|
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. |