Nudging Up Our F2010 GDP Forecast
December 02, 2009
By Tanvee Gupta | India & Chetan Ahya | Singapore
The Central Statistical Organization (CSO) announced on November 30 that GDP growth in the quarter ended September 2009 (QE Sep-09) was 7.9%, the highest since QE Jun-08. This compares with 6.1% registered in QE Jun-09 and 5.8% in QE Mar-09. The growth was much higher than our expectation of 6.4% and the consensus expectation (as per Bloomberg survey) of 6.3%. A large part of the growth surprise was due to agriculture sector output. The upside surprise here was mainly the result of the CSO accounting for a large part of the damage to food grain production in QE Dec-09 as compared to our view that it will be split between QE Sep-09 and QE Dec-09. While we now see agriculture output for QE Dec-09 being weaker than estimated earlier, industrial and services output should remain very strong. Indeed, IP growth has continued to surprise us on the upside over the last three months. Building in higher IP growth and services growth, we are lifting our F2010 (year ending March 2010) GDP growth forecast marginally to 6.7% from 6.4%.
Agriculture Growth Surprise - Accounting Factor
Growth in the agriculture sector decelerated to 0.9% in QE Sep-09 (versus 2.4% in the previous quarter). The deviation in actual GDP growth numbers from our forecasts is largely the result of positive growth in the agriculture segment versus our expectation of a decline due to poor monsoons. According to the first advance estimates of Kharif production released by the Department of Agriculture, the production of rice, coarse cereals, pulses and oilseeds is expected to decline by 17.9%Y, 19.7%Y, 7.5%Y and 14.8%Y, respectively in F2010. However, the CSO explains that a very small part of the anticipated Kharif (summer season) production of these crops accrues in QE Sep-09. We believe that poor agriculture growth due to weak monsoons has been pushed to QE Dec-09. Hence, we still expect agriculture output to decline by 2.4% in F2010 compared with our earlier estimate of -2.7%.
Industrial and Services Segment Sustaining Growth
Industrial production (IP) growth accelerated to 9.1%Y during QE Sep-09 compared to a trough of 0.3%Y during the three months ended February 2009. The seasonally adjusted IP index in September has increased by 8.7% over May 2009. This trajectory has been higher than our expectation. Various other economic indicators like passenger car sales, two-wheeler sales, railway freight, cement dispatches, consumer durables production have rebounded sharply from the lows touched during QE Dec-08, reflecting the strength of domestic demand. We now expect IP growth to average 8.8%Y in F2010 from 8% earlier. We expect services sector growth to rise marginally to 8.6% in F2010 from 8.4% estimated earlier due to higher growth in the trade, hotels, transport and communications segment. Consequently, we are lifting our F2010 GDP growth forecast to 6.7% compared to 6.4% estimated earlier. On a calendar year (CY) basis, we now expect GDP growth of 6% in 2009 compared to 5.9% earlier. Our GDP growth estimates remain unchanged at 8% for F2011 and 7.6% for F2012.
Better Traction to Policy Measures
We believe that the bulk of the acceleration in IP growth is coming from stronger domestic demand while exports continued to remain weak. The key driver of this acceleration in growth has been the lagged impact of expansionary fiscal policy and loose monetary policy. Indeed, we believe that traction to the government's policy measures has been better than expected. Moreover, a quick revival in global risk appetite also meant that the Indian corporate sector could access risk capital from international capital markets easily. This helped the corporate sector to repair its balance sheets faster, thus reducing the risk of a vicious feedback of large non-performing loans in the banking system, increased risk-aversion and slower growth. Capital inflows into India have increased to about US$10 billion (annualized rate of US$40 billion) during QE Sep-09 as per our estimates, compared with an outflow of US$5.3 billion during QE Mar-09.
We Maintain Our View on the Rate Outlook
We expect IP growth to remain strong in the 9-11%Y range for the rest of the financial year. We maintain our forecast that inflation (WPI) will reach 6.5% by end-March 2010. In our view, the recovery in growth and likely rise in WPI inflation imply that the RBI will need to start normalizing interest rates. We maintain our view that the RBI will lift policy rates by 25bp in January 2010. By then, it should have had adequate comfort on the pace of recovery. Indeed, we expect a cumulative increase of 150bp in the repo rate in 2010. However, we note that this potential rate hike is unlikely to derail the recovery, as we see this expected increase in policy rates as a move toward normalization rather than tightening that hurts growth.
Important Disclosure Information at the end of this Forum
Assessing Housing Risks
December 02, 2009
By Richard Berner | New York
Despite recent improvements in housing demand, construction and home prices, housing risks are turning negative immediately ahead. A ‘payback' from the end of the first-time homebuyer tax credit likely will be the main catalyst, and additional negatives involve the interplay among less-favorable demographics, looming foreclosures and rising joblessness. Yet we strongly believe that renewed housing recovery is coming, courtesy of improved affordability, some easing in credit availability, a renewed tax credit and a return to positive employment gains. The upshot: Weakness in demand, activity and prices is likely through year-end, but we still expect modest improvement in 2010 and beyond: A 10% rise in demand and housing activity is still the most likely outcome next year.
Improvement in many housing metrics. There is no mistaking the improvement in many housing metrics from their trough, at least through October. Sales of new and existing one-family homes jumped by 24.6% and 27.8%, respectively, in the six months ended in October, reflecting some of the positive factors mentioned above. Although one-family housing starts tumbled in October compared with September, they have risen 33% from their February lows. Inventories of new and existing homes have plunged dramatically, promoting a better balance between supply and demand. New home inventories stand at 239,000, the lowest since 1971 in absolute terms. Inventories of existing homes, at 3 million, are well below their peak of 3.8 million in late 2007, although still near the previous peak last seen in 1985. And home prices are either flat or up, depending on the measure used: Over the past six months, the FHFA purchase-only home price index has been flat, while the Case-Shiller S&P home price index is up 2.5%. That compares with declines of 11% and 32% over the previous two and three years, respectively.
Payback coming, plus barriers to activity. Yet those improvements must be set in perspective for two reasons: First, the first-time homebuyer tax credit boosted new and existing sales through October, and a payback is coming. Second, three hurdles still linger for housing: The overhang of inventories of existing homes on the market and a ‘shadow inventory' of yet-to-be foreclosed homes likely will continue to depress new home sales and housing activity for some time to come; demographics are still unfavorable; and rising joblessness is a barrier to qualifying for a mortgage.
Gauging the payback. To gauge the coming payback in sales of existing and new homes, we must calibrate the impact of the first-time homebuyer tax credit on demand. That is difficult, because the US$8,000 maximum tax credit incentive represented only about 5% of the price of homes typically purchased by first-time homebuyers and because there is scant basis for comparison - there is only one example of a similar credit (in 1975, and that was for new homes only). This time around, lawmakers enacted two credits for first-time homebuyers. A US$7,500 credit launched in July 2008 was really an interest-free loan. Then, in February 2009, Congress replaced it with a true credit running up to US$8,000 for low-income buyers who had not owned a residence in the last three years, expiring on December 1, for both new and existing properties.
The just-expiring credit stimulated demand, but it is unclear by how much. According to the National Association of Realtors (NAR), about 350,000 of the 1.8-2.0 million buyers who will claim the credit this year would not have purchased a home without it. But it is uncertain how much of that was genuine additional demand and how much was simply brought forward. Traditional measures of affordability have soared, courtesy of the plunge in home prices and in mortgage rates. But with lenders demanding bigger down payments, and with the credit not available until the deal is closed, down payments and credit availability remain hurdles for many buyers, especially first-time ones.
The 1975 homebuyer credit represents the sole historical parallel and may shed light on the potential payback this time. That earlier incentive, which was aimed only at new homes, initially boosted sales and then triggered a second surge as the expiration date neared. Fueled by lower mortgage rates, pent-up demand and the credit, new home sales jumped by 63% over 1975, but declined by 16% over several months in 1976 after the credit expired. That moderate ‘payback' may foreshadow today's experience, and we assume both home sales and single-family housing starts will soften a bit in the next few months (into early next year) and rise moderately thereafter. Indeed, the sharp decline in mortgage applications underway since early October already hints that the payback is coming. Yet, as discussed in more detail below, a new credit that extends through April 30, 2010 likely will limit the weakness.
Three hurdles for housing. No catalogue of housing risks would be complete without acknowledging three other headwinds. The recession has slowed household formation, looming foreclosures will dump more inventory on the market, and rising joblessness will deter lenders and buyers. Moreover, homebuilders are struggling to compete with distressed property sales, and financing to start construction is still hard to come by.
Less favorable short-run demographics. Demographic trends are critical for assessing long-term housing demand, but short-term changes in demographic fundamentals that are influenced by the business cycle also matter. In the current downturn, both slowing household formation and declining interstate labor mobility have been housing headwinds. The latest Census Bureau report showed that new households grew by only 398,000 between March 2008 and March 2009, compared with increases of 772,000 and 1.6 million in the two previous years. Data are incomplete for March 2009, but it appears that the growth in prime-age households (25-54) slowed even more significantly. That's a time-honored cyclical pattern; many couples postpone marriage and having children in recession, and this time is no different. What is different is the depth of the contraction in payrolls that has affected a broader swath of the population. Thus, the annual demographic increment to housing demand has slowed to perhaps 250,000, even assuming a pick-up in household formation and a 65% home ownership rate.
In a related development, the percentage of grown children moving back in with their parents has also escalated according to data from the Pew Research Center. The authors note that, "Overall, the proportion of adults ages 18 to 29 who live alone declined from 7.9% in 2007 to 7.3% in 2009. Similar drops in the proportion of young people who live by themselves occurred during or immediately after the recessions of 1982 and 2001." In addition, the interplay between housing woes and labor mobility has created frictions in the labor markets: Without a new job, workers wanting to move are unable to do so, depressing housing turnover; conversely, the inability to sell one's home has limited labor mobility and thus the capacity of workers to move to take a new job in another venue.
The ‘shadow inventory': How big? Fully 4.47% of all loans were in the foreclosure process and 9.64% were delinquent at the end of 3Q09, up 150bp and 265bp, respectively, from a year ago according to the Mortgage Bankers' Association; both are records. With about 55 million mortgages outstanding, some analysts estimate that the ‘shadow inventory' of yet-to-be foreclosed homes will rise to more than 13% of that total, or 7 million mortgages. A key trigger for foreclosure is when home owners are in a negative equity position; that is, when the amount they owe exceeds the value of the home. According to First American CoreLogic, 23% of all mortgagees are underwater. Such a surge in foreclosures, even if spread out over a couple of years (as seems likely in any case), would reverse the improved supply-demand balance seen over the past year, put renewed downward pressure on home prices, further discourage housing lenders from offering attractive loans, and pressure household wealth.
Several related factors could reduce the coming rise in foreclosures. First, lenders may be increasingly willing to modify outstanding mortgages by writing down the outstanding mortgage amounts to eliminate negative equity; previous efforts to modify the terms of mortgages by lowering rates or forbearing did not help many lenders or borrowers, because redefault rates ran between 50-60%. Second, lenders may also be more willing to accept short sales (in which they eliminate the sellers' negative equity to allow a sale to occur). Third, the Administration is promising to increase resources to enable eligible borrowers who have undergone trial modifications under the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) to convert to permanent modifications. If successful, these developments could limit price declines by holding otherwise foreclosed homes off the market or taking them out of the supply chain completely. So far, however, delays over documentation and other snafus have held up the modification process, so progress may be slow in coming.
Are there upside risks for housing? In our view, improved affordability, a better balance between supply and demand, some easing in credit availability, a renewed tax credit, and a pick-up in job and income growth are all likely to offset these housing headwinds and promote a modest recovery. The improvement in affordability lately has been the result of lower interest rates, but subdued home prices have also helped. Current coupon MBS yields have recently plunged to the lows seen in the spring, or 3.9%. With 30-year conventional mortgage rates already at a record-low 4.78%, and further declines likely, housing affordability is soaring. The 2.5% recovery in home prices over the past six months only represents a tiny offset to that improvement.
Further, although supply still exceeds demand, the balance is improving. The rebound in new home sales and the plunge to record lows in September housing completions has rapidly normalized inventories of newly constructed homes. As mentioned, new home inventories fell by 4% in October to 239,000 units, a 38-year low. At current sales rates, supply fell to 6.7 months' supply, close to the six months generally thought to represent balance. We may see a bit of renewed upside in months' supply if there is a temporary pullback in sales, but it now seems likely that inventories of newly constructed homes (although not the total, which includes the ‘shadow inventory') will be back to balanced levels by early next year.
Credit availability is also easing somewhat. The proportion of banks reporting that they tightened mortgage lending standards in the Fed's October Senior Loan Officer Survey dropped to 26%, down from 77% a year ago. While lending standards are still tight, it is the change in standards that matters for growth (see Calibrating the Credit Crunch, November 20, 2009).
Extending the credit. In addition, the payback from the expiration of the first-time homebuyer tax credit may be short-lived because new relief is on the way. Earlier this month, Congress passed new legislation that extends the credit for first-time buyers and expands it to cover current home owners purchasing a new or existing home (up to a maximum credit of US$6,500) between November 7, 2009 and April 30, 2010 (the purchaser will have until July 1, 2010 to close). Current home owners must have used the home being sold or vacated as a principal residence for five consecutive years within the last eight. Married couples with incomes up to US$225,000 are eligible for the maximum credit, higher than the US$175,000 under the credit expiring this week.
Finally, improving job and income growth are critical for any lasting improvement in housing demand. On that score, there is already some good news. High-frequency labor market indicators, such as initial and continued claims for unemployment insurance, point to some improvement in the immediate future. And the just-reported US$82 billion (1.3%) upward revision to 2Q wage and salary income likely foreshadows more cyclical improvement for both pay and payrolls. The upshot is that despite significant headwinds and near-term payback from the expiration of the first-time homebuyer tax credit, we think powerful offsetting factors will help housing mount a modest recovery into 2010 and beyond.
Important Disclosure Information at the end of this Forum
Disclosure Statement
The information and opinions in Morgan Stanley Research were prepared by Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, and/or Morgan Stanley C.T.V.M. S.A. and their affiliates (collectively, "Morgan Stanley").
Global Research Conflict Management Policy
Morgan Stanley Research observes our conflict management policy, available at www.morganstanley.com/institutional/research/conflictpolicies.
Important Disclosure for Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC Customers
The subject matter in this Morgan Stanley report may also be covered in a similar report from Citigroup Global Markets Inc. Ask your Financial Advisor or use Research Center to view any reports in addition to this report.
Important Disclosures
Morgan Stanley Research does not provide individually tailored investment advice. It has been prepared without regard to the circumstances and objectives of those who receive it. Morgan Stanley recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages them to seek a financial adviser's advice. The appropriateness of an investment or strategy will depend on an investor's circumstances and objectives. Morgan Stanley Research is not an offer to buy or sell any security or to participate in any trading strategy. The value of and income from your investments may vary because of changes in interest rates or foreign exchange rates, securities prices or market indexes, operational or financial conditions of companies or other factors. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance. Estimates of future performance are based on assumptions that may not be realized.
With the exception of information regarding Morgan Stanley, research prepared by Morgan Stanley Research personnel is based on public information. Morgan Stanley makes every effort to use reliable, comprehensive information, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete. We have no obligation to tell you when opinions or information in Morgan Stanley Research change apart from when we intend to discontinue research coverage of a company. Facts and views in Morgan Stanley Research have not been reviewed by, and may not reflect information known to, professionals in other Morgan Stanley business areas, including investment banking personnel.
To our readers in Taiwan: Morgan Stanley Research is distributed by Morgan Stanley Taiwan Limited; it may not be distributed to or quoted or used by the public media without the express written consent of Morgan Stanley. To our readers in Hong Kong: Information is distributed in Hong Kong by and on behalf of, and is attributable to, Morgan Stanley Asia Limited as part of its regulated activities in Hong Kong; if you have any queries concerning it, contact our Hong Kong sales representatives.
Morgan Stanley Research is disseminated in Japan by Morgan Stanley Japan Securities Co., Ltd.; in Canada by Morgan Stanley Canada Limited, which has approved of and takes responsibility for its contents in Canada; in Germany by Morgan Stanley Bank AG, Frankfurt am Main, regulated by Bundesanstalt fuer Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin);in Spain by Morgan Stanley, S.V., S.A., a Morgan Stanley group company, supervised by the Spanish Securities Markets Commission(CNMV), which states that it is written and distributed in accordance with rules of conduct for financial research under Spanish regulations; in the US by Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, which accepts responsibility for its contents. Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc, authorized and regulated by Financial Services Authority, disseminates in the UK research it has prepared, and approves solely for purposes of section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, research prepared by any affiliates. Private UK investors should obtain the advice of their Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc representative about the investments concerned. RMB Morgan Stanley (Proprietary) Limited is a member of the JSE Limited and regulated by the Financial Services Board in South Africa. RMB Morgan Stanley (Proprietary) Limited is a joint venture owned equally by Morgan Stanley International Holdings Inc. and RMB Investment Advisory (Proprietary) Limited, which is wholly owned by FirstRand Limited.
Trademarks and service marks in Morgan Stanley Research are their owners' property. Third-party data providers make no warranties or representations of the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of their data and shall not have liability for any damages relating to such data. The Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) was developed by and is the exclusive property of MSCI and S&P. Morgan Stanley bases projections, opinions, forecasts and trading strategies regarding the MSCI Country Index Series solely on public information. MSCI has not reviewed, approved or endorsed these projections, opinions, forecasts and trading strategies. Morgan Stanley has no influence on or control over MSCI's index compilation decisions. Morgan Stanley Research or portions of it may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of Morgan Stanley. Morgan Stanley research is disseminated and available primarily electronically, and, in some cases, in printed form. Additional information on recommended securities/instruments is available on request.
The information in Morgan Stanley Research is being communicated by Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc (DIFC Branch), regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority (the DFSA), and is directed at wholesale customers only, as defined by the DFSA. This research will only be made available to a wholesale customer who we are satisfied meets the regulatory criteria to be a client.
The information in Morgan Stanley Research is being communicated by Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc (QFC Branch), regulated by the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority (the QFCRA), and is directed at business customers and market counterparties only and is not intended for Retail Customers as defined by the QFCRA.
As required by the Capital Markets Board of Turkey, investment information, comments and recommendations stated here, are not within the scope of investment advisory activity. Investment advisory service is provided in accordance with a contract of engagement on investment advisory concluded between brokerage houses, portfolio management companies, non-deposit banks and clients. Comments and recommendations stated here rely on the individual opinions of the ones providing these comments and recommendations. These opinions may not fit to your financial status, risk and return preferences. For this reason, to make an investment decision by relying solely to this information stated here may not bring about outcomes that fit your expectations.
|
![](/img/clear.gif"){kind=spacer}