The
Casey Files
The Gold Price-Fixing Conspiracy
Doug Casey
The
International Speculator
Jan 30, 2007
For many years now, a number
of people in the financial arena have been alleging that there
is an active conspiracy to suppress the price of gold. Some see
it as a sinister backroom affair. Others claim that it's just
the way the world works, and that it happens right out in the
open, if only you know where to look.
Among the latter is the
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA), the source of much of
the material that has been written on the subject in recent years.
In order to get their take, we sent our own Doug Hornig to interview
Chris Powell, co-founder and secretary/treasurer of GATA.
-Doug Casey
International
Speculator
GATA's interest, Chris says,
is in "public policy with regard to the rigging - or 'regulation,'
if you prefer to be polite - of the currency markets, and specifically
gold, by the central banks.
"And we don't have to
speculate on what they're doing, because they've confessed in
several ways. Of course, it's not like they've gone out of their
way to let people know what they're up to. They don't go around
to the major news organizations and ask them to understand it.
But if you look reasonably carefully, you can find these confessions
in the public record in various places."
We asked Chris to define specifically
who they are.
"The central banks and
their agents, the bullion banks," he replied. "The
central banks include the ECB [European Central Bank], as well
as those of virtually all the European countries, including Britain,
along with the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department in this
country. Any of the big Western holders of gold. All of whom
communicate directly with each other and also through the BIS,
the Bank for International Settlements [the subject of an article
- 'The Most Powerful Bank You've Never Heard Of' - in the March
7, 2006 issue of What We Now Know]."
The world of international
money movement can sometimes be confusing, even for those of
us who follow it on a regular basis, so we wondered if the central
banks are bullion banks, as well. Chris notes that they can be,
but the definition is broader than that.
"A bullion bank is any
investment house that deals in the gold market, buys or sells,
borrows or lends gold. It need not be a 'bank' per se. It could
be a big brokerage house like Goldman Sachs."
That addressed who might
be manipulating the market. But it raised more questions than
it answered: What are they doing? How are they
doing it? And why do they bother? Chris took the first
one first.
"There's a general currency
market regulation scheme among the central banks, coordinated
to some extent by the BIS, in which all the central banks are
represented. They've pretty much acknowledged this.
"I first got onto this
around 1998, when I began reading the writings of Bill Murphy
[a futures trader and the co-founder of GATA]. He was ranting
about what he saw as collusion to restrain the gold and silver
price, which always seemed to involve the same suspects, Goldman
Sachs and Morgan Chase and Citibank and institutions like that.
After he went on like this for a few months, I emailed him saying
there seemed to be a lot of circumstantial evidence supporting
what he was saying, but if what he was saying was true, it would
be against U.S. anti-trust law, against the Sherman Act and the
Clayton Act and various others.
"Those laws prohibit any
collusion to interfere with the free market price of any good.
Which is exactly what the banks are doing with regard to gold."
Chris and Bill created GATA
in order to try to raise public awareness of what was happening
and, if they could, to prod government regulators into doing
something about it. A tough job, considering that a major government
agency, the Treasury Department, was up to its eyeballs in the
whole thing.
As the two men got to work,
and began posting on the Internet, others who had been looking
into the matter surfaced and contributed their own research and
evidence to GATA.
"It's embarrassing to
admit," Chris says, "that it took us a few years to
figure out that the bullion banks are just fronting for the central
banks, providing cover for them in the gold market. What we were
complaining about was indeed happening, but it wasn't an ordinary
anti-trust violation, it was simply the cover being lent by nominally
private entities to international central bank and treasury department
policies." That is, the central banks decide what they wish
the gold price to be, the bullion banks carry out those wishes.
GATA believes that the cover
under which central banks have been acting has now been blown
so totally that only the willfully ignorant can fail to see it.
And they point to the public record to bolster their claim.
For instance, there were a
few key words uttered by former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan when
he appeared before Congress in July of 1998. Greenspan was testifying
as to why the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) should
not concern itself with regulation of derivatives traded in the
over-the-counter market.
Greenspan argued that, "There
is no reason to believe either equity swaps or credit derivatives
can influence the price of the underlying assets any more than
conventional securities trading does."
One might think the chairman
guilty of a surprising naïveté, or perhaps something
a bit more sinister, but that's a topic for another day. The
relevance here is that gold, in addition to being a fundamental
currency, is also a commodity, and as such the CFTC is responsible
for oversight of its market.
Greenspan waved off the necessity
for the CFTC to regulate gold derivatives, telling Congress to
fear not, that the "central banks stand ready to lease gold
in increasing quantities should the price rise."
Oops. Bet he wishes he hadn't
let that slip. As Chris points out, "Greenspan was telling
Congress that the purpose of gold leasing was not what the central
banks had been telling the world - to earn a little money on
a dead asset. The real purpose of gold leasing was to suppress
the gold price. His remarks are still posted on the Federal Reserve's
Internet site." [they are - we checked]
Other confirmations of the
central bank price rigging scheme include a rather blatant admission
from William R. White, head of the Monetary and Economic Department
of the BIS. In late June of 2005, White delivered the opening
remarks to the Fourth Annual BIS Conference on the "Past
and Future of Central Bank Cooperation," an elite gathering
of "central bankers and academics." Among the latter
were "economists and economic historians," as well
as, for the first time, "political scientists interested
in political and other processes, and the development of institutions
to support such processes."
White's speech enumerated five
"intermediate objectives of central bank cooperation."
The fifth, and last, of these was "the provision of international
credits and joint efforts to influence asset prices (especially
gold and foreign exchange) in circumstances where this might
be thought useful." [emphasis added]
Useful to whom? Well, probably
not to the average investor.
Then there is the Washington
Agreement - signed in September of 1999 by representatives of
the ECB and the central banks of Austria, Belgium, Finland, France,
Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and England - which spelled out how
the banks would cooperate in the regulation of the gold market.
(The U.S., while not a signatory, hosted the announcement of
the agreement, and may be assumed to be supportive of it, if
not a direct participant.) It placed a limit on how much they
could collectively sell in any given year.
The alleged reason for the
Washington Agreement was to control the amount of gold being
sold by central banks, in order to keep the price high and protect
the value of those banks' holdings. That makes sense. It would,
additionally, serve as a self-checking mechanism for the signatories,
should any of them be tempted to sell off too much of their reserves.
But Chris isn't buying.
"I think the reasons they
gave were very disingenuous," he says, "and in fact
the opposite of what they were in there for. They said they were
going to regulate the gold market by coordinating their sales
and leasing in order to support the price. I would argue that
they were in there to control the price and see that it didn't
get out of hand, and to protect their agents, the bullion banks,
and the short positions the bullion banks had undertaken in gold
at the behest of the central banks."
In other words, to keep the
gold price lower than it should be.
Chris sees the agreement as
a smokescreen, a way of deceiving all but the insiders as to
what's actually going on. It allows the central banks to say
that they're taking the initiative to limit gold sales, which
is true of physical gold. But while they do that with one hand,
with the other they ramp up the action in the derivatives markets
- forward sales, options, swaps and shorts - thereby maintaining
the artificially low price of gold.
That argument is bolstered
by BIS statistics showing that gold derivative transactions ballooned
from $234 to $354 billion, an all-time high, in the first six
months of 2006. Conversely, though, it has been a very uneven
progression. For all of 2005, derivatives activity actually fell.
So a firm conclusion is difficult to draw.
Nevertheless, the argument
that the central banks have worked hard to suppress gold has
merit. To understand why the banks would do that, rather than
acting in what on the surface would appear to be their own best
interests, one has to understand what was going on behind the
scenes during gold's long bear market.
Chris explains: "I'm convinced
that the gold price suppression scheme wasn't really aimed at
gold itself. Gold was the tail on the dog. It was aimed at boosting
the government bond market, keeping interest rates down and making
the dollar look strong."
In order to accomplish that,
the central banks had to give bullion banks some incentive to
cooperate. Which they did.
"By the bullion banks
shorting gold," Chris says, "they deceived the world
about the level of inflation and money supply growth, and basically
they shorted gold to buy U.S. government bonds and collect the
difference. If you've been assured that the gold price is going
down, you short the metal and use the proceeds to buy government
bonds. You're getting 5% on government bonds and the gold price
is going down 5% a year, enabling you to close the short profitably,
so you have a risk-free trade. You're getting 10%, as long as
the central banks are willing to back you with more gold sales
to keep the gold price going down. And I think everybody was
happy with that. Financial houses, recruited as the banks' agents,
were happy with their easy profits. The Treasury Department was
happy because it boosted bond prices and kept interest rates
down. And the whole world was deceived about the vast growth
that was going on in the money supply. It worked for a while.
Until they started worrying that they were running out of gold
reserves."
Are they? we asked.
"That's the zillion-dollar
question," Chris says. "The trouble is, Fort Knox hasn't
been audited since the Eisenhower Administration. Now, the central
banks claim to have more than thirty thousand tons of gold in
their vaults, but our research has found a lot of double counting,
and in fact the IMF issued its own paper some months ago admitting
that its rules were allowing the double counting of gold by member
banks."
By double counting, we assumed
he meant that they're counting both physical and leased gold.
That's correct, he says, and jokes that "the actual disposition
of Western central bank gold reserves is a more closely guarded
secret than the plans for the construction of nuclear weapons,
which are posted on the Internet today. You'll never find out
exactly where all the gold is and who really owns it."
The question of ownership is
an important one, and it really muddies the waters. Who owns
what, and where, is complicated by the use of gold swaps. We
asked Chris to explain what a gold swap is.
"Basically an exchange.
Say the Bundesbank and the U.S. Treasury Department get on the
phone and Treasury says to the Bundesbank, 'hey, the gold price
is getting a little high, we'd like to sell twenty tons over
the next month to tamp it down, or at least lease twenty tons,
could you do it from over there to keep our fingerprints off
it?' In return, they say, 'we'll give you title to twenty tons
in the depository at West Point.' The Bundesbank says, 'no problem.'
They dispose of twenty tons in Europe through the London Bullion
Market Association, and they get a note from the Treasury Department
saying 'ok, you now have title to these bars in the vault at
West Point.' And hopefully for the sake of the Bundesbank, they're
numbered bars and they can come visit them every once in a while."
We had to say that it all sounded
very convoluted. It must be difficult to coordinate.
"Not really," Chris
says. "The central banks are constantly talking to each
other and they're all members of the BIS, which compiles extensive
data on gold reserves, as well as derivatives and leasing.
"They need to talk,
because they have to know whose gold is going out into the futures
pit today. And most Western central bank gold, or a lot of it
anyway, is held in trust by the U.S., whether it's in Fort Knox
or the basement of the Treasury Building in New York, or in the
vault up in West Point.
"The West Point gold,
by the way, was quietly reclassified a couple of years ago from
'gold bullion reserve' to 'custodial gold bullion.' No reason
given by the Mint, no indication of who we were acting as custodian
for. Then in July of 2001, the Mint redesignated 94% of the U.S.
gold reserve as 'deep storage.' Go figure."
Thinking about all this, it
seems to us that the Treasury Department, the Fed, and the European
central banks were engaging in some mighty risky behavior. Chris
agrees and says that, in fact, the house of cards almost came
tumbling down when gold spiked in late 1999, in the aftermath
of the Washington Agreement, and created a short squeeze.
With the Long Term Capital
Management meltdown fresh in people's memories (it had happened
only a year earlier), the central banks feared that the gold
squeeze could be even worse, taking down several major trading
houses and possibly setting a whole row of dominoes falling.
In the words of former World
Bank consultant Frank Veneroso, it was "an explosive gold
derivatives crisis" and "the official sector intervened
to prevent [it]."
The intervention worked. Gold
retreated back under $300 and stayed there for two years. Traders
were able to unwind their short positions without massive losses.
Since then, of course, steadily rising demand has driven the
gold price ever higher. Ongoing market rigging has been unable
to suppress it, but has served to prevent the metal from finding
its true equilibrium point, in Chris' opinion. He believes that
a day of reckoning will come. And what will that look like?
"Well, I don't want to make any hard predictions about what
will happen, or when," he says. "But what I think is
that we're going to wake up someday and find out that the Western
central banks have met - along with, maybe, some of the Asian
central banks - and there are going to be new currency arrangements.
Maybe in the name of helping the poor countries, the central
banks are going to be buying gold at $1,500 an ounce or something
like that. It'll probably happen overnight, because I don't think
the central banks can withstand a steady escape from the paper
currencies into the monetary metals. If they do it overnight,
everybody's locked into the fiat system, there's no getting out.
Either you've got your gold and silver or you don't, and there's
no incentive to get out of the whole central bank system."
That sounded to us like a sudden
and massive devaluation of the buck.
"Yeah," Chris says,
"I tend to expect that. In fact, that's what the whole Plaza
Agreement was about, back in the '80s under Reagan. It was a
devaluation of the dollar. They don't tell you these things are
going to happen, they tell you they've already happened."
Since up to that point, we'd
been talking about the central banks and the executive branch
of the federal government, we asked if Congress knows about all
this, too.
"The leadership in Congress
does," Chris says. "We told them. A friend of a friend
got GATA a private meeting with Dennis Hastert, speaker of the
House. The GATA delegation met with Speaker Hastert in his office
at the Capitol on May 10, 2000 and we laid it all out for him.
Also for Spencer Bachus, the Alabama Congressman who chaired
the subcommittee with jurisdiction over gold and silver. Not
that we really needed to. A couple of months later, I was able
to deduce that we'd been given that meeting not because the speaker
wanted to hear what we had to say, but rather wanted to know
how much of this was leaking out, how much was known, how much
of the whole thing was compromised. I can't explain exactly how
I know that, because it would put my source at risk, but trust
me, I do.
"Look, right now the Comptroller
General of the U.S. is going around saying that we're bankrupt
and we've got to do something about it immediately. So everyone
in government knows what's happening. As I said earlier, my request
to the world is not to look at GATA as some conspiracy nuts.
We just want to point out the public record and ask people to
pursue it and draw their conclusions. We're not issuing wild
charges or anything. We're just trying to call attention to the
admissions that have been made. And to get people to look at
those admissions in a new light. Or in any light at all, as far
as I'm concerned."
Forewarned is forearmed. In
Chris' words, either you've got your gold and silver or you don't.
Protecting your assets is
imperative in these times of fiscal insecurity. The card house
called "the United States economy" will collapse sooner
or later, and you'll be glad to have taken some precautions.
One of the easiest ways
to accumulate a nest egg for rougher times is to invest in precious
metals - physical gold and silver - and precious metals stocks.
For decades, Doug has proven that it is possible to make a double
or triple return (and sometimes much more than that) within 12
months or less.
You don't want to be unprepared
when the walls come crashing down around you. To learn what you
can do to survive financially and turn a major crisis to your
advantage, click here.
Casey Archives
321gold
|