The Central Bank has released the Money and Banking statistics for January here.
In a helpful development, the Bank are now publishing statistics for the six banks covered by the Government guarantee (ELG) scheme. The statistics are published both on a gross assets and liabilities basis and also on a consolidated basis, which net out all intra-bank transactions. For example, the gross balance sheets show assets of €623 billion in December. However, once intra-bank transactions are netted out, the consolidated assets are €455 billion.
Unfortunately, the new Table A.4.2. for the covered banks shows a pretty grim story in relation to deposit outflows. In contrast to some reports, deposit outflows from the covered banks in January were about €18.5 billion, about the same as the rate recorded in December.
Update: A contact from the Central Bank has been in touch with me about the calculation above on deposit outflows. As noted above, the Bank are releasing monthly figures on a gross unconsolidated basis and quarterly figures on a consolidated basis. The €18.5 billion figure that I cited is, as usual, from the gross unconsolidated figures. However, I have been informed by the Central Bank that approximately 75% of the decline in deposits reported inn Table A.4.2, is due to intra-group activities in the banks concerned, so that deposit outflows from the system in January were in fact considerably smaller than in December. I’m happy to pass on this as it is useful information. Still, it suggests that the next logical step is for the Bank to release the consolidated balance sheet on a monthly basis.
17 replies on “Money and Banking Statistics: January 2011”
“In contrast to some reports, deposit outflows from the covered banks in January were about €18.5 billion, about the same as the rate recorded in December.”
😯
Oh dearie me.
We are now going to renegotiate hard with the ECB and tell them firmly who is the master in this relationship — oh yes, and by the way, there have been some more deposit outflows so could we borrow an extra 18.5 billion this month?
Not so fast with that deposit outflow calculation — remember these are aggregate figures and so include lots of intragroup assets and liabilities. Add up all the market funding and it’s clear it dropped by only about €2.5 bn in January. (Cols 33+36-40).
I understand they are unconsolidated by how did you come to the 2.5bn figure for Jan?
PS: they have a conolidated table here http://www.centralbank.ie/frame_main.asp?pg=sta_con_data.asp&nv=sta_nav.asp
but only up to December.
@ Gurdleneck and Rob S.
See update above indicating the true picture on deposit outflows was better than suggested in my calculations. (So indeed, it depends on what you do with the figures …)
Not sure though about the point above about market funding. Column 36 includes a €17bn jump in debt securities thanks to own-bond issuance which had little to do with markets of any sort.
I’ve been around long enough to treat “consolidation differences” with a healthy dose of cynicism until verified.
As I understand it the new data relates to the six covered institutions and to their Irish operations. To take the private sector deposits, these fell by €1807m during January 2011 taking the balance of deposits at the end of Jan 2011 and subtracting the Dec 2010 balance.
Would anyone care to suggest how a “consolidation difference” might mean that the true decline was less than €1807m?
@ Jagdip
“Would anyone care to suggest how a “consolidation difference” might mean that the true decline was less than €1807m?”
To be fair, I don’t think anyone is claiming that. Which table does the 1.807bn figure come from?
@Karl
Table A.4.2 shows Private Sector deposits for Dec 2010 and Jan 2011 as €113670m and €111863m. The difference is a decline of €1807m.
Now this is less than the €3345m drop between Nov 2010 and Dec 2010, but as I understand it from your post above, “I have been informed by the Central Bank that approximately 75% of the decline in deposits reported inn Table A.4.2, is due to intra-group activities in the banks concerned,”
The figures show a decline in private sector deposits of €1807m. How might that be reduced by 75%?
I see that I will have to spell this out. The net fall in funding of €2.5 billion comes from:
Deposits from Irish residents = 225343-234278 = -8935
Debt securities issued = 50231+9924+19043-(33325+9982+19831) = +16060
Deposits from nonresidents =5617+88357-(5354+98229) = -9609
Net total = – 2483
If anyone wants to complain about my including the general government deposits, then they can exclude those and that will bring the outflow below €2 bn. In our banking system debt securities — most of them short-term must be added to deposits to get a full picture of market funding — whether or not intragroup transactions are involved.
Just as a (half) aside, this court case, should the various documents sought be delivered, has the potential to answer a lot of questions that many shareholders have been asking since Anglo collapsed.
“The Bank failed to tell him about matters which, if known to the financial markets, would have had “a devastating effect” on Anglo’s stability, Mr Browne claims. He claims he would not have executed his share options in late 2007 if he was aware of these matters and consequently would not have suffered losses when the bank’s share price collapsed.”
What is extraordinary, in my opinion, is that the government did not take the same tack at the time to get satisfactory answers for shareholders. Instead, retail shareholders were cast out of sight like medieval lepers.
On update – good. A-I B to AIB.
CBI more transparent and responsive these days. And The Governor will shortly have more powers.
A lot of the huge December number – c. €20, I believe – was BoSI transferring its banking operations across the water.
To whose lending was Tom Browne “head of” if he was not aware Anglo had loaned substantial amounts to Sean Quinn? Is the title somewhat more imposing than his actual role?
Were the previous categories of statistics released on a consolidated basis?
i.e. the “Domestic Credit Institutions” Figures
I have to dismay at Laura Noonan’s article in the Independent today
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/figures-reveal-euro100bn-deposit-exodus-from-covered-six-2560091.html
“Figures reveal €100bn deposit exodus from ‘covered’ six
First data from Central Bank detailing losses shows lenders using state guarantee scheme suffered €17bn hit in January”
But then going on to make the “unconsolidated” qualification in the third paragraph (bit late in the day) – although perhaps I am being a little harsh as the editor surely has final say on the titles.
Also, there is a side article by the side article (rightly) criticising the publication of “unconsolidated” figures (even suggesting Frankfurt may have had a hand in it!)
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/new-approach-still-doesnt-give-us-the-full-picture-2560092.html
@ Jon Ihle
BOSI’s exit will have affected Table 4.1 but not the new Table 4.2 which only reports figures for the covered insititutions.
@ Rob S.
“Were the previous categories of statistics released on a consolidated basis?
i.e. the “Domestic Credit Institutions” Figures”
No. One reason to report the balance sheet of the guaranteed banks on a consolidated basis is it gives us a better sense of how much the taxpayer is on the hook for. Financial journalists regularly quote very large figures from the BIS to give a sense of how big Ireland’s banking system is, with implications that the state is responsible for all of it.