Join Today!

Muni Bond Talk

Posts Tagged ‘municipal bonds’

Muniland and Pensions, (2/15/11)

Friday, April 1st, 2011

“In December, projections by Meredith Whitney, the banking analyst, about possible municipal defaults began to rattle the $2.86 trillion municipal-debt market. Investors withdrew $1.2 billion from U.S. municipal-bond mutual funds, the 13th-straight outflow, Lipper U.S. Fund Flows said about the week ending Feb. 10. About $24.8 billion has been redeemed since the week ended Nov. 17, including a record $4 billion in the week ended Jan. 19, the most since Lipper started compiling data in 1992.” Source: Bloomberg, Feb. 14.

Panic-driven mutual fund redemptions continue to depress the prices of high-grade Munis. To us, this means the buying opportunity for well-selected issues is intact. Remember, this is an idiosyncratic securities sector. Broad-brush painting of “all Munis are going to default” is specious.

Forced selling by mutual funds depresses the pricing references that are used by the pricing series. Most Munis do not trade every day. Hence, the drop of a few prices lowers the estimated prices of all Munis. This perception issue has created a misunderstanding in the market and resulted in exacerbation of the selloff.

Think about it this way. Let us examine the case of a single mutual fund that must sell to meet redemptions. The fund manager needs the cash at once. He sells his liquid and highest-credit-quality names, which allows him to get cash as once. These same bonds are used to price the entire universe of Munis. The next day all Muni reference prices are lower, even though most of them did not trade. Since the mutual fund holds many bonds, its share price reflects the new pricing, and hence is lower. That alarms more shareholders and another round of selling triggers a downward spiral. This has been going on for 13 weeks.

Some say the cause of the selling is the opacity in the unfunded pension systems of the states. Maybe so. Moreover, maybe that is part of the hype. We think the pension issue is clear. One only needs to do the homework.

In a state like Delaware, the pension system is nearly fully funded. The credit rating of the state is AAA. There is no pension issue in Delaware. The same is true for many states.

There are 218 separate state pension plans among the 50 states. There are 2,332 local pension systems. Thank you, Natalie Cohen of Wells Fargo for the data. Natalie notes the differences by illustrating Indiana. The Indiana Public Employee Retirement Fund is about 94% funded. The Indiana teacher plan is only 43% funded. In NJ, which was just down-graded by a rating agency, Natalie reports the public fund is 56% funded, the local fund is 71% funded, and the teachers’ plan is 64% funded. As we have been saying for months, broad brushing Muniland does not work. One must drill deeply into the data.

Estimating the present value of an unfunded pension obligation is imprecise. It takes a lot of assumptions and falls into the murky realm of actuarial science. Moody’s offers that “a 100 basis point movement in the discount rate results is an inverse movement in the obligation of approximately 8-12%.” Current rules allow much flexibility to states and local government in making assumption choices.

That is about to change. The Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is issuing new rules on accounting and reporting liabilities for pensions and other post-employment benefits. These are in draft form now. The rating agencies are combining the actual bonded indebtedness of states or local governments with the unfunded liability estimates. That is why NJ was recently downgraded.

In addition, there is legislation at work to force pension disclosure to be more consistent and transparent. Public Employee Pension Transparency Act or H.R.6484 is under discussion in the House of Representatives. It will require timely information on al governmental pension funds and it will impose penalties for failures to disclose. Rating agencies are endorsing such legislation. So do we. The effect will be to improve funding and force clarity. We expect this to become law in this congressional session.

At Cumberland, we already look at the unfunded obligations and the assumptions. We are glad to see this issue being addressed by states and local governments and by the rating agencies. It has been a long time coming.

One group that objects strenuously is the public employee unions. They are now the largest organized labor faction in the US, and they are trying to preserve the status quo. There is where the political rubber hits the road. We expect this to be a state-by-state fight. We saw the first salvo fired in Illinois as the retirement age was extended. Major changes proposed by NJ Governor Christie currently are stymied in the state’s legislature. Watch what happens as the NJ budget fight gets down to the last minute.

In our view, these issues will get resolved because they must get resolved. State and local governments cannot continue to fund promises they cannot afford. The tide has changed. We expect nearly all of them to alter their budgets, and we expect austerity to be imposed. The notion of electing default or bankruptcy as an option seems politically dead to us.

We continue to buy well-selected Munis at tax-free yields in excess of the taxable yield references. We are witnessing a generational opportunity and want to seize it Muniland and Pensions

David R. Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer

Published with permission by our friends at Cumberland Advisors

Muni Defaults: Whitney and Roubini (3/26/11)

Friday, April 1st, 2011

“The rule on staying alive as a forecaster is to give ‘em a number or give ‘em a date, but never give ‘em both at once.”

–Jane Bryant Quinn, Reader’s Digest, 1 Dec. 1980

Meredith Whitney broke the rule. This now haunts her to the point that she declined to appear before a Congressional committee that wanted to discuss Muni default issues. Nouriel Roubini is a skilled economist. He knows this rule. He, therefore, used modifiers to adhere to it.

Let’s talk about Whitney’s forecast first. With great media fanfare, she predicted “50 to 100” sizeable muni defaults, totaling about $100 billion, in 2011. That is correct: she said this year. The year in which the economy is in some sort of recovery and when the interest rate is held near zero by the Fed.

Meredith did not know about any oil shock when she made this forecast. While the current MENA turmoil is a serious new development, the resulting oil price shock will not help her be right in her forecast. In our view, there is nearly zero chance that there will be 50 to 100 sizeable Muni defaults amounting to $100 billion in the calendar year of 2011.

Nouriel Roubini suggested that there may be “close to $100 billion of defaults over five years, but typical 80% recoveries are far higher than on corporate bonds.” Nouriel outlined his view of trouble in the Muni world and attempted to measure the exposure in a very thoughtful way. He noted that most of the bonds he expected to default were in the high-yield or junk-bond category. His base-case estimate of defaults over five years for the investment-grade sector was under $30 billion, with “ultimate recovery” of nearly all the losses. Nouriel reminds us that “governments cannot be liquidated” like corporations.

Bloomberg’s Joe Mysak observed the following about Roubini:

“And so noted doomsayer Nouriel Roubini joins the numerous commentators who have opined about the municipal bond market, the most famous, of course, being Meredith Whitney, who in December on the CBS show ‘60 Minutes’’ blurted out the prediction that there would be ‘hundreds of billions’’ of municipal bond defaults in 2011. That $100 billion estimate from the Roubini firm isn’t in the same league as the Whitney call. What’s more, it may not be so outrageous, depending upon how you count defaults. The record year for municipal bond defaults was 2008, when 167 issues totaling $8.5 billion went bust, according to the Distressed Debt Securities Newsletter. In 2009, more municipal bonds defaulted, 207, on a lower dollar amount, $7.3 billion. In 2010, 82 deals failed to pay on $2.7 billion in bonds. The $100 billion over the next five years isn’t outside the realm of possibility. How are you counting? The people at Distressed Debt Securities, who have been doing it for decades now and who are the only ones with a historical database over that time, and who use a consistent methodology in their approach, count new defaults only in their calculations, which I think is the correct way to do it. Some analysts, scanning the daily material event notices at the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board’s EMMA web site, count all notices of default that are posted by issuers. And by doing it that way, by counting bonds that are already in default, you can come up with many more billions of dollars in defaulted municipals every year. That’s because it takes years to cure some of these things. In the case of so-called dirt-bonds, used to finance infrastructure improvements to real estate developments, for example, bondholders have to wait until the real estate is foreclosed upon and sold before they see any end to their money woes. Dirt bonds are the overwhelming majority of those that have defaulted over the past few years. The same long wait is true for bonds used to build speculative projects like toll roads, or de-inking mills, or aquariums, or any of the other various quixotic stuff that has been financed in the municipal market. Actual municipalities, that is, cities and counties, rarely default on their obligations. When they do, they usually cure them in pretty short order, in months if not weeks. Jefferson County, Alabama, which defaulted on almost $4 billion in sewer debt several years ago, is an outlier. If history is a guide, it probably will remain so. So, $100 billion over five years? That’s the headline number. It’s not impossible, especially if you count continuing defaults. Still, that’s quite a crystal ball.”

We believe it is important for readers to understand the term default. Here is the official definition from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). Remember, bondholders are concerned about monetary defaults. Non-monetary defaults are important because they tell you about the management of the organization or its political structure. These non-monetary defaults actually can provide a bond buyer with opportunity for a bargain if he is willing to do the homework.

“DEFAULT–A failure to pay principal of or interest on a bond when due or a failure to comply with any other covenant, promise or duty imposed by the bond contract. The most serious event of default, sometimes referred to as a ‘monetary’ default, occurs when the issuer fails to pay principal, interest, or both, when due. Other defaults, sometimes referred to as ‘technical’ defaults, result when specifically defined events of default occur, such as failure to maintain covenants. Technical defaults may include failing to charge rates sufficient to meet rate covenants, failing to maintain insurance on the project or failing to fund various reserves. If the issuer defaults in the payment of principal, interest, or both, or if a technical default is not cured within a specified period of time, the bondholders or trustee may exercise legally available rights and remedies for enforcement of the bond contract.”

MSRB reported a Fact Book on the hundreds of thousands of items and on the 10.5 million muni trades for 2010. There were 371 disclosures of a principal & interest delinquency; these involved 1951 securities. The overwhelming majority of them were in project-specific or otherwise non-rated or “junk” bonds. So if you count them on the default list, the list gets bigger.

Does that mean you have to buy any of these bonds? Certainly not. Does delinquency mean an actual monetary default will occur? Maybe yes, maybe no. Each case is different.

When it comes to actual defaults in 2011, the statistics, so far, are improving. “Municipal-bond defaults in the first two months of 2011 are down 50 percent from the same period last year, Standard & Poor’s said. Eight bond deals totaling about $222 million have entered default this year, compared with 16 totaling more than $329 million during the same period of 2010,” said J.R. Rieger, vice-president of fixed-income indexes for S&P in New York (Bloomberg, March 4).

The media has been filled with talk about municipal bankruptcy. This is a serious subject, of course. But it, too, has been overblown. Evidence from the 2008 Vallejo, California bankruptcy demonstrated how costly this is for a city or county. Vallejo has spent nearly $10 million so far and has nothing to show for it. The Bond Buyer, a trade publication, reports that “Vallejo bonds backed by non-general fund revenues amount to $62 million of debt. They have been paid in full and on time throughout the bankruptcy proceeding. They include securities with dedicated income streams including water revenue bonds, tax allocation bonds, and assessment and improvement district bonds.”

So far, in 2011, there has been just one Chapter 9 filing. Bloomberg reported it:

“Boise County, Idaho, with a population of about 7,450, filed for bankruptcy, making it the first U.S. municipality to file Chapter 9 this year. The county sought protection after a federal jury in December found the county violated federal fair housing law in its conduct related to a developer’s plan to build a 72-bed residential treatment facility for teenagers, the Idaho Statesman reported. The jury awarded a $4 million judgment to a developer, which hasn’t been paid. The county’s budget this year is $9.3 million. The county estimated its liabilities at less than $10 million, according to a March 1 filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Boise. Alamar Ranch LLC, the developer, was the largest unsecured creditor with the $4 million claim. Idaho is one of 26 U.S. states that authorize municipal bankruptcy. Like Chapter 11 under the federal bankruptcy code, municipalities allows debtor to adjust debt. Unlike corporate bankruptcies, creditors can’t force municipalities into liquidation and the bankruptcy court has little oversight of municipal operations. Six municipal entities filed for Chapter 9 last year, most of them small utility or sewer districts. The capital of Idaho, Boise, is in adjoining Ada County.”

Whitney’s report does not delve deeply into the recovery history of Munis and into the technical details of default. Nor does she examine the complexities of Chapter 9 bankruptcy.. That is a shame, since she does deserve credit for publicizing the important issue of budget stress in Muniland.

Roubini does examine recovery. He offers estimates and methodologies. And he thoroughly describes the issues involving Chapter 9. His conclusion is that Muni recovery is much higher than markets seem to be pricing and that the widespread use of Chapter 9 is unlikely.

We believe the Roubini report is straightforward and worthy of respect. It is serious research work. It examines nearly two centuries of development in state and local government debt in the United States. It explains the methodology that it used to reach conclusions and estimates. We are less respectful of the Whitney report.

Roubini also attempts to estimate the price adjustment needed in the market in order to normalize the Muni-treasury spread. He notes that the financial crisis sell-off brought Munis to “absurd panic levels.” He reminds readers that, while things are improved since these wide spreads, the Muni market is still under “extreme strain.”

Cumberland agrees with Roubini’s conclusion that the “ratio of Muni yields to Treasuries remains elevated.” We continue to be buyers of well-structured, high-grade, tax-free municipal bonds and of corresponding taxable municipal debt. They remain cheap, and spreads still have a ways to go before normalcy in pricing is attained.

David R. Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer

Published with the permission of our friends at Cumberland Advisors

A Tale of Two Sectors: BABs and Everyone Else, (4/1/11)

Friday, April 1st, 2011

Peter Demirali is a portfolio manager and heads Cumberland’s taxable fixed income area and is a long time veteran of taxable fixed income markets. He is a member of Cumberland Advisor’s Management Committee. His bio may be found at www.cumber.com. Comments on this article may be directed to peter.demirali@cumber.com.

The taxable bond market appeared to have a rather uneventful quarter, looking at where the quarter started and where it ended. Yields were a touch higher at quarter- end, but not significantly. However, there were plenty of crosscurrents, speed bumps, and turbulence along the way. Economic data in general showed growth domestically as well as globally. The industrial sector continued to chug along at a brisk pace, although the durable goods report for February showed some surprising weakness. Business surveys report growth, and optimism recovering. The employment situation has improved somewhat, with the private sector adding to payrolls while state and local governments continued to shed workers. A very mixed picture.

Build America Bonds took home the Oscar for Best Sector in the U.S. investment- grade bond universe for the quarter. As of March 31, 2011, this sector returned 2.41%, according to the Merrill Lynch Build America Bond Index. There were a number of reasons for this outperformance. The primary reason was the scarcity premium. The Build America Bond program (BABs) was introduced in the first quarter of 2009 and expired on 12/31/10. The program was a resounding success, allowing state and local governments to lower their borrowing costs for infrastructure projects, as well as expanding the investor base in municipal bonds to include pension funds, taxable bond funds, and foreign investors. Lack of supply and continued demand caused prices to rise and spreads to narrow. Another reason for the outperformance is the substantially higher yields BABs offer when compared to similarly rated corporate bonds. Triple-A-rated BABs can offer spreads 25-50 basis points higher than triple-A-rated corporate debt. Single-A- rated BABs often offer 75-150 basis points higher yield than A-rated industrial or utility bonds. Those higher-coupon BABs bonds generate significantly more coupon returns in a market that is more or less unchanged. Another justification for why these bonds have performed so well is that BABs provide diversification and high credit quality (low default risk relative to corporate debt) that money managers and pension funds cannot get elsewhere. Many of these managers have been underweight this sector relative to the benchmark and needed to add these bonds to the portfolios they manage.

Cumberland Advisors was one of the earliest to capitalize on the generous yields and high credit quality of BABs. Our decades of managing tax-free portfolios gave us a jump on other money managers and pension funds in allocating to this sector, as we were quite familiar with many of these credits. Most of our taxable-bond portfolios have a significant overweight to this sector. Since most of these bonds have a longer duration, the added yield and steepness of the yield curve (difference between short-term and long-term rates) have allowed our portfolios to generate returns in excess of the benchmark. We anticipate this trend of narrowing spreads and higher prices will continue for at least another quarter or two.

Published with permission from our friends, Cumberland Advisors

Harrisburg Bonds May Incinerate Value ( 41473EFH9 )

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

Buffet says ” when the tide goes out, you get to see who is swimming naked”.

Harrisburg bonds (41473EFH9) are a mess due to what appears to be wasteful spending. Is this representative of a nationwide muni default? In a word NO. So what happened in Harrisburg?

According to our sources, the Harrisburg incinerator that will likely burn bondholders was an mechanical engineering boondoggle dating back to its inception and went through several refits in an attempt to get it functioning to meet environmental standards. But by then it had acquired so much debt, it could not possibly cover its costs. So now the city and Dauphin County are on the hook for what amounts to about $10k per citizen!

Here is the list of this bond’s trades.

It hasnt traded Nov 2008. The lack of interest in trading this bear is no surprise since the Harrisburg municipality filed a July 2009 material events notice .

The former Mayor Reed – king of the city for 24 years may have tried to make the city a better place to live but the spending went far out of control. He spent tens of millions building the “national” civil war museum even thought Gettysburg is just a 45 minute drive from Harrisburg with it’s own museum run by the national park system. When it was obviously not performing, the Mayor argued it was because the city needed a critical mass of museums before it could be a success. So he planned 5 more including a wild west themed museum! He spent tens of millions on acquiring artifacts, the purchase of which he allegedly personally handled. When finally forced to sell these, the city got less than 20 cents on the dollar. Turns out he’s quite the history buff and many of the artifacts allegedly decorated his office while awaiting the building of the museums. Gee if a small business owner did that an IRS agent would have a field day. But since it was public monies that were spent, no crime but certainly a foul.

This is a case of public spending gone crazy. Where were the auditors? Lumped on top of this self created mess is the local government cant afford to continue to platinum healthcare & pension benefits to police, fire and teachers. In good times, fat pensions stress cities’ finances and increase our taxes. But In bad times , these debts break the camels back .

Good media sources on this topic include the excellent WSJ article “ Muni Threat: Cities Weigh Chapter 9 (2/18/10) Harrisburg Authority, city miss debt payment; Dauphin County pays”

Thats said, the Harrisburg bond problem doesnt seem representative of a nationwide muni default. With muni rates still low, the problem is a sick facility pushed over the edge due to unique bad economic times. What is interesting is cities may well choose, or be forced to use Chapter 9 causing sweet-hart city employee union contracts to be squeezed followed by layoffs. But bondholders will suffer too. Interest payments may be frozen, effected bonds prices will drop 50%+ and when the dust settles, private equity players will swoop in and buy the distressed assets on the cheap. Bahhh and good luck to all

AMBAC Lives Another Day

Saturday, November 21st, 2009

It seems for now that AMBAC may win its fight to survive, unless a few muni defaults of AMBAC insured bonds bankrupts them. The insurer can at least rely on the long term premiums continued to be paid by all the municipalities it did insure thereby assuring them an annual maintenance stream. All that said, the insurance industry thrives on conservative stability. So why the AMBAC roller-coaster? Well muni rates are low, but their 3rd quarter results showed a capital gain and a higher stock price moved ( over 30% to $1.30). Then last week AMBAC announced the possibility of a bankruptcy filing. And a few days later it reported $856M of surplus easing concerns the bond insurer would fall short of statutory minimums. How all this can happen in two weeks seems anything but predictable. Some Wall Street analysts had speculated the insurer would come up short of $2 million in minimum capital needed under rules set up by its regulator. Then Ambac said it will receive a gain and plus the US government is bailing them out (and alot of other companies) with a $440 million tax refund because of recent legislation that will allow it to carry back 2008 and 2009 losses as far back as 2004.

Here is a list of recently traded insured bonds from BondView.com

AMBAC Bites The Dust…?

Wednesday, November 11th, 2009

About 10 years ago my muni bond broker said the “day insurers of muni bonds cant pay off a defaulted bond you will have bigger problems on your hands” , implying such an event would never happen. Well he was right about big problems.  Bond insurers sent shudders through the $2.8 trillion municipal bond market when the threat to their internal triple-A credit ratings surfaced two years ago. But now that one of the biggest, Ambac, has said it may actually tip into bankruptcy, the market  barely cares.  With muni rates at all time lows, and bond pricing all over the place, bond insurance is a laughable notion. Up until  a few years ago any old municipality could buy a AAA bond rating bond insruance  helped  foster an environment where the AAA muni was  a commodity that was  easily traded. Many investors didnt care about the all important underlying rating of a muni and instead bought by issuing insured bonds. The underlying rating was meaningless since buyers thought they just wanted a commodity: The AAA Bond. We know now that  was a mistake, hopefully never to be repeated.

In the heyday of bond insurance, seven firms carried the top credit rating of triple-A, and half of new municipal bonds carried insurance. Now, barely 10% of new muni bonds have insurance. None have retained triple-A ratings and all but one, Assured,  have junk ratings! Their downfall came after the top insurers branched out to guarantee complex mortgage securities. When the housing market tanked, insurers saw their losses grow, their ratings fall and their clients flee.

What does this mean for today?  The muni bond market has largely taken its losses and has withstood the turmoil seen with the weakest of the insurers. Besides Ambac,  MBIA  posted its fifth straight quarterly loss earlier this year and its public finance insurance spinoff  is being challenged by banks, which say such a split is fraudulent.  Here is a list of  today’s insured bonds  trading info from BondView

Don’t sweat ratings downgrades on GOs?

Sunday, October 11th, 2009

In terms of safety, governors and state treasurers argue, GO state debt should be equivalent to Treasury bonds, or at least triple-A-rated corporate bonds. Although states can’t print their own money and are suffering budget problems during the recession, I tend to agree with the governors and treasurers. Don’t sweat ratings downgrades on GOs? Gee well the future will tell on this issue.

Moodys Should Disclose When A Ratings Or Rerating Was Given

Sunday, October 11th, 2009

Would you want to own muni bond  that hasn’t been given a sniff test for 20 years?  Well this is a common concern for muni investors according to  the N.Y. Times  “When Bond Ratings Get Stale” (10/11/09). We were not surprised by Moody’s alleged failure to monitor older ratings on many thousands of municipal bonds held by individual and institutional investors.  Former Moodys’ senior  employee  Scott McCleskey, head of compliance at Moody’s from April 2006 to September 2008,  outlined his employer’s failures to the US Congress this week and claimed that once Moody’s issues these ratings, it rarely reviews them again — leaving them fallow, sometimes for decades, a concern echoed by other former Moody’s employees. One way to resolve this glaring problem is  for agencies to disclose exactly when a ratings or rerating was given.