• 10 mins Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 55 mins China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 1 hour UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 2 hours Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 3 hours VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 4 hours Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 5 hours Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 6 hours OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 21 hours U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 23 hours Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 1 day Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 1 day EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 1 day Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 1 day Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
  • 4 days Trump Passes Iran Nuclear Deal Back to Congress
  • 4 days Texas Shutters More Coal-Fired Plants
  • 4 days Oil Trading Firm Expects Unprecedented U.S. Crude Exports
  • 4 days UK’s FCA Met With Aramco Prior To Proposing Listing Rule Change
  • 4 days Chevron Quits Australian Deepwater Oil Exploration
  • 5 days Europe Braces For End Of Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 5 days Renewable Energy Startup Powering Native American Protest Camp
  • 5 days Husky Energy Set To Restart Pipeline
  • 5 days Russia, Morocco Sign String Of Energy And Military Deals
  • 5 days Norway Looks To Cut Some Of Its Generous Tax Breaks For EVs
  • 5 days China Set To Continue Crude Oil Buying Spree, IEA Says
  • 5 days India Needs Help To Boost Oil Production
  • 5 days Shell Buys One Of Europe’s Largest EV Charging Networks
  • 5 days Oil Throwback: BP Is Bringing Back The Amoco Brand
  • 5 days Libyan Oil Output Covers 25% Of 2017 Budget Needs
  • 5 days District Judge Rules Dakota Access Can Continue Operating
  • 6 days Surprise Oil Inventory Build Shocks Markets
  • 6 days France’s Biggest Listed Bank To Stop Funding Shale, Oil Sands Projects
  • 6 days Syria’s Kurds Aim To Control Oil-Rich Areas
  • 6 days Chinese Teapots Create $5B JV To Compete With State Firms
  • 6 days Oil M&A Deals Set To Rise
  • 6 days South Sudan Tightens Oil Industry Security
  • 7 days Over 1 Million Bpd Remain Offline In Gulf Of Mexico
  • 7 days Turkmenistan To Spend $93-Billion On Oil And Gas Sector
  • 7 days Indian Hydrocarbon Projects Get $300 Billion Boost Over 10 Years
  • 7 days Record U.S. Crude Exports Squeeze North Sea Oil
Alt Text

Goldman’s Commodity Unit Sees Worst Q1 In A Decade

Investment bank Goldman Sachs saw…

Alt Text

5 Big Gainers In Oil & Gas This Week

Energy stocks have been among…

Alt Text

Why Wall Street Is Bullish On Refiners

Wells Fargo has noted that…

Charles Hugh Smith

Charles Hugh Smith

Charles Hugh Smith has been an independent journalist for 22 years. His weblog, www.oftwominds.com, draws two million visits a year with unique analyses of global…

More Info

American Investors Absorb $4 Trillion in Treasuries and Remove China’s Financial Leverage

China's "nuclear option"--selling its vast stash of U.S. Treasuries to wreak havoc on the U.S. economy and interest rates--has been downgraded by the flood of U.S. investors who have exited stocks in favor of Treasury bonds.

Pundits on both sides of the Pacific have been chewing on China's "nuclear financial option" for years. Here's the "story" in a nutshell:

1. The U.S. government has run a massive deficit since 2001.

2. Enamoured of real estate and stocks, U.S. investors shunned low-yield U.S. Treasury bonds (T-Bills).

3. As China's trade surpluses with the U.S. surged, generating billions in dollars that China needed to park in a safe, liquid market. U.S. Treasuries offered just such a market.

4. Following the lead of its mercantilist exporter neighbor Japan, which had long recycled its trade surpluses into Treasuries, China soaked up U.S. Treasuries for another reason: to keep interest rates low in one of its biggest markets (the U.S.).

5. If demand for Treasuries slumped, interest rates would rise, rippling through the U.S. economy, pinching credit-dependent U.S. consumers who would then buy fewer goods imported from China.

6. China buying massive quantities of U.S. Treasuries was thus a "ewin-win" situation for both the credit-dependent U.S. and trade-surplus China.

7. This dynamic led to China's hoard of Treasuries swelling to a staggering $1.2 trillion.

8. As the U.S. dollar declined in value against gold and other currencies, China's leadership understandably became nervous about being so exposed to significant declines in the purchasing power of their $1.2 trillion stash of Treasuries.

9. In response, China has trimmed its purchases and moved its portfolio into shorter-term U.S. bonds which are less exposed to the risk of future inflation.

10. The sheer size of the Chinese portfolio launched the "nuclear option" speculation: could China sink the U.S. economy via the financial "weapon" of selling its vast holdings of Treasuries?

11. Were China (or any owner) to dump $500+ billion of Treasuries on the market in one fell swoop, the supply would exceed demand, and the likely result would be a sudden, steep rise in yields (interest rates) as the Treasury would have to raise rates to attract more capital.

12. This sudden leap up in interest rates would devastate the U.S. economy on multiple levels: real estate would tank as mortgage rates jumped, stock would become less attractive when compared to high-yielding bonds, and the holders of existing low-yield bonds would suffer massive losses in the market value of their bonds. U.S. consumers would also face higher costs of borrowing.

13. The linchpin of the "nuclear option" is the belief that China has "decoupled" from the U.S. economy and thus can risk the collapse of its exports to the U.S. as American consumers are too crimped by higher rates to buy more Chinese goods. As I showed yesterday, faith in "decoupling" is misplaced and unsupported by financial facts.

14. The other part of the "nuclear option" story is that China could express its displeasure over various political and trade issues merely by threatening to pursue the "nuclear option."

But a funny thing happened to the "nuclear option" story": American investors have absorbed almost $4 trillion in U.S. Treasuries, making domestic owners the largest holders of Treasuries. China's holdings, as vast as they are, are now a modest percentage of domestic owners--as little as 25%.

This domestic move out of equities and into Treasuries is a sea change with broad consequences. Hundreds of billions of dollars has been pulled out of U.S. equities and dumped into low-yield Treasuries. For context, recall that domestic U.S. assets (real estate, bonds, equities, and other marketable capital) is around $52 trillion.

So owning $4 trillion in Treasuries--more than all non-U.S. owners combined, including China, Japan and the Gulf Oil states--does not require that great a percentage of U.S. capital. Even if U.S. owners absorbed another $4 trillion, that would make Treasuries less than 20% of total capital.

There are limits to U.S. debt growth, however, and it is those limits which constitute "the nuclear option." The U.S. could readily absorb the entire Chinese portfolio ($1.2 trillion), but what it cannot absorb is $1.4 trillion in annual deficits, year after year. In other words, if dent is a "nuclear" weapon, the U.S. will have to set the weapon off itself by borrowing more than it can support out of national income.

If the U.S. economy melts down due to over-borrowing, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

The U.S. government has already borrowed over $3 trillion in the past two years; at that pace, the nation's debt load will quickly balloon to ujnsustainable levels. (Exactly what that level will be depends on the interest rate/yield demanded by future buyers of Treasuries.)

Ironically, perhaps, the key driver behind domestic purchases of Treasuries is the widespread disdain for stocks after two equity meltdowns in less than a single decade.

The net result of this structural change is the Chinese "nuclear option" has been reduced to a firecracker.

China's leverage has slipped along with its percentage of the total Treasury market, and with Americans' disavowal of equities as a rigged, risky market.

Which side of the trade would you rather hold: China's dwindling share of U.S. bonds, or the U.S. share of Chinese exports? Let's put it this way: if China's export market implodes and its trade surplus disappears, the central government will have trouble creating the jobs needed to maintain its power.

If China launches its "nucelar option," the market might be roiled for a short period of time, but their share of the total Treasury markets is simply too small now to be "nuclear."

Perhaps the real "nuclear option" here is the potential for the U.S. to restrict China's imports to the U.S. market. Should China's exports dry up, it will face domestic turmoil on a scale few can imagine.

Charles Hugh Smith has been an independent journalist for 22 years. His weblog, www.oftwominds.com, draws two million visits a year with unique analyses of global finance, stocks and political economy. He has written six novels and Weblogs & New Media: Marketing in Crisis and just released Survival+: Structuring Prosperity for Yourself and the Nation.




Back to homepage


Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News