Mon, May 28, 2012, 11:10 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed for Memorial Day

Fed's Low Rates Killing Credit, Slowing Recovery: Gross

The Federal Reserve's zero-interest-rate policy is hampering economic recovery by discouraging bank lending, Pimco bond titan Bill Gross said in an analysis.

For banks, a healthy lending environment exists where they can borrow at low rates in the short term and lend at significantly higher rates over the long term, a situation that creates a profit through a positively sloped yield curve .

When the slope is tighter, banks still can make money if they can count on the principal value, rather than the yield, of their bonds rising. Bond prices rise when yields fall.

In the current environment, though, near-zero rates mean less room for appreciation either way - from a steepening yield curve or in price gains that would accompany lower yields. Gross said that's holding back lending and thus preventing a more aggressive economic recovery, particularly in housing.

"Zero-bound money may kill as opposed to create credit. Developed economies where these low yields reside may suffer accordingly," Gross wrote on the Pimco Web site. "It may as well, induce inflationary distortions that give a rise to commodities and gold as store of value alternatives when there is little value left in paper.

Banks were near the bottom of stock market performers in 2011 as the industry suffered under the weights of intensified regulation, a lackluster economy and worries over contagion from the European sovereign debt crisis.

Yet the group has enjoyed a relief rally thus far in 2012 even as earnings have remained mediocre.

Roughly as many banks beat earnings estimates as missed in the previous quarter - 44 percent to 43 percent, with 13 percent meeting Wall Street expectations - though financials have underperformed the market since earnings season began, according to Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, a New-York based financial services specialist.

Banks actually reported 1 percent loan growth for the quarter, with large regionals especially aggressive. But net interest margins remain under pressure - flat for the same period last year and actually down from the previous quarter, KBW reported.

Gross said the retrenchment of banks is a troubling sign that he expects to persist well into the future as financial markets swing from one extreme to the other in terms of risk-taking.

"A 30- to 50-year virtuous cycle of credit expansion which has produced outsize paranormal returns for financial assets - bonds, stocks, real estate and commodities alike - is now delevering because of excessive 'risk' and the 'price' of money at the zero-bound," he wrote. "We are witnessing the death of abundance and the borning of austerity, for what may be a long, long time."

The most recent Fed Senior Loan Officers Survey provided mixed signals about the state of lending.

Demand, particularly from small businesses, rose - in fact, more so than the "willingness to lend" category, which grew at its slowest level in two years.

"While lending standards continue to ease, the pace of progress has been set back some," Citigroup economist Steven C. Wieting said. "Such readings don't suggest restrictions in credit supplies will weigh on economic activity outright, but that broad conditions and bank lending are not highly accommodative despite a near zero Fed funds rate."

Gross said the Fed has disincentivized lending by allowing banks to earn as much by parking their money in overnight reserves as they would in a two-year Treasury.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, according to Gross, is making "it up as he goes along in order to softly delever a credit-based financial system which became egregiously overlevered and assumed far too much risk long before his watch began."

Gross added that investors need to be alert "to the significant costs that may be ahead for a global economy and financial marketplace still functioning under the assumption that cheap and abundant central bank credit is always a positive dynamic."



More From CNBC
 

54 comments

  • Fred  •  3 months ago
    Low rates effectively redistribute money from savers to debtors. Given that the federal government is the biggest debtor in the room.....
    • Daniel 3 months ago
      Couldn't have said it any better myself.
  • Madmouse  •  Goodman, Wisconsin  •  3 months ago
    If the Fed keeps giving banks free money how will that help the small guy with a CD that doesn't pay anything and a money market that pays .005%. I only see the big guys being bailed out and of course the little guy getting the shaft. Remember Obama started with a National deficit of 10.6 billion now it is 16.2 billion and expected to go up another 1 billion by election. We cannot afford our government any longer.
    • Jeremy 3 months ago
      You mean TRILLION, not billion.
    • realityguy 3 months ago
      Don't worry the new debt is 15 trillion which is actually 0 trillion in the new american peso.
  • mactruth55  •  3 months ago
    What Gross is stumbling around trying to say is banks are doing "carry trades" with the 0% money they are getting from the FED. Gross finance 101 - Carry trade: definition, borrowing money at low rates from the FED and buying Treasury Bills/bonds, pocketing the spread. That'[s the reason banks have not been loaning to individuals. They can show a profit with little or no risk. The banks can only keep this up as long as new money is printed and released to the financial sector. Watch for QE3 or equivalent.
    You want to know why you can't get a loan well the answer is "carry trades" and neither the banks or the government care since it's not in their best interest.
    • Luck of the Draw 3 months ago
      Good info Mac, i didn't realize thats what they were doing.
  • Aggie in CA  •  Santa Clara, California  •  3 months ago
    Most of you are missing a bigger picture. These mega banks are still insolvent, despite every attempt to provide liquidity to them. They still are flush with bad loans and debts, foreclosures, and derivative bets that could sour. They are 'zombie banks'.
    They are holding onto the money constantly being sent their way via the Fed and other programs out of self-preservation and pure avarice. They would rather make quick money in the markets than to lend.
    There is real fear over Europe and other markets.
    Most of the bailouts, in all their many forms, did not stipulate that the banksters receiving the money HAD TO use it to increasing market lending for the rest of the industries. Without mandates, they just won't lend.
    The New York Times, with regards to the TARP, wrote (after surveying 2 dozen US based banks),
    "few (banks) cited lending as a priority. Further, an overwhelming majority saw the
    program as a no-strings attached windfall that could be used to pay down debt, acquire
    other businesses or invest for the future."
  • Gary J  •  Sarasota, Florida  •  3 months ago
    It would be nice if the statements by the Federal Reserve were printed in a language that 90% of North Americans understood.
  • david  •  Seattle, Washington  •  3 months ago
    Poor banks. No more zillion dollar bonuses. There go the jets and that Italian villa. These people need to get a clue. The gravy train is over.
    • john reilly 3 months ago
      No, banks are now doing what they should have been doing prior to the housing crisis, they are now making prudent business decisions.

      Too many people were getting loans who should not have been. Now banks are (wisely) asking whether or not new loans are sound business decisions. By the feds leaving rates at near zero, the banks make very little from new loans so banks are basically left with knowing the loans they now make will produce little int he way of profit but they runt he risk of individuals defaulting on the loans. Once they have decided the risk (default on the loans) outweighs the possible reward (a very minor profit) they don't go forward with the loans. That's an appropriate business decision.
  • J  •  3 months ago
    Or course, the Fed isn't really concerned about the economy. Their only concern: enriching the banking cartel.
  • Luck of the Draw  •  3 months ago
    It also kills interest bearing investments. Banks are hoarding the stimulus cash and not lending it out. No profit in it.
  • Aggie in CA  •  Santa Clara, California  •  3 months ago
    The marketeers, including the banksters, will cry the blues no matter what.

    We need a lot more information about the activities of the Fed in this whole debacle, also. It would appear that the Federal Reserve is out of control from everything I read, and I started with an neutral opinion on the matter. We need to see more from the reports on Fed activities that were released in 2010. Congress needs to rein in Bernanke NOW.

    Take a real good look at the Fed's TALF program, initiated in November 2008. TALF money didn't originate from the US Treasury, so the program did not require congressional approval. TALF sprang into being after it became apparent that few banks would PUBLICALLY downgrade toxic holdings via TARP and PPIP.
    Please explain to me where the $1 trillion for the program came from and how it effects the American taxpayers.
    It took an act of Congress to force the Fed to reveal how it spent the money.
  • johngol  •  Waterbury, Connecticut  •  3 months ago
    0% is helping wall st and wall st only...it is choking the middle class with high inflation which also means we have less money to spend elsewhere
  • Kaos  •  Plainfield, Connecticut  •  3 months ago
    I've been harping on this for a few years now. People that have money could actually get more money to spend through higher rates. Banks would get more money to lend also people could actually make dime or two through bank accounts. Retired folks would have more income.
    This affects most regular folks even lower class folks that try and save. It gives incentives to save too. Low rates benefit nobody but big banks that make money buying treasuries.
  • william  •  3 months ago
    One side tells us to save more, pay off debt, and buy less. If we do that we get 0% on our savings, there is no demand for goods, and no new hiring. If we stop saving and spend more, we may create more jobs but we won't have anything to live on in retirement or if we get layed off. The only solution seems to be to die young and not worry about the future.
  • Franklin  •  3 months ago
    Many people won't try to buy a house until they see interest rates moving up - Since we have been told that interest will stay very low through 2014, and housing prices are still dropping in many areas , it pays to sit on the fence and wait.
  • Lou  •  New Orleans, Louisiana  •  3 months ago
    Dr. Is it gonna hurt?
  • Steve T.  •  3 months ago
    Gross's comments about Treasuries a year ago was in hindsight considered the worst call of 2011, and, many say, the worst call in many years. Why would anyone give his opinion any credibility after that? I'm no fan of Bernanke, but Bill Gross have proven himself to be one big doofus. If you'd taken his advice a year ago it would have cost you a bundle.
  • David E.  •  Lenexa, Kansas  •  3 months ago
    Bernanke is keeping the rates low to re-capitalize the big banks who the FED failed to regulate while they were out taking excessive risks. How this man who is taking the medicine and food out of the mouths of responsible retired savers can sleep is beyond me
  • MichaelM  •  Seattle, Washington  •  3 months ago
    Finally someone in a respectable position that is stating the obvious that most Keynsian economists don't understand. It translates to Ben Bernanke is an idiot and should be fired. Low interest rates are also a disincentive to save and saving is the engine of the economy.
  • Adam Smith, Jr.  •  Boston, Massachusetts  •  3 months ago
    The Federal Government, overall, is a ball-and-chain on the leg of the US economy. Low rates are killing insurance companies, pensions, and individual savings. But those are tomorrow's problems. Time to kick another can.
  • shomesuvra  •  Kolkata, India  •  3 months ago
    Small scale sector should form clusters to get loan from banks. Banks' NIMs can be compensated if the cost of fund is low through credit expansion.Quality of assets is also important.
  • Appletree  •  3 months ago
    "A 30- to 50-year virtuous cycle of credit expansion which has produced outsize paranormal returns for financial assets - bonds, stocks, real estate and commodities alike - is now delevering because of excessive 'risk' and the 'price' of money at the zero-bound," he wrote. "We are witnessing the death of abundance and the borning of austerity, for what may be a long, long time." In other words: The (efficient) market is correcting and the Fed is powerless to stop it.
Loading...
 
Recent Quotes
Symbol Price Change % Chg 
Your most recently viewed tickers will automatically show up here if you type a ticker in the "Enter symbol/company" at the bottom of this module.
You need to enable your browser cookies to view your most recent quotes.
 
Sign-in to view quotes in your portfolios.

Yahoo! Finance on Facebook

  YAHOO! FINANCE ON TWITTER