The Reserve Bank should follow the lead of its developed market peers (and some emerging market peers) in its response to the Covid-19 crisis

It seems that investors in emerging markets hold their governments and central banks to a much higher fiscal and monetary standard than is expected of their increasingly indebted developed market peers.

What is deemed to be right for the increasingly indebted developed world hoping to recover from the coronavirus – that is massive doses of extra government spending and money creation in support of government debt – is treated with suspicion when proposed or attempted by increasingly indebted emerging market economies, including SA.

We have argued that economies such as our own, which have suffered even more damage from the lockdowns, thanks to more widespread poverty and in the absence of capital reserves accumulated by households and businesses, need all the unconventional help they can get.

Not all emerging market central banks have taken the chastity vow. In Indonesia, as the Financial Times (FT) reported on 15 June: “Finance Minister, Sri Mulyani Indrawati, says quantitative easing and other policies are restoring confidence. Indonesia is at the forefront of emerging markets in implementing monetary policy that was once seen as the preserve of developed economies.”

The minister said that “Indonesia will use unprecedented quantitative easing and other emergency monetary and fiscal policies for as long as it takes to recover from the coronavirus pandemic, according to the country’s finance minister.  With the private sector in retreat after weeks of lockdown, massive state spending was needed to shore up the economy”, adding that Indonesia would not rely on central bank financing in the long run: “That is not good policy practice.”

Brazil, according to the FT in another report (8 June) has granted its central bank extraordinary powers for the next 12 months, even though the Bank seems somewhat reluctant to employ them. Central bank President Roberto Campos Neto said he would not employ such measures until traditional tools had been exhausted:

“We still think we have monetary space on the traditional policy. If you start using unconventional policy before you exhaust the conventional policy, you create noise that makes the central bank lose credibility.”
However, according to the FT, the central bank has slashed Brazil’s benchmark Selic interest rate to a historic low of 3% and is expected to cut by a further 75 basis points this month. Campos Neto said there was now greater clarity on the extent of the damage likely to be wrought by the coronavirus pandemic and that “uncertainty regarding the extreme cases has diminished”. The Bank in March launched a US$300bn financial liquidity package — equivalent to 16.7% of the country’s GDP — to mitigate the efforts of the broad economic shutdown caused by the coronavirus pandemic. “I don’t think any other country has done anything close to that,” Campos Neto said.

The case for extraordinary policies is clear enough. When economies are allowed to normalise, hopefully extra demand will match extra potential supplies that then become available. Extra spending to accompany extra output can be assisted by extra government spending – on income relief and relief for lenders and borrowers. Money creation by central banks can make it cheaper to issue more government debt and to encourage banks to lend more freely. In the absence of stimulus, the willingness of firms to increase output and to offer employment on normal terms would be more compromised. They are unlikely to hold optimistic forecasts of revenues and profits upon which to budget. The case for stimulus is thus every bit as strong in the less developed world, including SA.

There is as yet no indication that the SA Reserve Bank sees the crisis as calling for anything like such a vigorous a response. It remains largely in conventional inflation-targeting mode. The supply of central bank money, notes in circulation together with the cash deposits of the banks with the Reserve Bank, defined as the money base or M0, sometimes more evocatively described as high powered money, did not increase at all since the end of last year to May 2020.

Money base to May 2020

f1

Source: SA Reserve Bank Balance Sheets and Data Bank, and Investec Wealth & Investment

This unchanged level of the money base through the crisis occurred despite the purchase by the Reserve Bank of a modest extra R22bn of RSA bonds in the secondary market (modest by comparison with the other assets held by the Bank that are dominated by its foreign exchange reserves). In May 2020, as a result of drawing on its large deposits with the Bank to make payments abroad, the foreign assets of the Bank declined. Despite the limited QE designed to smooth volatility in the debt markets rather than to stimulate, and despite a significant increase in Reserve Bank loans to banks, net-net the money base has not increased during this time of grave crisis. We show the trends in the assets of the Reserve Bank and its liability to the government in the chart below.

Government deposits are not part of the money base held by the public and the banks. An increase in government deposits reduces the money base and a decline will do the opposite, provided the drawdown is used to fund spending or debt repayments in SA. If, as appears to have been the case in May 2020, the payments by the government (drawing down its deposits) went to foreign creditors and so foreign banks, the SA banks will thus not have seen an increase in their cash reserves and deposits with the Reserve Bank. In May, the loans to private banks declined sharply – also reducing the money base. Thus, despite the purchase of an additional R10bn of government stock by the Reserve Bank, the money base in May was practically unchanged and no larger than it was in December.

In the charts below, we show the Reserve Bank balance sheet over the period since December  and the monthly changes in some of the key items that move the money base – the notes in circulation plus the deposits of the banks with the Reserve Bank.

The money base in SA and its sources (December 2019 to May 2020)

f2
Source: SA Reserve Bank Balance Sheets and Data Bank, and Investec Wealth & Investment

Reserve Bank balance sheet – monthly movements affecting the money base (December 2019 to May 2020)

 f3
Source: SA Reserve Bank Balance Sheets and Data Bank, and Investec Wealth & Investment
SA desperately needs the same extraordinary interventions to counter the impact of the lockdown now underway in the developed world, and as we have indicated, also in some developing economies. Given the responses of the SA Treasury and Reserve Bank to date, it is not surprising that the consensus forecasts of market analysts are for a below average reduction in SA GDP in 2020 of 6%, but thereafter for a well below increase in GDP in 2021, a pedestrian 2%.

What is called for is firstly a properly vigorous response to the crisis. It also calls for a credible commitment to a return to fiscal and monetary normality when the crisis is over, and when the economy is operating at something like its potential. That long-term growth potential surely has to be above 2% annual growth. To realise permanently faster growth, needs more than effective crisis management. It calls for reforms of the economy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *