Economy

The Global Investment Strategy service tactically downgraded equities in February but then upgraded them in May. The decision to upgrade equities to overweight in May was clearly premature, as stocks fell significantly in June. However, the rally in July has brought stocks back above the level where we upgraded them. Hence, we are using this opportunity to shift our recommended equity allocation back to neutral. While our base case forecast still foresees no recession in the US over the next 12 months, the risks to this view have increased. In Europe, we see a recession as more likely than not. China’s economy will remain under pressure due to Covid lockdowns, a shift in global spending away from manufactured goods, and a weakening property market. Even if the US avoids a recession, this could prove to be a bittersweet outcome for stocks: While earnings will hold up, the Fed is unlikely to cut rates next year, as markets are currently discounting. Real bond yields, which have already risen steeply this year, will rise further, weighing on equity valuations.  Time to Take Some Chips Off the Table The consensus view among investors these days seems to be that the US is heading into a recession (or may already be in one), which will cause stocks to fall during the remainder of the year as earnings estimates are slashed. Looking out to 2023, most investors expect stocks to recover as the Fed begins to cut rates. I have the opposite view. While the risks to growth have increased, the US will probably avoid a recession over the next 12 months. This will allow stocks to rise modestly from current levels into year-end. However, as we enter 2023, it will become obvious that the Fed has no reason to cut rates. This could cause stocks to give up some of their gains, thus producing a fairly flat profile for equities over a 12-month horizon. In past reports, we have argued that the neutral rate of interest – the interest rate consistent with full employment and stable inflation – is higher than widely believed in the US. The nice thing about a high neutral rate is that it insulates the economy from tighter monetary policy: Even if the Fed raises rates to 3.8% next year, as the dots are currently forecasting, that will only put rates in the middle of our fair value range of 3.5%-to-4% for the US neutral rate. The downside of a high neutral rate is that eventually, investors will need to value stocks using a higher discount rate. The 10-year TIPS yield has already increased from -0.97% at the start of the year to +0.36% today. It will rise to 1%-to-1.5% by the middle of 2023. A higher-than-expected neutral rate also raises inflation risks because it could cause the Fed to inadvertently keep monetary policy too loose. Inflation is likely to fall significantly over the coming months as supply-chain bottlenecks ease. However, this decline in inflation could sow the seeds of its own demise: As inflation falls, real wage growth – which is now negative – will turn positive. Rising real wages will booster consumer confidence and spending. A reacceleration in inflation in the second half of next year could prompt the Fed to start hiking rates again in late 2023, thus producing a recession not in 2022 but in 2024. Outside the US, the outlook is more challenging. In Europe, a recession is more likely than not in the second half of the year. We expect the recession to be fairly short-lived, with European governments moving aggressively to mitigate the fallout from gas shortages through various income support schemes for the private sector. Chinese growth should rebound in the second half of the year. However, the specter of future lockdowns, the shift in global spending away from manufactured goods towards services, and the weakening property sector will continue to weigh on activity. We will have much more to say about this view change early next week. In the meantime, please review our report from last week entitled “The Downside Of A Soft Landing” for further color on some of the points made in this short bulletin. Tomorrow, my colleague Ritika Mankar will be sending you a Special Report making the case that the US economy’s ability to spawn mega-sized companies may become increasingly compromised over the next decade.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on LinkedIn & Twitter.

Special Report

Executive Summary Dollar Still The Largest Global Reserve Currency The rise of cryptocurrencies like stablecoins theoretically pose risks to fiat currencies and their general use. In the US, the Federal Reserve will look to adopt a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) – a digital dollar – this decade, to stave off these risks and usher in a new era of central bank money. A digital dollar would likely be integrated as seamlessly as possible into the current monetary regime, thereby maintaining an intermediated role played by existing financial sector actors as well as operating alongside existing circulating currency. The US dollar will eventually face rising competition from digital currencies, both at home and abroad. While other central banks make headway into developing their own CBDCs, China is by far the most advanced. China’s digital yuan will not resolve all of China’s problems with internationalizing its currency but it will create new opportunities. Public and political pushback will occur and will slow adoption of a digital dollar. Gridlock in 2023 may prove to be another headwind. To adopt a digital dollar, politicians will need to work along bipartisan lines to ensure the US remains at the forefront of digital and monetary innovation, especially as foreign competition on CBDCs rises. Recommendation (Tactical) Initiation Date  Return Long DXY (Dollar Index) 23-FEB-22 10.7% Bottom Line: Policymakers will adopt a CBDC – a digital dollar – this decade. Political pushback may slow adoption, but foreign competition will overcome domestic constraints. Feature Technological innovation over the past decade has given rise to a new asset class – digital assets. Investors are most familiar with cryptocurrencies, and to a lesser extent, non-fungible tokens and decentralized finance-based lending, among others. These assets have witnessed a boom and bust over the past few years (Chart 1). Chart 1Manias: Then And Now Cryptocurrencies have been touted to have money-like characteristics, the most popular being Bitcoin, and others like stablecoins. Stablecoins are mostly used as a medium of exchange between fiat money and cryptocurrencies and vice versa. They are pegged to fiat money and often backed by highly liquid traditional assets1 to maintain their pegs. But cryptocurrencies do not exhibit the traits of durable money today. However, the technological innovation of digital currency represents a natural evolution of money that is irreversible and could someday possess the main characteristics of money: a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and store of value. Cryptocurrencies with money-like qualities theoretically pose a challenge to fiat currencies, i.e. those issued by governments that are not backed by any underlying real asset but rather by trust in government institutions, including the treasury and central bank. Not that trust is a poor basis for a currency. But that trust could fail and new trust could be placed in cryptocurrencies. Governments could eventually lose control of the money supply and payments system, suffer from financial instability, fail to provide regulatory oversight, or fail to prevent the illicit use of digital assets for criminal gain. The same technology driving growth in digital assets has led central banks the world around to research and in some cases develop CBDCs. For an introductory guide to CBDCs, see BCA’s “The Investor’s Guide To Central Bank Digital Currencies.” CBDC research and development are at varying stages across the world’s central banks.2 In the US, the Federal Reserve (Fed) continues to research a CBDC (digital dollar) and its use-case, or justification for being. The Fed has made no commitment to designing a digital dollar anytime soon. But we bet that the Fed’s position will change in coming years. Introducing a digital dollar will reduce the various risks associated with cryptocurrencies whilst also creating efficiencies in the US economy. These efficiencies will also transverse into cross-border efficiencies. Globally, central banks are showing increasing activity in developing CBDCs and introducing a digital dollar would help the Fed maintain monetary dominance across the world while staving off cryptocurrencies, especially stablecoins. The Fed won’t sit idle as a global monetary revolution unfolds. But the policy front is fraught with challenges. Policy makers in the US have expressed mixed views on adopting a digital dollar. Some suggest the Fed would exercise even more control over monetary policy than it does today. Others note risks to consumer data privacy, which could be exploited by government. Public opinion is also mixed with no clear understanding of or need for a digital dollar. Commercial bank business interests may come under attack too, with a digital dollar scalping profit margins from banks, depending on the type and extent of the CBDC operating model employed. Ultimately, the US will want to maintain its position as the global monetary leader. Continued dollar dominance in the global economy is strategically advantageous for the US, especially in a hypo-globalizing world (Chart 2). Ensuring ongoing monetary dominance while rooting out domestic competition from stablecoins will be aided by adopting a digital dollar. Chart 2Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves Bottom Line: The Fed will most likely adopt a digital dollar within the decade. The Fed And A Digital Dollar The Fed has been actively researching a digital dollar for several years with growing research on design, implementation, and necessity. As it stands, the Fed has not committed to introducing a digital dollar in the foreseeable future. But what would a digital dollar look like and what role would it play in the economy if the Fed decided to introduce one? CBDC Model Briefly, the Fed could choose from three different CBDC operating models: unilateral, synthetic, or intermediated (Diagram 1). A unilateral model would mean the Fed performs all CBDC related functions including direct interaction with end-users. A synthetic model would mean non-Fed actors issuing money backed by Fed assets. Diagram 1Three CBDC Operating Models Realistically, a unilateral and synthetic digital dollar are unlikely. The former would crowd out traditional banking services, while the latter would let actors other than the Fed issue money, violating the Federal Reserve Act. Hence the Fed will most likely pursue an intermediated CBDC model. This model entails digital dollar issuance by the Fed but includes a role for private sector firms to interact with end-users. The intermediary role would be filled by financial firms but also other types of companies such as payment service providers and mobile phone operators. This means the Fed would not totally crowd out existing players across the payment and financial services space. An intermediated model would require the central bank to regulate and oversee other actors, which adds an extra layer of legal and operational complexity to implementation. But it is the model most consistent with the US’s combination of federal government and liberal capitalism, and the model cited by the Fed to most likely be adopted.3 The intermediated model will align with the current two-tier system currently in place (Diagram 2). Digital dollars will feature in both wholesale and retail transactions. Wholesale involves commercial banks and regulated financial intermediaries, while retail involves individuals and non-financial businesses. The model would also operate alongside existing paper money. A digital dollar would be a liability on the Fed, denominated in dollars, and would form an integral part of base money supply (M0). It would be distributed like, and act as a complement to, dollar bills and could be used in transactions conducted in currency and reserves. It would be legal tender just like the paper dollar. Diagram 2Two-Tier Monetary Regime System Digital Dollar Needs The Fed has stated that a digital dollar should, among other things, meet certain criteria before adoption (Table 1). Some of these criteria are already met. Others will be met with adoption. A digital dollar will benefit households, businesses, and the economy at large. For example, a digital dollar would enhance payment transparency, thereby supporting the Fed’s objective to promote safe and efficient payments. And depending on design choices, digital transactions could offer degrees of traceability and aggregate payment data could be analyzed in real time to provide insights into economic health and activity. Table 1Fed Criteria For CBDC Adoption Further, a digital dollar would promote diversification of the payments system, thereby increasing the safety and efficiency of US payment infrastructure. It may also attract new actors offering services related to the digital dollar, spurring financial innovation and fostering financial integration. The payments system is already broadly efficient but adding another layer of digitization with a digital dollar would mean that the US economy would be better positioned for the evolution of the digital economy over the next decade and beyond. The need for broad stakeholder support will be a difficult criterion to meet, however. There would need to be more engagement with the public, inter-government agencies, and Congress. For now, these “needs” outlined by the Fed are more than half met, signaling that a digital dollar could come to fruition within the decade from a policy perspective. International advances on this front will spur US policy makers into action even if they are disinclined. Bottom Line: The needs outlined by the Fed to adopt a digital dollar have been mostly met which ticks off one of the policy implementation checkboxes. There are gains to be had across the economy by introducing a digital dollar, ranging from a more efficient payments system to financial inclusion and decreasing transactions costs. Domestic Competition The proliferation of stablecoins has been noted by government agencies around the world. The Fed too has been keeping note. By the end of 2021, stablecoins had a relatively small market capitalization compared to the broader cryptocurrency market, approximately 6%. Now, stablecoins account for almost 16% of cryptocurrency market capitalization. But trading volumes point to stablecoins having a much larger role in transactions (Chart 3). Stablecoins resolve some of the problems of faith and trust that bedevil cryptocurrencies not backed by traditional assets. Chart 3Stablecoins Rise In Popularity Stablecoins pose two key threats that a digital dollar will essentially nullify: Systemic risk: A growing stablecoin market that is increasingly backed by traditional, high liquid assets could create systemic risk in traditional asset markets. An excessive rise or fall in demand for stablecoins would cause volatility in the liquid assets that back them. Moreover, for example, a fire sale in the stablecoin market would cause demand to fall excessively relative to the backing asset. Prices between stablecoins and the backing asset would diverge, potentially breaking the peg and resulting in further price divergence. And more broadly, high volatility from crypto markets can penetrate traditional or risk-free markets. A digital dollar would render stablecoins unnecessary, allowing cryptocurrency users to transact and convert digital dollars to cryptocurrency while enjoying the backing of the Fed on the value of digital dollars. Cross-border transactions: Stablecoins are also increasingly used for cross-border transactions. According to Fed data, the US pays 5.4% in fees on average per cross-border transaction, which also takes several days to settle. Stablecoins settle almost instantaneously and have much lower transaction fees. So too can a digital dollar. It would settle just as quickly as a stablecoin, if not quicker, and reduce transaction costs for cross-border payments. And because stablecoins are designed to maintain their pegs, they have more potential than cryptocurrencies to act as mediums of exchange outside of the crypto market and economy, potentially threatening the ongoing use of fiat money. Bottom Line: The Fed will design a CBDC around its existing monetary and payments system to allow for seamless integration. There are not many reasons holding back digital dollar adoption from a point of need and benefit. By adopting a digital dollar, the Fed will also fight off the growing risk of stablecoins, which could pose a threat to the use-case of fiat money in everyday life. Other Central Banks On The March The authority to issue money is an important element of economic power. History is replete with examples of currency competition both within countries and between them. CBDC research and development are picking up speed across central banks (Charts 4A and 4B). China is the world leader with its digital yuan, as we discuss below. Design and implementation of CBDCs will follow in coming years just like in the case of the digital yuan. If the theoretical payoffs to adopting a CBDC are met by real-world green shoots, then foreign CBDCs could pose a threat to continued dollar dominance in the global monetary and economic system, namely if countries can draw down their dependence on dollar reserves. Chart 4ACentral Banks Paying More Attention To CBDCs Chart 4BCentral Banks Paying More Attention To CBDCs Central Bank Competition Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has noted this challenge in recent remarks explaining that any implementation of a “US central bank digital currency must support the prominent role the dollar plays in the global financial system.”4 The Fed is on the same page as the Treasury noting that any CBDC should be used to preserve the dominant international role of the dollar. The dollar is the world’s most widely used currency for payments and investments and serves as the world’s premier reserve currency. The dollar’s international role allows the US to influence the practices and standards of the global monetary and economic system. Basically, when the US constricts the supply of dollars in response to domestic conditions, the rest of the world suffers tighter monetary conditions, and when the US expands the supply, the rest of the world enjoys looser conditions, almost regardless of what other nations want or need. Central banks have made their policy goals clear in respect to developing a CBDC. Some central banks look to expand financial inclusion, market access, and their payments system while others are looking to compete with one another (Table 2). Canada, China, and Sweden want to gain a local and international market advantage for their currencies by introducing CBDCs. Table 2CBDC Policy Goals Of Central Banks China Leading CBDC Race, But… At this early stage, China’s digital yuan poses the largest threat to a digital dollar on the international stage. It is the most prominent CBDC project at this current juncture. The digital yuan entered beta testing at the end of 2020 in parts of the country. Wider testing across provinces is being phased in. China’s monetary endeavors began with the Cross-Border Inter-Bank Payment Service in 2015. The digital yuan will be positioned as an extension of this system to promote the national currency and fight global dollar dominance. But how big of a challenge could a digital yuan mount? The answer is not much, not now. China is the world’s largest trading partner but the renminbi accounts for less than 3% of the world’s reserve currency (Chart 5). The disparity between trade and currency status in the global economy reflects a lack of global trust in the renminbi and is a cause for concern for China. China is structurally invested in the dollar-dominated financial system and hence vulnerable to American influence by means of that system. Chart 5Global Renminbi Reserves Are Low The digital yuan would support more debt issuance based on cost and payment incentives to debt holders when financing BRI projects. This will help drive the use of the digital yuan going forward. For example, China can assert its influence over countries with Chinese debt by having them accumulate digital yuan reserves to pay back loans. China can even provide countries with concessions on loans to promote its digital yuan. Concessions on Chinese debt may lead to easier uptake, therefore promoting issuance. If the cost of switching to the digital yuan is low, countries will see no benefit in continuing their trade transactions with China in US dollars. Using the digital yuan as the currency of invoice to disburse loans can make these transactions more transparent and manageable. This could also allow for more state control over funds, an attractive scenario for China. However, China’s monetary ambitions face serious constraints. Lack of trust in the currency is the most critical challenge for internationalization of the yuan, digital or otherwise. Even if the digital yuan project is five to ten years ahead of the curve, countries still opt to hold the dollar over the yuan in any type of crisis, as has been amply demonstrated in history, and over a range of global shocks since 2019. Hence digital yuan adoption will require guarantees from Chinese institutions. But these same institutions have struggled to internationalize the paper renminbi. Lack of openness, transparency, and convertibility are persistent problems. Bottom Line: Central banks around the world are gearing up to introduce CBDCs in coming years. Some are looking to promote financial inclusivity. Others like China’s digital yuan want to chip away at the dollar’s global dominance. Digital versions of fiat currencies will have to demonstrate substantial economic and trade efficiencies in order to encourage diversification away from the US dollar, since there is no inherent reason a digital version of a nation’s currency would increase trust beyond what is already established. But those efficiencies could take shape, which would put pressure on the US to respond. The US faces significant monetary challenges over the long run, including from CBDCs. But the US is a technological power and will eventually respond by developing its own CBDC. Pushback Against A Digital Dollar The Fed has stated that it would only pursue a digital dollar in the context of broad public and cross-governmental support. However, neither the public nor congress broadly support one at present. Public opinion is uneducated on the issue and therefore highly malleable depending on leadership and events. Public Opinion Is Non-Supportive Across age groups, people do not know enough about digital currencies and think it is a bad idea to introduce a digital dollar (Chart 6). A 2020 poll found that only 13% of respondents approved of a digital dollar.5 Low approval is becoming a trend. However, the same poll showed that 38% of respondents think the US dollar is backed by gold, bonds, or oil. Addressing poor monetary literacy among the public would help to improve public support of a digital dollar. US households say they are more likely to trust traditional financial institutions than government agencies to safeguard their personal data (Chart 7). A digital dollar will grant the Fed and federal government far-reaching information regarding the everyday financial transactions of households. Trust in government has been declining and a digital dollar underpinned by a central ledger system would provoke consumer privacy lobby groups and government activists to fight and protest adoption (Chart 8). Chart 6Popular Support For A Digital Dollar Is Lacking Chart 7Households Trust Government Less Than Financial Institutions Chart 8Trust In Government Has Been Waning Chart 9Inflation Outbreak Will Limit Big Government About half of the US public already view the government as “doing too much” (Chart 9). The explosive inflation of 2020-22 will slow the underlying ideological shift to the political left, potentially limiting support for a digital dollar. Public opinion has been shifting for decades in favor of more government involvement in people’s day-to-day lives (Chart 10), but that trend may well stall now that excess of government creates tangible negatives for household pocketbooks (inflation). The bigger of a problem the Fed has in taming inflation in 2022-23, the bigger the political backlash will be. Federal solutions will suffer as a result. This is our theme of “Limited Big Government,” since the role of the state will increase relative to the past 40 years but still within an American context of checks and balances. Chart 10People Have Favored Government Involvement Bottom Line: There is no clear public demand for the digitization of the dollar at present. A major financial or economic disruption stemming from the monetary system or digital assets may be necessary to call public attention to the question. Meanwhile the private sector will drive innovation and the federal government will react to try to maintain domestic stability and international competitiveness. These data support the Fed taking an intermediated approach to cbdc when forced to take action. Policymakers Will Resist Policymakers are divided over the idea of a digital dollar. Senator Ted Cruz introduced a bill in March 2022 to “prohibit the Federal Reserve from offering products or services directly to individuals, maintaining accounts on behalf of individuals, or issuing a central bank digital currency directly to an individual.”6 Cruz has yet to receive widespread party support on the bill but he could get the backing from more GOP members if Republicans take over Congress, as expected, this November. Some Republicans and Democrats have favored cryptocurrencies while others have not, advocating for crypto-mining and crypto start-ups in progressive-left and libertarian right states. But the center-left and center-right might lean more toward cryptocurrency regulation and digital dollar adoption. Coalitions may need to be formed on the topic of a digital dollar, in parties and between parties. A digital dollar will cause a level of disruption, which will affect both the Democrats and Republicans. Government gridlock will create challenges to digital dollar adoption too. The upcoming mid-term elections favor the GOP. Both the House and the Senate are expected to flip in favor of the GOP in 2023. The “Blue Sweep” policy setting will end and only the White House will remain in Democrat control. Republicans have a shot at flipping the White House in 2024, which could see a “Red Sweep.” This scenario may slow adoption of a digital dollar but it will only preclude the unilateral cbdc model, not the intermediated model. The period of 2023-24 is too soon for adoption of a digital dollar anyway but the fact is that gridlock will delay the process until external factors force US action. Bottom Line: Public and political pushback will slow the adoption of a digital dollar. Politicians will need to work along bipartisan lines to ensure the US remains at the forefront of digital and monetary innovation but this will be difficult in a highly polarized country and will likely depend on foreign competition. Investment Takeaways We avoided cryptocurrencies during the irrational exuberance over the past two years. We expect governments to regulate the sector in order to preserve a monopoly over money supply and hence geopolitical interests. With monetary conditions tightening, we expect continued volatility in the crypto space. The US dollar remains strong tactically but is nearing its peak cyclically. We remain long but have put the currency on downgrade watch as the market more fully prices a range of bad news this year. On the global stage, the US dollar will remain the premier reserve currency despite cyclical ups and downs. The current macroeconomic backdrop is negative for the US financial sector (Chart 11). Mergers and acquisitions are drying up while regulatory risks loom. Initial public offerings are also slowing, while trading volume is low. Consumers had already accumulated debt earlier in the cycle and with rising interest rates amid a more challenging job environment, growth in loans and ultimately bank profits will slow. The commercial banking sector faces challenges during the upcoming transitional period of disruptive innovation and regulatory uncertainty. We believe the Fed and policymakers in general will want to cause as little disruption as possible, by integrating any digital dollar with the traditional finance sector as seamlessly as possible. However, transitions, especially those digital in nature, bring with them high uncertainty in the financial sector and elsewhere. Chart 11Financial Sector Facing Macro Headwinds     Guy Russell Senior Analyst guyr@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Stablecoins are backed by various assets and means. Fiat money, commodities, other cryptocurrencies and by algorithmic means are some examples. 2     See The Bank For International Settlements, Central Bank Digital Currencies: Executive Summary, September 2021, bis.org. 3    See The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Money and Payments: The U.S.Dollar in the Age of Digital Transformation, January 2022, federalreserve.gov. 4    See U.S. Department Of The Treasury, Remarks from Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen on Digital Assets, April 2022, treasury.gov. 5    See Cointelegraph, Most Americans are against a digital dollar CBDC, survey reveals,september 25, 2020, cointelegraph.com 6    See Ted Cruz’s Proposed Bill to amend the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit the Federal reserve banks from offering certain products or services directly to an individual, and for other purposes, March 2022, cruz.senate.gov.   Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)   Table A2Political Risk Matrix Table A3US Political Capital Index Chart A1Presidential Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model  Table A4House Election Model Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets

Special Report

Executive Summary   Copper prices still face substantial downside (15-20% from current levels). The global copper market is shifting from a deficit to a considerable surplus over the next 12 to 18 months. Global copper supply will likely grow by 4-4.5% year on year in both 2022H2 and 2023, surpassing global copper demand growth of 2-3% during the same period. Global copper ore output will increase thanks to a slew of new projects and expansions this year and next year. Regarding copper demand in 2022H2 and 2023, China will be the main driver due to a moderate boost in traditional infrastructure investment, an acceleration in the build-up of green sources of electricity generation and surging penetration of new energy vehicles (NEV). Global Copper Supply Balance: Shifting From A Deficit To A Surplus Bottom Line: According to our projections, the global copper market will move from a deficit to a material surplus later this year and in 2023. This will continue weighing on copper and related equity prices.     Even though copper prices have plunged over 30% from their peak, we expect them to fall further (Chart 1). Chart 1Copper Prices & Copper Mining Stocks: The Decline Is Not Over The main reason is that the global copper market will swing from a deficit to a surplus over the next 12 to 18 months (Chart 2). Global copper output growth is currently accelerating and will average 4% in 2022 and 4.5% in 2023. This will outpace the 2-3% annual growth in global copper demand during the same period. Chart 2Global Copper Supply Balance: Shifting From A Deficit To A Surplus Beware Of Rising Copper Supply In 2022-23 The global copper market balance is in the process of swinging from a 283,000-ton deficit at the end of 2021 to a 464,000-ton surplus at the end of 2023, based on our calculations. In comparison, the International Copper Study Group (ICSG) expects a smaller surplus of 350,000 tons next year. There are two key estimates for our global copper supply balance calculation. Supply We expect global copper output to grow at 4% in 2022 and a slightly faster rate of 4.5% in 2023 as many new mines/expansions are coming on stream. Table 1 lists 12 major global copper mines that will add new copper ore supply in 2022. The combined copper ore output of these projects will increase the global copper ore supply by about 4.5% this year. Table 1Major Global New Copper Ore Supply In 2022 Robust copper ore production growth in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Congo), Zambia, Peru and China will boost the global copper ore supply in the next 12 to 18 months. Congo has been the largest contributor to global copper ore growth, accounting for over 60% of the increase in global copper ore output during the past five years. This country has already become the third largest producer of copper ore in the world. Chart 3Congo, Zambia and Peru Will Continue Boosting Their Copper Ore Supply Its Kamoa-Kalula copper mine listed in Table 1 began producing copper concentrates in May 2021 and its production will increase exponentially into 2023 (Chart 3, top panel). Zambia is another country with substantial potential for copper ore output (Chart 3, middle panel). President Hakainde Hichilema, who was elected last year, expects to increase the country’s annual copper ore production from 800,000 tons to three million tons in terms of copper content in 10 years. This will translate into new supply of 220,000 tons per year and constitutes about 1% growth in global copper ore supply this year and next year.  Peru is the world’s second largest copper ore producer. Despite the number of strikes rising in past two years, the country's copper ore output has stayed at a near historical high level (Chart 3, bottom panel).  China, which is the world’s fourth largest producer, is also set to boost its copper ore output within the next few years. The increase in supply will be driven by the construction of Tibet's Qulong copper mine, the second phase expansion of the Duobaoshan and the Jiama copper mines, and the Chifeng Fubo project. Chart 4New Mines Are Also Coming On Stream In Chile, Australia and Canada Copper ore output in other top producers such as Chile, Australia and Canada have already declined considerably in the past several years due to lower ore quality, the pandemic, drought, and protests (Chart 4). Nevertheless, new mines coming on stream will likely prevent copper ore output from falling further in these countries. For example, the Australian government expects the country’s copper mine output to increase by 15% in the 2022-2023 financial year and by another 7% in the 2023-2024 financial year. Regarding Chile, the world’s largest copper ore producer (representing 26% of the world total), we expect copper ore output to increase over the next 12 to 18 months after declining for three consecutive years. The reason for this optimism is that the Quebrada Blanca Phase 2 (QB2) project is expected to begin production in the second half of 2022. The company estimates that QB2 copper output over the first five years will average 286,000 tons per year. This is equal to 1.3% of annual global copper output. The same company is also considering a third phase for the project, which could significantly boost capacity in the longer term. That said, investments in Chilean copper mining may struggle over the long term if the proposed mining royalties increase1 gets passed in September. Table 2The World’s Top 10 Copper Producing Companies’ Capex investment In 2022 & 2023 At a company level, Table 2 shows that the capex of the world’s top 10 copper producing companies has been planned to increase by 21% in 2022 and remain at an elevated level in 2023. Such large capex seems to support the strong copper ore output growth forecasts shown in Table 1.   Demand We expect global copper consumption to grow by 2.5% in 2022 and a slightly higher rate of 3% in 2023. Table 3 shows our growth estimates for this year and next year for China, the US, the EU, and the rest of world. This year and in 2023, red metal consumption will likely rebound in China and will experience a slowdown in the rest of the world (Chart 5). We expect copper demand growth in China to recover from last year’s contraction to post 3% growth this year and then accelerate to 4% in 2023. A detailed discussion of Chinese copper demand is presented below. Copper demand growth in both the US and the EU is set to slow as their pandemic-triggered overspending on goods ex-autos has run its course (Chart 6). Given that the US lags the EU in terms of NEV sales/production and new energy development, we expect a lower growth in the US (0-2%) versus in the EU (2-4%). The ongoing energy crisis in the EU has incentivized the bloc to expedite its transition to green sources of energy. As a result, its copper demand will rise faster than copper demand in the US. Chart 5Global Copper Consumption: A Moderate Rise Across Regions Chart 6Decelerating Copper Demand Growth In The US and The EU Using these economies’ respective shares in global copper consumption in 2021, we estimate global copper consumption growth of 2.5% for 2022 and 3% for 2023 (Table 3). We are well aware that global copper demand from green sources – electric vehicles, wind turbines, solar panels and charging poles – will continue booming. Yet, their share of global copper consumption is about 4.2% according to our estimates (Table 4). It is too small to have any substantial effect on global copper demand in next 18 months. Table 3Global Copper Consumption Growth Forecast For 2022 & 2023 Table 4Global Green Demand For Copper Bottom Line: Global copper demand growth will likely fall short of copper supply in the next 18 months. Consequently, we expect the global copper market to swing from a supply deficit to a supply surplus over the next 12 to 18 months. Chinese Copper Demand Why do we expect Chinese copper demand to grow at 3% in 2022 and 4% in 2023?  Table 5 illustrates our rough estimates of the copper consumption growth from China’s main sources of red metal consumption.  Table 5Chinese Underlying Copper Consumption: Growth Estimates For 2022 & 2023 The power sector is the largest copper user as this metal is among the best conductors of electricity. The metal is used in high-, medium-, and low-voltage power networks. Chart 7The Power Sector Will Be The Main Driver Of Chinese Copper Demand Authorities will ensure a rapid expansion of renewable energy like wind power and solar power, as well as continue construction of smart power grids as the country strives to achieve its ambitious targets for 2030 peak carbon dioxide emissions and 2060 net-zero carbon dioxide emissions. Investment in the new and old power sector grew by about 4% y/y in nominal terms in the past 12 months (Chart 7). Production of power generation equipment output has risen by 8% y/y in real terms during the same period. All together, we forecast that the copper consumption from the power sector will grow by approximately 5% year on year both this year and next year. Chart 8Mean-Reversion IN The Appliance Sector The output of air conditioner, freezer and refrigerator production are all currently in contraction (Chart 8). The global “stay-at-home” economy significantly boosted Chinese exports of air conditioners, freezers, and refrigerators in 2020 and 2021. These appliances are all durable goods, and consumers who had already purchased them are unlikely to buy again this year and next year. Thus, we expect a 3% contraction in copper use this year and a slight growth of 2% next year from this industry Capital expenditures in the transportation network will improve from current zero growth, and production of traditional automobiles may increase again (Chart 9). Meanwhile, NEV output and construction of charging poles will continue booming (Chart 10). NEV uses more copper per car than the traditional autos, and charging poles also use copper. Putting all this together, we forecast a 3% and 4% year-on-year growth of copper consumption in the transportation sector in 2022 and 2023, respectively. Assuming there will be two million more NEVs this year, copper use will increase by an additional 160,000 tons, equaling to about a 1.2% increase in Chinese copper consumption. Chart 9Copper Demand From The Transportation Sector: Supported By Rebounding Traditional Auto Sales... Chart 10...As Well As Surging NEV Sales Copper or copper base alloys are used in printed circuit boards, electronic connectors, as well as in many semiconductor products. The tech-related new infrastructure, which includes information transmission, software, and information technology services, such as 5G networks, industrial internet, and data centers, will remain the government’s focus in the coming years. Tech-related new infrastructure investment increased by 20% year on year in the January – June period (Chart 11). We expect year-on-year copper usage growth in this sector to be 15% in 2022 and 12% in 2023. Chart 11Copper Demand Will Benefit From Strong Tech Investment Chart 12Chinese Property Market Is Negative For Copper Demand   The Chinese property market is in deep trouble. Our broad measure of China’s building construction activity/building area starts contracted 15% year on year in the second quarter of this year, and completions grew only moderately at 5% during the same period (Chart 12). Assuming half of this sector’s usage is in building area starts and the other half in completions, we expect the copper consumption in this sector to contract by 10% y/y in 2022. Next year, we expect the contraction to narrow to 5% as the government implements policies to support completions. Bottom Line: Chinese copper demand will increase moderately by 3% in 2022 and 4% in 2023. Investment Implications The global copper market is moving towards a surplus. This is one of reasons behind the red metal’s 30% price plunge since March 4, 2022. Copper inventories on global exchanges are low. Yet, that is not a sufficient reason to be bullish on copper prices as we elaborate in Box 1. Box 1 What About Copper Inventories? We believe inventory data released by exchanges – LME, COMEX and Shanghai Futures Exchange - do not provide a full picture of copper inventories. First, troughs in copper inventories – often but not always – coincide with peaks in copper prices and tops in inventories with bottoms in their prices (Chart 13). Hence, low inventory levels are not a reason to be bullish on copper prices. Chart 13Level of Copper Inventories In Exchanges Is Not A Good Forward-looking Indicator For Prices Second, inventory data from commodity exchanges may overstate the supply tightness as there might have been some build-up in unreported inventories. The basis is that many end-users (companies) around the world might purchase copper for the purposes of hoarding and speculation. These inventories are not counted in the data published by commodity exchanges.   Chart 14Copper: Bearish Sentiment Is Not Extreme Yet Net speculative positions of copper in the US as a share of total open interest have already tanked to near multi-year low levels (Chart 14, top panel). However, bearish sentiment is still far from the extreme level (Chart 14, bottom panel). Putting all together, copper prices are vulnerable to the downside over the next 6 to 12 months. We expect a 15%-20% downside in copper prices from the current level. Shares prices of copper miners always move closely with red metal prices. Equity portfolios should underweight copper miners.   Ellen JingYuan He Associate Vice President ellenj@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1     The proposed tax reform applies to copper producers of more than 50,000 tons and combines the ad-valorem component based on the copper price with a tax based on mining operating margins (MOM). The ad-valorem component has two regimes depending on whether the production volume is above or below 200,000 tons. For the larger producers, the effective rate applied will move in a range of 1% to 4% of revenue depending on the copper price, while below 200,000 tons the rate will be between 1.0% and 1.6% of revenue. Source: "Proposed Tax Reform Weakens Cost Positions for Chilean Miners,” Fitch Ratings, July 7, 2022, www.fitchratings.com. Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations