Saturday, May 4, 2013

4/5/2013: Corporate tax rate Laffer Curve


A very interesting, albeit not too rigorous (econometrically) exercise on the relationship between corporate tax rates and corporate tax revenues (the Laffer Curve):
http://alephblog.com/2013/05/03/on-the-laffer-curve-regarding-marginal-corporate-tax-rates/

Worth a read.

Top of the line conclusion: ex-Norway, "...at a 5% level of significance, the equation is significant, with a prob-value of 1.4%, and all but one of the coefficients are significant, and the coefficient on the squared term has a prob value of 11.6%. The signs all go the right way, and the intercept is near zero."

So: "It looks like there is some validity to the idea that as marginal corporate tax rates rise, so do corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP, until the taxes get too high. I didn’t test anything else.  With both equations we learn two ideas:
  • The tax take tops out at a 30% marginal rate
  • You don’t give up much if you set the marginal rate at 20%"


Friday, May 3, 2013

3/5/2013: Basel 2.5 can lead to increased liquidity & contagion risks


Banca d'Italia research paper No. 159, "Basel 2.5: potential benefits and unintended consequences" (April 2013) by Giovanni Pepe looks at the Basel III framework from the risk-weighting perspective. Under previous Basel rules, since 1996, "…the Basel risk-weighting regime has been based on the distinction between the trading and the
banking book. For a long time credit items have been weighted less strictly if held in the trading book, on the assumption that they are easy to hedge or sell."

Alas, the assumption of lower liquidity risks associated with assets held on trading book proved to be rather faulty. "The Great Financial Crisis made evident that banks declared a trading intent on positions that proved difficult or impossible to sell quickly. The Basel 2.5 package was developed in 2009 to better align trading and banking books’ capital treatments." Yet, the question remains as to whether the Basel 2.5 response is adequate to properly realign risk pricing for liquidity risk, relating to assets held on trading book.

"Working on a number of hypothetical portfolios [the study shows] that the new rules fell short of reaching their target and instead merely reversed the incentives. A model bank can now achieve a material capital saving by allocating its credit securities to the banking book [as opposed to the trading book], irrespective of its real intention or capability of holding them until maturity. The advantage of doing so is particularly pronounced when the incremental investment increases the concentration profile of the trading book, as usually happens for exposures towards banks’ home government. Moreover, in these cases trading book requirements are exposed to powerful cliff-edge
effects triggered by rating changes."

In the nutshell, Basel 2.5 fails to get the poor quality assets risks properly priced and instead created incentives for the banks to shift such assets to the different section of the balance sheet. The impact of this is to superficially inflate values of sovereign debt (by reducing risk-weighted capital requirements on these assets). Added effect of this is that Basel 2.5 inadvertently increases the risk of sovereign-bank-sovereign contagion cycle.

The paper is available at: http://www.bancaditalia.it/pubblicazioni/econo/quest_ecofin_2/qef159/QEF_159.pdf

3/5/2013: Irish Employment in Services & Manufacturing: April PMIs

On foot of both NCB Manufacturing PMI and NCB Services PMI for Ireland for April 2013, let's take a look at underlying employment conditions signals from the two core sectors of the economy.

From the top:

Manufacturing and Services PMI readings continued to diverge in April for the 5th consecutive month, with headline PMI readings for:

  • Manufacturing PMI falling to 48.0 in April from 48.6 in March marking the second consecutive monthly sub-50 reading. 12mo MA is now at 51.3 and Q1 2013 average is at 50.1 so things are moving South for Manufacturing in recent months.
  • Services PMI rising to 55.2 in April from 52.3 in March. 12mo MA is at 53.3 and Q1 2013 average is 54.2, implying PMI readings moving North for Services in recent months.
These trends in overall PMI readings were broadly repeated in the Employment sub-index dynamics:
  • Employment index for Manufacturing slipped to 46.9 in which is significantly below 50.0 and marks second consecutive month of declines and sub-50 readings. In the last 6 months, index declined 4 times, but was below 50.0 only in two months. 12mo MA is at 51.3, but Q1 2013 average is 50.1 and this comes after 52.0 average for Q4 2012. So things are sliding and sliding rather fast.
  • Employment index for Services, in contrast, posted a robust increase in April to 55.2 from 52.3 in March. April marked ninth consecutive month of employment increases being signaled by Services PMI, which is a good strong trend. Thus, 12mo MA is at robust 53.3 and Q1 2013 average is at 54.2 - a slower rate of growth on Q4 2012 average of 56.0, but statistically significant growth nonetheless.
Tables detailing employment indices changes below:
Manufacturing:
Services:

Now for the reminder: Employment in Services has far less tangible connection to actual sector activity than Employment in Manufacturing, with volatility-adjusted 1 point increase in respective headline PMI implying 0.67 units increase in employment index in Services against 0.87 units rise in manufacturing employment index over historical data horizons:
Click on the chart to see in detail the overall dynamics y/y for April in employment and PMI indices, clearly showing the switch between Services and Manufacturing in terms of the sectors' position relative to economic recovery. If in 2011 Services were a drag on growth and employment, while Manufacturing was experiencing strong gains, by 2013 Services became the core driver for positive momentum in both growth and employment, with Manufacturing pushing economic activity and employment down.

3/5/2013: Not a week goes by without a Tax Haven Ireland story?


More from the 'Tax Haven Island' newsflow, with a second story this week: "US firms paid an average tax rate of 8% profits in Ireland"
http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2013/0503/390280-us-corporations-tax/

I wonder if Michelle Obama's rumoured trip to Ireland will include a visit to such sunny tax haven locations as Barrow St, Dublin 2, or IFSC...


To track my posts on Irish Corporate Tax Haven, follow this link : http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2013/05/252013-news-from-irish-tax-haven.html

Hat tip to:

Updated 08/05/2013: Two new links on the same subject:
and
Hat tip to: 

3/5/2013: Irish Services PMI April 2013: Some good, some make-believe news


For a change from the declining fortunes of Irish manufacturing (aka, production of at least some real tangible stuff by humans, albeit richly peppered with tax arbitrage), the accounting trick called Irish Services (aka, billing of services sold in Mongolia to Dublin by companies minimising tax exposures in the US) is booming.

Good news for GDP. Good or bad news (depending on capex cycle and financial engineering - as exhibited by Apple 'bond' offer this week, etc) for GNP. Even better news for the Government solemnly incapable of supporting growth at home, and thus solely reliant on Mongolian demand for 'Irish' services and Obama administration lag in realising that another corporate tax amnesty is long overdue (note to the White House: check out Ireland's IFSC deposits).

Latest NCB Services PMI for Ireland published today show continued expansion in Services sector:

  • Headline Services PMI rose from 52.3 in March to 55.2 in April - statistically significantly above 50.0 for the first time since January 2013. This marks ninth consecutive monthly reading above 50.0, and sixth time the index is above 50 with statistically significant margin.
  • Good news: this time around there was significant growth signaled in Transport, Travel, Tourism & Leisure sector (potentially due to twin effects of The Gathering and the EU Presidency - which should really count as subsidy activities this year). However, another significant driver in upside growth were Financial Services (aka IFSC). Business Services and Technology, Media & Telecoms services both recorded moderation in the rate of growth, as signaled by PMI.
  • On dynamics side, 12mo MA through April 2013 for Business Activity headline index now stands at 53.3, with 3mo average at 53.7. Both are below 3mo average through January 2013 which stood at 56.2, so there is still some slowdown in the rate of growth. Latest 3mo average is ahead of same period 3mo averages for 2010-2012.



Per last chart above, 
  • New Business sub-index remained practically unchanged at 54.2 in April, compared to March (54.1) with both months posting reading statistically above 50.0 - which is good news.
  • On dynamics side, 12mo MA was at 53.7 in April 2013 - a healthy reading, with 3mo MA through April 2013 almost bang on at 12mo average level of activity at 53.8. Previous 3mo average through January 2013 was at blistering 56.5, so there is some marked slowdown in the rate of growth. Nonetheless, last 3 months marked the fastest growth for the same three months period for any year since 2010.
  • April 2013 was the ninth consecutive month of New Business sub-index readings above 50.0, with seven of these months posting readings statistically significantly above 50.0.
I will blog separately on employment and profitability in both services and manufacturing so stay tuned for details on these.

Business confidence and New Export Business sub-indices both showed some slowdown in growth, but still remain in rude health. On foot of this, employment growth rate improved:


Overall, sarcasm aside, the Services sectors continued to support economic growth, even though much of this growth is coming from the make-believe tax arbitrage stuff. Still, better have make-believe dosh than none at all. And a welcomed reprieve from the past years' trials for the Travel & Toursim sector too.

One note of caution, though: Irish Services PMI have little to do with Irish Services actual activity levels... see here: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2013/04/742013-irish-services-activity-index.html

Thursday, May 2, 2013

2/5/2013: ECB's message: "don't let the bed bugs bite..."



In light of today's 'historic' decision by the ECB to lower its refinancing rate to 0.50% from 0.75%, let's just not get too excited, folks.

Consider the historical perspective:

1) ECB rates are low. By ECB-own standards. But they are not low by pretty much anyone else's standards, save for countries, like Canada and Australia, which didn't really have a Great Recession. At least not yet.



2) ECB rates are low today, but they will be higher one day:


And when they do get to those averages, oh… the bond markets valuations are going to fly out of the window (leaving big black holes in banks balance sheets and pension funds assets ledgers), while equities are going to also suffer risk-repricing away from current dizzying expectations. Meanwhile, mortgages and credit costs will rise and rise faster than the ECB rates for 2 reasons: (a) legacy margins rebuilding that is not even started yet, and (b) see 'black hole' on the bonds valuations side. So when we do start heading toward that green dashed line (and above, as ECB averages are above that green line), things are going to go South fast.

3) And the ramp up back to the mean will have to be sustained and drastic:


We are clearly in an unconventional period when it comes to mean reversion. In all previous episodes, mean reversion took at most 40 months of deviation from the mean to deliver on (red lines). This time around we are already into month 53 and counting. The longer the duration of deviation, the greater the imbalance built up as the blue line above clearly shows.

Based on average overshooting of the mean in each reversion episode, we are currently 1.79 percentage points away from the mean target and are likely to see additional 1.71 percentage points overshooting of the target on adjustment, which means that the direction we are heading toward, if previous history of ECB rates were to be our guide (very imperfect, I must add) is 0.5%+1.79%+1.71%=4.0%

Close your eyes and imagine your mortgage bill with:
1) ECB rate at 4.0% and
2) Bank margin on ECB rate of x2 at least of pre-crisis levels.

Now, good luck sleeping.

But, hey, for now, there's more room for ECB to 'ease'…


And yet… things are already bad enough… ECB is running policy at massively above the G3 average rates and there is no real relief to the euro area economy in sight.

So what is really going on? My quick comment for Express today:

"ECB's 25 bps cut in the refinancing rate is the central bank's de facto admission of the limitations to its ability to have a meaningful impact on the ground, in the real economy. Let's start from the diagnosis. With previous rate cuts failing to stimulate credit flows and private sector investment, it is now painfully obvious that the euro area economy is suffering from a structural crisis, not a cyclical or a liquidity crisis.  going into today's rates decision the ECB had really just three choices: 1) Do nothing and keep pressure on the Euro area governments to introduce and implement real structural reforms, 2) Do marginally little to sustain some outward expression of monetary activism, and 3) Do something big to attempt unfreezing both demand and supply of credit. The latter would have entailed a cut in the refinancing rate of 70 basis points and setting up an LTRO- like 3- to 5- years programme for lending against collaterilised business and household loans. It would have been risky, but it would have stood a chance of possibly shifting increasing significantly new credit creation. even more dramatic would have been a programme for indefinite financing of the weaker banks - a super-LTRO - set against explicit targets for their writing down of some SMEs and household loans.

That, in the end, ECB has opted for the second option of providing token expressions of accommodative monetary policy using largely weak tools, speaks volumes about the ECB's inherent legal dilemma. The ECB is facing the problem of a structural crisis in the economy, while being armed with a mandate that forces it to explicitly ignore the real economy. Thus, as the result of the crisis, the ECB has consistently traded-down the reputational curve by continuously deploying 'extraordinary' measures of ever-increasing complexity, which are having little real impact in the private economy. ECB's most-lauded OMT, for example, has had zero positive effect outside the Government bonds markets. In short, much of what ECB is doing is providing backstop insurance for the crisis amplification, but little actual means for dealing with the crisis itself.

As the result, ECB's monetary policy decisions of late can be best viewed in the prism of the EUR foreign exchange rates and European stockmarkets valuations. Liquidity supply into the financial channels that are trapped outside the real economy so far have meant firming up of the euro and increased speculative inflows into European equities that stand contrasted with both the fortunes of the euro area economies and the realities of the European companies earnings. Today's decision simply reinforces this trend. yet, as the recent years have shown, the divergence between financial markets valuations and the real economic activity is the sign of systemic malfunctioning in the monetary, fiscal and economic environments. This is exactly the road down which we are traveling, guided by the ECB Governing Council."

And my tongue-in-cheek top of the line conclusion? "ECB's Council throws a wet napkin at Euro area's economic Chernobyl and rests for lunch… breathless from exhaustion..."

So for all of us in the eurozone, tune in at 00:59:
http://www.anyclip.com/movies/despicable-me/beddie-bye/#!quotes/

2/4/2013: MDH: Do as I imagine... not as I say or do...


So Irish President Michael D. Higgins has called for a “radical rethink” of the “single hegemonic model”, adding that a “pluralism of approaches” is needed in Europe. He also called for a more active ECB and debt pooling in the eurozone.

wait, what's that? Another statement of plausibly sounding populism with underlying internal contradictions so deep, the whole thing makes no sense? Well, yes.

MDH wants more 'pluralism' in policies then calls for 'more active ECB debt pooling' - which of course is anti-pluralist centralisation of policy. Oh, well, if only MDH actually had an idea what he speaks about beyond the cliches of 'bad capitalism, bad, bad, bad'.

And then to add a  self-insult to his self-injury. MDH penned his name to the IBRC bill which converts promissory notes (the 'pluralist' in nature instrument of quasi-governmental debt) into government bonds (the 'centralised' in nature instrument of pure sovereign liability standardised across all countries).

Is MDH no longer a 'do as I say, not as I do' leader but a 'do as I imagine, not as I say or do' leader?

2/5/2013: Gravy, door, windows... JobBridge

Here's something that can be described as a pricey exemplification of the 'Only in Ireland' policy approach to public institutions:
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/consultant-report-into-controversial-jobbridge-scheme-recommends-more-reports-29236030.html

That's right: JobBridge 'internships' scheme (or rather 'free labour for few months' scam concocted by the Government to register further 'improvements' in 'labour costs competitiveness') has been assessed by the public sector captive research outfit Indecon (aka ESRI Junior).

And the conclusion of the already pricey report is that we need more and even pricier reports.

Gravy flooding through the door is apparently not enough... need windows access too...

2/5/2013: Austerity... savagely over-hyped?..


It was May 1 yesterday and in celebration of that great socialist holiday, "In Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy and France tens of thousands of people took to the streets to demand jobs and an end to years of belt-tightening".

Except, no one really asked them what did the mean by 'belt-tightening'. Some, correctly, meant by the term the concept of transfers from taxpayers (usually via higher taxes, rather than spending cuts) to the broken banks, but majority, undoubtedly, we decrying cuts in Government spending. You see, damned austerity is just that (or supposed to be just that): cuts in the levels of expenditure. These can mean reduction in absolute level of spending, or a reduction in spending as a proportion of GDP.

And, you see, not much of that is going on in Europe nowdays, despite all the fierce rhetoric about savage cuts.

Ok, let's do some exercises, using IMF data.

First, consider tax revenues:


In the chart above, I marked with darker columns countries where tax revenues as % of GDP have declined during the current crisis (more precisely, taking average tax revenues fior 2003-2007 pre-crisis boom days and comparing against 2012 outrun). Guess what?
  • In % of GDP terms, savage austerity meant that Government revenues have declined by less than 1 percentage point in Cyprus (-0.89 ppt), Czech Republic (-0.64 ppt) and Portugal (-0.08 ppt), the revenues have fallen by between 1 and 2 percentage points in Ireland (-1.26 ppt) and the UK (-1.68 ppt) and have declined by more than 2 percentage points in Denmark (-2.50 ppt), Spain (-3.28 ppt) and Sweden (-3.15 ppt).
  • All in, only 8 out of the 20 EU countries considered above (these are all advanced economies of the EU, excluding Luxembourg, where data is so dodgy, no meaningful analysis can be made) have managed to post any declines in Government revenues relative to GDP. All other countries have posted increases. Overall, sample average Government revenues as % of GDP stood at 43.04% in 2003-207 period and this has risen to 43.84% in 2012.
  • Now, onto levels of revenues. The sample of countries shown above had combined annual Government revenues of EUR7,791.61 billion in 2003-2007 on average. In 2012 this number stood at a 17.96% premium or EUR9,190.96 billion.
  • Of all 20 countries considered, only one - Ireland - had experienced level reduction in Government revenues, which dropped from an annual average of EUR57.896 billion in 2003-2007 period to EUR55.42 billion in 2012.
  • As I said above, there is only one meaningful form of austerity in Europe today: austerity of higher tax burdens on people.
Now, let's check out expenditure side of Europe's 'savage austerity' story:


Again, chart above highlights in darker color countries where Government expenditure had declined in 2012 compared to 2003-2007 pre-crisis average in % of GDP terms. The picture hardly shows much of any 'savage cuts' anywhere in sight:
  • Of the three countries that experienced reductions in Government spending as % of GDP compared to the pre-crisis period, Germany posted a decline of 1.26 percentage points (from 46.261% of GDP average for 2003-2007 period to 45.005% for 2012), Malta posted a reduction of just 0.349 ppt and Sweden posted a reduction of 1.37 ppt.
  • No peripheral country - where protestes are the loudest - or France et al have posted a reduction. In France, Government spending rose 3.44 ppt on pre-crisis level as % of GDP, in Greece by 4.76 ppt, in Ireland by 7.74 ppt, in Italy by 2.773 ppt, in Portugal by 0.562 ppt, and in Spain by 8.0 ppt.
  • Average Government spending in the sample in the pre-crisis period run at 44.36% of GDP and in 2012 this number was 48.05% of GDP. In other words: it went up, not down.
  • In level terms, things are even uglier for the 'anti-austerians'. Total (for this sample of countries) Government annual spending averaged EUR8,002 billion in 2003-2004 period and this rose to EUR9,941 billion in 2012 a rise in Government spending of whooping 24.2%.
  • In level terms, not a single country in the sample of 20 advanced EU economies posted a decline in Government spending from the pre-crisis period to 2012. All posted increases in overall spending ranging between 88% for Estonia, to 7.76% for Portugal. Of all peripheral countries, not one cut a single cent on 2003-20007 average spending levels, with Cyprus hiking spending by whooping 39.8% in 2012 compared to 2003-2007 averages, France delivering a massive increase of 24.9%, Greece raising it modestly by 8.73%, Ireland by a massive 22.01%, Italy by a relatively benign 14.67%, Portugal by the sample lowest rate of 7.76% and Spain by a jaw-dropping 38.67%.
  • All in, there is no 'savage austerity' in spending levels or as % of GDP.
So what is going on, folks? May be we can find austerity in deficits? Afterall, Paul Krugman & Co are telling us that we need to run deficits in the economy during recessions and this is the leitmotif to all of the anti-austerian policies proposals?

Savage austerity thesis must find at least a significantly large number of countries where there is no deficit financing going on during the crisis compared to pre-crisis activity, or at least a very large number of countries where deficits have declined compared to pre-crisis activity. Is that the case?


Sorry to say it, folks, errr... No. That is not the case.
  • Only three countries in the entire sample of 20 have posted decreases in Government deficits in level and as 5 of GDP terms.
  • In level terms, deficits declined in Germany, Italy and Malta. They rose in all other countries. Overall level of deficits in 20 countries analysed rose from EUR40.07 billion in 2003-2007 (annual averages) to EUR127.79 billion in 2012. In other words, during 'savage austerity' deficits tripled, not shrunk.
  • In terms of relative weight to GDP, deficits also declined only in three countries - the same three countries as above. 
  • Savage austerity meant that deficits increased in all peripheral states save Italy and that across 20 economies, whereas average deficit stood at -1.315% of GDP in 2003-2007 period, that rose to -4.215% of GDP in 2012.
 
As I said above, there are really two reasons for protesting in Europe today against what can very loosely be termed 'austerity':
  1. As taxpayers we should protest against higher taxes & charges levied against us by the States to pay for various banks rescue measures and for continued public spending inefficiencies and private sector subsidies (note: I am not saying that all public sector spending is inefficient, I am alleging that some of it remains inefficient today); and
  2. As taxpayers and residents we should protest about misallocation of scarce resources (including some public spending) from necessities (e.g. social welfare and unemployment protection, health, education, etc) to rescuing insolvent banks and corporate cronies.
Aside from the above reasons, please spare yourselves the blind belief in various Social Partners-produced spin about 'savage cuts'. All they care for is to increase even more state spending on their pet projects.

2/5/2013: News from the Irish Tax Haven Central... Barrow St, D2

Given our Manufacturing PMI released today, things have to be looking sour when it comes to Irish GDP and GNP for Q1-Q2 2013. But, as always, never mind. In reality, Irish manufacturing is no longer the core driver of the economy. Instead, making stuff in Ireland (even if it was done for tax purposes with la-la-land accounting for value added) is now surpassed by billing revenues into Ireland by the services exporters, like Google.

Of course, the latter activity is also driven by tax arbitrage. And it is booming. So much so, that we now have a weekly international media instalment labeling Ireland a tax haven for services exporting MNCs.

Here's the latest one http://mobilebeta.reuters.com/special-report-how-google-uk-clouds-its-tax

And should you want to trace more stories on the same subject of Ireland as tax haven, here is the link to start with (keep tracing posted links): http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2013/04/2742013-news-from-irish-corporate-tax.html

2/5/2013: Microfinance: not really working all too well?


In recent years, there has been some new evidence emerging on the negative aspects of microfinance - the darling of many development quangos. Here's an interesting study showing that, basically, the entire concept might not be working all too well.

"The Miracle of Microfinance? Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation" by Abhijit V. Banerjee, Esther Duflo, Rachel Glennerster and Cynthia Kinnan (April 10, 2013, MIT Department of Economics Working Paper No. 13-09, available http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2250500) carried out "the first randomized evaluation of the impact of introducing the standard microcredit group-based lending product in a new market. In 2005, half of 104 slums in Hyderabad, India were randomly selected for opening of a branch of a particular microfinance institution (Spandana) while the remainder were not, although other MFIs were free to enter those slums."

Core findings from the experiment?

"Fifteen to 18 months after Spandana began lending in treated areas, households were 8.8 percentage points more likely to have a microcredit loan."

However, despite having more credit, households in treated areas "were no more likely to start any new business, although they were more likely to start several at once, and they invested more in their existing businesses."

Did consumption improve due to availability of microfinance? "There was no effect on average monthly expenditure per capita. Expenditure on durable goods increased in treated areas, while expenditures on “temptation goods” declined."

What about longer-term effects? "Three to four years after the initial expansion (after many of the control slums had started getting credit from Spandana and other MFIs ), the probability of borrowing from an MFI in treatment and comparison slums was the same, but on average households in treatment slums had been borrowing for longer and in larger amounts." In other words, availability of credit did not improve due to presence of microfinance lenders in terms of access to credit, but credit did increase for those who have borrowed.

Again, consumption did not improve and neither did the quality of enterprises started in the microfinance covered areas. "Consumption was still no different in treatment areas, and the average business was still no more profitable, although we find an increase in profits at the top end."

Top of the line conclusion? "We found no changes in any of the development outcomes that are often believed to be affected by microfinance, including health, education, and women’s empowerment. The results of this study are largely consistent with those of four other evaluations of similar programs in different contexts."

Much hype has been expanded on microfinance over the years, including a Nobel Prize award and UN and other multinational organisations cheerleading. Subsidies have been lavished on some lenders, while other lenders have gotten off to stock exchange listings on foot of 'doing good' by microlending. Yet, newer evidence continues to emerge that not all is happy in the microfinance world.

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

1/5/2013: Not pretty and getting uglier: Irish Manufacturing PMI April 2013

Another unpleasant print of NCB Manufacturing PMI for Ireland was out today, marking broad-based, deepening contraction for the second month in a row and for the third month in last four.

Here are top figures:


Overall Manufacturing PMI declined to 48.0 in April 2013 from 48.6 in March, marking second consecutive monthly fall and reaching the lowest level since September 2011. It is worth noting that the current reading is statistically significantly below 50.0, but that the last two months of decline came on foot of 12 months of consecutive expansions through February 2013. Nonetheless, 3mo average through April 2013 is now down to 49.4 against 3mo average through January 2013 at 51.4, and current 3 mo period marks the lowest average reading compared to same period 2010-2012.


Overall, recovery was short, shallow and predominantly trending down, with most significant sub-indicators now below 50. As chart above shows:

  • Output index contracted sharply from already statistically significant contraction of 48.1 in March 2013 to 46.5 in April. 3mo average through April is at 48.6, with April reading being the lowest recorded since August 2009 and previous 3mo periods average through January 2013 at 52.2, a 3mo average swing of massive 5.7 points. Current 3mo average is the lowest (and the only one below 50) for any same-period reading from 2010 through 2013.
  • New Orders sub-index fell to 48.4 from 49.1 in March, with 3mo average through April at 49.4, below 3mo average through January 2013 at 50.8. New Orders are currently running at the fastest rate of contraction since January 2012.
  • New Export Orders index posted slower rate of contraction at 49.2 in April, compared to brisk decline of 47.6 recorded in March 2013. 3mo average through April 2013 is at 49.0 against 3mo average through January 2013 at 52.2. In Q1 2013, New Export Orders index was running on average at 49.53, so the current index reading signals continued slowdown on the Q1 already poor showing, same as with New Orders sub-index.
Structurally over time, both New Orders and New Export Orders are on downward momentum sub-50 and are seeking confirmation to the downside:


Input prices and output prices are trending down, but inputs are still inflating, while outputs are still deflating, which means profit margins continue to shrink, albeit at moderating pace, compared to March 2013:


Of course, profit margins here are relative, since much of our Manufacturing PMI is skewed to reflect MNCs activities. These activities - as I wrote before - are predominantly on transfer pricing side, so booking higher inputs costs against lower output costs improves tax arbitrage.

In the chart above, Employment sub-index posted a worrying two-months consecutive slip:

  • Employment sub-index fell to 46.9 in April from already steeply contractionary 47.2 in March. April marks the lowest sub-index reading since September 2011. 3mo average through April is at 48.9 against 3mo average through January at 52.1 and Q1 average of 49.8. Reminder: Q3 and Q4 2012 saw employment sub-index averaging 52.8 and 52.9 respectively, which implies a swing of 5.9 points to April 2013 from the end of 2012.

Lastly, my own Composite Current and Forward indices, re-weighting exports contributions and profitability conditions into overall PMI:

  • Composite Current conditions indicator fell to 47.2 in April from 48.3 in March, with April reading statistically significantly below 50.0. The deterioration is broad on 3mo average basis and quarterly averages basis. The index is now at the lowest reading since August 2009!
  • Composite Forward conditions indicator posted another (second consecutive) monthly contraction at 48.8 in April, which is marginally shallower than 48.4 contraction in March 2013. The reason for this is that the index is clearly tracking some of the forward activity, suggesting that conditions will ease slightly in months to come, but will remain in the 'negative headwinds'.


With both Current and Forward Composite Indices tracing close to (and even breaking) the lower bound of statistical significance, Irish Manufacturing activity seems to be heading for some rougher seas in months ahead. Granted, volatility can easily return things back above 50, but the dynamics overall are not pretty.