…. si alte tari pot urma Germania pe drumul repatrierii rezervei nationale de aur! Si asta poate da peste cap “sistemul” si mecanismele care determina acum miscarile de piata metalului pretios. Mai mult decat atat insa … repatrierea aurului Bundesbank-ului ridica numeroase semne de intrebare cu privire la acuratetea inregistrarilor privind depozitele de aur ale bancilor centrale din buncarele sau contabilitatea unor institutii precum BIS, FMI, FED sau BoE. Inaintea materialului din Financiar Times – New era of openness on Bundesbank gold …. iata un material care analizeaza modul in care marile institutii financiare transnationale cu sprijinul/implicarea marilor banci centrale manipuleaza piata si pretul aurului …: Este piaţa aurului manipulată de FMI, BIS, BCE, Banca Angliei şi FED?
Other countries should follow Germany’s lead The gold market barely shrugged when the Bundesbank announced it would move 674 tonnes of the stuff from Paris and New York to Frankfurt, writes Jack Farchy.
Sursa: Financial Times, New era of openness on Bundesbank gold
But the move is important: not for what it says about Germany’s faith in French or American vaults; nor for the cost of shifting 674 tonnes of gold, but because it is a major victory for transparency in the gold market.
Most report, on a monthly basis, their gold reserves to the International Monetary Fund. But these data fall a long way short of full transparency. They tell us nothing about derivative positions in the gold market – for example gold loans, agreements for future sales or options transactions.
They are open to the whims of whether individual countries decide to classify a chunk of gold as belonging to their “international reserves” or being held by some other state entity (such a as sovereign wealth fund).
Thus Saudi Arabia announced abruptly in 2010 that its reserves had more than doubled as the result of an accounting shift. And China a year earlier revealed a 550 tonne increase in its gold reserves – a buying programme that traders believe was carried out over several years and has continued since.
In that context, it is not the Bundesbank’s decision to move its gold but its decision to be more open about where it is located and how it has traded it in the past, that is most welcome.
In one document published on its website this month, the Bundesbank lists, for example, each one of its gold transactions since 1951.
The historical lack of transparency among central banks is somewhat understandable. With 29,500 tonnes between them (a decade of global mine supply), they have the ability to disrupt the market significantly if their trades are too public. See, for example, the reaction to the UK’s announcement that it would sell a large part of its reserves in 1999.
But there is a difference between revealing your trading strategies to the world and disclosing simple facts about your reserves – such as their quantity, where they are held, whether they have been lent or swapped, and so forth – with a delay if need be.
That the Bundesbank has been nudged into this new-found transparency must be chalked up as a victory for the groups of investors – most prominent among them, the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee, or Gata – that have for years been asking central banks to reveal their activities.
If central banks wish to refute suggestions from such groups that their gold does not exist, or that they are scheming to manipulate prices, they could do worse than to follow the Bundesbank’s lead.