference — a gathering of dozens of economics-adjacent academic organizations recognized by the American Economic Association — had multiple climate-related presentations to choose from, and most appeared similarly popular.For those who have long focused on environmental issues, the proliferation of climate-related papers was a welcome development. “It’s so nice to not be the crazy people in the room with the last session,” said Avis Devine, an associate professor of real estate finance and sustainability at York University in Toronto, emerging after a lively discussion.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    The dangers lurking in our messy and unpredictable world

    Last week, I discussed five long-term drivers of the world economy — demography, climate change, technological advance, the global spread of knowhow and economic growth itself. This week I will look at shocks, risks and fragilities. Together, I suggest, all these shape the economy in which we live.A “shock” is a realised risk. Risks, in turn, are almost all conceivable. In Donald Rumsfeld’s helpful phraseology they are “known unknowns”. But their likelihood and severity are unknown. We are surrounded by such risks — further pandemics, social instability, revolutions, wars (including civil wars), mega-terrorism, financial crises, collapses in economic growth, reversals in global economic integration, cyber-disruptions, extreme weather events, ecological collapses, huge earthquakes or eruptions by super-volcanoes. All of these are imaginable. The realisation of one raises the likelihood of at least some of the others. Moreover, known fragilities increase the likelihood or at least the likely severity of such shocks.As the Global Risks Report 2024 from the World Economic Forum demonstrates, we live in just such a high-risk world. It is not so much that anything can happen. It is rather that a sizeable number of quite conceivable somethings might happen, possibly at much the same time. The recent past has shown this clearly: we have suffered a pandemic, albeit a relatively mild one by historical standards, two costly wars (in Ukraine and the Middle East), an unexpected surge in inflation and an associated “cost of living crisis”. Moreover, these disturbances followed not long after the multiple financial crises of 2007-15.Not surprisingly, these shocks have proved damaging and destabilising. They are likely to impose long-term costs, especially on more vulnerable countries and people. But we can see a piece of good fortune: the inflation shock looks likely to fade relatively soon. Consensus forecasts for inflation in 2024 have changed very little since January 2023. In January 2024, they were 2.2 per cent for the eurozone, 2.6 per cent for the US and 2.7 per cent for the UK. Central bankers are mostly desperate to avoid the mistake of loosening too soon and so are far more likely to do so too late. Consensus forecasts for growth in 2024 are consequently low, but not negative, so far. The future of the current wars is far more uncertain. They might be resolved, fade away or explode into something bigger and more damaging. Such uncertainty, history tells us, is in the nature of war. Moreover, how they end might — indeed, probably will — create further risks. At one end, there might be peaceful settlements of both conflicts. At the other, there might be a mere pause before still worse hostilities.What happens in the future depends not only on how the driving forces continue to operate, when (and how) recent shocks work themselves out, and which risks are realised. It also depends on the fragilities in the system. Four stand out.The first set is environmental. We are engaged in an irreversible experiment with the biosphere, largely, but not exclusively, in relation to climate. As the human economy grows, so is its impact on the biosphere likely to expand, too. It will take a big effort to avoid making the environment still more fragile. So far, we have failed to reverse the trends and so the fragility of the environment will grow.The second set is financial. Over time, the quantity of debt, both public and private, has tended to rise. Often, this has been sensible, indeed essential. The difficulty is that people come to rely on both the soundness of their claims and their ability to finance and, when necessary, refinance their debts. Economies rely on the confidence of creditors in their debtors. If anything causes a big shock to such expectations, mass bankruptcy might trigger deep depressions, with ghastly economic and political consequences. With today’s high indebtedness, an extended period of high interest rates might trigger such shocks.The third set lies in domestic politics. We are living in what Larry Diamond of Stanford has called a “democratic recession”. There is growing hostility to fundamental norms of liberal democracy, even in western countries. As I have argued elsewhere, this is rooted in economic disappointment, policy failures, and disruptive social changes. That has lowered the legitimacy of conventional politicians and raised that of populist demagogues. This then makes our politics fragile.The final set lies in geopolitics. The combination of changes in relative economic power with the emergence of a bloc of authoritarian powers centred on China has cemented divisions in the world. These can be seen in today’s conflicts. The resulting distrust threatens our capacity to summon the co-operation needed to secure “prosperity, peace and planet”. In a world in which the dangers of conflict and the cost of failure to co-operate are so great, this final fragility might be the most important. If we do not find a way to co-operate, we are likely to fail to manage many of the risks. That, in turn, will make further big shocks more likely and harder to deal with.Ours is indeed a messy and unpredictable world. This is not because we do not know anything. On the contrary, we know a great deal. The problem is that we also know that the world is unpredictable and complex. The crucial response must be to reduce fragilities, manage shocks, plan for risks and understand the fundamental drivers. Moreover, since many of these are global, we must think globally, too. Humanity’s habitual myopia and tribalism will not work. Alas, it is hard to imagine we will outgrow them in the near [email protected] Martin Wolf with myFT and on Twitter More

  • in

    Soaring homelessness threatens to tip English councils into insolvency

    Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.Council leaders from across England have urged ministers to urgently uprate funding subsidies for temporary accommodation, warning that soaring levels of homelessness threaten to tip many authorities into insolvency.   Local leaders, speaking on Tuesday at an emergency meeting in Westminster, said budgets were being devastated by the exponential cost of keeping vulnerable people off the streets. They called on the government to raise the “housing benefit subsidy”, which supports councils with the provision of temporary accommodation, in line with inflation.The subsidy has been capped since 2011, which has led to a growing gulf between what councils pay to fulfil their statutory duty to help the homeless and the support they receive from central government, as the cost of housing has risen.  “They are presiding over the end of local government if they fail to take the urgent action needed,” said Michael Jones, Labour leader of Crawley council in West Sussex. The annual cost of providing temporary accommodation in his district had risen from a manageable £262,000 five years ago to more than £5mn last year, Jones said, and was using up a third of council spending. “It’s the acceleration of the issue that is so concerning,” he added, explaining that an increase in homelessness among asylum seekers in the borough had added to recent pressures.The meeting came after more than 40 Tory MPs, including seven former cabinet ministers, wrote to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak threatening to vote against the local government funding settlement next month, warning that without urgent intervention from Westminster their constituents would pay more council tax for fewer services.Research by Shelter found a record 279,400 people were in temporary accommodation in England and Wales last year. The housing advocacy group also reported a 26 per cent annual jump in the number of rough sleepers in 2023. Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, has committed to raising the cap on “local housing allowance”, a benefit that goes to lower-income households, in May to reflect huge increases in the cost of renting privately.However, Steve Holt, the Liberal Democrat leader of Eastbourne council, said this fell “a long, long way short of what we need to avoid decimating essential frontline services”.He said his council was spending 49p on temporary accommodation for every £1 it raised in council tax, threatening the viability of its finances.The Treasury has now offered to hold a special meeting to discuss the acute pressures facing councils as a result of the housing crisis, Holt said. The Department of Levelling up, Housing and Communities said it was “committed to reducing the need for temporary accommodation,” and was providing councils with £1bn through the “homelessness prevention grant” over three years.“Councils are ultimately responsible for their own finances, but we remain ready to talk to any concerned about its financial position,” it added. More