BoE quantitative tightening goal entangled in 'fiscal jiggery-pokery': Mike Dolan
By Mike Dolan
LONDON, Sept 18 (Reuters) -The Bank of England may sit out this month's interest rate cutting bonanza, but Thursday's meeting will still be meaningful, as it will throw a spotlight on the BoE's delicate dance with the UK Treasury.
The BoE's hesitation in delivering its second rate cut of the year is partly due to questions about how it will incorporate next month's budget statement from the new UK Labour government into its thinking on inflation and growth over the next year.
The UK government's murmuring thus far indicate that it's going to put forward a tight budget. This should help the BoE in its efforts to cover the sticky "last mile" of disinflation in services and wages, and it may well clear the decks for more rapid monetary easing moving ahead.
And the BoE may end up returning the favour, whether it intends to or not.
The Bank is due to announce next year's target for reducing its pandemic-bloated balance sheet of gilts. This "quantitative tightening" (QT) plan is technically separate from its rate policy, and a programme it likely hopes it can pass off without much attention or disruption.
But the BoE's QT announcement may be hard to shuffle away quietly.
That's partlybecause it has been one of the few major central banks to engage in active sales of bonds to downsize its balance sheet. In other words, it's not just allowing the debt to mature and roll off organically like the Federal Reserve orEuropean Central Bank.
And this time around, there's a twist in the calculation - one that should affect both BoE activity in the bond market over the year ahead and the new Labour government's fiscal math for its keenly-awaited and controversial first budget statement.
As it stands, the overwhelming market consensus is the BoE will simply recycle last year's goal of reducing the balance sheet by 100 billion pounds ($131.59 billion)over the coming 12 months. So far, so simple - and in keeping with the BoE's stated aim to be predictable.
The issue, however, is that next year will feature a heavier schedule of maturing debt. So a 100 billion-poundtargeted runoff would mean active gilt sales would be 75% lower compared to the totals recorded over the past 12 months.
And analysts think that the roughly 13 billion poundsof gilt sales required could be completed by year-end, removing the BoE as a seller completely for most of next year.
That's likely to be a boon for bond investors - but also forthe Chancellor of the Exchequer.
GILT FREE?
A quirk in the QT process is that it crystallisesvaluation losses incurred on the bonds between the period in which the BoE bought them, when policy interest rates were near zero, and now, when rates are 5%. The price of those bonds will have plummeted in the meantime.
Given that the Treasury is effectively on the hook for BoE losses, QT crimps the government's fiscal space and scope.
True, these calculation may merely be shifting the periods in which balance sheet losses are booked, but this added wiggle room could still be a big help for an incoming government under pressure to fill what it claims to be an inherited fiscal hole of some 20 billion pounds.
To be sure, not everyone thinks the BoE will stick to the 100 billion QT figure for the year ahead - so the "gift" of fiscal wiggle room may not materialise.
Deutsche Bank's UK economist Sanjay Raja thinks the BOE may want to retain a "more consistent footprint" of gilt sales. So he sees it lifting the overall QT target to ensure quarterly gilt sales of 5 billion to 10 billion pounds - not least because active sales will have to rise again the following year.
The BoE's estimate of its balance sheet's "steady state" - that is, the size it'll be comfortable with over the long term -implies another 230 billion-poundreduction at least. That suggests the QT process has at least another couple of years to run.
Yet, the question of whether UK finance minister Rachel Reeves will use the Treasury's BoE exposure to game its own self-imposed fiscal rules is certainly a live one.
There's much speculation about whether Reeves will change the definition of "public sector net debt" that it uses in its five-year debt reduction pledge by excluding BoE exposure, unlike the previous government.
The independent Institute for Fiscal Studies last month estimated that based on the last budget, such a move could open as much 16 billion pounds of "fiscal headroom" for the government. The institute also noted this move could be justified if used for investment spending and would be tempting as it involves changes "few people understand or care about".
But even so, the think tank said shifting goalposts to make the figures add up seemed hard to justify.
"If the government wants to borrow more and spend more, it would ideally make the case for doing so on its own terms, rather than hide behind fiscal jiggery-pokery," it added.
Whether the BoE QT plays ball on Thursday remains to be seen.
The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters
($1 = 0.7599 pounds)
BoE gilt holdings, rates and yields https://tmsnrt.rs/3ZqM9YU
BoE makes first interest rate cut since 2020 https://reut.rs/3YuZoY2
IFS chart on different UK definitions public net debt https://tmsnrt.rs/3zv6amr
OBR chart on long-term UK debt risks https://tmsnrt.rs/3MO2gZ3
BoE chart on balance sheet history as % of GDP https://tmsnrt.rs/44OTWAz
By Mike Dolan; Editing by Jamie Freed
免責聲明: XM Group提供線上交易平台的登入和執行服務，允許個人查看和/或使用網站所提供的內容，但不進行任何更改或擴展其服務和訪問權限，並受以下條款與條例約束：（i）條款與條例；（ii）風險提示；（iii）完全免責聲明。網站內部所提供的所有資訊，僅限於一般資訊用途。請注意，我們所有的線上交易平台內容並不構成，也不被視為進入金融市場交易的邀約或邀請 。金融市場交易會對您的投資帶來重大風險。
所有缐上交易平台所發佈的資料，僅適用於教育/資訊類用途，不包含也不應被視爲適用於金融、投資稅或交易相關諮詢和建議，或是交易價格紀錄，或是任何金融商品或非應邀途徑的金融相關優惠的交易邀約或邀請。
本網站的所有XM和第三方所提供的内容，包括意見、新聞、研究、分析、價格其他資訊和第三方網站鏈接，皆爲‘按原狀’，並作爲一般市場評論所提供，而非投資建議。請理解和接受，所有被歸類為投資研究範圍的相關内容，並非爲了促進投資研究獨立性，而根據法律要求所編寫，而是被視爲符合營銷傳播相關法律與法規所編寫的内容。請確保您已詳讀並完全理解我們的非獨立投資研究提示和風險提示資訊，相關詳情請點擊 這裡查看。
