|
One of the statistics
complied by the International Monetary Fund is the quantity
of gold owned by the world’s central banks. That weight is
reported to be 32,291 tonnes of gold. Most people accept this
number at face value and without questioning its accuracy.
However, central banks actually own less gold.
In reality central
banks own 32,291 tonnes of gold AND gold receivables. This
distinction is important. From both a legal and an accounting
point of view, gold in the vault is clearly very different
from gold owed to you. The reason is that gold in the vault
is much less risky than someone’s promise to pay you gold.
This distinction
between these two unlike assets is one of the most basic principles
of accounting, namely, that cash is different from a receivable.
For this reason, cash and accounts receivable appear as two
different line items on balance sheets prepared according
to generally accepted accounting principles. But some central
banks do not report their gold assets using these sound and
well-established accounting standards.
For example,
the Bundesbank discloses in its 2002 annual report that it
has €36,208 million of "Gold and gold receivables".
It further sustains the fiction that these two different assets
are one asset by stating in the footnotes to its financial
statements: "At the end of 2002 the Bank's holdings of
fine gold amounted to 111 million ounces." The Bundesbank
does not, however, state anywhere in its annual report what
portion of its gold is stored in vaults and what portion has
been removed from the vault and placed at risk by being loaned.
Another central
bank with a large gold asset is the Banca d’Italia. According
to its 2001 annual report, which is the latest report available:
"Monetary gold reserves were 48.1 trillion lire (EUR
24.8 billion, or $21.9 billion)." One would think from
this statement that this "gold reserve" is sitting
safely in secure vaults, as a reserve. But this central bank
too has been withdrawing gold from the vault and placing it
at risk. Its balance sheet also records "Gold and gold
receivables", and like the Bundesbank, it fails to disclose
how much of its gold has been loaned.
In contrast to
these reports by the German and Italian central banks, the
annual report of the Banque de France shows that none of its
gold has been loaned. There is no gold receivable reported
by it, so none of its gold has been placed at risk by being
loaned.
There is also
a third category of reporting. The Swiss National Bank, for
example, uses generally accepted accounting principles to
prepare its financial statements. Not only does it disclose
that 254.7 tonnes of its 1,661.9 tonnes have been loaned,
it provides information to assess the level of risk. For example,
158.7 tonnes were loaned on an unsecured basis.
Another central
bank that discloses its gold lending is Banco de Portugal.
According to its latest annual report, it has removed from
the vault and placed at risk 434.1 tonnes of its 606.7 tonnes,
or 71.6%, which is relatively much greater than the percentage
of gold placed at risk by the Swiss National Bank, which is
15.3%.
Accordingly,
there is no question that some central bank gold has been
removed from vaults and loaned into the market. But because
the level of reporting by the central banks is inadequate,
it has been impossible to precisely determine the exact weight
of gold removed from central bank vaults. This unknown weight
of gold has become one of the most contentious issues within
the gold industry. And the debate that has arisen as a result
is well warranted.
If gold is removed
from a vault and sold into the market, this dishoarding obviously
will have an impact on gold’s rate of exchange to the dollar
and other currencies. This result from dishoarding is a basic
principle of economics, but with a twist. An adaptation is
necessary in a post-Gold Standard world to account for the
fact that national currencies are no longer directly tied
to gold.
Economic models
prove that the extension of credit debases a currency, which
is a principle that is true for any money, whether dollars,
euros or gold. However, because goods and services are today
priced in terms of national currencies – all of which are
fiat and are only exchangeable for but not redeemable into
gold – the impact of credit extensions in gold is different
than the impact of credit extensions in national currencies.
When credit is
pumped up using a national currency, it’s a process that usually
results in inflation; the prices of goods and services rise.
The new extensions of credit increase the supply of the national
currency, and if this growth in supply is greater than the
demand for the currency (which has always been the case since
the abandonment of the last remnants of the Gold Standard
in 1971), the currency loses purchasing power. In other words,
it is debased, and that debasement is reflected by rising
prices. Each unit of currency purchases less and less. However,
goods and services are no longer priced in terms of gold,
so gold credit extensions have a different result on gold’s
purchasing power.
If gold credit
extensions are greater than the demand for gold, it is debased,
and like national currencies, it’s purchasing power declines.
But because goods and services are priced in national currencies,
gold’s debasement is manifested by a decrease in its exchange
rate, or to put it in the terms commonly used, the ‘gold price’
falls. In other words, gold when debased in this way purchases
less national-currency-denominated goods and services. Thus,
it is clear from this analysis that it is important to know
how much central bank gold has been loaned, so that these
credit extensions can be analyzed to assess their impact on
gold’s rate of exchange – the so-called ‘gold price’ – compared
to the many national currencies.
In recent years
several efforts have been made to overcome the inadequate
reporting of central banks in order to determine the weight
of gold dishoarded from their vaults. Many people continue
to accept the results prepared by Gold Fields Mineral Services,
which have generally stated that around 5,000 tonnes have
been removed from central bank vaults. However, I dismiss
this number because GFMS surveys do not capture the weight
of gold borrowed by commercial banks to fund their national
currency assets, and my assessment is that this weight of
gold represents the largest portion of gold loaned out by
central banks.
Consequently,
I have relied upon the work completed by Frank Veneroso and
Reg Howe. Both of them have used a different methodology to
reach basically the same conclusion, namely, that some 15,000
tonnes of gold have been removed from central bank vaults
through lending and other forms of credit extension, such
as swaps.
Frank Veneroso
determined this number from a supply-and-demand perspective
using various historical analyses, levels of economic activity
and other statistics. His most recent report, Gold Derivatives,
Gold Lending,Official Management Of The Gold Price And The
Current State of the Gold Market, has been posted by GATA
at http://www.gata.org/Veneroso1202.html
Reg Howe has concluded
that the weight was 15,000 tonnes by analyzing the derivative
activity of banks that is reported by the Bank for International
Settlements. See the article posted on his website, Gold
Derivatives: Moving towards Checkmate http://www.goldensextant.com/commentary23.html#anchor19855
Both of these
reports are exceptional. The analysis of each is clear and
thorough, and it is noteworthy that their conclusion from
two entirely different approaches reinforces each report’s
accuracy. But for a while I have been wondering whether there
might be a third way to reach this same 15,000 tonnes conclusion.
From time to
time, I have attempted to analyze the flow of gold leaving
central bank vaults, but have been thwarted by insufficient
information. Some banks like the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York report these flows, but the Bank of England and Swiss
National Bank – both of which are among the dominant players
– do not. Recently, I began to consider yet another alternative
method of compiling central bank gold data.
I was put on
this new path to discover a ‘third way’ after stumbling upon
an old report published nearly ten years ago by the IMF, The
Structure and Operation of the World Gold Market. One
table in particular, which I present below, caught my attention.
By analyzing the UK’s import and export statistics, the table
showed the flow of monetary gold (i.e., essentially large
bars of refined gold) through that country from 1960 to 1990.
|
Monetary Gold Stock
within the UK (metric tonnes)
|
|
|
Net Imports
|
UK Stocks
|
|
Net Imports
|
UK Stocks
|
|
|
(Exports)
|
Cumulative
|
|
(Exports)
|
Cumulative
|
|
1960
|
170.2
|
170.2
|
1976
|
30.4
|
784.6
|
|
1961
|
814.5
|
984.7
|
1977
|
(11.5)
|
773.1
|
|
1962
|
159.1
|
1,143.8
|
1978
|
(127.2)
|
645.9
|
|
1963
|
476.4
|
1,620.1
|
1979
|
304.7
|
950.6
|
|
1964
|
723.4
|
2,343.5
|
1980
|
276.4
|
1,227.0
|
|
1965
|
(1,155.1)
|
1,188.4
|
1981
|
(78.7)
|
1,148.3
|
|
1966
|
(321.8)
|
866.6
|
1982
|
(55.3)
|
1,093.0
|
|
1967
|
(806.5)
|
60.1
|
1983
|
(231.8)
|
861.2
|
|
1968
|
(296.7)
|
(236.6)
|
1984
|
(85.5)
|
775.7
|
|
1969
|
75.3
|
(161.4)
|
1985
|
(77.4)
|
698.3
|
|
1970
|
372.8
|
211.4
|
1986
|
(7.7)
|
690.6
|
|
1971
|
370.4
|
581.8
|
1987
|
6.7
|
697.3
|
|
1972
|
148.0
|
729.8
|
1988
|
(25.8)
|
671.5
|
|
1973
|
156.5
|
886.3
|
1989
|
(185.2)
|
486.3
|
|
1974
|
(109.8)
|
776.5
|
1990
|
12.9
|
499.2
|
|
1975
|
(22.3)
|
754.2
|
|
|
|
I was intrigued.
The Bank of England is very secretive about its gold activity
and does not disclose the quantity of gold held in its vaults
for the custody of others, mainly central banks. For this
reason, the table begins in 1960 with the 170.2 tonnes of
net monetary gold imported that year. The exact weight of
gold before then is unknown. Each subsequent year shows the
net additions or subtractions to this cumulative stock of
gold measured from 1960. From this table we can see the pattern
of central bank activity in the gold market.
For example,
note the huge dishoarding of gold from 1965 to 1968. We know
from the dishoarding reported back then by the US Treasury
that there were huge gold movements in the years immediately
prior to the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system in March
1968. This table confirms that activity.
So I wondered,
would the gold flows from 1990 to the present similarly reflect
central bank activity? Would there be some evidence of the
gold mobilization in the late 1990’s that would confirm my
analysis (see www.fgmr.com)
that central banks were actively intervening in the gold market
during this period? In fact, I wondered whether HM Customs
even continued to collect and disclose this data because it
would provide compelling evidence of central bank gold activity.
So recently I
spent one Saturday afternoon in London’s Westminster Reference
Library digging through stacks of data that probably hasn’t
seen the light of day for years. And I wasn’t disappointed.
Not only did Her Majesty’s civil servants continue to collect
the customs data with utmost efficiency, it was all disclosed.
I even went back to 1989’s data to make sure that I was compiling
the gold flows in a way consistent with those earlier years.
I was stunned, but not surprised, by the result.
Here are the
results, along with data showing the weight of gold dishoarded
in each of these years from the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York
|
Monetary Gold Exports
from the UK & US (metric tonnes)
|
|
|
Net UK
|
UK
|
Dishoarded
|
Annual
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
Imports
|
Stocks
|
FRBNY
|
Dishoarding
|
Dishoarding
|
|
|
(Exports)
|
Cumulative
|
Stock
|
from UK/US
|
from UK/US
|
|
1991
|
-65.5
|
433.7
|
-61.6
|
-127.1
|
-376.7
|
|
1992
|
-477.5
|
-43.8
|
-136.0
|
-613.5
|
-990.2
|
|
1993
|
-214.3
|
-258.1
|
-582.0
|
-796.3
|
-1,786.5
|
|
1994
|
-255.8
|
-513.8
|
-217.0
|
-472.8
|
-2,259.2
|
|
1995
|
-543.8
|
-1,057.6
|
-244.0
|
-787.8
|
-3,047.0
|
|
1996
|
-160.8
|
-1,218.4
|
-373.0
|
-533.8
|
-3,580.8
|
|
1997
|
-2,472.9
|
-3,691.4
|
-143.0
|
-2,615.9
|
-6,196.8
|
|
1998
|
93.6
|
-3,597.7
|
-310.0
|
-216.4
|
-6,413.1
|
|
1999
|
-48.6
|
-3,646.4
|
-303.0
|
-351.6
|
-6,764.8
|
|
2000
|
208.6
|
-3,437.7
|
-356.0
|
-147.4
|
-6,912.1
|
|
2001
|
-78.5
|
-3,516.2
|
-259.0
|
-337.5
|
-7,249.6
|
|
2002
|
-5.7
|
-3,521.9
|
-31.9
|
-37.6
|
-7,287.2
|
I have several key observations/conclusions
about this data:
(1) Note the 2,472.9
tonnes of gold exported from the UK in 1997. Not only is it
a staggering amount (an amount equal to annual production),
but it was in April of that year when I began to suspect that
the gold price was being manipulated by central banks, see
http://www.fgmr.com/smokegun.htm
Why would this weight of gold, and indeed, the weight of gold
cumulatively presented in the table above be mobilized unless
to intervene in the gold market with the result of suppressing
its price?
(2) It was not
possible to determine from HM Customs data to where most of
the gold was being exported, but if the data from the US Geological
Survey http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals
for US exports is any guide, then most of the gold was shipped
from the UK to Switzerland. As the IMF report states, even
back in 1993 Switzerland "has retained its dominance
in physical gold trading by providing specialized banking
and ancillary gold services in an essentially unregulated
and confidential environment." In other words, Switzerland
is the center of the world’s gold lending activity, and its
transactions in physical metal dwarf the other gold-trading
centers. While London remains the center for pricing gold,
Zurich is by far the dominant location for transactions involving
physical metal.
(3) Taken together
the reports by HM Customs and the FRBNY show that 7,287.2
tonnes of gold were dishoarded from the UK and the FRBNY from
1991 through the first nine months of 2002. Now I recognize
that this amount is not 15,000 tonnes, so some subjective
analysis is required here. Specifically, the UK and US are
secondary players in the physical gold market, as are the
other centers such as Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Perth, etc. But
in the absence of customs data from these other centers and
given the 7,287.2 tonnes of gold mobilized from just the UK
and US, it does not take a leap of blind faith to recognize
that at least an equal amount would have been mobilized from
Switzerland and the other centers, which would bring the total
amount of mobilized gold to approximately 15,000 tonnes, again
the same weight of gold determined by Frank Veneroso and Reg
Howe.
(4) I would argue
that in order to maintain the gold price suppression scheme,
gold was exported from the UK and US to Switzerland for two
reasons. First, physical metal had to be sent to Zurich to
meet the ongoing supply/demand deficit reported by Frank Veneroso,
as the available gold there was being used up in filling these
deficits. Second, Switzerland is the ideal staging area for
any price manipulation scheme. The huge weight of metal that
has been used to suppress the gold price – some 15,000 tonnes
– can be more easily hidden in a market where the largest
volume of physical gold trading occurs. What’s more, given
the "essentially unregulated and confidential environment"
in Switzerland described by the 1993 IMF report, central bank
intervention in the gold market can easily be hidden, particularly
if the interventions are camouflaged by acting through the
secretive Bank for International Settlements. Thus, the gold
market in Switzerland provides price manipulators with the
ability to intervene in the gold market undetected.
(5) The marked
decline in dishoarding for the first nine months of 2002 is
noteworthy. Does it mean that the central banks are not going
to unwisely dishoard more physical metal in their foolhardy
attempt to maintain these low gold prices? Having mobilized
and used much of their gold, are they now running out of ‘bullets’?
Central bankers and their cohorts in the IMF have one aim
– to maintain the illusion that the US dollar is worthy of
being the world’s reserve currency when in fact it is not.
But central bankers will do everything within their power
to perpetuate this illusion, including dishoarding their most
precious asset, their gold. In the late 1960’s they dishoarded
some 10,000 tonnes of gold in a feeble attempt to pretend
that gold was only worth $35 per ounce, when in fact everyone
knew that gold was worth more. Today they have dishoarded
probably 15,000 tonnes for the same inane purpose, different
only by the near ten-fold increase in the dollar price of
gold compared to back then, which is due largely to inflation
and the resulting fact that it takes $10 today to purchase
what $1 purchased in 1971. Central bankers know that a low
gold price makes the US dollar look stronger than the underlying
fundamentals warrant. My point is that they will eventually
stop feeding physical metal into the market because they cannot
risk using up all of their metal. If they did dishoard it
all, a crisis of confidence would cause people to flee the
fiat currencies they produce, which would then become worthless.
Gold is power, and central bankers will not risk using all
of their gold in a futile attempt to keep the gold price from
moving higher. So the 2002 gold flows to me indicate that
the tide has turned against the central bankers, which is
a result also confirmed by the rising gold price last year.
In conclusion,
I have established yet a third methodology to make obvious
the weight of gold that has been dishoarded from central bank
vaults. By using HM Customs reports to determine the weight
of gold passing through the UK’s borders and adding to that
total the dishoarding from the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York, along with similar activity assumed for Switzerland
and the other lesser gold centers, we can deduce that some
15,000 tonnes of gold have been removed from central bank
vaults.
Consequently,
"gold receivables" equal 46% of the 32,291 tonnes
of gold reported by central banks. So only 17,291 tonnes of
physical metal is left in central bank vaults.
In 1945, 68%
of the world’s gold was in central bank vaults, and the total
quantity of money, i.e., national currency in circulation,
was about $300 billion. Today the total quantity of national
currency is about $30 trillion, a one hundred-fold increase
in 57 years compounded at an 8.4% annual growth rate. And
central banks hold in their vaults some 17,291 tonnes of gold,
which is just 40% of the weight they held in 1945 and only
11.9% of today’s aboveground gold stock.
Clearly, these
numbers show that today’s monetary system is out-of-whack,
that the money-substitutes produced by central banks have
become too excessive and therefore overvalued against money
itself, i.e., gold. The central banks and the fiat national
currency they produce are therefore vulnerable. After decades
of abusive policies undermining the purchasing power of those
national currencies, the central banks are running out of
gold, their most valuable and powerful asset.
Consequently,
history will repeat. Gold will again soar just as it did after
the last manipulation scheme failed in 1971.
opyright © 2003 Freemarket Gold & Money Report.
|