Banking and Financial Institutions

More stories

  • 163 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Companies Like Afterpay and Affirm May Put Americans At Risk For ‘Phantom Debt’

    by

    Buying mattresses, clothes and other goods on installment plans has propped up spending, but economists worry that such loans could put some people at risk.“Buy now, pay later” loans are helping to fuel a record-setting holiday shopping season. Economists worry they could also be masking and exacerbating cracks in Americans’ financial well-being.The loans, which allow consumers to pay for purchases in installments, often interest-free, have soared in popularity because of high prices and interest rates. Retailers have used them to attract customers and to get people to spend more.But such loans may be encouraging younger and lower-income Americans to take on too much debt, according to consumer groups and some lawmakers. And because such loans aren’t routinely reported to credit bureaus or captured in public data, they could also represent a hidden source of risk to the financial system.“The more I dig into it, the more concerned I am,” said Tim Quinlan, a Wells Fargo economist who recently published a report that described pay-later loans as “phantom debt.”Traditional measures of consumer credit indicate that U.S. household finances overall are relatively healthy. But, Mr. Quinlan said, “if those are missing the fastest-growing piece of the market, then those reassurances aren’t worth a darn.”Estimates of the size of this market vary widely. Mr. Quinlan thinks that spending through pay-later options was about $46 billion this year. That is small when compared with the more than $3 trillion that Americans put on their credit cards last year.But such loans — offered by companies like Klarna, Affirm, Afterpay and PayPal — have climbed fast at a moment when the finances of some Americans are showing early signs of strain.Credit card borrowing is at a record high in dollar terms — though not as a share of income — and delinquencies, though low by historical standards, are rising. That stress is especially evident among younger adults.People in their 20s and 30s are by far the biggest users of pay-later loans, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. That could be both a sign of financial problems — young people may be using pay-later loans after maxing out credit cards — and a cause of it by encouraging them to spend excessively.Liz Cisneros, a 23-year-old college student in Chicago who works part time at Home Depot, said she was surprised by the ease of pay-later programs. During the pandemic, she saw influencers on TikTok promoting the loans, and a friend said they helped her buy designer shoes.Ms. Cisneros started using them to buy clothes, shoes and Sephora beauty products. She often had multiple loans at a time. She realized she was overspending when she didn’t have enough money while in a grocery checkout line. A pay-later company had withdrawn funds from her bank account that morning, and she had lost track of her payment schedule.“It’s easy when you keep continually clicking and clicking and clicking, and then it’s not,” she said, referring to when she realizes she has spent too much.Ms. Cisneros said the problem was particularly intense around Christmas, and this year she was not shopping for the holiday so she could pay off her debts.Pay-later loans became available in the United States years ago, but they took off during the pandemic when online shopping surged.The products are somewhat similar to the layaway programs offered decades earlier by retailers. Online shoppers can choose from pay-later options at checkout or on the apps of pay-later companies. The loans are also available at some physical stores; Affirm said on Tuesday that it had started offering pay-later loans at the self-checkout counters at Walmart stores.The most common loans require buyers to pay a quarter of the purchase price upfront with the rest usually paid in three installments over six weeks. Such loans are typically interest-free, though users sometimes end up owing fees. Pay-later companies make most of their money by charging fees to retailers.Some lenders also offer interest-bearing loans with repayment terms that can last a few months to more than a year. Pay-later companies say their products are better for borrowers than credit cards or payday loans. They say that by offering shorter loans, they can better assess borrowers’ ability to repay.“We’re able to identify and extend credit to consumers who have the ability and willingness to repay above that of revolving credit accounts,” Michael Linford, Affirm’s chief financial officer, said in an interview.In its most recent quarter, 2.4 percent of Affirm’s loans were delinquent by 30 days or longer, down from 2.7 percent a year earlier. Those numbers exclude its four-payment loans.Briana Gordley, who works on consumer finance issues for a progressive policy organization, learned about pay-later firms in college from friends, and still uses them occasionally for larger purchases.Montinique Monroe for The New York TimesThe service makes the most sense for certain purchases, like buying an expensive sweater that will last many years, said the chief executive of Klarna, Sebastian Siemiatkowski.He said pay later probably made less sense for more frequent purchases like groceries, though Klarna and other companies do make their loans available at some grocery stores.Mr. Siemiatkowski acknowledged that people could misuse his company’s loans.“Obviously it’s still credit, and so you’re going to find a subset of individuals who unfortunately are using it in not the way intended,” said Mr. Siemiatkowski, who founded Klarna in 2005. He said the company tried to identify those users and deny them loans or impose stricter terms on them.Klarna, which is based in Stockholm, says its global default rates are less than 1 percent. In the United States, more than a third of customers repay loans early.Kelsey Greco made her first pay-later purchase about four years ago to buy a mattress. Paying $1,200 in cash would have been difficult, and putting the purchase on a credit card seemed unwise. So she got a 12-month, interest-free loan from Affirm.Since then, Ms. Greco, 30, has used Affirm regularly, including for a Dyson hair tool and car brakes. Some of the loans charged interest, but she said that even then she preferred this form of borrowing because it was clear how much she would pay and when.“With a credit card, you can swipe it all day long and be like, ‘Wait, what did I just get myself into?’” Ms. Greco, a Denver resident, said. “Whereas with Affirm, it’s giving you these clear-cut numbers where you can see, ‘OK, this makes sense’ or ‘This doesn’t make sense.’”Ms. Greco, who was introduced to The New York Times by Affirm, said pay-later loans helped her avoid credit card debt, with which she previously had trouble.But not all consumers use pay-later options carefully. A report from the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau this year found that nearly 43 percent of pay-later users had overdrawn a bank account in the previous 12 months, compared with 17 percent of nonusers. “This is just a more vulnerable portion of the population,” said Ed deHaan, a researcher at Stanford University.In a paper published last year, Mr. deHaan and three other scholars found that within a month of first using pay-later loans, people became more likely to experience overdrafts and to start accruing credit card late fees.Financial advisers who work with low-income Americans say more clients are using pay-later loans.Barbara L. Martinez, a financial counselor in Chicago who works at Heartland Alliance, a nonprofit group, said many of her clients used cash advances to cover pay-later loans. When paychecks arrive, they don’t have enough to cover bills, forcing them to turn to more pay-later loans.“It is not that the product is bad,” she added, but “it can get out of control really fast and cause a lot of damage that could be prevented.”Barbara L. Martinez, a financial counselor in Chicago who works with low-income families, meeting with a colleague about an upcoming workshop for people wanting to learn more about financial stability.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesBriana Gordley learned about pay-later products in college. She was working part time and couldn’t get approved for a credit card, but pay-later providers were eager to extend her credit. She started falling behind when her work hours were reduced. Eventually, family and friends helped her repay the debts.Ms. Gordley, who testified about her experience last year in a listening session hosted by the Senate, now works on consumer finance issues for Texas Appleseed, a progressive policy organization. She said pay-later loans could be an important source of credit for communities that lacked access to traditional loans. She still uses them occasionally for larger purchases.But she said companies and regulators needed to make sure that borrowers could afford the debt they were taking on. “If we’re going to create these products and build out these systems for people, we also just have to have some checks and balances in place.”The Truth in Lending Act of 1968 requires credit card companies and other lenders to disclose interest rates and fees and provides borrowers with various protections, including the ability to dispute charges. But the act applies only to loans with more than four payment installments, effectively excluding many pay-later loans.Many such loans also aren’t reported to credit agencies. As a result, consumers could have multiple loans with Klarna, Afterpay and Affirm without the companies knowing about the other debts.“It’s a huge blind spot right now, and we all know that,” said Liz Pagel, a senior vice president at TransUnion who oversees the company’s consumer lending business.TransUnion and other major credit bureaus and pay-later companies all say they are supportive of more reporting.But there are practical hurdles. The credit-rating system rates borrowers more highly for having longer-term loans, including longstanding credit card accounts. Each pay-later purchase qualifies as a separate loan. As a result, those loans could lower the scores of borrowers even if they repay them on time.Ms. Pagel said TransUnion had created a new reporting system for the loans. Other credit bureaus, such as Experian and Equifax, are doing the same.Pay-later firms say they are reporting certain loans, particularly ones with longer terms. But most are not reporting and won’t commit to reporting loans with just four payments.That worries economists who say they are particularly concerned about how such loans will play out when the economy weakens and workers start losing their jobs.Marco di Maggio, a Harvard Business School professor who has studied pay-later products, said that when times were tough more people would use such loans for smaller expenses and get into trouble. “You only need one more shock to push people into default.” More

  • 163 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    The Debt Problem Is Enormous, and the System for Fixing It Is Broken

    by

    Economists offer alternatives to financial safeguards created when the U.S. was the pre-eminent superpower and climate change wasn’t on the agenda.Martin Guzman was a college freshman at La Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina, in 2001 when a debt crisis prompted default, riots and a devastating depression. A dazed middle class suffered ruin, as the International Monetary Fund insisted that the government make misery-inducing budget cuts in exchange for a bailout.Watching Argentina unravel inspired Mr. Guzman to switch majors and study economics. Nearly two decades later, when the government was again bankrupt, it was Mr. Guzman as finance minister who negotiated with I.M.F. officials to restructure a $44 billion debt, the result of an earlier ill-conceived bailout.Today he is one of a number of prominent economists and world leaders who argue that the ambitious framework created at the end of World War II to safeguard economic growth and stability, with the I.M.F. and World Bank as its pillars, is failing in its mission.Martin Guzman, a former finance minister in Argentina, is among the economists and world leaders who argue that the framework created at the end of World War II to safeguard economic growth and stability is not working.Nathalia Angarita for The New York TimesJavier Milei, the newly elected president of Argentina, at an election event in Salta, Argentina, in October. He has described himself as an “anarcho-capitalist.”Sarah Pabst for The New York TimesThe current system “contributes to a more inequitable and unstable global economy,” said Mr. Guzman, who resigned last year after a rift within the government.The repayment that Mr. Guzman negotiated was the 22nd arrangement between Argentina and the I.M.F. Even so, the country’s economic tailspin has only increased with an annual inflation rate of more than 140 percent, growing lines at soup kitchens and a new, self-proclaimed “anarcho-capitalist” president, Javier Milei, who this week devalued the currency by 50 percent.The I.M.F. and World Bank have aroused complaints from the left and right ever since they were created. But the latest critiques pose a more profound question: Does the economic framework devised eight decades ago fit the economy that exists today, when new geopolitical conflicts collide with established economic relationships and climate change poses an imminent threat?Volunteers serving free meals in Buenos Aires. Argentina’s economy is in a tailspin, with growing lines at soup kitchens.Rodrigo Abd/Associated PressProtests in Buenos Aires in 2001. A debt crisis in Argentina led to default, riots and a devastating depression.Fabian Gredillas/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThis 21st-century clash of ideas about how to fix a system created for a 20th-century world is one of the most consequential facing the global economy.The I.M.F. was set up in 1944 at a conference in Bretton Woods, N.H., to help rescue countries in financial distress, while the World Bank’s focus was reducing poverty and investing in social development. The United States was the pre-eminent economic superpower, and scores of developing nations in Africa and Asia had not yet gained independence. The foundational ideology — later known as the “Washington Consensus” — held that prosperity depended on unhindered trade, deregulation and the primacy of private investment.“Nearly 80 years later, the global financial architecture is outdated, dysfunctional and unjust,” António Guterres, secretary general of the United Nations, said this summer at a summit in Paris. “Even the most fundamental goals on hunger and poverty have gone into reverse after decades of progress.”The world today is geopolitically fragmented. More than three-quarters of the current I.M.F. and World Bank countries were not at Bretton Woods. China’s economy, in ruins at the end of World War II, is now the world’s second-largest, an engine of global growth and a crucial hub in the world’s industrial machine and supply chain. India, then still a British colony, is one of the top five economies in the world.A session of the United Nations Monetary Conference in Bretton Woods, N.H., on July 4, 1944. Delegates from 44 countries are seated at the long tables.Abe Fox/Associated Press, via Associated PressAntónio Guterres, secretary general of the United Nations, said this summer that “the global financial architecture is outdated, dysfunctional, and unjust.”Martin Divisek/EPA, via ShutterstockThe once vaunted “Washington Consensus” has fallen into disrepute, with a greater recognition of how inequality and bias against women hamper growth, as well as the need for collective action on the climate.The mismatch between institution and mission has sharpened in recent years. Pounded by the Covid-19 pandemic, spiking food and energy prices related to the war in Ukraine, and higher interest rates, low- and middle-income countries are swimming in debt and facing slow growth. The size of the global economy as well as the scope of the problems have grown immensely, but funding of the I.M.F. and World Bank has not kept pace.Resolving debt crises is also vastly more complicated now that China and legions of private creditors are involved, instead of just a handful of Western banks.The World’s Bank’s own analyses outline the extent of the economic problems. “For the poorest countries, debt has become a nearly paralyzing burden,” a report released Wednesday concluded. Countries are forced to spend money on interest payments instead of investing in public health, education and the environment.An assembly line at the electric vehicle manufacturer Nio in Hefei, China. China’s economy was in ruins at the end of World War II but is now the world’s second largest and an engine of global growth.Qilai Shen for The New York TimesGita Gopinath, first deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said of the current financial system, “We have countries strategically competing with amorphous rules and without an effective referee.”Jalal Morchidi/EPA, via ShutterstockAnd that debt doesn’t account for the trillions of dollars that developing countries will need to mitigate the ravages of climate change.Then there are the tensions between the United States and China, and Russia and Europe and its allies. It is harder to resolve debt crises or finance major infrastructure without bumping up against security concerns — like when the World Bank awarded the Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei a contract that turned out to violate U.S. sanctions policy, or when China has resisted debt restructuring agreements.“The global rules-based system was not built to resolve national security-based trade conflicts,” Gita Gopinath, first deputy managing director of the I.M.F., said Monday in a speech to the International Economic Association in Colombia. “We have countries strategically competing with amorphous rules and without an effective referee.”The World Bank and I.M.F. have made changes. The fund has moderated its approach to bailouts, replacing austerity with the idea of sustainable debt. The bank this year significantly increased the share of money going to climate-related projects. But critics maintain that the fixes so far are insufficient.“The way in which they have evolved and adapted is much slower than the way the global economy evolved and adapted,” Mr. Guzman said.Argentina’s new president devalued the currency by 50 percent this week.Sarah Pabst for The New York TimesA vegetables shop in Almagro in Buenos Aires. Argentina’s economy is South America’s second largest.Anita Pouchard Serra for The New York Times‘Time to Revisit Bretton Woods’Argentina, South America’s second-largest economy, may be the global economic system’s most notorious repeat failure, but it was Barbados, a tiny island nation in the Caribbean, that can be credited with turbocharging momentum for change.Mia Mottley, the prime minister, spoke out two years ago at the climate change summit in Glasgow and then followed up with the Bridgetown Initiative, a proposal to overhaul the way rich countries help poor countries adapt to climate change and avoid crippling debt.“Yes, it is time for us to revisit Bretton Woods,” she said in a speech at last year’s climate summit in Egypt. Ms. Mottley argues that there has been a “fundamental breakdown” in a longstanding covenant between poor countries and rich ones, many of which built their wealth by exploiting former colonies. The most advanced industrialized countries also produce most of the emissions that are heating the planet and causing extreme floods, wildfires and droughts in poor countries.Mavis Owusu-Gyamfi, the executive vice president of the African Center for Economic Transformation, in Ghana, said that even recent agreements to deal with debt like the 2020 Common Framework were created without input from developing nations.“We are calling for a voice and seat at the table,” Ms. Owusu-Gyamfi said, from her office in Accra, as she discussed a $3 billion I.M.F. bailout of Ghana.Yet if the fund and bank are focused on economic issues, they are essentially political creations that reflect the power of the countries that established, finance and manage them.And those countries are reluctant to cede that power. The United States, the only member with veto power, has the largest share of votes in part because of the size of its economy and financial contributions. It does not want to see its influence shrink and others’ — particularly China’s — grow.The impasse over reapportioning votes has hampered efforts to increase funding levels, which countries across the board agree need to be increased.A vegetable market in Accra, Ghana. “We are calling for a voice and seat at the table,” said Mavis Owusu-Gyamfi, the executive vice president of the African Center for Economic Transformation in Ghana.Natalija Gormalova for The New York TimesCustomers at lunch in Buenos Aires. Mr. Guzman and others pushing for change argue that indebted countries need more grants and low-interest loans with long repayment timelines.Sarah Pabst for The New York Times‘Big Hole’ in How to Deal With DebtStill, as Mr. Guzman said, “even if there are no changes in governance, there could be changes in policies.”Emerging nations need enormous amounts of money to invest in public health, education, transport and climate resilience. But they are saddled with high borrowing costs because of the market’s often exaggerated perception of the risk they pose as borrowers.And because they are usually compelled to borrow in dollars or euros, their payments soar if the Federal Reserve and other central banks raise interest rates to combat inflation as they did in the 1980s and after the Covid pandemic.The proliferation of private lenders and variety of loan agreements have made debt negotiations impossibly complex, yet no international legal arbiter exists.Zambia defaulted on its external debt three years ago, and there is still no agreement because the I.M.F., China and bondholders are at odds.There’s a “big hole” in international governance when it comes to sovereign debt, said Paola Subacchi, an economist at the Global Policy Institute at Queen Mary University in London, because the rules don’t apply to private loans, whether from a hedge fund or China’s central bank. Often these creditors have an interest in drawing out the process to hold out for a better deal.Mr. Guzman and other economists have called for an international legal arbiter to adjudicate disputes related to sovereign debt.“Every country has adopted a bankruptcy law,” said Joseph Stiglitz, a former chief economist at the World Bank, “but internationally we don’t have one.”The United States, though, has repeatedly opposed the idea, saying it is unnecessary.Rescues, too, have proved to be problematic. Last-resort loans from the I.M.F. can end up adding to a country’s budgetary woes and undermining the economic recovery because interest rates are so high now, and borrowers must also pay hefty fees.Those like Mr. Guzman and Ms. Mottley pushing for change argue that indebted countries need significantly more grants and low-interest loans with long repayment timelines, along with a slate of other reforms.“The challenges are different today,” said Mr. Guzman. “Policies need to be better aligned with the mission.”Mia Mottley, the prime minister of Barbados, offered a proposal this year to overhaul the way rich countries help poor countries adapt to climate change and avoid crippling debt.Sean Gallup/Getty ImagesFlash flooding in Bangladesh last year. The global economic framework was devised long before climate change posed an imminent threat to poor nations.Mushfiqul Alam/NurPhoto More

  • 113 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Is Jerome Powell’s Fed Pulling Off a Soft Landing?

    by

    It’s too soon to declare victory, but the economic outlook seems sunnier than it did a year ago, and many economists are predicting a surprising win.The Federal Reserve appears to be creeping closer to an outcome that its own staff economists viewed as unlikely just six months ago: lowering inflation back to a normal range without plunging the economy into a recession.Plenty could still go wrong. But inflation has come down notably in recent months — it is running at 3.1 percent on a yearly basis, down from a 9.1 percent peak in 2022. At the same time, growth is solid, consumers are spending, and employers continue to hire.That combination has come as a surprise to economists. Many had predicted that cooling a red-hot job market with far more job openings than available workers would be a painful process. Instead, workers returned from the labor market sidelines to fill open spots, helping along a relatively painless rebalancing. At the same time, healing supply chains have helped to boost inventories and ease shortages. Goods prices have stopped pushing inflation higher, and have even begun to pull it down.The Fed is hoping for “a continuation of what we have seen, which is the labor market coming into better balance without a significant increase in unemployment, inflation coming down without a significant increase in unemployment, and growth moderating without a significant increase in unemployment,” Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said Wednesday.As Fed policymakers look ahead to 2024, they are aiming squarely for a soft landing: Officials are trying to assess how long they need to keep interest rates high to ensure that inflation is fully under control without grinding economic growth to an unnecessarily painful halt. That maneuver is likely to be a delicate one, which is why Mr. Powell has been careful to avoid declaring victory prematurely.But policymakers clearly see it coming into view, based on their economic projections. The Fed chair signaled on Wednesday that rates were unlikely to rise from their 5.25 to 5.5 percent setting unless inflation stages a surprising resurgence, and central bankers predicted three rate cuts by the end of 2024 as inflation continues to cool and joblessness rises only slightly.Consumers continue to spend, and growth in the third quarter was unexpectedly hot.Tony Cenicola/The New York TimesIf they can nail that landing, Mr. Powell and his colleagues will have accomplished an enormous feat in American central banking. Fed officials have historically tipped the economy into a recession when trying to cool inflation from heights like those it reached in 2022. And after several years during which Mr. Powell has faced criticism for failing to anticipate how lasting and serious inflation would become, such a success would be likely to shape his legacy.“The Fed right now looks pretty dang good, in terms of how things are turning out,” said Michael Gapen, head of U.S. Economics at Bank of America.Respondents in a survey of market participants carried out regularly by the research firm MacroPolicy Perspectives are more optimistic about the odds of a soft landing than ever before: 74 percent said that no recession was needed to lower inflation back to the Fed’s target in a Dec. 1-7 survey, up from a low of 41 percent in September 2022.Fed staff members began to anticipate a recession after several banks blew up early this year, but stopped forecasting one in July.People were glum about the prospects for a gentle landing partly because they thought the Fed had been late to react to rapid inflation. Mr. Powell and his colleagues argued throughout 2021 that higher prices were likely to be “transitory,” even as some prominent macroeconomists warned that it might last.The Fed was forced to change course drastically as those warnings proved prescient: Inflation has now been above 2 percent for 33 straight months.Once central bankers started raising interest rates in response, they did so rapidly, pushing them from near-zero at the start of 2022 to their current range of 5.25 to 5.5 percent by July of this year. Many economists worried that slamming the brakes on the economy so abruptly would cause whiplash in the form of a recession.But the transitory call is looking somewhat better now — “transitory” just took a long time to play out.Much of the reason inflation has moderated comes down to the healing of supply chains, easing of shortages in key goods like cars, and a return to something that looks more like prepandemic spending trends in which households are buying a range of goods and services instead of just stay-at-home splurges like couches and exercise equipment.In short, the pandemic problems that the Fed had expected to prove temporary did fade. It just took years rather than months.“As a charter member of team transitory, it took a lot longer than many of us thought,” said Richard Clarida, the former Fed vice chair who served until early 2022. But, he noted, things have adjusted.Fed policies have played a role in cooling demand and keeping consumers from adjusting their expectations for future inflation, so “the Fed does deserves some credit” for that slowdown.While higher interest rates didn’t heal supply chains or convince consumers to stop buying so many sweatpants, they have helped to cool the market for key purchases like housing and cars somewhat. Without those higher borrowing costs, the economy might have grown even more strongly — giving companies the wherewithal to raise prices more drastically.Now, the question is whether inflation will continue to cool even as the economy hums along at a solid clip, or whether it will take a more marked economic slowdown to drive it down the rest of the way. The Fed itself expects growth to slow substantially next year, to 1.4 percent from 2.6 percent this year, based on fresh projections.“Certainly they’ve done very well, and better than I had anticipated,” said William English, a former senior Fed economist who is now a professor at Yale. “The question remains: Will inflation come all the way back to 2 percent without more slack in the labor and goods markets than we’ve seen so far?”To date, the job market has shown little sign of cracking. Hiring and wage growth have slowed, but unemployment stood at a historically low 3.7 percent in November. Consumers continue to spend, and growth in the third quarter was unexpectedly hot.While those are positive developments, they keep alive the possibility that the economy will have a little too much vim for inflation to cool completely, especially in key services categories.“We don’t know how long it will take to go the last mile with inflation,” said Karen Dynan, a former Treasury chief economist who teaches at Harvard. Given that, setting policy next year could prove to be more of an art than a science: If growth is cooling and inflation is coming down, cutting rates will be a fairly obvious choice. But what if growth is strong? What if inflation progress stalls but growth collapses?Mr. Powell acknowledged some of that uncertainty this week.“Inflation keeps coming down, the labor market keeps getting back into balance,” he said. “It’s so far, so good, although we kind of assume that it will get harder from here, but so far, it hasn’t.”Mr. Powell, a lawyer by training who spent a chunk of his career in private equity, is not an economist and has at times expressed caution about using key economic models and guides too religiously. That lack of devotion to the models may come in handy over the next year, Mr. Gapen of Bank of America said.It may leave the Fed chief — and the institution he leads — more flexible as they react to an economy that has been devilishly tricky to predict because, in the wake of the pandemic, past experience is proving to be a poor precedent.“Maybe it was right to have a guy who was skeptical of frameworks manage the ship during the Covid period,” Mr. Gapen said. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    What’s Next for Interest Rates? An Era of ‘Peak Uncertainty.’

    by

    Federal Reserve officials could keep all options on the table at their meeting this week, even as data shape up according to plan.When Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, takes the stage at his postmeeting news conference on Wednesday, investors and many Americans will be keenly focused on one question: When will the Fed start cutting interest rates?Policymakers raised borrowing costs sharply between March 2022 and July, to a 22-year high of 5.25 to 5.5 percent, in a bid to wrestle rapid inflation under control by cooling the economy. They have paused since then, waiting to see how the economy reacted.But with inflation moderating and the job market growing at a more modest pace, Wall Street increasingly expects that the Fed could start cutting interest rates soon — perhaps even within the first three months of 2024.Fed officials have been hesitant to say when that might happen, or to even promise that they are done raising interest rates. That’s because they are still worried that the economy could pick back up or that progress taming inflation could stall. Policymakers do not want to declare victory only to have to walk that back.Mr. Powell is likely to strike a noncommittal tone this week given all the uncertainty, economists said. After their decision on Wednesday, Fed officials will release a fresh quarterly Summary of Economic Projections showing where they think rates will be at the end of 2024, which will indicate how many rate cuts they expect to make, if any. But the projections will offer few hints about when, exactly, any moves might come.And both the Fed’s forecasts and Wall Street’s expectations could mask a stark reality: There is a wide range of possible outcomes for interest rates next year, depending on what happens in the economy over the next couple of months.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

  • 150 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Jerome Powell Says It’s Too Soon to Guess When Rates Will Drop

    by

    The Federal Reserve chair said officials could still raise rates “if” that becomes necessary, and that it’s too soon to guess when they will ease.Jerome H. Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, suggested on Friday that the central bank may be done raising interest rates if inflation and the economy continue to cool as expected, saying that central bankers could raise interest rates further if that became necessary.“It would be premature to conclude with confidence that we have achieved a sufficiently restrictive stance, or to speculate on when policy might ease,” Mr. Powell said in a speech at Spelman College. “We are prepared to tighten policy further if it becomes appropriate to do so.”Mr. Powell’s comments are likely to cement an already-widespread expectation that the Fed will leave interest rates unchanged at its meeting on Dec. 12 and 13. The Fed has already raised interest rates to a range between 5.25 and 5.5 percent, up sharply from near-zero as recently as March 2022. Those higher borrowing costs are weighing on demand for mortgages, car loans and business debt, cooling the economy in a bid to lower inflation.Given how high interest rates are now, the Federal Open Market Committee has paused its rate increases for several months. Investors have increasingly come to expect that its next move would be to cut rates — though Fed officials have been hesitant to declare victory, or to confidently predict exactly when lower borrowing costs could arrive.The Fed can “let the data reveal the appropriate path,” Mr. Powell said. “We’re getting what we wanted to get, we now have the ability to move carefully.”The Fed will release fresh economic projections after the December meeting. Those will show where policymakers expect rates to be at the end of 2024. That will give investors a hint at how much officials expect to lower interest rates next year, but little insight into when the cuts might commence.Policymakers want to avoid setting interest rates in a way that crushes the economy, risking much-higher unemployment and a recession. But they also want to be sure to fully stamp out rapid inflation, because if price increases are allowed to run too hot for too long, they could become entrenched in the way that consumers and companies behave. That would make rapid inflation even more difficult to get rid of in the longer run.After months of choppy progress, the Fed has recently received a spate of data suggesting that it is making meaningful progress toward achieving its goals.Inflation has been moderating noticeably, and the slowdown is coming across a range of products and services. The job market has cooled from white-hot levels last year, although companies are still hiring. Consumer spending is showing some signs of deceleration, though it has not fallen off a cliff.All of those signals are combining to give central bankers more confidence that interest rates may be high enough to bring inflation back toward their 2 percent goal within a couple of years. In fact, the data are shoring up optimism that they might be able to pull off a historically rare “soft landing”: Cooling inflation gently and without inflicting serious economic pain.“There’s a path to getting inflation back down to 2 percent without that kind of large job loss,” Mr. Powell said, explaining that he believes a gentle cooling is possible. “We’re on that path.”Still, inflation has cooled before, only to pick back up, and the staying power of consumer spending has surprised many economists. Given that, officials do not want to celebrate prematurely.“As the demand- and supply-related effects of the pandemic continue to unwind, uncertainty about the outlook for the economy is unusually elevated,” Mr. Powell said Friday.The Fed, he said, “is strongly committed to bringing inflation down to 2 percent over time, and to keeping policy restrictive until we are confident that inflation is on a path to that objective.” More

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Climate Protesters Get in Fed’s Face as Policy Clash Grows Louder

    by

    Jerome H. Powell, the central bank’s chair, has been interrupted recently by a climate group that thinks disruption will win the day.A video of security officers wrestling a protester to the floor in the lobby of the Jackson Lake Lodge in Wyoming, outside the Federal Reserve’s most closely watched annual conference, clocked more than a million views.A protest that disrupted a speech by Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, at the Economic Club of New York this fall generated extensive coverage. And when the activists showed up again at Mr. Powell’s speech at the International Monetary Fund in early November, they seemed to get under his skin: The central bank’s usually staid leader was caught on a hot mic using a profanity as he told someone to close the door.All three upheavals were caused by the same group, Climate Defiance, which a now-30-year-old activist named Michael Greenberg founded in the spring. Mr. Greenberg had long worked in traditional climate advocacy, but he decided that something louder was needed to spur change at institutions like the Fed.“I realized there was a big need for disruptive direct action,” he explained in an interview. “It just gets so, so, so, so, so much more attention.”The small but noisy band of protesters dogging the Fed chair is also spotlighting a problem that the central bank has long grappled with: precisely what role it should play in the world’s transition to green energy.Climate-focused groups often argue that as a regulator of the nation’s largest banks, the Fed should play a major role in preparing the financial system for the damaging effects of climate change. Some want it to more overtly discourage bank lending to fossil fuel companies. Mr. Greenberg, for instance, said he would like the Fed to use regulation to make lending to oil and gas companies essentially cost-prohibitive.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

  • 75 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    Cómo sale el dinero de China

    by

    Las personas chinas acaudaladas han sacado cientos de miles de millones de dólares del país este año, aprovechando el fin de las precauciones por covid que habían sellado casi por completo las fronteras de China durante casi tres años.Están utilizando sus ahorros para comprar apartamentos en el extranjero, acciones y pólizas de seguros. Ahora que pueden volar de nuevo a Tokio, Londres y Nueva York, los viajeros chinos han comprado apartamentos en Japón y han invertido dinero en cuentas en Estados Unidos o Europa que pagan intereses más altos que en China, donde las tasas son bajas y sigue cayendo.La salida de dinero indica, en parte, el malestar existente en China por su vacilante recuperación tras la pandemia, así como por problemas más profundos, como la alarmante desaceleración del sector inmobiliario, principal depósito de riqueza de las familias. Para algunas personas, también es una reacción a los temores sobre la dirección de la economía bajo el liderazgo de Xi Jinping, que ha tomado medidas enérgicas contra las empresas y ha reforzado la influencia del gobierno en muchos aspectos de la sociedad.En algunos casos, los residentes chinos están improvisando maneras de eludir los estrictos controles gubernamentales de su país sobre las transferencias de dinero al extranjero. Han comprado lingotes de oro lo suficientemente pequeños como para esparcirlos discretamente por el equipaje de mano, así como grandes cantidades de divisas extranjeras.Los bienes inmuebles también son una opción. Los chinos se han convertido en los principales compradores de apartamentos en Tokio que cuestan 3 millones de dólares o más, y a menudo pagan con maletas llenas de dinero en efectivo, dijo Zhao Jie, director ejecutivo de Shenjumiaosuan, un servicio en línea de venta de inmuebles en Tokio. “Es un trabajo muy duro contar esta cantidad de dinero en efectivo”.Antes de la pandemia, dijo, los compradores chinos solían comprar estudios en Tokio por 330.000 dólares o menos para alquilarlos. Ahora compran unidades mucho más grandes y obtienen visas de inversión para trasladar a sus familias.El Park Tower Harumi, un complejo de apartamentos de lujo en Tokio que ha atraído a compradores de China continental.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesLos jardines del Branz Tower Toyosu, otro proyecto de apartamentos de lujo en Tokio que también ha atraído a compradores de China continental.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesEn total, se calcula que este año han salido de China unos 50.000 millones de dólares al mes, principalmente de hogares chinos y empresas del sector privado.Los expertos dijeron que el ritmo de salida de dinero de China probablemente no representaba un riesgo inminente para la economía del país, de 17 billones de dólares, en gran parte porque las exportaciones de muchos de los principales productos manufacturados del país son fuertes, lo que devuelve un flujo constante de efectivo.Una amplia operación para enviar los ahorros familiares a otra parte podría ser motivo de alarma. Las salidas de dinero a gran escala han desencadenado crisis financieras en las últimas décadas en América Latina, el sudeste asiático e incluso la propia China, a finales de 2015 y principios de 2016.Hasta ahora, todo indica que el gobierno chino cree tener la situación bajo control. La salida de dinero de China ha debilitado la moneda, el renminbi, frente al dólar y otras divisas. Y esa debilidad del renminbi ha ayudado a mantener las exportaciones del país, que sostienen decenas de millones de empleos chinos.El flujo de dinero que sale de China “es muy manejable”, dijo Wang Dan, economista jefe para China en la oficina de Shanghái del Hang Seng Bank.Personas comprando joyas en LukFook.Billy H.C. Kwok para The New York TimesLos legisladores chinos siguen recurriendo a algunos de los límites a la salida de dinero del país que impusieron para frenar la crisis monetaria hace ocho años. Otras restricciones que se hicieron entonces, como el escrutinio de las exportaciones e importaciones para detectar estrategias encubiertas de transferencias internacionales de dinero, se dejaron sin efecto y no se han vuelto a imponer este año, a pesar de que se han reanudado las salidas de dinero.La salida de dinero de China ha igualado aproximadamente la entrada de dinero por los grandes superávits comerciales del país. Para consternación de muchos países, sobre todo europeos, China está exportando cada vez más paneles solares, autos eléctricos y otros productos avanzados, incluso cuando ha reemplazado más importaciones por producción nacional.El valor del renminbi cayó a principios de año a su nivel más bajo en 16 años. Durante gran parte de los dos últimos meses, se mantuvo en torno a los 7,3 por dólar, antes de subir un poco en la última semana.En 2015, los inversores que operan a tiempo real observaron fuertes ventas masivas de acciones chinas, cuando la salida de dinero del país provocó turbulencias en los mercados de todo el mundo.Ng Han Guan/Associated PressLa oleada de dinero que salió de China hace ocho años fue provocada por una caída en la bolsa de valores y un intento fallido de devaluar la moneda de forma controlada. El banco central de China tuvo que gastar hasta 100.000 millones de dólares al mes de sus reservas de divisas extranjeras para apuntalar el renminbi.En cambio, China parece haber gastado unos 15.000 millones de dólares al mes desde mediados de verano para estabilizar su moneda, según datos del banco central. “No hay nada que sugiera que sea desordenada”, dijo Brad Setser, especialista en finanzas internacionales del Consejo de Relaciones Exteriores. “La escala de la presión sigue siendo mucho menor que en 2015 o 2016”.Las salidas de 2015 y 2016 reflejaron los esfuerzos de las grandes empresas estatales por trasladar fuertes sumas de dinero al extranjero. En la actualidad, el gobierno ejerce un control político más estricto sobre esas empresas, y no ha habido indicios de una urgencia por movilizar dinero de su parte.En cambio, las empresas privadas y los hogares chinos han estado trasladando dinero al extranjero. Pero gran parte de la riqueza de la gente está anclada a bienes inmuebles, que no pueden venderse fácilmente.Al mismo tiempo, las empresas ilegales de cambio de moneda de Shanghái, Shenzhen y otras ciudades que solían convertir el renminbi en dólares y otras divisas extranjeras fueron cerradas por redadas policiales hace ocho años.Turistas chinos frente al Casino Londoner de Macao en octubrePeter Parks/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesTuristas chinos en un ferry durante una excursión a Hong KongBilly H.C. Kwok para The New York TimesY los reguladores han cerrado casi todos los viajes de apuestas a Macao, una región china de administración especial. Estos viajes permitían a los chinos adinerados comprar fichas de casino con renminbi, apostar una parte en el bacará o la ruleta y convertir el resto en dólares.Pekín también ha prohibido la mayoría de las inversiones extranjeras en hoteles, torres de oficinas y otros activos de escaso valor geopolítico. El arquitecto de las restricciones a la inversión extranjera en China, Pan Gongsheng, fue ascendido en julio a gobernador del banco central, el Banco Popular de China.Pero los hogares y las empresas siguen arreglándoselas para enviar dinero al extranjero.Una tarde reciente, las sucursales del Banco de China y del China Merchants Bank en China continental vendían lingotes de oro un 7 por ciento más caros que sus bancos afiliados en la adyacente Hong Kong. Esa diferencia de precios indica que, dentro de China, existe una gran demanda de oro, que puede trasladarse fácilmente fuera del país.Otro truco que están utilizando los residentes de China continental para sacar su dinero es abrir cuentas bancarias en Hong Kong y luego transferir dinero para comprar productos de seguros que se asemejan a certificados de depósito bancario. Según la Autoridad de Seguros de Hong Kong, las primas de las nuevas pólizas de seguro vendidas a los habitantes de China continental que visitan Hong Kong fueron un 21,3 por ciento más altas en el primer semestre de este año que en el primer semestre de 2019, tras casi desaparecer durante la pandemia.Una larga fila frente al Banco de China en Hong Kong el lunesBilly H.C. Kwok para The New York TimesEn una sucursal del Banco de China en la península de Kowloon, en Hong Kong, los habitantes de China continental esperaban a las 7:30 de una mañana reciente para abrir cuentas, 90 minutos antes de la apertura del banco. La fila era tan larga a las 8 a. m. que quien llegaba más tarde tenía suerte de llegar al principio de la fila antes de que terminara la jornada laboral, dijo Valerius Luo, agente de seguros de Hong Kong.Las familias suelen invertir entre 30.000 y 50.000 dólares estadounidenses en productos de seguros, varias veces más que antes, mientras buscan lugares seguros donde colocar sus ahorros, dijo Luo. “Sigue habiendo personas con un capital poderoso”, dijo, “y quieren un paquete de inversión que conserve el valor”.Li You More

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Corporate America Has Dodged the Damage of High Rates. For Now.

    by

    Small businesses and risky borrowers face rising costs from the Federal Reserve’s moves, but the biggest companies have avoided taking a hit.The prediction was straightforward: A rapid rise in interest rates orchestrated by the Federal Reserve would confine consumer spending and corporate profits, sharply reducing hiring and cooling a red-hot economy.But it hasn’t worked out quite the way forecasters expected. Inflation has eased, but the biggest companies in the country have avoided the damage of higher interest rates. With earnings picking up again, companies continue to hire, giving the economy and the stock market a boost that few predicted when the Fed began raising interest rates nearly two years ago.There are two key reasons that big business has avoided the hammer of higher rates. In the same way that the average rate on existing household mortgages is still only 3.6 percent — reflecting the millions of owners who bought or refinanced homes at the low-cost terms that prevailed until early last year — leaders in corporate America locked in cheap funding in the bond market before rates began to rise.Also, as the Fed pushed rates above 5 percent, from near zero at the start of 2022, chief financial officers at those businesses began to shuffle surplus cash into investments that generated a higher level of interest income.The combination meant that net interest payments — the money owed on debt, less the income from interest-bearing investments — for American companies plunged to $136.8 billion by the end of September. It was a low not seen since the 1980s, data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis showed.That could soon change.While many small businesses and some risky corporate borrowers have already seen interest costs rise, the biggest companies will face a sharp rise in borrowing costs in the years ahead if interest rates don’t start to decline. That’s because a wave of debt is coming due in the corporate bond and loan markets over the next two years, and firms are likely to have to refinance that borrowing at higher rates.Overall Corporate Debt Interest Payments Have PlummetedAlthough the Fed has rapidly raised interest rates, net interest payments paid by corporations are reaching 40-year lows.

    Note: Data consists of interest paid by private enterprises (minus interest income received) as well as rents and royalties paid by private enterprises.Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesThe junk bond market faces a ‘refinancing wall.’Roughly a third of the $1.3 trillion of debt issued by companies in the so-called junk bond market, where the riskiest borrowers finance their operations, comes due in the next three years, according to research from Bank of America.The average “coupon,” or interest rate, on bonds sold by these borrowers is around 6 percent. But it would cost companies closer to 9 percent to borrow today, according to an index run by ICE Data Services.Credit analysts and investors acknowledge that they are uncertain whether the eventual damage will be containable or enough to exacerbate a downturn in the economy. The severity of the impact will largely depend on how long interest rates remain elevated.“I think the question that people who are really worrying about it are asking is: Will this be the straw that breaks the camel’s back?” said Jim Caron, a portfolio manager at Morgan Stanley. “Does this create the collapse?”The good news is that debts coming due by the end of 2024 in the junk bond market constitute only about 8 percent of the outstanding market, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. In essence, less than one-tenth of the collective debt pile needs to be refinanced imminently. But borrowers might feel higher borrowing costs sooner than that: Junk-rated companies typically try to refinance early so they aren’t reliant on investors for financing at the last minute. Either way, the longer rates remain elevated, the more companies will have to absorb higher interest costs.Among the firms most exposed to higher rates are “zombies” — those already unable to generate enough earnings to cover their interest payments. These companies were able to limp along when rates were low, but higher rates could push them into insolvency.Even if the challenge is managed, it can have tangible effects on growth and employment, said Atsi Sheth, managing director of credit strategy at Moody’s.“If we say that the cost of their borrowing to do those things is now a little bit higher than it was two years ago,” Ms. Sheth said, more corporate leaders could decide: “Maybe I’ll hire less people. Maybe I won’t set up that factory. Maybe I’ll cut production by 10 percent. I might close down a factory. I might fire people.”Small businesses have a different set of problems.Some of this potential effect is already evident elsewhere, among the vast majority of companies that do not fund themselves through the machinations of selling bonds or loans to investors in corporate credit markets. These companies — the small, private enterprises that are responsible for roughly half the private-sector employment in the country — are already having to pay much more for debt.They fund their operations using cash from sales, business credit cards and private loans — all of which are generally more expensive options for financing payrolls and operations. Small and medium-size companies with good credit ratings were paying 4 percent for a line of credit from their bankers a couple of years ago, according to the National Federation of Independent Business, a trade group. Now, they’re paying 10 percent interest on short-term loans.Hiring within these firms has slowed, and their credit card balances are higher than they were before the pandemic, even as spending has slowed.“This suggests to us that more small businesses are not paying the full balance and are using credit cards as a source of financing,” analysts at Bank of America said, adding that it points to “financial stress for certain firms,” though it is not yet a widespread problem.Corporate buyouts are also being tested.Carvana renegotiated its debt this year to defer mounting interest costs.Caroline Brehman/EPA, via ShutterstockIn addition to small businesses, some vulnerable privately held companies that do have access to corporate credit markets are already grappling with higher interest costs. Backed by private-equity investors, who typically buy out businesses and load them with debt to extract financial profits, these companies borrow in the leveraged loan market, where borrowing typically comes with a floating interest rate that rises and falls broadly in line with the Fed’s adjustments.Moody’s maintains a list of companies rated B3 negative and below, a very low credit rating reserved for companies in financial distress. Almost 80 percent of the companies on this list are private-equity-backed leveraged buyouts.Some of these borrowers have sought creative ways to extend the terms of their debt, or to avoid paying interest until the economic climate brightens.The used-car seller Carvana — backed by the private-equity giant Apollo Global Management — renegotiated its debt this year to do just that, allowing its management to cut losses in the third quarter, not including the mounting interest costs that it is deferring.Leaders of at-risk companies will be hoping that a serene mix of economic news is on the horizon — with inflation fading substantially as overall economic growth holds steady, allowing Fed officials to end the rate-increase cycle or even cut rates slightly.Some recent research provides a bit of that hope.In September, staff economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago published a model forecast indicating that “inflation will return to near the Fed’s target by mid-2024” without a major economic contraction. If that comes to pass, lower interest rates for companies in need of fresh funds could be coming to the rescue much sooner than previously expected.Few, at this point, see that as a guarantee, including Ms. Sheth at Moody’s.“Companies had a lot of things going for them that may be running out next year,” she said.Emily Flitter More