Something economists thought was impossible is happening in Europe

Peter

Pratik Maitra
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
2,938
Likes
3,341
Country flag
Something economists thought was impossible is happening in Europe

Something really weird is happening in Europe. Interest rates on a range of debt — mostly government bonds from countries like Denmark, Switzerland, and Germany but also corporate bonds from Nestlé and, briefly, Shell — have gone negative. And not just negative in fancy inflation-adjusted terms like US government debt. It's just negative. As in you give the German government some euros, and over time the German government gives you back less money than you gave it.

In my experience, ordinary people are not especially excited about this. But among finance and economic types, I promise you that it's a huge deal — the economics equivalent of stumbling into a huge scientific discovery entirely by accident.

Indeed, the interest rate situation in Europe is so strange that until quite recently, it was thought to be entirely impossible. There was a lot of economic theory built around the problem of the Zero Lower Bound — the impossibility of sustained negative interest rates. Some economists wanted to eliminate paper money to eliminate the lower bound problem. Paul Krugman wrote a lot of columns about it. One of them said "the zero lower bound isn't a theory, it's a fact, and it's a fact that we've been facing for five years now."

And yet it seems the impossible has happened.

Why did economists think negative interest rates were impossible?

Well think about it. A bond with a negative interest rate is a guaranteed money-loser. Why would you buy one if you can just hold cash instead?

The traditional view has always been that no one would. People thought that the interest rate on bonds can't fall below zero because at that point people will just hold onto their money.

Where are negative interest rates happening?


Broadly speaking, borrowing at negative cost is happening on the European continent. Mostly in the Eurozone, but actually most severely in Switzerland.

In early February, Nestlé (which is headquartered in Switzerland) saw its four-year euro-denominated bonds trading at a negative interest rate.
Countries like the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, and Austria all saw bonds trade at negative rates.
In early February Finland became the first European government to see negative rates on the initial sale of bonds.
On February 28, Germany sold five-year bonds at negative rates, proving that the negative trend isn't a fluke trading trend _ a big, mainstream country is being paid to borrow money.
Why have interest rates gone negative?

In the most literal sense, negative interest rates are a simple case of supply and demand. A bond is a kind of tradable loan. Whoever is selling the bond is offering to pay the buyer interest in exchange for his money. If there isn't much demand for buying the bonds, the interest rate has to go up to make customers more willing to buy. If there's a lot of demand, the interest rate will fall. Mathematically speaking, nothing special happens to this process when the interest rate hits zero. If there's still a lot of demand, then the rate just goes negative. Simple.

In this specific case, a few things are driving the supply/demand dynamic.

One is that European investors seem very pessimistic about the overall economic outlook for the continent. That's making them reluctant to invest in risky, but potentially high-yielding ventures. Things like government debt from really well-run northern European countries or banal global food conglomerates are in high demand.

The other is that European governments are very reluctant to increase the supply of debt available. Germany, for example, is now running a budget surplus, which makes German debt scarce. A lot of people around the world would be happy if Germany went and gave a bunch of money to Greece and Spain, or announced a massive infrastructure building plan, or sharply reduced sales taxes. And if it did that, it would entail a lot of new debt, which would soak up demand. But northern European countries aren't responding to high demand for their debt with more borrowing. So prices just keep falling.

Isn't buying a money-losing bond insane?


It all got started with Denmark. Denmark doesn't use the euro as its currency. But as an official matter of government policy, it pegs the value of its krone to the value of the euro. But while Denmark's economy looks pretty similar to the economies of Eurozone members like Finland, Germany, or the Netherlands, it's much stronger than Greece or Portugal or Slovenia.

Because of that strength, foreign investors have the notion that in the long-term, the value of the krone is likely to go up relative to the value of the euro. If you think of buying Danish bonds as a currency play, then buying them at negative interest rates can make sense.

This was all a little strange, but not all that unexpected. It just turned out that the dynamics around small countries trying to maintain currency parity with much larger neighbors were a little bit weird.

Things changed in January 2015 when the Eurozone's central bank launched a program of quantitative easing — in other words, printing money and using it to buy government bonds.

How did quantitative easing change things?

QE is supposed to help the economy by reducing interest rates. Increased demand for government bonds makes the interest rate on them cheaper, making them less attractive to private investors. That's supposed to inspire private investors to increase their demand for other investments — loans to businesses or homebuilders, for example — which boosts the economy.

But now, here's the catch. The Eurozone has one central bank — the European Central Bank — but there's no consolidated Eurozone debt, no "eurobonds."

So when the ECB goes out and buys bonds, it needs to buy the bonds of its member states — a little Belgium, a dollop of Portugal, a smattering of Finland, a dose of Italy, etc. But one consequence of the Eurozone crisis of 2010-2011 is that people think the Eurozone might break up. If the Eurozone does break up, you're going to be way better off owning the debt of a rich and stable country like Germany than the debt of a country like Spain that's much poorer and facing an uncertain political situation. So whatever the interest rate on Spanish bonds, the rate on German bonds is sure to be lower.

In other words, if the ECB takes steps to make Spanish interest rates really low, then the interest rate on more creditworthy eurozone countries has to go below zero.

Okay, but still "¦ why would you buy a negative interest bond?

This is a very good question. The basic financial mechanics of negative interest rates are easy enough to see. But why not just hold cash in your bank account? It's not entirely clear what's happening, but here are three major motivations that market insiders say are in play:

Safety: A bond is backed by the full faith and credit of the government that issues it. Bank accounts are only government-guaranteed up to a certain extent — most European countries cover 100,000 euros. Very rich people and big companies have more money than that and need to do something with it. Obviously you could fill shoeboxes with paper money, but there are safety risks with that, too.

Passive funds: Because people thought negative interest rates were impossible, few institutions have rules in place that were designed to accommodate this situation. Pension funds, mutual funds, and other impersonal investment vehicles have rules and formulae they're supposed to be following. To the extent that those rules call for the holding of safe bonds, some bond-buying can simply happen on autopilot.

Banks: Banks can't store their spare money in a bank account. Instead, they store reserves with a government-run central bank. A certain amount of reserves are required by regulators. But banks can also store "excess" reserves. The European Central Bank is currently charging a fee on excess reserves, which means it makes more sense to park excess cash in government bonds.


What are the implications going forward?

The big one is that central banks, including the United States', may want to consider being bolder with their interest rate moves. For years now, the Federal Reserve's position has been that it "can't" cut interest rates any lower because of the zero bound. Instead, it's tried various things around communications and quantitative easing. But maybe interest rates could go lower? Unlike the European Central Bank, the Federal Reserve pays a small positive interest rate on excess reserves. Fed officials normally say this doesn't make a difference in practice, but it looks like negative rates on excess reserves may be the key to negative bond rates.

At the moment, the Fed is debating how quickly to raise interest rates, but with inflation still running well below 2 percent maybe it should try cutting them — paired with a change in reserve policy, if necessary.

For Europe, one question this raises is whether issuing some Eurozone-wide debt might make sense. Voters in Germany and other more-creditworthy countries have historically been reluctant to share credit risk with the likes of Greece and Italy. But with the interest rates involved so incredibly low, it's not clear that this is a huge downside. And German savers might appreciate the creation of a new debt vehicle that would be safe and also have a positive interest rate.
Something economists thought was impossible is happening in Europe - Vox

@atheisthindu @Razor @Mad Indian @Sakal Gharelu Ustad @Bangalorean sir
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Peter

Pratik Maitra
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
2,938
Likes
3,341
Country flag
I have no knowledge in economics so this may sound dumb.
However the above article says that countries like Germany are not spending money and thus not acquiring debt. However this also means that Germany and some European countries cannot issue positive interest bonds.

Does that mean that countries with a high debt are actually keeping that debt so as to provide positive interest bonds?(eg Japan,US)

Is national debt a good or bad thing to keep?
Can someone explain this thing to me.
 
Last edited:

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
I have no knowledge in economics so this may sound dumb.
However the above article says that countries like Germany are not spending money and thus not acquiring debt. However this also means that Germany and some European countries cannot issue positive interest bonds.

Does that mean that countries with a high debt are actually keeping that debt so as to provide positive interest bonds?(eg Japan,US)

Is national debt a good or bad thing to keep?
Can someone explain this thing to me.
Simple answer.

EU is weird because nations have same currency which makes their monetary policy same but they are still independent countries with different agendas.

So if you want to know how things work, look at simple countries or one country to get an idea. I will post an article if I think it explains things well. Sorry, I am a bit busy and can't give detailed explanations.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
Simple answer.

EU is weird because nations have same currency which makes their monetary policy same but they are still independent countries with different agendas.

So if you want to know how things work, look at simple countries or one country to get an idea. I will post an article if I think it explains things well. Sorry, I am a bit busy and can't give detailed explanations.
I beg to disagree.

The reason is not that EU is weird. The reason is concepts such as Fractional Reserve Banking is weird. Why weird? Simple. The whole concept is, to put it simply, based on an exponential function, which blows out of proportion.


@Peter Check this video out :)
Good video. Many people don't understand the concept of fees and tariffs. I invite @jouni to share his views on this video, since we have discussed a lot about borrowing money and credit ratings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
I beg to disagree.

The reason is not that EU is weird. The reason is concepts such as Fractional Reserve Banking is weird. Why weird? Simple. The whole concept is, to put it simply, based on an exponential function, which blows out of proportion.
Again!! You don't have to bring in fractional reserve banking in every discussion.

Bond rates were worst for Switzerland because it was pegged to Euro. Now people knew sooner or later it would become impossible for Swiss central bank to maintain the peg with Euro. And once it happens, Swiss Franks would rise. So essentially, there was negative bond rate but positive exchange rate expectation. And indeed that happened. Swiss Frank rose phenomenally once they took it off peg. Now I do not know where does fractional reserve banking come in this explanation.
 

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
Excellent video. More than Peter, it is @jouni who needs to check this out.

So @jouni, what is your view on integrating entire Europe into one giant nation like USA? Do you see it as a positive or a negative?
I am definitely for the United States of Europe. IMHO this crisis revealed where the real cultural border of Europe is. It is not on the Phosphorous strait, it is on the west bank of it. Greece is not culturally Europe, they do not have the mentality to prosper in a union like EU. I think Greece should resign Europe, Ukraine should be taken in ( in the long term ). The only way Europe can compete against China and US, is to have common fiscal policy. Also learning English should be compulsory in all the member state schools. Tighter Union, with reasonable speed is the future.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bangalorean

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,233
Likes
6,854
Country flag
I am definitely for the United States of Europe. IMHO this crisis revealed where the real cultural border of Europe is. It is not on the Phosphorous strait, it is on the west bank of it. Greece is not culturally Europe, they do not have the mentality to prosper in a union like EU. I think Greece should resign Europe, Ukraine should be taken in ( in the long term ). The only way Europe can compete against China and US, is to have common fiscal policy. Also learning English should be compulsory in all the member state schools. Tighter Union, with reasonable speed is the future.
I agree with your view, if I was a European I would also have wanted unified Europe.

What is your view about where should the capital be, how should elections happen (smaller nations will have less representation), how will defence policy be managed?

My personal view: there should be 4-5 capitals - one "normal capital" (say, Dublin), one "summer capital" (say, in Madrid), one financial capital (say, in Frankfurt), one cultural capital (say, in Paris), one religious capital (Rome of course). And one defence/security capital (choose some good one).

This way, try to satisfy all constituents and make it work. India is actually very similar to EU in terms of linguistic and cultural differences. Every Indian state has a different culture, different cuisine, different needs, different prosperity level, different economic mix, etc. Very similar to EU (in fact a much greater scale than EU).

If EU unifies, it will be a great challenger to the USA, it will become the second pole of the world. But if it continues to be divided, European nations will fade away into obscurity, eclipsed by China, India and USA in the coming years.
 

Khagesh

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,274
Likes
870
Finnish economy does not seem to be going anywhere. From whatever I have trawled on the net they are right there with Italy and Spain and on their way to Greece.
Finland Economic Report | Outlook, Statistics and Forecasts


Going by what is being reported Finns will have to pay more for the debt they issue and Germany will enjoy all the hard work of Finns.

So when the ECB goes out and buys bonds, it needs to buy the bonds of its member states — a little Belgium, a dollop of Portugal, a smattering of Finland, a dose of Italy, etc. But one consequence of the Eurozone crisis of 2010-2011 is that people think the Eurozone might break up. If the Eurozone does break up, you're going to be way better off owning the debt of a rich and stable country like Germany than the debt of a country like Spain that's much poorer and facing an uncertain political situation. So whatever the interest rate on Spanish bonds, the rate on German bonds is sure to be lower.

In other words, if the ECB takes steps to make Spanish interest rates really low, then the interest rate on more creditworthy eurozone countries has to go below zero.
Had their been a common bond things would have been better for Finns and other south and east europeans but why would Germany share its hard work with these countries that they can basically have simply by screwing up their internal politics, some evangelism and lotsa promises of a bright future all the while simply out competing these laggards in the real market.

This should not apply to merely the Finns, rather probably to 2/3rd of Eurozone populations.

This is actually not too different from the Indian populations where Delhi enjoys the most amount of investments sourced from all of India but Delhi then turns right back to ask for muft bijli. Mind you farm electricity for free was rejected by most of the BJP states.
 
Last edited:

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
Finnish economy does not seem to be going anywhere. From whatever I have trawled on the net they are right there with Italy and Spain and on their way to Greece.
Finland Economic Report | Outlook, Statistics and Forecasts


Going by what is being reported Finns will have to pay more for the debt they issue and Germany will enjoy all the hard work of Finns.



Had their been a common bond things would have been better for Finns and other south and east europeans but why would Germany share its hard work with these countries that they can basically have simply by screwing up their internal politics, some evangelism and lotsa promises of a bright future all the while simply out competing these laggards in the real market.

This should not apply to merely the Finns, rather probably to 2/3rd of Eurozone populations.

This is actually not too different from the Indian populations where Delhi enjoys the most amount of investments sourced from all of India but Delhi then turns right back to ask for muft bijli. Mind you farm electricity for free was rejected by most of the BJP states.
Finnish population is about 1% of total EU population, you are right that our economy is not going anywhere at the moment. I am not worried, our credit rate is top, unemployment is not too high, weak Euro helps our export. I would really like to open our country, take more immigrants, now we are too homogenous, they would also generate growth.
 

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
I agree with your view, if I was a European I would also have wanted unified Europe.

What is your view about where should the capital be, how should elections happen (smaller nations will have less representation), how will defence policy be managed?

My personal view: there should be 4-5 capitals - one "normal capital" (say, Dublin), one "summer capital" (say, in Madrid), one financial capital (say, in Frankfurt), one cultural capital (say, in Paris), one religious capital (Rome of course). And one defence/security capital (choose some good one).

This way, try to satisfy all constituents and make it work. India is actually very similar to EU in terms of linguistic and cultural differences. Every Indian state has a different culture, different cuisine, different needs, different prosperity level, different economic mix, etc. Very similar to EU (in fact a much greater scale than EU).

If EU unifies, it will be a great challenger to the USA, it will become the second pole of the world. But if it continues to be divided, European nations will fade away into obscurity, eclipsed by China, India and USA in the coming years.
I would keep the HQ in Brussels like it is, all the infra is there, there is no point building additional levels. Paris will be Paris in the future also. Maybe defense will be built around Finnish armed forces, top EU military intelligence chief is a Finn, also top civil intelligence chief is a Finn. EU will purchase Mistral class ships from France and they will be stationed in Helsinki.

Finland is the only hero-nation in Europe. Finnish army was the only army that could both stop Red Army strategic offense and chase Wehrmacht out of Finland. Because of our long history of non-alliance and neutrality, we would be the perfect country to build defense around. Our Flag is also blue-white, goes well with blue-yellow EU flag. Our soldiers are mostly blond with blue eyes, it does not hurt either.
 
Last edited:

Khagesh

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,274
Likes
870
What you are saying is good for the Finnish economy. But this will have only a very long term impact w.r.t. Finnish status within the Eurozone as a Europartner. When people decide to collaborate on - knowledge, defences, economy and emotionally, then losses should not be counted unlike what Germany is doing. And if a partner wants to do bean-counting then he should have the gumption to leave the partnership. What you Europeans are trying is the kind of way marriages happen in the west, purely a deal.

However I cannot fault Germany for this state of affairs. Germany is a nation without Europe too and they have worked towards their success and taken a lot of hits to become/remain a country.
 

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
What you are saying is good for the Finnish economy. But this will have only a very long term impact w.r.t. Finnish status within the Eurozone as a Europartner. When people decide to collaborate on - knowledge, defences, economy and emotionally, then losses should not be counted unlike what Germany is doing. And if a partner wants to do bean-counting then he should have the gumption to leave the partnership. What you Europeans are trying is the kind of way marriages happen in the west, purely a deal.

However I cannot fault Germany for this state of affairs. Germany is a nation without Europe too and they have worked towards their success and taken a lot of hits to become/remain a country.
Well spoken, thought I did not understood a thing.
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
I have no knowledge in economics so this may sound dumb.
However the above article says that countries like Germany are not spending money and thus not acquiring debt. However this also means that Germany and some European countries cannot issue positive interest bonds.

Does that mean that countries with a high debt are actually keeping that debt so as to provide positive interest bonds?(eg Japan,US)

Is national debt a good or bad thing to keep?
Can someone explain this thing to me.
As far as i understand, debt per se is not good or bad. Its what the debt is for which makes it good or bad. For eg, you want to take a 20000Rs. loan(debt) for drinking it away- its a bad debt. You take a 20000Rs. loan(again debt) for opening a business which is more profitable than the interest accrued on the loan you take, then its a good debt.


For a national debt analogy- taking a loan or debt to finance a infrastructure project which will increase the revenue for the govt directly or indirectly, is a good debt.
Taking a loan or a debt to finance a useless welfare policy like MNREGA- bad debt
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
What you are saying is good for the Finnish economy. But this will have only a very long term impact w.r.t. Finnish status within the Eurozone as a Europartner. When people decide to collaborate on - knowledge, defences, economy and emotionally, then losses should not be counted unlike what Germany is doing. And if a partner wants to do bean-counting then he should have the gumption to leave the partnership. What you Europeans are trying is the kind of way marriages happen in the west, purely a deal.

However I cannot fault Germany for this state of affairs. Germany is a nation without Europe too and they have worked towards their success and taken a lot of hits to become/remain a country.
WTH? How is Germany at fault for PIIGS spending on useless welfare programs for their citizens?
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
@Sakal Gharelu Ustad I cant think of a single reason why people would buy a negative interest rated bond. Seriously? Can you pls give me an example for why they might ? I tried thinking that it could be tied up to the inflation/deflation being higher than the impact of the negative interest rate but even then it would make much more sense to just hold on to the cash rather than on the bonds?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

monrand

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
11
Likes
1
This may be a question of patriotism, but of course, it is possible only regarding very small percentage of people.
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
@Sakal Gharelu Ustad I cant think of a single reason why people would buy a negative interest rated bond. Seriously? Can you pls give me an example for why they might ? I tried thinking that it could be tied up to the inflation/deflation being higher than the impact of the negative interest rate but even then it would make much more sense to just hold on to the cash rather than on the bonds?
Its nominal negative bond but real future return can be positive.

1) Swiss franc pegged to euro (switzerland not part of monetary union)
2) ECB decides monetary easing
3) This would make money fly to Switzerland bidding up swiss franc price, if it were not pegged
4) Since Swiss Franc is pegged, the Swiss central bank can intervene for a while but not for too long
5) When it removes the peg, the swiss franc would appreciate
6) Now you can buy a Swiss national bond with negative interest rate at date 't' and 1 franc = 0.8 euro and sell later at data 't+5' when Swiss franc is 1 franc=1euro

In the end you make profit due to gains on the exchange rate. Now since there was some positive profit on the Swiss bonds in foreseeable future, no one wanted to sell them. So to buy them some people were ready to pay higher price than nominal price of the bond implying -ve return. Hope it answers you!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
Its nominal negative bond but real future return can be positive.

1) Swiss franc pegged to euro (switzerland not part of monetary union)
2) ECB decides monetary easing
3) This would make money fly to Switzerland bidding up swiss franc price, if it were not pegged
4) Since Swiss Franc is pegged, the Swiss central bank can intervene for a while but not for too long
5) When it removes the peg, the swiss franc would appreciate
6) Now you can buy a Swiss national bond with negative interest rate at date 't' and 1 franc = 0.8 euro and sell later at data 't+5' when Swiss franc is 1 franc=1euro

In the end you make profit due to gains on the exchange rate. Now since there was some positive profit on the Swiss bonds in foreseeable future, no one wanted to sell them. So to buy them some people were ready to pay higher price than nominal price of the bond implying -ve return. Hope it answers you!
I am having a hard time understanding your example, pls clarify a bit. For example, in point 6, am I buying the swiss bond with francs or with Euro? and what will be the negative interest rate on such a bond?
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top