Investments in municipal bonds is a bit 'like the kiss of your grandmother, it is comforting, but not particularly exciting. Recently, however, by an extraordinary media attention is the issuance of municipal bonds to a very uncomfortable topic for many investors. Recent headlines in national newspapers including celebrities like saying titles such as "mourning the Muni market", "Say disturb titles Muni Bond Investors" and "debts mounting fears were fed the crisis." EList goes on.
If the municipal bond market here in front of a real crisis, or is it really a case of journalistic sensationalism? Perhaps a more important question: what are the consequences if you market an investor in municipal bonds, or an investor in the stock market? For reasons I discussed shortly, I believe that investors in equity markets may not have the big picture, and actually had to bondholders lose most by the crisis than the actual municipal bondTo lose. In 2008, many stock investors suffered huge losses, because only the resources themselves, and usually do not borrow to pay attention to the problems taking place in the market for the bank during the night. Similarly, the ongoing problems in the municipal bond markets, the country should be closely monitored by investors because of the anti-growth taxes and expenses for all policies are implemented.
Let's start with the beginningmunicipal bond market itself, and then our attention on the financial implications for the broader stock market. Recent press reports suggest that 5-10 may local needs in the coming year are from. This would be a historically high number, even if true, this is a very small percentage of a whole. In particular, the state and municipal bond market about $ 2800000000000 in size, with over 60,000 different titles. So, even if by default, in addition to 100 numbersThis year represents only 0.2% of the total. Moreover, according to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, in the last 40 years there have been only 54 cases of Moody's rating of municipal insolvency was. Of these, 78% in the seat and stand-alone health projects. (Wall Street Journal: "new risks emerge in Muni's" November 10, 2010). contains the number of individual titles, this is a very low rate of default history and shows that cases oftrue by default in the county of the city, and also at the state level is extremely rare.
The media love, in which Vallejo, California, and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania – two cities with serious financial problems – but nothing of the thousands of cities, counties and various government bodies that never misses a single payment, the bondholder said . As outlined in Moody's data, which are most common bond requirements of revenue bonds to project specifications. These are not general obligation bonds,by the full faith and taxing powers of the town of emission limits. Without doubt, the vast majority of general obligation municipal bonds continue to be very creditworthy and is a solid investment for tax-sensitive investors with a need remains of income.
However, as suggested above, even if our worst fears prove true, investors in municipal bonds are probably not linked to the most vulnerable groups – are the investors may lose more in thisCrisis. Why? First, we must first understand that every 7 workers actually work in the United States for a municipality, including the state, provincial and municipal authorities for transport, police, school districts, and so on. That's right, 15% of all workers in this country working for a municipal government or public nature together, this means that "Local America" is by far the largest employer in the country, and the employer work aftera disastrous financial situation. In addition, 13% of the total U.S. economic output (ie gross domestic product) of municipal expenditure. This means that municipal spending to represent the second largest component of the total U.S. economy, consumption is the greatest. Consequently, the real danger to our financial system, the potential for dozens of municipal bonds in default is a real risk that thousands of communities are forced to flee or to leave hundreds of thousands of layEmployees and significantly reduce spending and services in order to tilt the fragile U.S. economy into recession. In turns out that all these developments have already begun.
In fact, states and municipalities have been cutting the wages and salary increases in speed over the past 12 months, with about 250,000 jobs in 2010 alone, lost, lost the top of 130,000 jobs in 2009. Even more interesting: In January 2008, the U.S. economy added 7.2 million jobs, but overall the state and has lostlistings of local employment fell only 225,000 cumulatively over the last three years. Since the latter group represents 15% of total employment, one would expect a proportional share of these jobs were lost here, but that was not the case. If so, then the state and local authorities over 1.1 million jobs have been lost. Because local authorities do not start cutting wages and salaries has been in large numbers up to one year after the onset of recession, it is reasonable to think thatsignificant losses, are now heavily upon us, and we can up to 1 million jobs from more state and local payrolls in the coming years to cut.
But even this understates the total economic impact of municipal waste economic policies, because it has only lost jobs, with the exception of the remuneration of employees who have seen only the leaves of absence, freezes, benefit cuts and so on. A recent New York Times titled "The crisis is looming in the U.S.," said that "government spending fell by 3.8 per cent in 2009The fiscal year and 7.3 percent more in fiscal year 2010. "
If you happen to be a municipal entity, it is likely that recently adopted a hiring freeze, a block with pay, restrictions on working hours and be seen so on. Many of the projects by the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 will soon be financed and communities are not engaged in large expenditures for new infrastructure projects. This will lead to a significant reduction in construction spending. Finally, ifThey occur in an unfortunate set of states as Illinois, will soon pay much higher rates and receive reduced services. Illinois has recently launched its state income tax from 3% to 5%, the average family of four will cost about $ 1,000 more per year. Similarly, the newly elected governor of California is proposing tax increases in $ 12000000000 $ 12500000000 more in spending cuts for next year, with cuts in health, welfare, community madeSchools, universities, institutes for the disabled to pay for state employees, and so on. This is very good news for bond holders Illinois and California, but bad news for nearly all residents, workers and the country's economy, as well as companies that do business with the state.
municipal councils are still painful decisions in 2011 and 2012, but most face their problems in a logical order: financial discipline. This is good news for municipal bondInvestors. But if the trend continues, as it almost certain that further reduces the prospects of a broad economic recovery in 2011 and 2012, which means that the municipal bond crisis is worrying for the stock market than most investors realize. Some types of businesses will be hit hard, of course, the construction companies, information technology and services, among others. Communities to return to new construction projects, and they will move to upgradeSystems and technologies for another year or more. Service companies, which depend on contracts with state and local authorities are also injured.
Remembering the lesson of 2008, investors are stocks as the markets pay attention to the continuing crisis in the municipal bond. Financial saving measures in all state and local agencies are to make the 2011 and 2012, very difficult year for many local businesses and create a significant downward pressure on consumerSpending and corporate profits in the process.