HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025224.jpg

3.01 MB

Extraction Summary

5
People
10
Organizations
7
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Financial newsletter / market report
File Size: 3.01 MB
Summary

This document is page 4 of a J.P. Morgan 'Eye on the Market' newsletter dated July 25, 2011. It discusses the European sovereign debt crisis, specifically analyzing the financial burden on Germany ('Germany as paymaster') and the potential costs of a permanent transfer union, estimated at 3.3% of German GDP. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of the discovery process in the House Oversight Committee's investigation into J.P. Morgan's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, although the content itself is a standard financial market analysis.

People (5)

Name Role Context
Bernard Connolly Analyst/Advisor
At Hamiltonian Advisors, sent a paper to the author.
Weidmann Bundesbank President
Quoted in footnote 5 criticizing the risk transfer package.
Carl-Ludwig Holtfrerich Source
Listed as a source for the chart regarding costs to German taxpayers.
Lüder Gerken Author
Co-author of the cited paper from Centrum fur Europaische Politik.
Matthias Kullas Author
Co-author of the cited paper from Centrum fur Europaische Politik.

Organizations (10)

Name Type Context
J.P. Morgan
Author/Publisher of the document.
J.P. Morgan Private Bank
Source for data.
Bundesbank
German central bank, members described as opposition.
Hamiltonian Advisors
Employer of Bernard Connolly.
Centrum fur Europaische Politik
Think tank in Freiburg providing analysis.
Halle Institute for Economic Research
Source for data.
White Castle
Used metaphorically ("hamburger-throwing moment").
EU
European Union, conducting stress tests.
Factset
Data source.
MSCI
Data source.

Timeline (3 events)

July 2011
US debt ceiling negotiations
US
July 2011
European bailout plan announcement
Europe
EU
July 2011
EU Bank stress tests
Europe
EU

Locations (7)

Location Context
US
Mentioned in context of debt ceiling and PE ratio comparison.
General region of economic discussion.
Discussed as the 'paymaster' for the EU.
Location of Centrum fur Europaische Politik.
Mentioned as growing at anemic levels.
Mentioned as growing at anemic levels.
Mentioned regarding execution risk and 'Five Stages of Greece'.

Relationships (1)

Bernard Connolly Professional/Informational J.P. Morgan Author
Connolly sent the author a paper.

Key Quotes (4)

"If German citizens were faced with costs this high, it could be a White Castle hamburger-throwing moment of national proportions."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025224.jpg
Quote #1
"Germany as paymaster."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025224.jpg
Quote #2
"the following Orwellian clause indicates how European policymakers feel about rating agencies these days"
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025224.jpg
Quote #3
"By transferring significant risks to the support-giving countries and their taxpayers, the Euro area has taken a large step to socialising risks created by unsound government finances"
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025224.jpg
Quote #4

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (4,473 characters)

Eye on the Market | July 25, 2011
J.P.Morgan
Topics: US debt ceiling negotiations, a more ambitious European bailout plan (finally), and how large cap growth stocks and rising corporate profits are patiently waiting for both of them to end
The third concern: Germany as paymaster. We are often told that Germans across both major parties are unflinching supporters of the European project, and will do whatever it takes to prevent a break-up. The objections from members of the Bundesbank are described as lonely voices of opposition that carry no weight⁵. But how large are the costs going to be? German politicians and voters may see current circumstances as exceptional, and that if they just agree to one more package, the problem will go away. However, we are starting to see analyses of how costly a permanent transfer union may be for Germany. Bernard Connolly at Hamiltonian Advisors sent me a recent paper from the Centrum fur Europaische Politik⁶ in Freiburg, which provides some clues. They see three alternatives for the deficit countries:
• massive reduction in regulations and unit labor costs to regain competitiveness
• exit from the EMU, re-introduction of national currencies
• permanent transfer union from surplus countries to deficit ones
On the last option, they estimate a "creditworthiness gap" in European deficit countries of Eur 108 billion in 2010. The gap measures how much European deficit countries rely on capital inflows to fund consumption, rather than investment (which contributes to future GDP). Germany's share of the European surplus is around ¾, so let's assume a pro-rata burden on Germany to maintain the transfer union. As a result, the theoretical economic cost could be 3.3% of German GDP every year, which as shown, gets close to some expensive episodes in German history. If German citizens were faced with costs this high, it could be a White Castle hamburger-throwing moment of national proportions.
[Chart Left]
Cost to German taxpayers of major events
Percent of GDP, annual
[Bar chart showing: Peak Versailles reparations (1929) approx 3.2%; Unification (since 1991) approx 4.3%; Potential cost of EMU transfer union approx 3.3%]
Source: Carl-Ludwig Holtfrerich, Halle Institute for Economic Research, Zentrum fur Europaische Politik (Freiburg), J.P. Morgan Private Bank.
[Chart Right]
Europe equities, priced for the risks
Europe 10-yr trailing PE divided by US 10-yr trailing PE
[Line graph showing fluctuation between 0.65 and 1.15 from 1998 to 2010]
Source: Factset, MSCI.
Bottom line. At a time when European equities are trading close to 2009 lows relative to earnings and book value, this package could result in a relief rally for European equities, particularly banks. The chance of a disorderly default in 2011 has decreased markedly, and a process has been put in place to create more seamless transfers to areas (and banks) in need. But the size of the transfer union fund is not big enough to allay all concerns, particularly with Spain and Italy growing at anemic levels, and there is execution risk in Greece.
Recent bank stress tests conducted by the EU concluded that only Eur 2.5 billion of capital needs to be raised (70 to 80 billion sounds more reasonable to us). And in the package announced last week, the following Orwellian clause indicates how European policymakers feel about rating agencies these days:
Point 15. We agree that reliance on external credit ratings in the EU regulatory framework should be reduced, taking into account the Commission's recent proposals in that direction, and we look forward to the Commission proposals on credit ratings agencies
In Europe, denial appears to be an essential ingredient to the process (See "Five Stages of Greece", June 30, 2011). Last week's package is a bold step towards Federalization and the worst-case outcomes have been avoided (money market failures, bank runs, etc), but markets will remain nervous about Europe.
⁵ Bundesbank President Weidmann, in response to last week's package: "By transferring significant risks to the support-giving countries and their taxpayers, the Euro area has taken a large step to socialising risks created by unsound government finances and macroeconomic problems. This weakens the foundations of the fiscal self-responsibility that EMU is built on".
⁶ Centrum fur Europaische Politik, "Creditworthiness trends in European countries", Lüder Gerken & Matthias Kullas, 2011
4
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025224

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document