Financial repression has come back to stay

Analysis: Elevated levels of public debt in the US and elsewhere will probably be the most enduring legacy of the world's recent financial crises.

By MSNMoney partner Mar 14, 2012 1:28PM Carmen M. Reinhart, Bloomberg


As they have before in the aftermath of financial crises or wars, governments and central banks are increasingly resorting to a form of "taxation" that helps liquidate the huge overhang of public and private debt and eases the burden of servicing that debt.


Such policies, known as financial repression, usually involve a strong connection between the government, the central bank and the financial sector. In the U.S., as in Europe, at present, this means consistent negative real interest rates (yielding less than the rate of inflation) that are equivalent to a tax on bondholders and, more generally, savers.


In the past, other measures also included directed lending to the government by captive domestic entities (such as pension funds or banks), explicit or implicit caps on interest rates, regulation of cross-border capital movements, and (generally) a tighter coordination between governments and banks, either explicitly through public ownership of some institutions or through heavy "moral suasion" by officials.


Central banks in both developed and developing countries are being subjected to complementary pressures. Emerging markets may increasingly look to financial regulatory measures to keep international capital "out" (especially given the expansive monetary policy stance pursued by the U.S. and Europe). Meanwhile, advanced economies have incentives to keep capital "in" and create a domestic captive audience to absorb the financing for the high existing levels of public debt.


Concerned about potential overheating, rising inflationary pressures and the related competitiveness issues, emerging-market economies may continue to welcome changes in the regulatory landscape that keep financial flows at home. Indeed, this trend is already well under way. This concern means advanced and emerging-market economies are finding common cause in increased regulation and/or restrictions on international financial flows and, more broadly, the return to more tightly regulated domestic financial environments.


This scenario entails both a process of financial deglobalization (the reappearance of home bias in finance) and the re-emergence of more heavily regulated domestic financial markets.


Public and private debt overhang: Elevated levels of public debt in the U.S. and elsewhere will probably be the most enduring legacy of the post-2007 financial crises. For the advanced economies, public debts had not approached such levels since the end of World War II.


Data tracing the evolution of average gross public debt for the 22 advanced economies from 1900 to 2011 demonstrate the magnitude of the policy challenges now facing many (if not most) of these countries. However, these numbers significantly understate the magnitude of the debt surge in recent years by excluding record private borrowing -- particularly by banks -- which remains a major possible contingent liability of governments.


Throughout history, debt-to-GDP ratios have been reduced in five ways: economic growth, substantive fiscal adjustment or austerity plans, explicit default or restructuring of private and/or public debt, a surprise burst in inflation, and a steady dose of financial repression that is accompanied by an equally steady dose of inflation. It is critical to note that the last two options -- inflation and financial repression -- are only viable for domestic-currency debts (the euro area is a special hybrid case).


Some of these channels have been used in combination during historical episodes of debt reduction. Fiscal adjustment, however, is usually painful in the short run and politically difficult to deliver. Debt restructuring leaves a troublesome stigma and is also often associated with deep recessions. Pretending that no restructuring will be necessary doesn't make the debt overhang disappear. For many, if not most, advanced countries, concerns about those debt burdens will shape policy choices for many years to come.


In this setting, monetary policy in the advanced economies is likely to remain "overburdened" for some time.


Complicating the situation is the fact that the debt overhang isn't limited to the public sector, as it was immediately after World War II. There is now a high degree of leverage in the private sector, especially in the financial industry and households. In addition, the recent buildup in external leverage was greater than in past crises. This debt overhang and the financial fragility it creates are a common feature of most advanced economies, along with stubbornly high unemployment. Concerns that higher real interest rates and deflation will worsen an already precarious situation will probably impose added constraints on monetary policy.

Negative real interest rates, 1945-80 and post-2008: One of the main goals of financial repression is to keep nominal interest rates lower than would otherwise prevail. This effect, other things being equal, reduces governments' interest expenses for a given stock of debt and contributes to deficit reduction. However, when financial repression produces negative real interest rates and reduces or liquidates existing debts, it is a transfer from creditors (savers) to borrowers and, in some cases, governments.


This amounts to a tax that has interesting political-economy properties. Unlike income, consumption or sales taxes, the "repression" tax rate is determined by factors such as financial regulations and inflation performance, which are opaque -- if not invisible -- to the highly politicized realm of fiscal policy. Given that deficit reduction usually involves highly unpopular spending cuts and/or tax increases, the "stealthier" financial-repression tax may be a more politically palatable alternative.


Liberal capital-market regulations and international capital mobility had their heyday before World War I, when the gold standard was in force. However, the Great Depression, followed by World War II, put an end to laissez-faire banking. It was in this environment that the Bretton Woods arrangement of fixed exchange rates and tightly controlled domestic and international capital markets was conceived.


The result was a combination of very low nominal interest rates and inflationary spurts of varying intensities across the advanced economies. The obvious results were real interest rates -- whether for Treasury bills (see attached Figure 2), central bank discount rates, deposits or loans -- that were markedly negative from 1945 to 1946.


For the next 35 years or so, real interest rates in both advanced and emerging economies were, on average, negative. Binding interest-rate ceilings on deposits (which kept real ex- post deposit rates even more negative than real ex-post rates on Treasury bills) "induced" domestic savers to hold government bonds. In addition to the effect of capital controls, leakages by investors in search of higher yields elsewhere were limited because the incidence of negative returns on government bonds and on deposits was, more or less, a universal phenomenon at this time.


The frequency distributions of real rates for the period of financial repression (1945 to 1980) and the years following financial liberalization, shown in Figure 2, highlight the universality of lower real interest rates prior to the 1980s and the high incidence of negative real interest rates.


Strikingly, however, real ex-post interest rates for the advanced economies have, once again, turned increasingly negative since the outbreak of the crisis, and this trend has been intensifying.


Real rates have been negative for about half of the observations and below 1 percent for about 82 percent of the observations. This turn to lower real interest rates has occurred even though several sovereign borrowers have been teetering on the verge of default or restructuring (with the attendant higher risk premiums). Real ex-post central bank discount rates and bank deposit rates have also become markedly lower since 2007.

Negative Rates


Critical factors explaining the high incidence of negative real interest rates after the crisis are the aggressively expansive stance of monetary policy and heavy central bank intervention in many advanced and emerging economies.


This raises the broad question of whether current interest rates are more likely to reflect market conditions or whether they are determined by the actions of official large players in financial markets. A large role for non-market forces in interest-rate determination is a central feature of financial repression.


In the U.S. Treasury market, the increasing role of official players (or conversely the shrinking role of "outside market players") is made plain in the evolution from 1945 through 2010 of the share of "outside" marketable U.S. Treasury securities plus those of so-called government-sponsored enterprises, such as the mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.


The combination of the Federal Reserve's two rounds of quantitative easing and, more importantly, record purchases of U.S. Treasuries (and quasi-Treasuries, the government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs) by foreign central banks (notably China) has left the share of outside marketable Treasury securities at almost 50 percent, and when GSEs are included, below 65 percent.


These are the lowest shares since the expansive monetary policy stance of the U.S. regularly associated with the breakdown of Bretton Woods in the early 1970s. That, too, was a period of rising oil, gold and commodity prices, negative real interest rates, currency turmoil and, eventually, higher inflation.


A similar situation prevails in the U.K., where the Bank of England's quantitative-easing policies since the crisis -- coupled with the requirement (since October 2009) that banks hold a higher share of gilts in their portfolios to satisfy tougher liquidity standards -- have reduced the share of "outside" gilts to about 70 percent. If foreign official holdings (by central banks) were included in this calculus, the share of outside gilts would be considerably lower.


The European Central Bank's purchases of the bonds of Greece, Ireland and Portugal amounted to about 76 billion euros ($100.9 billion) from May 2010 to March 2011 and account for about 12 percent of the combined general government debts of those three countries.


To summarize, central banks on both sides of the Atlantic (and the Pacific, for that matter) have become even bigger players in purchases of government debt, possibly for the indefinite future. Meanwhile, fear of currency appreciation continues to drive central banks in many emerging markets to purchase U.S. (and, increasingly, European) government bonds on a large scale. That means markets for government bonds are increasingly populated by nonmarket players, calling into question the information content of bond prices relative to their underlying risk profile -- a common feature of financially repressed systems.


Modern financial repression, 2008-12: Advanced economies face the common policy challenge of finding prospective buyers for their abundance of government debt. Huge purchases of such debt by central banks around the world have played a clear role in keeping nominal and real interest rates low. In addition, the Basel III rules provide for the preferential treatment of government debt in bank balance sheets.


Other approaches to creating or expanding demand for government debt may be more direct. For example, at the height of the financial crisis, U.K. banks were required to hold a larger share of gilts in their portfolio. Figure 4 documents how Greek, Irish and Portuguese banks among others have already increased their exposures to domestic public debt.


Thus, the process whereby debts are being "placed" at below market interest rates in pension funds and other more captive domestic financial institutions is under way in several countries in Europe. Spain recently reintroduced a de facto form of interest-rate ceilings on bank deposits.


It is difficult to sort out the exact motivations, but as bank deposits have migrated from the periphery countries in Europe to Germany and Scandinavia, among others, the amount of disclosure, red tape and other requirements that are necessary to make such transfers has been on the rise. Although some of these requirements may be motivated by a government's desire to curb money laundering and tax evasion, the measures also amount, in some cases, to administrative capital controls.


Similar trends are emerging in Eastern Europe. The pension reform adopted by the Polish parliament in March 2011 has been criticized by the Polish Confederation of Private Employers, which said the proposal is intended to hide part of the state's debt by grabbing the money of the insured and passing the buck to future governments. Hungary has nationalized its prefunded pension plans and excluded the cost of the reforms from public debt figures. Bulgaria has taken similar measures.


Faced with a private and public domestic debt overhang of historic proportions, policymakers will be preoccupied with debt reduction, debt management and, in general, efforts to keep debt-servicing costs manageable.


In this setting, financial repression in its many guises (with its dual aims of keeping interest rates low and creating or maintaining captive domestic audiences) will probably find renewed favor and will likely be with us for a long time.

More from Bloomberg

Mar 17, 2012 12:34AM
 To IDK and ME...If everyone started jumping off bridges would you? It is about personal responsibility and morals. You racked up the debt now pay for it.  Three rules pounded into by my , grandparents were, have a budget,  spend less than you earn and be happy with what you have. Living off of 40k in the Seattle area, have a 1400 sq ft house that I can afford , a used car that runs great with no car payment, sticking 14% of gross( no net) income into my 401k and can vacation for 5 weeks a year. How is this possible ?? budget,budget,budget and if I cant afford something I will do without or find a means to barter,swap, or get a part time job to afford the item.  Pull yourself by the boots straps! 
Mar 17, 2012 9:18AM

The problem starts at the local level.  The County I live in has $90M of debt which does  not have amortized payments.  It is interest only debt.  Does this sound familiar to anyone- home mortgages that are interest only.


We have 21 County Commissioners in the County I live in, who are only thinking about - guess what? REELECTION.  Last year the property tax rate was increased - to give money to you guessed it - EDUCATION.  NONE of the tax increase was used to reduce the debt.


We all know that throwing more money at EDUCATION = BETTER RESULTS; CORRECT?


In 1969 THE FEDERAL DEPT. OF EDUCATION WAS SIGNED INTO LAW TO TAKE EFFECT IN 1970.  At this point the High School Graduation Rate in the U.S. was 69-70%.  Guess what it is now about 70%.  So tell me why do we need this Agency if after 40 + years it has shown 0 value? 

Mar 17, 2012 5:08AM
Facts the reason the government debt is so high is two unpaid for wars at the cost of 2 billion a week for 10 yrs plus ! Another young people need to know that their soc sec is matched by their employer every time they pay into the system ! that's why they want you to believe that it will not be their for you ! NOW the FEDs with their near Zero int rates is devaluing the US $ by printing money! That's why QE3 will do nothing but inflate stocks even more and devalue the US $ and the CDs and bond markets just like QE2 , gee lets PRINT MORE MONEY  ! And as the US $ falls the price of oil and gasoline goes up because everything is traded in US dollars!!! Its nice to see republicans rant tax cuts creates jobs ? Well the Bush tax breaks has been around for over 10 yrs and where are all them jobs ? Tax cuts do not create jobs ? CONSUMERS DO !!! By devaluing our dollar they take money out of our economy by raising the price of fuel , food and so on ! And making saving in CDs and bonds LOL useless  , The US 10 yr note is only 2 % LOL LOL LOL .. Lets just TAKE more money out of the US economy! LOL LOL Only in the USA Land of the free? Home of the stupid! OH BTW anyone who thinks the POTUS can control gas prices is a fool !~!!!! And lets not discount the devaluing of our homes and wealth that was in them ! LOL ONLY IN THE USA BABY.. U elect them in NOV and the lobbyist own the congress the rest of their terms! LOL That a boy wall street!!!
Mar 17, 2012 5:46AM
When the 2008 banking crisis hit we should have let capitalism work and let the banks FAIL ! But the BANKS and wall street ran to the government  i.e the U.S. TREASURY you and our tax money , for a bailout! AND THEY GOT ONE !! To republicans i guess BIG GOVERNMENT is OK for bailout of wall street banks ! The reason i say we should have let them fail is that the FDIC insured Americans deposits and it TRULY would not have been as bad as FOX news and all the pundits said it would be ! Ther market would have dropped 600 pts but once the investors knew the government was going toBAIL THEM OUT and let capatilism take its course !!! It would have stableized ! The free market system is gone folks and it shows !  You elect them in November and the lobbyist OWNs the U.S. Congress the rest of their terms !!! Big Government ? WALL STREET loves it , but its no good for Americans LOL Where is our bailout in our home values ? All the Americans like me who did everything right and has never been late on our MORTGAGE , where is a 20-30 thousand DROP on our principal to at least give US A little help ? NO We have to be scum bags that walked away or just stoped paying because their home was only worth 40 thousand instead of 100.000 thousansd !!!! Thanks to the BEST CONGRESS MONEY CAN BUY!!! ONLY IN THE USA BABY Land of the free? HOME of the stupid..
Mar 18, 2012 9:58AM



You sound like you live in the same county as I do. This has been going on for years now, and I live in a heavily GOP county, in a heavily GOP municipality, so it is not just the DEMs that are the problem.  Taxpayers scream about the IRS, but my Fed taxes have actually droppped since the recession started in 2008, people need to open their eyes and see the tax snakes in their own backyards. A couple of years back, county government told our local township assessor that property assessments needed to be increased because the county wanted more tax revenue, so he increased assessment about 25% for a lot of us in 2008, at a time when home values were drastically falling.  He did not run for relection in 2010 (most people wanted to lynch him). And yes, most of the money goes to the local school district.  They publish a periodic newsletter, and they incredibly admitted they used stimulus money to hire additional staff (not pay down debt or set aside funds for future needs). Then they stated that with no additional stimulus money coming in, they had to decide how to fund this increase in staff, and they did decide, they significatly increased their tax levy in our next RE Tax bill (they consistently have the largest % increase each year, particualry for pensions).  These people have no concept of reality or how to run their operations in sensible, cost effective ways.  I live in Illinois (but hopefully, not for long, I'm looking north), and our state has more school districts (and associated superintendants, asst superintendants, and other non-teaching staff) than either California or Texas, two states with much larger populations.  The school districts have become parasitic fiefdoms, that feed upon the taxpayers (many of them elderly on fixed incomes).  They have the true entitlement mentality, i.e., if they want it, we have to give it to them, after all , "it's for the kids". 

Mar 16, 2012 9:11PM
Borrow, borrow, borrow and don't pay the debt. If the government don't have to pay their debt, why should we. Bankruptcy redistributes the wealth, we are all broke.
Mar 18, 2012 11:47AM
Yes, savers do get screwed...but there is a way to save and beat Gold and Silver
Mar 19, 2012 2:20AM
The same is true with Social Security and Pension COLAs.  Mutual Fund Bond Fund managers estimate that the CPI underestimates inflation by a couple percent every year.  Consequently, the present value of the money that recipients get each year decreases and helps balance things.
Mar 19, 2012 12:25AM
Brilliant!  This should be read by everyone in the world.
Mar 18, 2012 7:23PM
Another reason to cut the size of government. Everything they do is wrong so why support it.
Mar 18, 2012 12:00PM
Where are the referenced charts? Anyway, you can get a better take on this from PIMCO commentary on their website. In fact, this may be directly derived from their published comments.
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?


Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.

Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.




Quotes delayed at least 15 min
Sponsored by:


There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.
There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.
Market index data delayed by 15 minutes

[BRIEFING.COM] The stock market finished an upbeat week on a mixed note. The S&P 500 shed less than a point, ending the week higher by 1.3%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average (+0.1%) cemented a 1.7% advance for the week. High-beta names underperformed, which weighed on the Nasdaq Composite (-0.3%) and the Russell 2000 (-1.3%).

Equity indices displayed strength in the early going with the S&P 500 tagging the 2,019 level during the opening 30 minutes of the action. However, ... More


There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.