MinBane

Helt ute av sporet (Okumala ekigwo okulyaku kya okuziga)

Archive for the tag “Gross Domestic Product”

Kenya: Monetary Policy Committee Meeting (29.05.2017)

Uganda: Civil Society Position on Tax Revenue Measures for FY 2017/18 (21.04.2017)

Report from the MoFPED shows the growing Ugandan debt by June 2016!

Again, the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) dropped another report on the fiscal policies and the fiscal health of the economy in Uganda. The National Resistance Movement (NRM) have created this environment as the growing debt and growing interest payment comes with their planned debt rise. Still, the PriceWaterhouseCoopers spelled gloom earlier in the year, as this report was dropped on the MoFPED web page today. Even if the Report was spelled out in December 2016. It is if like the NRM didn’t want this to spelled out early. Since the numbers aren’t compelling of an arts piece, more issues… just take a look!

The stock of total public debt grew from US$ 7.2 billion at the end of June 2015 to US$ 8.4 billion in June 2016. This represents an increase from 30.6% of GDP to 33.8% over the two periods. The increase was largely on account of external debt, which grew from US$ 4.4 billion to US$ 5.2 billion over the period. Domestic debt increased from US$ 2.8 billion to US$ 3.2 billion” (MoFPED, P:V, 2016).

That the debt are growing quick, as the public debt grew with US$ 1.2 billion, that the percentage of GDP went up with 3,2%, the external debt rose with US$ 0.8 billion and the Domestic debt went up US$ 0.4 billion. All of these numbers show the amount of monies that the Government are adding on their debt, as the UNRA and the development projects are suspended by World Bank. So the Infrastructure development can be questioned as the growing debt, as the government must have other uses of the growing and scaled up debt. Since the transparency of the economy isn’t there and that the sanctioned bills comes from the State House. Just look at the growing interest rates as well.

Interest Payment as a percentage of GDP stood at 2.2% as at end June 2016, up from 1.9% as at June 2015. The increase is largely explained by interest payments on domestic debt, which grew from Shs 1,077 billion in FY2014/15 to 1,470 billion in FY2015/16. There was a significant increase in the weighted average interest rate of Government debt; from 5.9% to 6.5% in June 2015/16. This followed increases in the weighted interest rates for both domestic and external debt, from 13.6% to 15.3% for domestic debt and from 0.9% to 1.2% external debt. As interest rates increase, so do the debt service obligations of Government” (MoFPED, P: 4, 2016).

The difference between June 2015 and June 2016 the percentage has grown with 0.3%, the domestic interest rate grew with Shs. 0.393 billion. The Interest rate alone went up by percentage 0.6%, as the weighted interest rates went up 1.7%. The key sentence that the report wrote and I repeat: “As interest rates increase, so do the debt service obligations of Government”.

That idea isn’t only on the interest payment percentages are running higher, but as the debt goes up, the interests goes up. So the Debt Service Obligations are going up for the Government. This is a natural outcome, that the obligations for the state goes up with the amount of debt it rises. So the government can try to portray this is controlled, and to one extent it is under control. Still, the growth in this regard proves that the NRM regime are pilling up debt and increasing their debt, as well as interests. In the end this will make the state worse. Especially knowing that the energy dams have been built poorly and many of the expensive roads haven been fruitful. This is development that the growing debt is being used to…

So the NRM regime and the Ugandan government isn’t believable… the rise of debt and interests show’s the current state of affairs. Even if the percentage is after plan, the government still has to take charge and make sure they can pay back both the debt and interests. Peace.

Reference:

Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) – ‘DEBT SUSTAINABILITY

ANALYSIS REPORT 2015/16’

Kenya: Monetary Policy Committee Meeting (27.03.2017)

Bank of Uganda: Monetary Policy Statement for February 2017 (15.02.2016)

bou-mps-15-02-2017-p1bou-mps-15-02-2017-p2

Confidential reports stern warnings about the Italian national bank debt ratio and possible damaging scenarios when restructuring it!

italianbank

The Astellon Capital Partners report on the Italian nation debt is troublesome, as the reports are indicating troubled waters ahead for controlling the debt and repayment on the defaulted loans. This will create other higher issues than only the Greek debt and interest-rates from Brussels and Berlin. The Italian and Rome problem will cause monetary effects for all of Europe, as the debt are like his:

“1980 –1995: Debt / GDP increased by 64%, due to high interest rates levied by Bank of Italy to fight inflation and promote exchange rate stability of Lira within European Monetary System, precursor to the Eurozone” (…)”1995 –2015: Debt / GDP increased by 11%, due entirely to debt servicing costs as Italy ran a primary fiscal surplus over this period” (Astellon Capital Partners, P: 2, 2017).

The continued pressure of the Italian debt is showed with the average primary balance since 1995 have been 2, 1% and the average interest costs of the GDP have been 5, 5%. “Italy among the most fiscally sound member states in the Eurozone, yet also among the most burdened by interest costs” (Astellon Capital Partners, P: 3, 2017).

These numbers are not really positive at all, as the high interest rate by the Bank of Italy together with the rise of debt servicing that increased 11% alone in a decade. That the Italian state have the amount of costs of interests amounting to 5,5% says lots of the economic pressure on the budgets and fiscal policies within the government structures. This does not like a prosperous and strong economic situation.

The report continues with more worrying numbers that the Italian labour costs are 11% higher than rest of the EU average. Certainly also that the average productivity of the labour are 12% lower than the Eurozone average. So you got higher paid workers that work less, which also isn’t strengthening the economy.

That the Italians bank’s they have deflated badly loans that has gone from under 5% in 2005 to the running value of close to 15% in 2016. So that the European Central Bank have bought into the government debt issuance: “2014 –2019: At current government debt net issuance rates and announced QE levels, ECB will have been responsible for financing 100% of Italy’s deficits from 2014 –2019”. This is if the debt is: “Assumes €50bn annual run-rate of government net debt issuance” (Astellon Capital Partners, P: 6, 2017). That is a hefty sum when considering all the other fiscal issues that already put forward.

“Substantial increase in non-bank net purchases of Italian debt required ECB and Italian Banks acquired 88% of government debt net issuance since 2008. Over next six years non-banks will need to increase purchase activity to 7x that of past nine years” (Astellon Capital Partners, P: 7, 2017). So a nation that struggles with high paid performance with low productivity are suddenly needed to get the workforce to 7 times higher purchase activity, meaning the production and selling has to increase seven-fold if the state should have ability to sustain the defaulted debt that has increased and the debt the ECB has bought. Together with the Italian Bank gold-reserve which is lower than the stated and needed figures to be sufficient. The bank has gold-reserves by today’s value about €100bn, but by the ECB agreement need to collateralised that needs to be up to €350bn. That the report claims to be only 25%; while the assets are dwindling too and that is also worrying!

The Assets have from 2011 gone from being around 0% or none, to 2016 when the assets of the Italian bank is now in 2016 -20%. Because this have come a German proposal to avoid an new Argentine Bank collapse case. As the Italian Bank are required independent assessments of debt sustainability.

The great risks for Italy and the Italian republic are these scenarios. Like the hedge funds can buy into with high risks and yields through BTP yields during the 2016-2017. Second scenario in 2018 is that the ECB or European Central Bank will be a marginal buyer of the government bonds and buying debts. Third scenario is that the Italian Banks becoming net-sellers and therefore losing their assets with less of profits in the 2016-2017. Last scenario is unilateral re-profiling or re-domination or some form of Greek-Haircuts by 2017-2018, that means trade-offs and cutting taxes to try to revamp the economy (Astellon Capital Partners, P: 21, 2017).

With these numbers and situation, there are certain men in ECB and in Italy that is worried. The strength and sovereign nation of Italy has to find ways of restructuring the debt and assets. What is certain is that the debtors cannot take it easy on this one. The Italian debts and reserves are worrying as the debt has to restructure and the focus on how the Italian republic has to get more productivity and create more production so the taxes and debt per GDP can go down. This will be painful for the Italian state and their government institutions, together with all the debt and bad-debt that the state has to cover, because the banks cannot afford to lose all of these fiscal funds. There have to be a revolution of something if the Italian republic and its workforce are able to 7 times higher purchase activity. That will not come easy and how they will ever achieve that must be by a unicorn arriving and spinning the Fiat wheels of Torino more than ever before; even getting the world more hooked on Milan fashion design or Illy coffee. Peace.

Reference:

Astellon Capital Partners – ‘Q1 2017 Notes No. 24 – Ciao a tutti: An orderly restructuring of Italian debt’

Press Release: IMF Staff Completes Review Mission to Rwanda (05.04.2016)

Rwanda Francs

WASHINGTON D.C., United States of America, April 5, 2016 –  An International Monetary Fund (IMF) team, led by Laure Redifer, visited Kigali from March 22–April 5, 2016 to carry out discussions with the Rwandan authorities on the fifth review of their economic and financial program supported by the IMF’s Policy Support Instrument (PSI)[1], and to reach understandings on economic policies that could be supported under the IMF’s Stand-by Credit Facility (SCF).[2]
Ms. Redifer issued the following statement at the end of the visit:

“The IMF team reached staff-level agreement with the authorities, subject to approval by IMF Management and the Executive Board, on policies that could support completion of the fifth review of Rwanda’s PSI-supported program, as well as a new agreement on an 18-month arrangement under the Fund’s SCF. The Executive Board meeting is tentatively scheduled for May 2016.

Rwanda’s economic performance in 2015 remained robust, with GDP growth of 6.9 percent. Growth in 2015 was buoyed by strong construction and services activity, with agriculture and manufacturing also performing well. Consumer price inflation remained contained, averaging 2.5 percent for the year, though it increased in the second half of 2015 due to higher food prices and administrative price increases. In February 2016, prices were 4.4 percent higher than a year before.

“However, new challenges emerged over the course of 2015 as a result of global developments. Lower prices and demand for Rwanda’s minerals almost halved the country’s mineral exports, leading to a significant loss of export revenue. This was exacerbated by lower-than-projected inflows of private capital and remittances, which together led to downward pressure on the Rwandan franc and foreign exchange reserves.
“Despite these developments, macroeconomic policy performance through end-December 2015 remained in line with program objectives. Most quantitative targets were met, and were supported by structural reforms, notably changes to boost domestic revenue collection, reduce liquidity overhangs, strengthen financial market supervision and functioning, and improve domestic revenue collection. Planned measures to revise the law for property taxes and improve the timeliness of public reporting on budget execution are taking somewhat longer than originally anticipated.  

“Over the medium term, growth prospects remain in line with Rwanda’s high potential, and the mission welcomes ongoing initiatives to promote export diversification and encourage local production of what Rwanda currently imports, in order to improve Rwanda’s resilience to external shocks. These policies will, however, take time.  In the near term, more immediate measures are needed to deflate external pressures and stem the drop in foreign exchange reserves. The mission welcomes, therefore, the authorities’ commitment to implement more cautious monetary policy and postpone some non-priority public spending to help dampen still-strong demand for imports. Allowing the exchange rate to continue to adjust as necessary will be critical in this regard. The mission expects that successful implementation of these policies will maintain economic growth at around 6 percent, while keeping inflation below 5 percent.

“The mission commends the authorities for decisive economic policies aimed at safeguarding external sustainability and reinforcing Rwanda’s long-term development potential. The mission also welcomes the authorities’ ambitious program of supporting forward-looking policy reforms aimed at strengthening the efficiency of public spending; and improving tax compliance.

“The mission met with Minister of Finance and Economic Planning Honorable Ambassador Claver Gatete, Governor of the National Bank of Rwanda Honorable John Rwangombwa, Minister of Trade and Industry Honorable François Kanimba, and other senior government officials, private sector representatives, and development partners. The mission thanks the authorities and other interlocutors for the open, fruitful and collaborative discussions.”

[1] Rwanda’s PSI was approved by the IMF Executive Board on December 2, 2013 (see Press Release No.13/483). The PSI is an instrument of the IMF designed for countries that do not need balance of payments financial support. The PSI helps countries design effective economic programs that, once approved by the IMF’s Executive Board, signal to donors, multilateral development banks, and markets the Fund’s endorsement of a member’s policies. Details of Rwanda’s current PSI are available atimf.org/rwanda.

[2] The SCF supports low-income countries that have reached broadly sustainable macroeconomic positions, but may experience short-term financing needs, including those caused by shocks. The SCF supports countries’ economic programs aimed at restoring a sustainable macroeconomic position consistent with strong and durable growth and poverty reduction. (see imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/scf.htm).

Ministry of Mining – Press Statement on Cabinet Approval of Kenya’s First Mining and Mineral Policy (04.04.2016)

Kenya Mining Policy P1Kenya Mining Policy P2

Press Release: Kenya’s Economy Strong in a Challenging Global Environment, says World Bank (31.03.2016)

kenya-money-1

NAIROBI, March 31, 2016—Kenya’s economy is projected to grow at 5.9% in 2016, recording an improvement over the 5.6% estimated for 2015, says a new World Bank Group economic report released today. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is expected to improve further to 6% in 2017.

The Kenya Economic Update (KEU): Kazi ni Kazi: Informality Should Not Be Normal attributes the positive outlook to low oil prices, good agriculture performance, supportive monetary policy, and ongoing infrastructure investments. Kenya experienced strong economic performance in 2015, and has exceeded the average growth for Sub Saharan Africa countries consistently since 2009, the report adds.

The KEU reviews Kenya’s economic performance in the context of three global factors which have been discussed for some time, and are now in full force. These include: industrialized countries’ monetary policy adjustment; the end of the commodity price boom, and the rebalancing of Chinese economy. The report says that the interaction between these global factors with domestic policy and conditions will determine Kenya’s growth in the near term.

“The prevailing global conditions call for a more vigilant policy stance which is supportive of growth,” said Diarietou Gaye, World Bank Country Director for Kenya

According to the report, Kenya’s economy remains vulnerable to domestic risks that could moderate the growth prospects. These include: first, the possibility that investors could defer investment decisions until after the elections; second, that election related expenditure could result to a cut back in infrastructure spending, and third, security remains a threat, not just in Kenya but globally. Finally, changes in monetary policy in industrialized countries could trigger volatility in financial markets putting the currency under pressure.

The KEU, whose special focus is on jobs notes that Kenya is creating more jobs now, but mainly in the informal sector. In the next ten years, nine million youth will enter the labor market, a majority will continue to find jobs in the informal sector, the report adds.

“Kenya is not short of jobs; it is short of high productivity jobs,” said Jane Kiringai, the Bank’s Senior Country Economist for Kenya and the lead author of the report. “To increase productivity of jobs in the informal sector, policy interventions could be geared towards increasing access to broad skills beyond formal education, creating linkages between formal and informal firms, and helping small scale firms enter local and global value chains.”

To create more and better jobs, it is also imperative to reduce the cost of doing business which is necessary for a robust private sector, the report adds.

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: