Why The Dollar Will Lose Its Status As The Global Reserve Currency

Why The Dollar Will Lose Its Status As The Global Reserve Currency

Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black)  May 13, 2024

By the early 400s, the Roman Empire was coming apart at the seams and in desperate need of strong, competent leadership. In theory, Honorius should have been the right man for the job.

Born into the royal household in Constantinople, Honorius had been groomed to rule, practically since birth, by the finest experts in the realm. So even as a young man, Honorius had already accumulated decades of experience.

Yet Rome’s foreign adversaries rightfully believed Honorius to be weak, out of touch, divisive, and completely inept.

He had entered into bonehead peace treaties that strengthened Rome’s enemies. He paid vast sums of money to some of their most powerful rivals and received practically nothing in return. He made virtually no attempt to secure Roman borders, leaving the empire open to be ravaged by barbarians.

Inflation was high. Taxes were high. Economic production declined. Roman military power declined. And all of Rome’s foreign adversaries were emboldened.

To a casual observer it would have almost seemed as if Honorius went out of his way to make the Empire weaker.

One of Rome’s biggest threats came in the year 408, when the barbarian king Alaric invaded Italy; imperial defenses were so non-existent at that point that ancient historians described Alaric’s march towards Rome as unopposed and leisurely, as if they were “at some festival” rather than an invasion.

Alaric and his army arrived to the city of Rome in the autumn of 408 AD and immediately positioned their forces to cut off any supplies. No food could enter the city, and before long, its residents began to starve.

Historians have passed down horrific stories of cannibalism-- including women eating their own children in order to survive.

Rather than send troops and fight, however, Honorius agreed to pay a massive ransom to Alaric, including 5,000 pounds of gold, 30,000 pounds of silver, and literally tons of other real assets and commodities.

(The equivalent in today’s money, adjusted for population, would be billions of dollars… similar to what the US released to Iran in a prisoner swap last year.)

Naturally, Honorius didn’t have such a vast sum in his treasury… so Romans were forced to strip down and melt their shrines and statues in order to pay Alaric’s ransom.

Ironically, one of the statues they melted was a monument to Virtus, the Roman god of bravery and strength… leading the ancient historian Zosimus to conclude that “all which remained of Roman valor and intrepidity was totally extinguished.”

Rome had spent two centuries in the early days of the empire-- from the rise of Augustus in 27 BC to the death of Marcus Aurelius in 180 AD-- as the clear, unrivaled superpower. Almost no one dared mess with Rome, and few who did ever lived to tell the tale.

Modern scholars typically view the official “fall” of the Western Roman Empire in the year 476. But it’s pretty clear that the collapse of Roman power and prestige took place decades before.

When Rome was ransomed in 408 (then sacked in 410), it was obvious to everyone at the time that the Emperor no longer had a grip on power.

And before long, most of the lands in the West that Rome had once dominated-- Italy, Spain, France, Britain, North Africa, etc. were under control of various Barbarian tribes and kingdoms.

The Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Franks, Angles, Saxons, Burgundians, Berbers, etc. all established independent kingdoms. And for a while, there was no dominant superpower in western Europe. It was a multi-polar world. And the transition was rather abrupt.

This is what I think is happening now-- we’re experiencing a similar transition, and it seems equally abrupt.

The United States has been the world’s dominant superpower for decades. But like Rome in the later stage of its empire, the US is clearly in decline. This should not be a controversial statement.

Let’s not be dramatic; it’s important to stay focused on facts and reality. The US economy is still vast and potent, and the country is blessed with an abundance of natural resources-- incredibly fertile farmland, some of the world’s largest freshwater resources, and incalculable reserves of energy and other key commodities.

In fact, it’s amazing the people in charge have managed to screw it up so badly. And yet they have.

The national debt is out of control, rising by trillions of dollars each year. Debt growth, in fact, substantially outpaces US economic growth.

Social Security is insolvent, and the program’s own trustees (including the US Treasury Secretary) admit that its major trust fund will run out of money in just nine years.

The people in charge never seem to miss an opportunity to dismantle capitalism (i.e. the economic system that created so much prosperity to begin with) brick by brick.

Then there are ubiquitous social crises: public prosecutors who refuse to enforce the law; the weaponization of the justice system; the southern border fiasco; declining birth rates; extraordinary social divisions that are most recently evidenced by the anti-Israel protests.

And most of all the US constantly shows off its incredibly dysfunctional government that can’t manage to agree on anything, from the budget to the debt ceiling. The President has obvious cognitive disabilities and makes the most bizarre decisions to enrich America’s enemies.

Are these problems fixable? Yes. Will they be fixed? Maybe. But as we used to say in the military, “hope is not a course of action”.

Plotting this current trajectory to its natural conclusion leads me to believe that the world will enter a new “barbarian kingdom” paradigm in which there is no dominant superpower.

Certainly, there are a number of rising rivals today. But no one is powerful enough to assume the leading role in the world.

China has a massive population and a huge economy. But it too has way too many problems… with the obvious challenge that no one trusts the Communist Party. So, most likely China will not be the dominant superpower.

India’s economy will eventually surpass China’s, and it has an even bigger population. But India isn’t even close to the ballpark of being the world’s superpower.

Then there’s Europe. Combined, it still has a massive economic and trade union. But it has also been in major decline… with multiple social crises like low birth rates and a migrant invasion.

Then there are the energy powers like Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Indonesia; they are far too small to dominate the world, but they have the power to menace and disrupt it.

The bottom line is that the US is no longer strong enough to lead the world and keep adversarial nations in check. And it’s clear that other countries are already adapting to this reality.

Earlier this month, for example, China successfully launched a rocket to the moon as part of a multi-decade mission to establish an International Lunar Research Station.

By 2045, China hopes to construct a large, city-like base along with several international partners including Russia, Pakistan, Thailand, South Africa, Venezuela, Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Egypt. Turkey and Nicaragua are also interested in joining.

This is pretty remarkable given how many nations are participating, even if just nominally. Yet the US isn’t part of the consortium.

This would have been unthinkable a few decades ago. But today the rest of the world realizes that they no longer need American funding, leadership, or expertise.

e can see similar examples everywhere, most notably in Israel and Ukraine. And I believe one of the next shoes to drop will be the US dollar.

After all, if the rest of the world doesn’t need the US for space exploration, and they can ignore the US when it comes down to World War 3, then why should they need the US dollar anymore?

The dollar was the clear and obvious choice as the global reserve currency back when America was the undisputed superpower. But today it’s a different world.

Foreign nations continuing to rely on the dollar ultimately means governments and central banks buying US government bonds. And why should they take such a risk when the national debt is already 120% of GDP?

In addition, Congress passed a new law a few weeks ago authorizing the Treasury Department to confiscate US dollar assets of any country it deems an “aggressor state.”

While people might think this is a morally righteous idea, the reality is that it will only turn off foreign investors. Why should China, Saudi Arabia, or anyone else buy US government bonds when they can be confiscated in a heartbeat?

All of this ultimately leads to a world in which the US dollar is no longer the dominant reserve currency. We’re already starting to see signs of that shift, and it could be in full swing by the end of the decade.

To your freedom,  James Hickman   Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/why-the-dollar-will-lose-its-status-as-the-global-reserve-currency-150843/

Settling the Gold Versus Crypto Debate

Settling the Gold Versus Crypto Debate

Notes From The Field by James Hickman  April 24, 2024

In 1972, while excavating to build a factory on the Black Sea coast of Bulgaria, a backhoe operator noticed gold objects glimmering in the bucket of his machine.

The construction worker had accidentally discovered the Varna Necropolis.

Dating back to around 4500 BC, the jewelry found in this ancient burial site is the earliest evidence of the use of gold by humans, and archeologists believe that they were considered a status symbol in ancient burial rituals.

Thousands of years ago, gold was likely collected from the earth’s surface in the form of nuggets or river dust.

It wasn’t until about 3500 BC, on a hilltop located in the modern-day country of Georgia, that a group of people from the prehistoric Kura-Araxes dug the oldest known gold mine.

Known as Sakdrisi-Kachagiani, the gold mine predates Ancient Egypt and even Mesopotamia.

By around 2000 BC, commercial transactions involving gold were being recorded on cuneiform tablets in modern-day Turkey. Materials like tin and textiles were traded for a particular weight of gold, because the first known gold coins weren’t minted until around the 6th Century BC.

King Croesus of Lydia in modern-day Turkey, used these coins to standardize the weight and purity of gold.

After that, gold coins were used directly in commerce for thousands of years, until the United Kingdom formally adopted the gold standard in the early 1800s. This was the first monetary system where a country’s paper money had a value directly linked to gold.

And even today, over 50 years since the US abandoned its own gold standard, central banks around the world still hold vast quantities of gold as a reserve to store value.

Individuals and large financial institutions do the same. And gold jewelry is still extremely valuable.

That’s quite a track record. For over 6,000 years, humans have valued gold.

Fifteen years ago, Bitcoin was created. And today there are countless millions of people who believe crypto has value too.

Now, gold and crypto are completely different and seldom belong in the same sentence. But for some reason there are often heated debates between proponents of each who argue bitterly over whether Gold or crypto is better.

No other asset classes attract such conflict or controversy. You don’t see passionate oil investors engaging in riotous debates with natural gas speculators. There is no heated argument over wheat vs. soybeans.

But gold and crypto are sometimes positioned as diametrically opposed, and this is just silly. Each asset has its function.

Gold has an enormous amount of value— and I have actually argued that it is still undervalued, even at its all-time high.

I’ve written extensively about the US government’s financial woes; the national debt is closing in on $35 trillion, and that figure is set to grow by $20+ trillion over the next decade according to the government’s own financial forecasts.

In addition to the new debt, the amount of debt the US government has to refinance over the next 5-7 years is staggering— literally tens of trillions of dollars. And all of it will be refinanced at a higher interest rate.

This means that interest payments on the national debt will keep growing like a malignant tumor.

In fact this year the amount of interest paid on the national debt will exceed defense spending for the first time in US history. And it will only keep rising.

Gold will most likely do very well in that scenario. But more importantly, foreign governments will likely move away from the US dollar as the global reserve currency over the next 5-10 years… and gold is the most likely asset to replace the dollar.

Central banks are already buying more gold as a reserve. And when the dollar loses its dominant global reserve status, countries are likely to turn to gold as a stable alternative that they can trust… because they already own it.

Simultaneously, crypto also has a lot of benefits. If you hold 100% of your savings in the financial system— whether at a bank, brokerage, etc., you might be surprised to find how easily it is to lose access to your funds.

Government agencies can seize your account (without due process) even by mistake. Banks can fail. They can freeze your account and force you to prove that you’re not doing anything wrong.

Plus even the most mundane bank transfers these days are heavily scrutinized. I had an exasperating conversation with a bank not long ago when I tried to send money to my sister… and they required all sorts of paperwork and justification to send my own money to my family.

Crypto is a great way to bypass that mess… to simply send money from point A to point B directly, without any middleman whatsoever.

Crypto exists digitally, so it can be moved across borders easily and at no cost. And if you know what you’re doing, you can hold it yourself, without any third party or even special security equipment… and this is an incredibly unique feature.

The idea behind a Plan B is to figure out what you want to accomplish and figure out which tools are available to help you achieve your goals.

Well, it’s a pretty smart goal to want to have protection against the declining currency of the world’s most heavily indebted nation. It’s also a reasonable goal to want to own some assets that are completely beyond the financial system.

Crypto and gold are two completely separate tools for completely separate purposes. There’s no sense in debating crypto vs. gold. To me the answer is both.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/settling-the-gold-versus-crypto-debate-150734/

The Fed’s Game Of “Make Believe” Comes To An End

The Fed’s Game Of “Make Believe” Comes To An End

Notes From The Field by James Hickman (Simon Black)  April 29, 2024

It’s barely been a year since the 2023 bank crisis in which several large banks, including Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, failed.

At the time, I wrote that the bank failures weren’t over, and that there would be more.

But it’s been quiet for most of the last year; the banking system has been pretty calm thanks in large part to an emergency program that the Federal Reserve created to bail out other troubled banks.

They called it the Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP), and it essentially expired a few weeks ago. In other words, no more emergency lending to troubled banks.

Barely a month later, we have already witnessed our first casualty: Pennsylvania-based Republic First (not to be confused with First Republic, which failed last year) was shut down by regulators on Friday afternoon.

Republic First had the same issues as the others that failed last year — too many ‘unrealized bond losses’ on their balance sheet.

Just like Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, etc. last year, Republic First had used their customers’ deposits to buy US Treasury bonds in 2021 and 2022, back when bond prices were at all-time highs.

By early 2023, the situation had reversed. Bond prices had plummeted; even supposedly ‘safe’ and ‘stable’ US Treasury bonds had fallen substantially in price, and banks were sitting on huge losses.

Remember that bond prices fall when interest rates rise. So when the Fed jacked up interest rates from 0% to 5% in an attempt to control inflation, they were simultaneously creating huge losses in the bond market... which also meant huge losses for banks.

Silicon Valley Bank was just the tip of the iceberg. Plenty of other banks (including Bank of America) had racked up enormous bond losses. In fact the total unrealized losses in the banking sector last year amounted to a whopping $620 billion.

The Fed knew they had an enormous problem on their hands. So they created this Bank Term Funding Program, which was basically a giant game of ‘make believe’.

Through the BTFP, banks were allowed to borrow money from the Fed using their cratering bond portfolios as collateral. But instead of valuing the bonds at the actual market price, everyone simply pretended that the bonds were still worth 100 cents on the dollar.

In other words, the banks just made up prices for their assets, and the Fed allowed them to do it.

(It’s ironic that a certain former President is on trial in New York City for inflating the value of his assets, even though banks were inflating the value of their bonds through the BTFP.)

The Fed managed to prevent any further embarrassing bank failures last year by sprinkling this magical fairy dust across the banking system.

But now that the BTFP has expired, it has become obvious that problems in the banking system haven’t gone away. Republic First’s failure a few days ago is just one symptom.

Think about it: Bond prices are still down (because interest rates remain much higher than they were in 2021-2022). Banks are still sitting on massive unrealized losses.

And now that the Fed has stopped playing ‘make believe’, the bank failures have started up again.

It’s not to say that ALL banks are in terrible shape; some banks wisely used the last twelve months to get their financial houses in order.

Unfortunately most didn’t... which is why there’s still more more than HALF A TRILLION dollars in unrealized losses in the US banking system. This means that Republic First probably won’t be the only failure, unless the Fed steps in with its magical fairy dust again.

Also bear in mind that losses from their US Treasury portfolios aren’t the only problem in the banking system; for example, plenty of banks are sitting on huge potential losses from loans they made on office properties.

I don’t think the scope of this problem is anywhere near the 2008 financial crisis, which brought down some of the world’s largest banks. Not even close.

But the reality is that there are still a lot of banks with a lot of unrealized losses. And the biggest one of all happens to be the Federal Reserve.

According to its own financial statements, just released last month, the Fed’s total unrealized losses are almost $1 TRILLION — $948.4 BILLION to be more precise. And the vast majority of those unrealized losses come from US Treasuries.

So just like Silicon Valley Bank, Signature, First Republic, and now Republic First, the Federal Reserve has rendered itself completely insolvent.

In fact, total Federal Reserve capital is just $51 billion... versus $948 billion in losses. This means the Fed is insolvent 19 times over.

Think about that: the largest, most important central bank in the world... the steward of the global reserve currency... is completely insolvent on a mark-to-market basis.

You’d think that would be front page news. But no one ever talks about it. No one even wants to talk about it.

Of course plenty of people will insist that it doesn’t matter, just like they insist that the national debt doesn’t matter.

But this is yet more absurd fantasy; just look at the facts:

The FDIC’s published reports show more than $500 billion in unrealized losses in the US banking sector.

The Federal Reserve, which in theory would bail out the banking sector, is itself insolvent by $900 billion.

The US government, which would bail out the Fed, is insolvent by more than $50 trillion.

It’s just debt on top of debt on top of debt. Losses on top of losses on top of losses.

Just like the BTFP, everyone wants to play a giant game of ‘make believe’ and pretend that the Fed’s solvency is not a problem, that the US government’s enormous debt is not a problem.

On the contrary, they’re huge challenges. And the ultimate consequence is going to be the loss of the US dollar as the global reserve currency.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/the-feds-game-of-make-believe-comes-to-an-end-150768/

America’s Biggest Bank Sounds the Alarm Bell

America’s Biggest Bank Sounds the Alarm Bell

Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) April 8, 2024

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JP Morgan Chase, did not open his annual shareholder letter with rosy language about the state of the world, or even enthusiasm about his bank’s record profits.

Instead, he describes “yet another year of significant challenges” including the war in Ukraine, war in the Middle East, extreme tensions with China, higher food and energy prices, turmoil in the banking sector, outrageous government deficits, and even major risks with the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy.

Dimon writes that “America’s global leadership role is being challenged outside by other nations and inside by our polarized electorate,” and that this is a “time of great crises”.

He went on with a few charts and thoughts about the bank’s business and financial performance over the last year… and then dedicated most of the remaining 57 pages of his letter to the serious problems which face the world.

His observations are wide-reaching-- from the decay of social cohesion to the prospect of war and higher inflation, to the serious potential for a reset of the Bretton Woods system (which made the US dollar the world’s reserve currency).

Frankly the letter almost reads as a manifesto written by someone who is completely fed up with government incompetence and positioning himself to run for office. I can’t agree with everything he says, but it’s obvious that his ideas are balanced and well thought out.

There are a few points in particular worth repeating.

1. Keep it in perspective; the world is not coming to an end

“If you read the newspaper from virtually any day of any year since World War II,” Dimon writes, “there is abundant coverage on wars — hot and cold — inflation, recession, polarized politics, terrorist attacks, migration and starvation. As appalling as these events have been, the world was generally on a path to becoming stronger and safer.”

This is absolutely a true statement. It’s easy to get caught up in the negativity while missing the abundance of growth and opportunity.

In the year 1918, most people probably thought that the world was coming to an end. The Great War was at its peak, economies were faltering, inflation was surging, rationing and shortages were everywhere… and then the Spanish flu popped up and killed tens of millions of people.

Bleak times indeed. And yet the next century was the most prosperous in human history… despite a very bumpy path along the way.

This is similar to where we are today. Yes, Inspired Idiots have caused a gigantic mess. But the general trajectory of the human species is still improving.

2. That said, long-term risks should not be underestimated. Especially for the West.

Dimon finds that there is “too much emphasis on short-term, monthly data and too little on long-term trends”, and he talks about inflation as a great example.

Economists and investors tend to be almost singularly focused on monthly inflation reports in an effort to divine if and when the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates.

They’re entirely missing the point, Dimon writes. Month by month, and even year by year, inflation numbers could vary wildly. But if you look at the big picture, you’ll see substantial evidence for future inflation.

We’ve been writing about this for a long time. In fact, since inception we’ve only been focused on long-term trends… and we see these as highly inflationary.

Similar to our view, Dimon understands how “ongoing fiscal [deficit] spending, remilitarization of the world, restructuring of global trade, capital needs of the new green economy, and possibly higher energy costs in the future” are all inflationary in the long run.

The inflation might not show up next month or next quarter, but he believes (as do we) that the coming years are full of “persistent inflationary pressures”.

There are also significant risks to the current US-led global order; America’s influence is waning, and Dimon writes that the “international rules-based order established by the Western world after World War II is clearly under attack by outside forces, somewhat weakened by its own failures [and] confusing and overlapping regime of policies.”

As part of this, he talks about the distinct possibility for a reset of the post-WW2 financial system (known as Bretton Woods) that anointed the US dollar as the global reserve currency. He puts it succinctly: “we may need a new Bretton Woods.”

We’ve been writing about this for years; the dollar’s decline is a long-term trend, but for us, it’s an obvious one. You cannot run multi-trillion-dollar deficits each year and still expect to be the world’s economic superpower.

It’s notable that even someone like Dimon can see this coming.

3. These problems are still solvable.

We’ve written extensively that the problems facing the US and the West are still solvable. For now. But every year that the problems continue to be ignored brings the country closer to a point of no return... where there is no way out but default.

Dimon is not shy about offering up suggestions, many of which we have written about in the past. He talks about border security, streamlining sensible regulations, and economic policies which prioritize growth.

“Unfortunately,” Dimon writes, “the message America hears is that the federal government does not value business — that business is the problem and not part of the solution.”

“There are fewer individuals in government who have any significant experience in starting or running a company, which is apparent every day in the political rhetoric that demonizes businesses and free enterprise and that damages confidence in America’s institutions.”

He says he finds it “astounding that many in Congress know what to do and want to do it but are simply unable to pass legislation because of partisan politics”.

He goes on to list a multitude of government failures and the “staggering number of policies, systems, and operations that are underperforming”, including pitiful public schools, broken healthcare, infrastructure woes (especially the energy grid), terrible immigration policy, Social Security’s looming insolvency, and more.

Dimon states very clearly that the federal government “needs to earn back trust through competence and effective policymaking.”

True statement. But I’m not holding my breath. Because in related news, the White House just announced that Joe Biden is working on yet another way to forgive student debt for 30 million Americans.

He doesn’t seem to care that the Supreme Court already rejected his previous effort to forgive student debt, saying he did not have the legal authority.

It’s pathetic that the cost of university education is so high… especially given how many degrees in an AI-world are useless. Plus many universities these days are just hotbeds of radicalization. It hardly seems worth taking on $80,000 of debt for such a dubious outcome.

But nevertheless, taxpayers have footed the bill for college and loaned out over $1 trillion to students across the country.

This is a basic tenet of capitalism (which Mr. Biden claims to embrace): debts have to be paid.

But because this guy’s poll numbers are so pathetic-- especially with young people-- he’s trying to score points by canceling their debts.

Well, canceling student debt means that taxpayers will lose hundreds of billions in loans that they made. So rather than taking steps to strengthen America’s balance sheet, the President is once again violating the law to make the balance sheet worse… all to improve his image among young voters.

This is hardly a way to restore trust in government. So again, I’m not holding my breath.

Dimon’s letter is worth the read if you have the time. You might not agree with everything he says, but it is rather telling that the CEO of the country’s largest bank is speaking so plainly about obvious risks.

It’s another reminder of why it makes so much sense to have a Plan B.

To your freedom,

James Hickman (Simon Black)  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/americas-biggest-bank-sounds-the-alarm-bell-150673/

Why Saudi Arabia’s Futuristic City Is A Sign Of Major Inflation To Come

Why Saudi Arabia’s Futuristic City Is A Sign Of Major Inflation To Come

Notes From the Field   By Simon Black/James Hickman  April 3, 2024

[Important Reminder: In case you missed our announcement from January 24, Sovereign Man has merged with Peter Schiff's media group. We are now called Schiff Sovereign, and our founder (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

Did you hear about the new streamlined tourist visa to Saudi Arabia? I’m sure you’re standing in line for it already.

No? Me neither.

I was actually stationed in Saudi Arabia for a while when I was in the Army… and, the most unique ‘tourist’ attraction, at least for non-Muslims, is a place we used to call “Chop Chop Square” where they would do the public beheadings and dismemberments of convicted criminals.

Aside from that, Saudi Arabia has virtually nothing to offer tourists. At least for now.

But over the past few years the government has set itself on a path to building massive futuristic cities and giant resorts in an effort to bring tourists and diversify its economy-- including a recently streamlined visa process.

But to me, this screams of desperation… because it means that Saudi Arabia’s oil industry is in serious trouble.

As recently as just a century ago, what we know as ‘Saudi Arabia’ today was just a bunch of nomadic tribes roaming the desert who were constantly at war with one another.

Then one day a tribal leader named Abdulaziz Ibn Saud rose to power, a bit like Genghis Khan, and conquered everyone else. And in 1932, he declared himself sole ruler of the newly established Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Initially he wasn’t King of much at all; Saudi Arabia was mostly just a desert backwater in the early 1930s.

But things began to change quickly when a major oil discovery was made in early March of 1938. And over the years, Saudi Arabia’s prominence in the world grew dramatically.

By 1970, Saudi Arabia had overtaken the United States as the world’s #1 oil producer, with daily output more than tripling over the course of that decade to roughly 10 million barrels per day.

Ever since then there has been almost a Homeric mythology that Saudi Arabia has a sort of inexhaustible ocean of oil, and they could just turn on a spigot and fill up millions of barrels.

But that’s simply not true.

In fact, more than 40 years later, Saudi Arabia produces less oil today than they did in 1980. And there has long been speculation that Saudi oil reserves might actually be running low.

Not long ago, in fact, the Saudi government announced that they would make investments in their oil infrastructure to increase their maximum production capacity to 13 million barrels per day… but nothing further.

In other words, they set a hard ceiling for how much oil they were capable of producing, essentially shattering the mythology of their infinite oil capacity.

Then, just two months ago, they reversed their plans, and announced that their maximum drilling capacity would be 12 million barrels, and not 13 million.

Both of these should have been taken as obvious indicators that Saudi Arabia’s oil reserves are well past their peak… and that they know it.

But there is perhaps no greater indicator than the Saudi government’s desperate attempt to give its economy a gigantic sexy makeover.

For example, Saudi Arabia is building a ski resort in the desert mountains... where it occasionally dips below freezing in the winter. Then there’s Neom, the futuristic megapolis planned for the coast of the Red Sea featuring flying cabs and an artificial moon.

Then there’s The Line, a city stretching for 170 kilometers across the desert. And of course there’s the Red Sea Project, a luxurious resort the size of Belgium.

The more Saudi Arabia launches these sorts of projects, the more obvious it becomes that they are running out of oil and are desperately trying to diversify their economy while they still have time.

The fact that Saudi Arabia even started selling off small pieces of its state-owned oil company, Saudi Aramco, back in late 2019 is another indicator.

They could have IPO’d in 1988… or 2005… or any other time. But they didn’t. It seems like they know they’re in decline, and they’re trying to monetize the mythology of their oil reserves while they still can.

Now, Saudi Arabia isn’t going to run out of oil anytime soon; rather, the larger point is that supply and demand fundamentals will likely lead to much higher oil prices in the future.

And this is very inflationary.

Oil is the most important energy commodity in the world, and so its price influences the price of just about everything. If oil prices spike, then it’s not just the price of gasoline that goes up.

The cost of operating data centers with racks of servers and GPUs will increase. Food costs will increase. Manufacturing costs will increase. Virtually everything will increase in price.

Energy prices, like just about all prices, are ultimately about supply and demand. And the demand side is pretty easy to see— it will most likely continue increasing as emerging economies and global population grow.

Yes, there may be a time off in the future where oil is no longer necessary. But that’s still a long way out. Because guess what critical commodity you need to produce solar panels and wind turbines? Oil.

Meanwhile, on the supply side, it’s clear that one of the world’s biggest oil producers is in decline. At a minimum, they won’t be able to increase production commensurate with the increase in demand. And they’ve flat out admitted to that.

Meanwhile, another of the world’s biggest oil producers, the United States, is going out of its way to obstruct oil companies.

They create special taxes to penalize them. They refuse to follow the law and auction off concessions. They never miss an opportunity to demonize them.

Even in the financial industry, bankers and investors deprive the industry of the funds necessary for exploration. Hedge funds have taken over the Boards of major oil companies and forced them into inefficient green energy projects.

The United Nations hosts entire summits about phasing out oil production.

And let’s not forget about the fanatics who vandalize art museums and glitter bomb public sporting events to demand that the world “just stop” producing oil.

So, we have rising demand coupled with policies that restrict supply. The end result, predictably, has been rising oil prices, which are now hovering around $85-$90.

This is one of the reasons why the inflation numbers remain high; again, expensive energy impacts core inflation.

I write a lot about why we think the future is inflationary, and a lot of it has to do with the tidal wave of debt and government spending.

But that’s just one source of inflation. Higher energy prices are another.

Like the debt problem, however, the energy problem is also solvable. There’s plenty of oil in the world-- the issue is just misguided policy. There are also other technologies (like nuclear) which can provide abundant, cheap, clean energy.

 There doesn’t seem to be much appetite among the environmental fanatics who enjoy complaining, but not actually solving any problems.

Now, one way to offset this oil cost inflation is to own shares of the oil companies themselves; and right now, several of them that are very cheap since it’s apparently not socially acceptable to own them.

In our investment research newsletter the 4th Pillar, we highlighted a highly profitable oil producer that is practically debt-free, and trading at a very attractive Price/Earnings ratio of just 3.4.

The company was able to turn a strong profit when oil prices were low, and they’re positioned to do extremely well as oil prices go higher.

Of course, no one can be happy about the prospect of future inflation.

But there are solutions. And if you understand what’s likely coming, you can take steps now to reduce the impact or even potentially benefit from inflation.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  

Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

PS. I mentioned an oil company we have researched for our investment research newsletter the 4th Pillar. So far, we have added three to our portfolio. But oil isn’t the only critical real asset we discuss.

We’ve also detailed gold miners, iron works, shipping companies, agriculture, and so many more vital investments that make the world go round.

They all have something in common— they are great investments to guard against, or even benefit from, inflation, and they are all trading at extremely low valuations.

You can learn more about the 4th Pillar here.

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/why-saudi-arabias-futuristic-city-is-a-sign-of-major-inflation-to-come-150337/

“It looks like fly crap to me. . .”

“It looks like fly crap to me. . .”

Notes From the Field by Simon Black / James Hickman  March 25, 2024

I’m on my way back home from Mexico City after an incredible weekend event here with more than 100 of our Total Access members.

First things first, if you’ve never been to Mexico City, I highly recommend it. A lot of people have a misconception that the city is some kind third world dump. It’s not. And most first-time visitors are stunned by the vast green areas, expansive parks, tree-lined streets, museums, architecture, and modern lifestyle.

In my opinion it also has some of the best restaurants in the western hemisphere. You can eat extremely well in Mexico City, but you don’t pay very much for it.

The event we held for our Schiff Sovereign Total Access members was also pretty great.

I started off the conference explaining why we should expect higher inflation in the future-- and I’ve written about this extensively. The US government’s own projections call for $20 trillion in additional debt over the next decade. And frankly we think they’re woefully underestimating the problem.

But even $20 trillion will likely prove catastrophic. That would mean the US national debt will reach $55 trillion.

If yields remain at today’s levels (roughly 4.5%), then the government will have to spend nearly $2.5 trillion per year, just to pay interest on the debt. That would make interest on the debt the #1 expense of the federal government, triggering a vicious cycle in which the Treasury Department would have to borrow more and more each year just to be able to pay interest on the money they’ve already borrowed.

To say this is unsustainable would be a massive understatement. And we believe that the Federal Reserve will step in to bail out the government by slashing interest rates to zero (or even negative levels).

Think about it-- if the national debt is $55 trillion, but the interest rate on that debt is literally 0%, then the government’s annual interest bill is zero… essentially saving them $2.5 trillion per year.

Sounds great. But it would come at substantial cost.

For the Federal Reserve to lower rates, it would require them to dramatically increase the money supply, what we typically refer to as ‘printing money’. They’re not actually printing physical currency-- it all happens electronically. But the effect is the same: it’s highly inflationary.

When the Fed ‘printed’ $5 trillion during the pandemic, the US economy saw 9% inflation. So, if the Fed prints $20 trillion or more to push interest rates down to zero, how much inflation will be see then?

No one knows. But it probably won’t be their magical 2% target.

My partner Peter Schiff came on the stage later and made similar comments. And with this inflationary scenario in mind, we sketched out a number of strategies, both personal and financial, that would make sense in the coming years.

It would be easy to study this problem and come away with a sense of dread. After all, a $55+ trillion national debt and $2.5 trillion in annual interest expense looks pretty scary. (Remember, these are based on the government’s own forecasts.)

But if you can understand the trend and its consequences, then you can also take completely rational steps to reduce their impact. That’s the entire concept behind a Plan B.

Peter and I both see overwhelming evidence of substantial inflation in the future. But this means we can prepare for it now, rationally. And we outlined a number of strategies to do so.

One rather obvious one is gold. And we talked about why gold will likely become very important in the future. My personal view is that gold will eventually displace the dollar as the global reserve standard, i.e. how foreign governments and central banks settle their accounts.

With a $55+ trillion projected national debt, and $2.5 trillion in annual interest expense, it’s hard to imagine the rest of the world continuing to allow the US dollar to remain the dominant reserve currency.

And it would be a similar outcome if the Fed ‘prints’ tens of trillions of dollars.

Either way, we see the dollar’s reign as the dominant reserve currency coming to an end over the next decade.

But since no one trusts the Chinese government, or some new ‘BRICS dollar’, gold is the most likely candidate to replace the US dollar since every government and central bank on the planet already owns it… and has confidence in it.

Gold has the added benefit that no single government controls it. And so single country dominates gold production; China, Russia, the United States, Canada, etc. all produce substantial quantities each year.

We later heard from a colleague of mine who runs one of the largest precious metals storage facilities in the world, based in Singapore. He gave me an insider’s view of the gold and silver markets, and sketched out why there may be a shortage coming, especially in silver.

He explained how many of the world’s largest commodities and metals exchanges have seen dwindling stockpiles… while many mines are doing direct ‘offtake’ agreements with large industrial consumers (like electronics companies).

The end result has been a trend of declining physical silver availability, and he believes this will ultimately drive the silver price much higher.

He added that silver is currently quite cheap compared to gold, with the silver/gold ratio currently at about 90:1, versus its historic average over the past several years of roughly 70.

We also had a presentation from a venture capital firm that talked about buying shares of prominent startups (Airbnb, SpaceX, etc.) in the secondary market, i.e. from employees or early-stage investors seeking liquidity. It’s an interesting way to take a discounted position in a high growth business whose value could explode in an inflationary environment.

As one could expect right now, there was also ample discussion about cryptocurrency, including a mini-debate between Peter and our guest Mark Moss, who also spoke at the event. More on that another time.

Perhaps my favorite part was hearing from the former President of Mexico, Vicente Fox. He spoke in the morning about how many short-sighted and dangerous leaders are ruining the world… and I couldn’t agree more.

During a Q&A session later, he told the crowd about the time that George W. Bush came down to Mexico to convince him to support the war in Iraq.

Former President Fox told us that Bush’s team rolled out maps of Iraq onto his desk and pointed at a tiny speck, saying, “There are the weapons of mass destruction.”

Fox stared closely at the table and brought his face closer to where they were pointing, and said, “It looks like mierda de mosca to me…” That’s Spanish for ‘fly shit’.

I want to extend my sincerest thanks to all the members who joined us for a wonderful weekend in Mexico City. The event, the restaurants, the personal discussions with each of you, and the camaraderie were all unforgettable.

And if you’re not currently a member but interested in joining Total Access, you can find out more about it here.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

 [Important Reminder: In case you missed our announcement from January 24, Sovereign Man has merged with Peter Schiff's media group. We are now called Schiff Sovereign, and our founder (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/it-looks-like-fly-sht-to-me-150313/

Uranium Hasn’t Been This Critical Since The Days Of Oppenheimer

Uranium Hasn’t Been This Critical Since The Days Of Oppenheimer

Notes From the Field By Simon Black – James Hickman 3-12-24

If you saw Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster Oppenheimer, you might remember the scene in which Dr. Oppenheimer travels to Chicago to meet with physicist Enrico Fermi, who had just achieved the world’s first ever self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction.

This really happened-- it was December 2, 1942, and Enrico Fermi’s experiment was a massive scientific breakthrough.  Fermi and his team proved that a fission reaction could be controlled… and therefore the vast amount of energy inside of an atom’s nucleus could be harnessed for other purposes.

Obviously, the US government was singularly focused on turning that immense nuclear energy into the biggest bomb the world had ever seen. But Fermi’s discovery also paved the way for nuclear power.

Proponents envisioned a world powered by nuclear energy where the cost of electricity would be practically free… and the benefits to mankind incalculable.

It all came down to efficiency; the amount of nuclear power that could be generated from a single rock of uranium was equivalent to thousands of tons of coal in a conventional power plant.

The cost of electricity would plummet. And that cheap energy would mean that consumers would pay far less for utilities, saving plenty of money that could be put to other uses.

Cheap energy also means that the production costs of just about everything would fall; cars, houses, food, etc. all become cheaper.

Cheap energy also helps countries develop more rapidly and increase economic growth, resulting in greater national prosperity and more tax revenue for the government.

The promise of nuclear energy was extraordinary-- it was a win/win/win. So naturally when other nations began to develop the technology on their own, it set off an arms race to stockpile as much uranium as possible-- mostly to ensure that no one else could make weapons.

The United States government bought up entire warehouses full of it and made an exclusive deal with the Belgian Congo (which had the world’s largest uranium reserves), simply to make sure that other countries couldn’t get their hands on any nuclear fuel.

Then, over the years, the US government slowly sold down its uranium inventory, little by little.

Mining companies also added new supply to the uranium market, ensuring there was plenty of uranium to meet growing demand.

But then a series of infamous accidents took place-- Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc. The public freaked out, and the entire nuclear power industry nearly vanished.

Now, an objective analysis shows that, any way you slice it, far more people have died from accidents related to coal, oil, natural gas, and other forms of electricity production than have ever died from nuclear power accidents.

In fact, more people have died from accidents related to wind power than have died from nuclear.

But nuclear power still suffered a terrible blow to its reputation, and it remained that way for a very, very long time.

Power companies scrapped their plans for new nuclear power plants, and the demand for uranium collapsed, prompting many mining companies to shut down their operations.

The existing nuclear power plants that remained in business, however, continued buying uranium from the government… so those stockpiles from the 1950s continued to dwindle.

And that takes us to today: nuclear is finally making a comeback.

Unfortunately, most of the West (as usual) is missing the boat; the vast majority of new reactors will be in China, India, and other rapidly growing nations who understand that no other energy technology offers the same advantages as nuclear.

Western politicians are still stuck in their idiotic, Dark Age beliefs that wind and solar are the way to go. But these are both completely inefficient and extremely expensive technologies.

The amount of energy it takes to produce solar panels relative to the electricity that solar panels actually generate is a laughable pittance; this is known as ‘Energy Return on Energy Invested’, or EROEI… and with nuclear power, it’s off the charts.

Plus, nuclear power also has one of the lowest levels of CO2 emissions of any energy source.

 (It’s also worth noting that emerging nuclear reactor technology promises to slash costs even further and increase safety.)

This means that nuclear has the potential to provide massive economic AND environmental benefits. Virtually no other technology has that capability… which is why it’s only a matter of time before the world ‘rediscovers’ nuclear.

Again, it’s already happening in Asia. In fact, it’s possible to literally count all the planned / in-progress nuclear power plants that will be coming on line in the next few years, and then estimate the annual uranium demand.

One of the best researchers in this field, by far, is my colleague Adam Rozencwajg, who has spoken at a few of our Total Access events; Adam has gone through the trouble to count up all the new reactors and their projected uranium needs, and the answer is very clear:

Bottom line, uranium demand is set to skyrocket. Yet supply isn’t going anywhere, not for a while.

It takes many years to get a new uranium mine up and running-- sometimes even longer than it takes to build a new nuclear power plant.

So, you can see how there’s likely going to be a massive imbalance in uranium supply and demand.

I first started talking about uranium in September of 2022 when spot prices hovered around $40 per pound.

Today, uranium trades for more than $90 per pound. But I think it could go much, much higher from here.

In fact, global uranium demand already exceeds new mining production. In the past, whenever this happened, there were always vast government stockpiles to keep the power plants supplied.

But now the government stockpiles have dwindled. So, we could easily see a major uranium shortage… and prices go through the roof.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/uranium-hasnt-been-this-critical-since-the-days-of-oppenheimer-150247/

Why Gold Might (Weirdly) Be A Contrarian Investment Right Now

Why Gold Might (Weirdly) Be A Contrarian Investment Right Now

Notes From the Field By Simon Black/James Hickman  March 5, 2024

[Important Reminder: (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

It’s hard to say with a straight face that an asset hovering near its all-time high could be a “contrarian” investment. But I’m going to say it anyhow-- I think gold may be a contrarian play right now.

Now, it would be easy to assume that gold is near its all-time high because everyone is buying. And normally that would be true; typically, whenever an asset soars to a record high, it’s because individual investors are piling into the market.

We’ve seen this countless times, from Bitcoin to meme stocks; once something becomes the hot thing to own, small investors-- and occasionally professionally managed funds-- drive the price higher.

But that’s not happening with gold. In fact, investors have been abandoning gold for years.

Publicly available data from more than 100 gold ETFs (all of which are conveniently aggregated by the World Gold Council) show that western investors have been selling off their gold ETFs for most of the past few years.

WGC data show that North American and European investors dumped over 700 metric tons of gold since May of 2022, equivalent to nearly 20% of ETF holdings.

In fact, outflows for the month of January alone (the most recent month of published data) totaled more than 50 metric tons-- the second highest outflow in a year.

Most notably, however, North American, and European investors dumped 179.6 metric tons of gold September 2023 through January 2024.

This is important, because during that time period, the price of gold surged from $1820 per ounce to nearly $2100.

Strange, right? If investors were selling off substantial quantities of gold, it seems like the price should have fallen. Instead, it rose 15%. How is that possible?

Well, the reason that gold keeps going higher is because, while individual investors are selling, there’s another group that’s buying.

In fact, this group of buyers is completely price insensitive. They don’t care how much they pay per ounce. They are not even looking for a return on investment. And they have mountains of cash to spend.

The group of buyers I’m talking about is central banks and governments.

And not just the usual suspects like China and Russia either (though China did buy more than 200 metric tons in 2023). Others like Poland, India, Singapore, Czech Republic, Philippines… and even Iraq.

To me this is an obvious signal that the global financial system is probably going to change sooner rather than later. And long-time readers know we have been writing about this for years.

Reserve currencies throughout history have always come and gone.

There was a time when the Greek drachma dominated trade and commerce in the Mediterranean (due in large part to the conquests of Alexander the Great). It was displaced by the Roman denarius, then the Byzantine gold solidus, then the Venetian ducat.

Reserve currencies rise to prominence because people have confidence in the issuer, i.e. the Roman Empire, or the Republic of Venice, or the Spanish Empire.

But eventually that confidence wanes-- especially as the empire debases its currency and runs up massive debts.

That’s the situation the United States is in right now.

The national debt is already $34.4 trillion. And the Congressional Budget Office expects it to rise by at least $20 trillion over the next decade.

The dollar became the global reserve currency back in 1944 when there were no other nations to rival the US.

The US was the only country that hadn’t been completely obliterated by war. It boasted the largest, freest, most productive economy. It possessed the best technology and manufacturing capacity. It had the largest pool of savings.

And it also had one of the world’s largest and most rapidly growing populations.

Yet even with such an impressive socioeconomic resume, the rest of the world wasn’t willing to blindly trust the US government with the world’s reserve currency… not without first putting some critical checks and balances in place.

First, while other nations agreed to fix their currencies to the US dollar, the US agreed to fix the dollar to gold at a rate of $35 per troy ounce.

And second, the US government had to guarantee that the dollar would be freely convertible to gold; that way, if any nation ever lost confidence in the Treasury Department or Federal Reserve, they could easily redeem their dollars for gold.

This is a pretty critical point to understand: immediately following World War II, the US was at the peak of its power. Every other developed nation on earth had been devastated by the war. Farms and factories had been destroyed. Chaos and hunger were rampant. Entire governments had been toppled.

Yet even with such a tremendous power imbalance (i.e. the US was in pristine condition compared to Europe), allied nations still weren’t willing to go all-in on the US dollar. And they demanded the gold convertibility as a guarantee.

That was 80 years ago. And it’s safe to say that the US is nowhere near the peak of its geopolitical power anymore. Adversary nations are everywhere, and the US government’s finances are an embarrassing catastrophe.

When I see central banks buying up gold at record high prices, this suggests to me that they are preparing for a new global financial system-- one that is based on gold instead of the US dollar.

After all, this is the most logical scenario.

It would be naive (and deliberately ignorant of history) to believe that the dollar will go on indefinitely as the world’s dominant reserve currency, given the pitiful trend of US government finances. Even the IMF has called for a reset in the global financial system.

It’s also hard to believe that any new financial system would be centered on a Chinese currency; no one trusts the CCP, nor should they.

Gold is the most viable option to replace the dollar as the global reserve currency because it doesn’t require any convincing. Governments and central banks all over the world already own gold, just as they have for thousands of years.

And it’s a lot easier for everyone to have confidence in an asset class that no single nation controls.

Given the trend of their large-scale gold purchases, it appears that foreign governments and central banks may be preparing for this potential new financial system.

I’ve argued before that a gold-based financial system could send prices beyond $10,000 or more.

So, yes, even though gold is near a record high, it’s important to remember that individual investors are selling at a time when central banks are gobbling it up even more quickly.

And it’s possible they’re buying for a very deliberate reason.

To your freedom,   James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

Even The FDIC Doesn’t Want To Pay Its Tax Bill…

Even The FDIC Doesn’t Want To Pay Its Tax Bill…

Hotes From the Field By Simon Black/James Hickman February 28, 2024

[Important Reminder: In case you missed our announcement from January 24, Sovereign Man has merged with Peter Schiff's media group. We are now called Schiff Sovereign, and our founder (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

Almost one year ago to the day-- on February 24, 2023-- Silicon Valley Bank released its 2022 annual report. And senior executives must have been pretty nervous since the report showed that the bank was nearly insolvent.

The bank had acquired a massive portfolio of more than $100 billion of US government bonds-- supposedly the ‘safest’ asset class in the world-- during 2020 and 2021 back when interest rates were at historic lows.

But then the Fed started hiking rates very quickly in 2022. And higher rates cause bond prices to fall-- even the ‘safest’ ones like US Treasury bonds.

By the end of 2022, Silicon Valley Bank’s portfolio of US government bonds was down by more than $15 billion. And with barely $16 billion in total capital, Silicon Valley Bank was nearly wiped out.

Their 2022 annual report communicated this insolvency risk very clearly. And the bank’s leadership must have probably been expecting the stock to crash almost immediately.

And yet it didn’t. After the annual report was released and all the ‘experts’ on Wall Street had a chance to see the alarming data, Silicon Valley Bank’s stock price barely budged.

Then, just ten days later, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve testified to Congress that the Fed’s rapid interest rate hikes presented absolutely zero risk to the financial system:

“Nothing about the data suggests to me that we’ve [raised rates] too much. . .” he said.

Of course, the Fed’s rapid interest rate hikes were precisely the reason why Silicon Valley Bank’s bond portfolio had lost so much value.

But again, neither Wall Street nor the Fed (which, as a financial regulator, had unfettered access to Silicon Valley Bank’s real-time financial condition) thought there was any risk whatsoever.

We know what happened next, and Silicon Valley Bank collapsed within a week.

But there’s now a new, and even more bizarre chapter to the story.

Typically, when banks in the US fail, one of the federal banking regulators (usually the FDIC, or Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) steps in to take over. 

And that’s what happened with Silicon Valley Bank: the FDIC took over operations almost immediately to try and sort out the mess.

Bank restructurings, however, are almost always chaotic. They take time. The FDIC must liquidate assets in an orderly manner to maximize the value of the balance sheet, then prioritize claims against those assets.

Depositors obviously need to be paid. Creditors and lenders want their money too. And so, of course, does the government.

It turns out that Silicon Valley Bank also owed a tax bill to the IRS… $1.45 billion to be exact.

And since the FDIC became the legally responsible party of Silicon Valley Bank, the IRS went knocking on the door of its fellow government agency to ask for the money.

The FDIC refused.

In fact, according to the FDIC, they owe absolutely zero tax and will pay nothing.

Hilarious, right? This is literally government agency versus government agency in a dispute over taxes. And they can’t even settle the matter like grown adults, so the case is now going to federal court.

This raises an obvious point: if even a government agency like the FDIC is going out of its way to minimize its tax bill, then why shouldn’t everyone else?

There are way too many hard-core Marxists in the United States these days who insist on higher taxes, new taxes, punitive taxes. Activist groups like Pro Publica have published the illegally acquired tax returns of wealthy Americans in an effort to shame people… as if following the tax code and taking completely legitimate steps to reduce what you owe is some mortal sin.

But this case between the FDIC and IRS only proves the point made by Judge ‘Learned’ Hand decades ago, that “Anyone may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury.”

Taking legal steps to reduce your taxes is completely sensible. And frankly tax reduction isn’t even part of a Plan B; it should be Plan A!

Fortunately, there are plenty of ways to do this. In 2024, for example, you can reduce your taxable income by $23,000 (or $27,000 if you're 50 or older), through pre-tax contributions to a Traditional 401(k).

For those who are self-employed or have a side business, a solo 401(k) allows an even greater tax-free contribution of up to $69,000 (and $76,500 for those aged 50 or older).

Plus, you have more freedom to invest your money as you see fit-- real estate, crypto, and more.

And while you do eventually have to pay taxes when you withdraw the funds in retirement, most retirees will be in a lower tax bracket at that point. Plus, your investments will have grown and compounded tax-free for that entire time.

If you’re willing to move across state lines, you can reduce or eliminate state and local taxes. If you are willing and able to move abroad, you can potentially eliminate federal taxes as well.

For US citizens living abroad, the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE) allows you to earn up to $126,500 as an individual, or $253,000 as a couple, tax-free (though this does not include investment income).

Plus, you can exclude even more as a housing expense, which varies depending on where you live overseas.

And for people who move to Puerto Rico, as both myself and my partner Peter Schiff did, tax rates go down to 0% on capital gains, and just 4% on business income.

To your freedom,   James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/even-the-fdic-doesnt-want-to-pay-its-tax-bill-150216/

Even Warren Buffett’s Legendary Optimism Is Fading

Even Warren Buffett’s Legendary Optimism Is Fading..

Notes From the Field By Simon Black/James Hickman February 26, 2024

[Important Reminder: In case you missed our announcement from January 24, Sovereign Man has merged with Peter Schiff's media group. We are now called Schiff Sovereign, and our founder (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

Early in the spring of 1956, only weeks after Elvis Presley released his debut studio album, and actress Norma Jean Mortenson had her name legally changed to Marilyn Monroe, a budding 25-year-old businessman from the American Midwest fatefully registered his first-ever company.

His name, of course, was Warren Buffett. And the company he founded was called Buffett Associates-- which was formed with $105,000 of capital from his friends and family.

The US economy at the time was absolutely booming. Interest rates in 1956 were at historic lows. Inflation was practically zero. Economic growth was a dizzying 7%. Productivity growth was strong.

The US was no longer at war. And the national debt-- which had reached a peak of 120% of GDP in the 1940s due to the costs of World War II-- had been cut in half… and was falling further each year.

America was proudly capitalist, and the government actually made sound and effective investments, like the US federal highway system. Businesses reaped the benefits: corporate earnings across the S&P 500 index soared.

Yet, at the time when Buffett formed his business in 1956, stocks were still cheap… trading at less than 12x earnings (versus nearly 30x today).

It’s hard to imagine better economic or market conditions: a high growth, capitalist economy with low inflation, low debt, high productivity, and cheap stocks? Buffett could have hardly picked a better time to get started.

And, although there were plenty of ups and downs along the way, those pristine conditions lasted throughout the first several decades of his career.

Buffett is obviously one of the most talented investors to have ever lived, and he surrounded himself with other incredibly talented people.

But (and he would probably be the first to admit) his success would not have been as great without the power and dynamism of the US economy behind him.

And this is why Warren Buffett has long been one of America’s biggest economic cheerleaders.

Over the past 15+ years, Buffett has had an insider’s view of some very concerning trends. The US national debt has been rising out of control. The Federal Reserve has made a mess of the dollar. Woke fanatics have hijacked capitalism.

Yet through it all, Buffett has maintained a calm, persistent optimism in America; he routinely dismisses concerns over the debt, or the dollar, or the future of the US economy, and has seemed to believe that nothing could ever derail American progress.

But as I read through his annual letter this past weekend, it seems that even Buffett’s legendary optimism is starting to crack.

First, it’s clear that even Buffett thinks that government regulation has gone way too far.

Buffett explains, for example, that utility companies were “once regarded as among the most stable industries in America” because of their consistent profitability.

Yet he laments that the utility companies he acquired were a “severe earnings disappointment” in 2023 due to over-regulation from fanatical politicians.

Buffet complains that “the regulatory climate in a few states has raised the specter of zero profitability or even bankruptcy (an actual outcome at California’s largest utility and a current threat in Hawaii).”

“In such jurisdictions,” he writes, “it is difficult to project both earnings and asset values in what was once regarded as among the most stable industries in America.”

In the end, he tells shareholders that he “did not anticipate or even consider the adverse developments in regulatory [changes] and . . . made a costly mistake in not doing so.”

He goes on to talk about America’s dilapidated infrastructure, which is in critical need of maintenance and reinvestment. And Buffett cites the case of BNSF Railway (the largest freight rail in the US) which he acquired in 2009.

BNSF, he explains, has had to spend tens of billions of dollars to fix up its rail network “simply [to] maintain its present level of business. This reality is bad for owners. . .”

But it’s not just BNSF. And it’s not just railways. Almost ALL infrastructure in the US is in serious need of repair.

Obviously, the US government made a halfhearted attempted to address infrastructure challenges when it passed a $1 trillion investment package in 2021. But “the consequent capital expenditure” that’s truly required to fix it, Buffett writes, “will be staggering.”

One final point worth mentioning is Buffett’s comments on size. Again, when he started his first partnership in 1956, he only had $105k to invest, and he could move nimbly in and out of the market.

Today, Buffett’s company has almost $170 billion in cash, which is virtually impossible to manage efficiently. He writes that it’s “like turning a battleship”, and that the days of being quick and nimble “are long behind us; size did us in...”

Buffett, of course, is talking about his own company (Berkshire Hathaway). But the same could just as easily be said for the US government.

Think about it-- if someone of Buffett’s extraordinary talent admits that he cannot efficiently deploy $170 billion, how are Joe Biden or Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg supposed to be able to invest that $1 trillion infrastructure money?

Quite poorly, I’d imagine.

Buffett does acknowledge that “America has been a terrific country for investors.” And he’s absolutely right. It still is, for the most part.

Nvidia is an easy example: it simply would not have been able to achieve the same level of success had it been based in most other countries. If Nvidia were a Chinese company, for example, it would have been taken over by the CCP long ago, and CEO Jensen Huang would have probably been disappeared.

But one of the most important caveats of investing applies to the US economy as well: “past performance does not guarantee future results.”

Warren Buffett enjoyed some of the most pristine economic conditions imaginable for the vast majority of his nearly 70-year career. And as I have written several times, it is absolutely possible that America’s best days are still ahead.

There is clearly a future scenario in which small-scale nuclear reactors generate clean, low-carbon, ultra-cheap energy which powers highly productive AI and robotic automation. Economic growth is off the charts, and tax revenue soars as a result. The national debt eventually melts away, and the US re-establishes its primacy by out-producing and out-innovating the competition.

But at the moment there are serious issues to contend with.

US productivity is anemic. So is economic growth. War, inflation, cyberattacks, border crisis, social conflict, the rise of adversary nations, decline of the US dollar’s dominance, etc. are all pervasive challenges.

(Not to mention potential near-term consequences-- like the impact of Russia, China, North Korea, and terrorist groups sending so many of their operatives across the southern border.)

The government not only isn’t fixing these problems, but they seem to be making them worse by the day.  So, it’s important to take notice when even someone as optimistic as Buffett starts complaining.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/even-warren-buffetts-legendary-optimism-is-fading-150201/

It’s Not A Prediction. It’s Arithmetic.

It’s Not A Prediction. It’s Arithmetic. 

Notes From the Field BY Simon Black (James Hickman)  February 7, 2024

[Important Reminder: In case you missed our announcement from January 24, Sovereign Man has merged with Peter Schiff's media group. We are now called Schiff Sovereign, and our founder (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

Thousands of years ago during the late Bronze Age-- most likely between 1100 and 1200 BC, two ancient civilizations were exhausted after nearly a decade of warfare.

On one side was the ancient Achaean peoples led by the Mycenaean king Agamemnon. On the other was a legendary Hittite city that had already been in existence for more than 2,000 years.

Back then the city was called Wilusa. Today we know it as Troy.

The general consensus among historians today is that, most likely, the war did take place. But it obviously lacked the drama and intrigue of Homer’s epic tale, the Iliad.

We all know the story: after nine grueling years of war, Odysseus hatched a plan to sneak through the impenetrable gates of Troy. Guided by Athena, the goddess of wisdom and warfare, the Greeks built a hollow statue of a horse and hid their soldiers inside.

The horse was left as a gift for the Trojans with an inscription of goodwill and peace. And, according to Homer’s legend, the Trojans took the bait.

But there were a few people who predicted severe consequences, including a Trojan priest named Laocoon, who famously warned, “Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.”

Translation: “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.”

This was a time in human history in which oracles and prophets were a normal part of life. People in the ancient world regularly sought counsel from ‘seers’ who claimed to have some special power to predict the future.

And frankly this addiction to prophesy lasted for thousands of years. Even famous historical leaders into the 19th and 20th centuries like Napoleon, Joseph Stalin, and Adolf Hitler reportedly took advice from fortune tellers and astrologers.

But if we really analyze Laocoon’s legendary warning about the Trojan Horse, he wasn’t making a prediction about the future. He was just looking at obvious facts and exercising good judgment and common sense.

That’s what good ‘predictions’ are anyhow. No one has a crystal ball to see the future like some prophetic oracle from ancient mythology.

And I wanted to be clear about this point… because when we write about future financial consequences, like a debt crisis down the road, or the US dollar losing its reserve status, etc., we’re not making ‘predictions’.

Rather, we’re looking at obvious facts and trends, then exercising good judgment and common sense. And the facts are very clear.

We don’t peer into a crystal ball when we say that the US national debt is set to increase by $20 trillion over the next decade. This is publicly available information pulled directly from the Congressional Budget Office’s own forecast.

It’s not some magical prophesy when we say that Social Security’s trust funds will run out of money in a decade. This information comes directly from the official report of the Social Security Board of Trustees.

Nor are we exercising any special powers when we say that the Federal Reserve is completely insolvent. We’re just looking at the Fed’s own quarterly financial statements which show an unbelievable $1.3 TRILLION in unrealized losses.

You get the idea. There’s nothing mystical about the ‘predictions’ we’re making; we’re simply citing official reports and connecting the dots that almost everyone in the ‘expert class’ chooses to ignore.

Sure, we think that an insolvent Federal Reserve, plus $20 trillion in new debt, plus Social Security’s bankruptcy, will probably have consequences. But we’re also careful to acknowledge where we might be wrong.

I’ve written several times that the US government still has a very narrow window of opportunity to get its house in order. Sadly, they are not taking advantage of that window.

It’s also possible that an AI-led economic boom could dramatically increase productivity and tax revenue in the US, similar to the Internet boom in the 1990s.

But given that there are so many prominent figures in both government and within the AI community itself, trying to restrain AI’s growth, I’m skeptical that an economic boom will happen in time to forestall the most severe consequences of America’s gargantuan debt.

This is why we feel that our analysis is on very solid ground. And that leads me to solutions.

There’s an old Danish proverb (frequently mis-attributed to Mark Twain) which translates as “Predictions are hard. Especially about the future.”

But sometimes they’re not. Or better yet, I’d say that predictions are hard… except when you’re not actually making predictions.

Again, we’re looking at clear and obvious facts.

Social Security, for example, states that the program will “become depleted and unable to pay scheduled benefits” within 10-12 years. That’s not a ‘prediction’. That’s arithmetic.

For rational, thinking people, however, this should not be a cause for panic. Instead, it should be a reason to take action and solve the problem on an individual basis… rather than wait for Inspired Idiots in the government to fix it.

And there are plenty of options. Setting up a more robust retirement structure like a solo 401(k), for instance, allows you to contribute a lot more money for retirement, plus it provides a wider range of investment options like real estate, crypto, and more.

And even if the Inspired Idiots miraculously come together to solve the Social Security problem, you won’t be worse off for having set aside more money for retirement.

Ditto for other risks we discuss.

Real assets, for example, generally tend to perform very well during inflationary periods. Yet many real asset producers are currently trading at historic lows.

There are highly profitable, debt-free, dividend-paying companies out there whose share prices are extremely cheap. And if the future inflation scenario we’ve outlined takes hold, those types of companies typically experience extreme gains.

But if we turn out to be wrong, it’s hard to imagine being worse off buying shares of a successful, dividend-paying business at historic lows.

This is a great way to think about a Plan B: consider solutions that make sense regardless of what happens (or doesn’t happen) next.

To your freedom,  James Hickman   Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

[Important Reminder: In case you missed our announcement from January 24, Sovereign Man has merged with Peter Schiff's media group. We are now called Schiff Sovereign, and our founder (Simon Black) has dropped the pen name and is now writing under his real name, James Hickman.]

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/its-not-a-prediction-its-arithmetic-150109/