So far, Russia has turned
down any offer to get involved in bailing out Cyprus. That could be
because Cyprus has not been prepared to offer Russia the things in
return it requires, such as control over the gas reserves, and a warm
water port, or at least not at a price Russia feels it has to pay
given the situation. In response, the EU and IMF have toughened
their stance to an extent that it looks like Cyprus may be forced out
of the Eurozone, because the changed conditions mean that any
bail-out is likely to be insufficient to deal with the now bigger
problem. Already, Cyprus is talking about 20% levies on deposits
over €100,000, but also the introduction of capital controls to
prevent large scale capital flight, if and when its banks do open.
Capital controls themselves breach EU rules, which insist upon the
free movement of Capital and Labour, though their introduction was
mooted last year in response to the potential capital flight from
Spain, Italy and Portugal.
A lot of the coverage of
events in Cyprus, and the complaints raised by other EU states are
hypocritical. Cyprus is not, after all the only EU country that is
host to large amounts of Russian money. The London property market
has been massively inflated upon a sea of Russian money, much of it
of dubious origin. The events surrounding the death of Boris
Berezovsky today are just one aspect of that. But, there are lots of
other property developments in London that have forced up property
prices on similar grounds. For example, their have been numerous
property developments that have occurred with no real intention of
providing immediate shelter for anyone, but instead have been
investment vehicles for foreign money, that is happy to simply allow
the property to remain empty, while the owners benefit from rising
prices, whilst paying no Council Tax even.
Britain is particularly
hypocritical in its criticisms over the use of Cyprus as a tax haven
given its role in that regard. Places like the Isle of Man, and the
Channel Islands only survive, because they are even bigger tax havens
than Cyprus. There can be little doubt that the same Russian money
that went into Cyprus, that goes into London property, will also be
tucked away in places like the Isle of Man, and the Channel Isles.
These purpose built tax havens created by Britain, so that its rich
can conveniently shelter their funds away from the tax man, have the
benefit of paying no tax to Britain, elect their own Parliaments to
keep those benefits in tact, and yet have all the benefits that
British residents have to pay for, such as defence against attack,
and so on.
Even less than Cyprus do
these tiny British enclaves of tax exiles, have anything they can
rely on other than the inflow of funds from the rich. If the
Russians and other global rent seekers, decide that after Cyprus,
their funds are not particularly safe anywhere in Europe, these tax
havens could also see massive outflows. Given that many of the banks
that operate there are themselves branches of British banks, that
could have a significant effect on them. No doubt, they too, will
then be looking to the British taxpayers once again to bail-them out.
Its time that Britain ended the charade with these tax havens.
Either they are part of the British State or they are not. They
should be asked to either be governed by the British Parliament, pay
British taxes and so on, or else separate themselves entirely. That
would mean them having to pay for their own defence, their own health
service and so on.
But, for Europe there is a
much bigger problem. Much has been said about the fact that the
deposits of the Cypriot banks amounted to 8 times its GDP. But, of
course, Cyprus' GDP is tiny. Its less than the annual income of a
large company like Apple. Apple, with its $140 billion of cash
sitting on its Balance Sheet, could have bailed out Cyprus 20 times
over! A country with a much bigger GDP, and with a much bigger
proportion of deposits to its GDP is –
Luxembourg.
In 2011, according to this IMF document,
“Luxembourg’s
financial sector is exceptionally large and globally interconnected (Table 1). It represents
about one-fourth of Luxembourg’s GDP, one-third of its tax
revenues, and 12.5 percent of its
labour force. It comprises the banking industry, with total assets surpassing 20 times GDP;
the investment fund industry, with assets under management equivalent to around 50
times GDP; and the insurance industry, with an aggregate balance sheet of about four times
GDP. Luxembourg’s international financial centre has strong
linkages with France,
Germany, Italy, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States (Box 1), and is driven by private banking and investment fund activities (Figures 1 and
2). Its monetary and financial institutions (MFIs) intermediate about 16 percent of total
cross-border exposures among Euro area MFIs.1”
Cyprus'
GDP is $22.5 billion, whereas Luxembourg's GDP is $55 billion, which
means the total exposure is that much greater in Luxembourg than in
Cyprus. But, the problem for Luxembourg is that much greater,
because of the interconnectivity of its financial system with that of
the rest of Europe.
According
to the IMF,
“Luxembourg’s banks
are mostly foreign-owned and net providers of liquidity to their parent groups. The
banking sector accounts for about 28 percent of total financial sector assets. As of June
2010, there were 149 banks operating in Luxembourg. However,
most banks and 90 percent
of total bank assets are foreign-owned. The majority of these groups operate through
both subsidiaries and branches in Luxembourg, which provides flexibility to accommodate clients’ needs for financial services and to optimize
funding operations with parent
groups. Indeed, reflecting the liquidity generated by treasury
management for
institutional customers, as well as private banking and custody
activities, the local banking system is a
net provider of liquidity to parent banks (“upstreaming”).
Overall, interbank positions
represent about half of bank assets and liabilities (compared to an
average of about 28 percent in
the euro area), two thirds of these interbank positions are
cross-border exposures, and
intra-group exposures account for about 40 percent of total bank
assets.”
And,
“Luxembourg is the
world’s second largest centre for investment funds after the United States. Investment
funds domiciled and marketed in Luxembourg account for about 70 percent of its total
financial sector assets, and about 30 percent of total assets under management by European
funds. Fund sponsors mainly originate from Europe and the United States. Funds
domiciled in Luxembourg are generally managed from other international financial
centers. Fund shares are distributed in other European countries through an extensive use
of the European passport, as well as to investors worldwide (particularly Asia). MMFs
represent a fifth of Luxembourg’s investment funds and more than 25 percent of total
European MMF assets under management.”
The tiny Northern Rock was the canary in the coal mine. |
In other words, Luxembourg
represents a much bigger threat to European, and therefore, global
financial security than Cyprus ever could. But, the measures
undertaken in Cyprus, in particular the expropriation of Cypriot bank
funds, and the reneging on the Bank Deposit Guarantee, must now mean
that this foreign money must be removing itself from Luxembourg as fast
as it can! All eyes are currently on Cyprus, and from there to Spain
and Italy, but the real focus should be on these other tiny
economies, where contagion is likely to spread to first, but which
represent a much bigger systemic threat than does Cyprus.
Many more could be asking the same question - "Where is my money?" |
That is not to say that if
you have money in Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal, or Ireland you
shouldn't be getting it out as soon as you can find some alternative
safe home for it. A rush for the doors in Luxembourg, the Channel
Isles, Isle of Man, and other small states like Malta, will crush
their banks and their economies even more severely than in Cyprus,
but because those banks are largely foreign owned, and tightly
enmeshed in the European, and global banking system, the
ramifications will send shock waves around the globe, and the first
banks to get swamped by the tsunami will be in those weaker economies
like Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece and Ireland. Far better to move
to higher ground well in advance of any potential flood than to wait
until its lapping your ankles.
But, Britain would not
escape such a situation. Nigel Farage has called on the government
to give a public statement saying that the existing Bank Deposit
Guarantee will not be infringed, and Government Ministers have come
out to say that of course there is no chance that they would renege
upon it. Well, given that the EU and IMF called for it to be
scrapped in Cyprus, we now know how much such government backed
guarantees are worth! In fact, of course, the British Government is
already imposing such expropriation on British savers via Financial
Repression.
On the one hand, money
printing by the Bank of England is crushing the value of the pound,
thereby pushing up inflation. On the other hand, that same money
printing means that savers are able to get nothing in interest on
their savings. With inflation at real levels way over 3%, and after
tax interest rates at around 1%, British savers have already had
around 10% of their bank deposits taken from them over the last 3 or
4 years. Those that have been encouraged to save for a lifetime in a
pension fund now find that this same money printing means that the
annuity they can get on their pension pot is virtually worthless.
Given that the British Government has already been filching money
from savers in this way, there can be little doubt that if push comes
to shove, and they need to save the necks of their friends in the
banks, they will take even more arbitrary action to do so.
Apparently, sellers of safes
are doing good business at the moment. But, as the Foreign Office
pointed out in recommending that British tourists take plenty of
Euros with them to Cyprus, beware of thieves. There again deciding
exactly who the thieves are now, is not that clear.
No comments:
Post a Comment