FT : Rivian: 1,000 electric vehicles produced, 999,000 to go

Rivian: 1,000 electric vehicles produced, 999,000 to go
Electric vehicle maker is on the right road despite recent unsettling developments

From the biggest US initial public offering of 2021 to a miss on deliveries and the exit of a senior executive, Rivian’s short ride as a public company has been unsettling. At $83 per share, it trades above its IPO price but half the November high point.

Choppy stock moves are unlikely to settle in the near term. It is not easy to pin a value on a company that is part of an industry-transforming revolution but is at such an early stage. Tesla’s shift to profitability has given the entire electric vehicle maker sector a boost. But Rivian has only just begun to make vehicle deliveries. It reported revenue of a mere $1m last quarter and is forecast to remain lossmaking for at least the next four years.

The good news is that the latest developments have not veered the company completely off course. COO Rod Coates’ exit should have been flagged to investors more clearly but it has been staggered to help continuity. The production miss was also small. Last year Rivian produced 1,015 vehicles instead of the planned 1,200. The shortfall is not enough to prove it will fail its target of 1m vehicles per year by 2030.

What matters more is the scale of demand and the company’s ability to increase production while rivals including Ford and GM race to do the same. Demand is high. Pre-orders for R1T and R1S models have jumped from 55,400 to 71,000 in two months. Even news that Amazon, an investor in the company, will buy EVs from Stellantis does not mean Rivian has lost a customer. Amazon is still planning to buy 100,000 Rivian vehicles in the next four years.

As companies and countries try to meet emission restrictions, demand for EVs should keep rising. Mizuho analysts estimate EVs will account for 45 per cent of global new car sales by 2030. With an extra $13.7bn from the IPO and plans to start construction on a new plant in Georgia able to make 400,000 vehicles per year, Rivian is still on the right road.

FT : Brussels riven by splits over proposed EU budget rule reform

Brussels riven by splits over proposed EU budget rule reform
Budget commissioner Hahn advocates frugal approach, while France and Italy favour looser spending

Stripping out certain categories of public debt from national budgets would damage transparency and overcomplicate EU rules on countries’ borrowing limits, a senior Brussels policymaker has warned amid a fierce debate in European capitals over how to overhaul the current regime.

Johannes Hahn, the EU’s human resources and budget commissioner, said he was opposed to carving out climate spending and other strategic expenditures from the EU’s public debt calculations, insisting that member states must focus on reducing their indebtedness.

“I am not supporting any ideas [to] exclude certain kinds of debts, qualifying them as good ones, sustainable ones, green ones etc. At the end of the day, debt is debt,” Hahn told the Financial Times, calling instead for member states to face regular “stress tests” of their public finances.

European Commission officials are working on bridging a rift between northern and southern member states as part of a consultation on overhauling the EU’s Stability and Growth Pact rules. The rules, which are designed to ensure fiscal discipline, were suspended during the pandemic. Euro area finance ministers are due to discuss the topic in Brussels on Monday.

French president Emmanuel Macron, who holds the EU’s rotating presidency, and Italian prime minister Mario Draghi last month argued that “key spending for the future” should be incentivised under a revised set of rules.

EU economics commissioner Paolo Gentiloni has also said he supports “renewed and reviewed” budget rules to incentivise green and digital spending. Executive vice-president Valdis Dombrovskis, who with Gentiloni is overseeing the consultation, has insisted that member states will still need to offer “credible” plans to cut their debt even if they get extra leeway for green investments.

In contrast, Hahn, who is Austria’s commissioner and a member of the centre-right European People’s party, reflects the traditional view in frugal northern states such as the Netherlands, Nordics, and Baltics. There, fiscal conservatives are wary of allowing swaths of public spending to be incentivised under a so-called “golden rule” principle.

Hahn, who is in charge of the EU’s human resources and its seven-year budget, signalled he was open to changes to the pact that would ensure a “country-specific, tailor-made road map” to public debt reduction. But he warned that countries should not assume that favourable borrowing costs would last forever.

“The commission has to be tough in monitoring, checking and taking remedial action in case the road map is not respected,” he said. “In terms of transparency, it is obvious that we should have a clear picture of the situation of each member state.” 

Hahn’s stance is an early sign of the tussles between fiscally conservative commissioners and more reform-minded ones. Brussels aims to put forward its SGP reform proposals this summer.

The current rules do not permit states to routinely disregard broad categories of green or other strategic spending when assessing compliance with EU targets. Capitals and the commission are debating whether rigorous definitions can be found for public spending projects and categories that might benefit from more favourable treatment.

French officials say they want to incentivise growth-enhancing investment in strategic areas, such as the green and digital transitions.

Pascal Canfin, a French MEP from Macron’s En Marche party, said a compromise could involve placing a cap on the green spending exempt from debt and deficit calculations.

Canfin said an annual limit of 1 per cent of a country’s gross domestic product was a suitable figure to help plug the “green investment gap” needed to meet the EU’s ambitious target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

He said the commission should be allowed to select green spending projects submitted by member states that can be exempted from the SGP every year.

“We need a cap that is politically acceptable for all countries on what spending gets special treatment,” Canfin told the FT. “If we inject 1 per cent of GDP per year it makes a clear difference and can start a virtuous investment cycle.”

FT : French defence victory could mean defeat for European co-operation

French defence victory could mean defeat for European co-operation
UAE’s Rafale deal tilts balance of power in combat air systems project towards Paris

There were two reasons for France’s defence industry to celebrate when the United Arab Emirates agreed to buy 80 Rafale fighters from Dassault Aviation last month.

First, it was sweet revenge for the humiliation last autumn when Australia walked away from a submarine deal in favour of an alliance with the US. There must have been a frisson of satisfaction in Paris when Abu Dhabi, days after agreeing to buy the French fighter, suspended talks with the US on the purchase of Lockheed Martin’s F-35.

Second, the UAE’s order — worth an estimated €14bn — will guarantee production of the Rafale through to 2031, as well as work for more than 400 French companies in the supply chain.

It will also help fund France’s investment in future upgrades to the Rafale, which is now expected to be in service through the 2050s.

Yet, while the deal has a lot going for it from a French perspective, it risks destabilising Europe’s efforts at defence collaboration. For it strengthens Dassault’s hand in the still-troublesome negotiations with Airbus’s German-based defence division over Europe’s proposed Future Combat Air System (FCAS).

The last time Dassault — and by extension the French defence ministry — felt it wasn’t getting what it needed from a European fighter programme, it walked away. The result was Dassault’s Rafale.

Launched in 2017 by former German chancellor Angela Merkel and French president Emmanuel Macron, FCAS was an overtly political project. It showed both countries’ determination to bolster Europe’s sovereign military capability after Britain’s exit from the EU. In 2019, Spain joined the programme.

The problems began when politicians handed it to industry. From the start, it was marked by squabbling over technology sharing and leadership of the most critical parts of the programme. The fighting was exacerbated by fundamentally different ideas of what collaboration meant.

“French collaboration is making sure you get the most effective output,” generally under French leadership, says one European defence executive. “In Germany, it is partly about the best athlete, but also about industrial workshare.”

The project also forced together two bitter rivals — Dassault and Airbus Defence and Space. But last year it seemed Europe’s political ambitions had gained the upper hand. A deal on basic principles was struck and industrial agreements were reached on six of the project’s seven pillars, spanning manned and unmanned aircraft, space and terrestrial communications, cutting-edge stealth technologies, artificial intelligence and more.

But divisions remain on the seventh pillar — the next-generation fighter jet itself — and there is no sign of imminent compromise.

Both sides have logical reasons for digging in their heels. Dassault, standard bearer of France’s sovereignty in combat aircraft, argues it needs to develop and manage the crucial flight-control system itself, for example. But Germany understandably expects its industry to have access to the technology, having pledged billions for the project.

It is in this context that the UAE’s Rafale deal could tilt the balance, argues Francis Tusa, consultant and editor of Defence Analysis newsletter. “It has changed the equation,” he says. “France no longer needs Germany. The profits they get from the UAE deal will finance upgrades to Rafale.”

“The days for the project are numbered unless the Germans understand where they are in the pecking order,” Tusa adds. “They are not equals in industrial capability.”

Meanwhile, the new German government’s plans to codify into law the country’s tougher restrictions on arms exports — potentially limiting them to just Nato and the EU — is adding to tensions. Such constraints on exports “would be a deal killer”, said one French defence executive.

It would be a significant blow to Europe’s defence ambitions if France chose to walk away again from a European fighter. It would be a failure, too, for Macron, who has prioritised collaboration during France’s presidency of the EU. But presidential elections are looming in April and the Dassault family does not just control a key French defence company. It owns the politically influential Le Figaro newspaper.

Ultimately, while only politicians on both sides can resolve the stand off, that may have to wait until France goes to the polls. But the longer the stalemate continues, the greater the risk for Europe that its latest test case of co-operation begins to fall apart.

FT : EU green investment labels pose problems for German coalition

EU green investment labels pose problems for German coalition
Greens are irked by the inclusion of nuclear and gas in the bloc’s taxonomy

Germany’s taxonomy troubles
Brussels’ tortured negotiations over its green labelling rules will be extended by another week, prolonging the recriminations that have surrounded the so-called “taxonomy on sustainable finance”, writes Mehreen Khan in Brussels.

The European Commission’s consultation over its draft taxonomy rules was due to end today but has been prolonged to January 21, allowing a group of independent experts and member states more time to provide their feedback on the controversial treatment of nuclear energy and gas.

A leaked copy of the draft, first reported by the FT, sparked uproar from environmental campaigners and some member states for including nuclear power and natural gas under the green label. The taxonomy is designed to help guide private capital to truly sustainable economic activity to stamp out “greenwashing”. 

Germany’s green economy minister Robert Habeck was one of the earliest critics of the draft, using a press conference yesterday to repeat his opposition. “We wouldn’t have needed the second delegated act. The first act was good, it didn’t require the inclusion of nuclear and gas,” he said.

The taxonomy is proving to be an early test of the new coalition’s unity and the Greens’ resolve. The Greens’ coalition partner, the liberal FDP, celebrated the commission’s text, calling gas a vital transitional energy for a country that is weaning itself off nuclear power.

Officials have told Europe Express that Berlin may abstain during a member state vote on the taxonomy due in the coming months. The abstention will have little impact on the approval of the legislation, which has the support of a supermajority of member states.

But strains over the taxonomy could be a foreshadowing of broader splits between the traffic light trio on related EU topics.

Chief among them is the debate on how to reform the EU’s budget rules — where the Greens have pushed for a softer position on the treatment of debt and deficit limits. That’s in contrast to the hawkish FDP who run the finance ministry. The FT reports today on how commission officials are trying to heal rifts between frugal northerners and the south over the upcoming reform of the Stability and Growth Pact.

And before MEPs and member states have their say on the taxonomy, it will first have to pass through the college of commissioners. Johannes Hahn, EU budget and human resources commissioner, told Europe Express he has “strong reservations” about the safety, security and economics of nuclear power.

Austria and Luxembourg have said they will sue the commission over the rules in protest at the inclusion of nuclear power. Hahn, an Austrian, echoed Vienna’s opposition and warned the taxonomy opens the door for “nuclear operations to continue well beyond 2050, which in my view is no longer a transition”.

>>> US Close Dow +0.51% S&P +0.92% Nasdaq +1.41% Russell +1.05% VIX 18.41 -5.1%

Closing Stock Market Summary

The S&P 500 gained 0.9% on Tuesday in a continuation of dip-buying efforts that started yesterday afternoon. The Nasdaq Composite (+1.4%) and Russell 2000 (+1.1%) outperformed with gains over 1.0% while the Dow Jones Industrial Average (+0.5%) rose more modestly.

The session started on a softer note as buyers held off conviction for Fed Chair Powell's Senate confirmation hearing. Mr. Powell didn't say anything particularly new, reaffirming that he thinks the Fed will end asset purchases in March, hike rates over the course of the year, and allow the balance sheet to run off later in the year.

The reaction in the Treasury market was perhaps more consequential for stocks. The 2-yr yield quickly backed down from 1.94% and settled unchanged at 0.90% while the 10-yr yield drifted lower by three basis points to 1.75%. The U.S. Dollar Index fell 0.4% to 95.62. 

The S&P 500 information technology (+1.2%) led the market higher with the retracement in yields, but it was outdone by the 3% gain in the energy sector (+3.4%). Energy stocks followed oil prices ($81.14, +3.03, +3.9%) higher. 

Conversely, the utilities (-0.9%), real estate (-0.2%), and consumer staples (-0.1%) sectors closed lower, as their defensive characteristics did not sit well with investors in the rebound-minded session. 

From a technical perspective, the ability for the S&P 500 to reclaim its 50-day moving average (4678) was seen as another good development for dip-buying activity. This key technical level has shown to be a good buying opportunity since April 2020. 

Looking at individual stocks, IBM (IBM 132.87, -2.16, -1.6%) was an exception in the tech sector after receiving a downgrade to Sell from Neutral at UBS. Illumina (ILMN 423.80, +61.52, +17.0%) jumped 17% on upbeat guidance while CVS Health (CVS 106.04, +0.98, +0.9%) set a 52-week high after raising its FY21 EPS guidance above consensus. 

Tuesday's economic data was limited to the NFIB Small Business Optimism Index, which December increased to 98.9 in December from 98.4 in November. 

Looking ahead, investors will receive the Consumer Price Index for December, the Fed's Beige Book for January, the Treasury Budget for December, and the weekly MBA Mortgage Applications Index on Wednesday.

  • Dow Jones Industrial Average -0.2% YTD
  • S&P 500 -1.1% YTD
  • Russell 2000 -2.3% YTD
  • Nasdaq Composite -3.1% YTD

>>> US After Hours Summary: BIIB -7.1% falls as Medicare reportedly to limit cov

After Hours Summary: BIIB -7.1% falls as Medicare reportedly to limit coverage for Aduhelm; LLY -1.7% down in sympathy; SRLP +7.3% gets takeout bid

After Hours Gainers:

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: IART +0.5% (guides Q4 revs slightly above consensus; also announces $125 share repurchase authorization)

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to news: SRLP +7.3% (receives takeover proposal at $16.50/unit), ALLY +2.4% (approves $2 bln share repurchase program; also increases dividend), C +0.8% (to exit of consumer, small business, and middle mkt banking ops in Mexico), APAM +0.7% (reports December AUM), AB +0.2% (reports December AUM), GKOS +0.1% (enrolls first patients in trials for GLK-301 and GLK-302; also its iDose TR implant provided sustained reductions in IOP), ALE +0.1% (CFO to retire)

After Hours Losers:

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: None

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to news: BIIB -7.1% (Medicare proposes to cover Aduhelm only for patients in clinical trials, according to NYT), RC -2.9% (commences 6 mln share offering; also files mixed securities shelf offering), ACRS -2.8% (Chief Medical Officer has stepped down; also provides R&D update), LLY -1.7% (in sympathy with BIIB news), IVZ -0.8% (reports December AUM), CROX -0.2% (CEO appears on CNBC: says Wall Street may not fully appreciate HeyDude acquisition), X -0.1% (announces new steel production facility)

WSJ : Powell Says Economy No Longer Needs Aggressive Stimulus

Powell Says Economy No Longer Needs Aggressive Stimulus
Fed preparing to raise rates and shrink asset holdings, central bank chairman says at hearing

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said he was prepared to begin raising interest rates to cool down the economy but that he also was optimistic that supply-chain bottlenecks would ease this year to help bring down inflation.

The central bank will use its tools “to prevent higher inflation from becoming entrenched,” Mr. Powell said Tuesday at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking Committee.

Mr. Powell, a Republican, is expected to win a second term leading the central bank but was pressed during the hearing over how the central bank will tighten policy to combat inflation, which is running near its highest annual levels in four decades.

Mr. Powell said he hoped there would be “a return to normal supply conditions” this year but added, “if we see inflation persisting at high levels longer than expected [and] we have to raise interest rates more over time, we will.”

“What we have now is a mismatch between demand and supply. We have very strong demand in areas where supply is constrained,” such as for cars, he said.

The main question for the Fed this year boils down to “how are those two things going to get better into alignment,” he said. “A part of the answer is going to be through shifts in demand.” The Fed typically lowers interest rates to boost demand and spur more growth, and it raises them to slow down the economy and curb demand.

Mr. Powell and his colleagues at their meeting last month penciled in three quarter-point rate increases this year, and over the past week, they have signaled those rises could start in March.

The Fed cut short-term interest rates to near zero and started buying bonds to lower long-term rates in 2020 as the coronavirus pandemic hit the U.S. economy, triggering financial market volatility and a deep, short recession.

Mr. Powell told lawmakers the economy no longer needs aggressive stimulus but that it would take time for the central bank to return interest rates to levels that prevailed before the pandemic.

“It is really time for us to move away from those emergency pandemic settings to a more normal level,” Mr. Powell said. “It’s a long road to normal from where we are.”

Mr. Powell has been trying to balance two risks over the past year: raising interest rates prematurely and risking a prolonged period of elevated unemployment, or providing too much stimulus that allows higher inflation to become entrenched, forcing a faster adjustment later.

Fed officials were wary last year of overreacting to one-time price increases by raising rates and cooling down the labor market if supply-chain bottlenecks were a primary driver of inflation and were expected to reverse themselves over time. Over the first half of 2021, they highlighted how the economy was employing millions fewer workers compared with February 2020, just before the pandemic hit the U.S. economy.

But Mr. Powell unveiled a policy pivot in late November, amid signs that the labor market was tightening. He began to signal greater concern that demand was stronger than expected and might fuel broader and sustained price pressures, even if idiosyncratic increases due to supply problems reversed later.

Mr. Powell has said that using pre-pandemic labor market benchmarks might no longer be appropriate to guide officials’ policy decisions, another clue that rate increases could start in March.

“We can begin to see that the post-pandemic economy is likely to be different in some respects. The pursuit of our goals will need to take these differences into account,” Mr. Powell said. Monetary policy needs to “take a broad and forward-looking view, keeping pace with an ever-evolving economy.”

Fed officials have dropped hints they may start shrinking their asset portfolio soon after they raise rates, which would be another form of tightening policy. Mr. Powell said such a process could begin “perhaps later this year.”

Officials are giving more weight to the prospect that the aggressive fiscal- and monetary-policy responses to the pandemic over the past two years may have altered traditional recessionary dynamics, buoying wage growth that normally takes longer to recover after a downturn.

A sharp run-up in home values, stocks and other assets has boosted wealth for many Americans, fueling stronger demand and potentially allowing some to retire earlier than they had anticipated, tightening the labor market. Demand might rise higher still if the pandemic subsides, boosting spending on services and leading more Americans to seek jobs.

Brisk demand for goods, disrupted supply chains and various shortages have pushed 12-month inflation to its highest readings in decades. Core consumer prices, which exclude volatile food and energy categories, were up 4.7% in November from a year earlier, according to the Fed’s preferred gauge. That is well above the Fed’s 2% target.

But it has been developments in the labor market, and not just high inflation readings, that have provided fuel for the Fed’s shift in recent weeks toward tightening policy much faster than appeared likely last summer.

The unemployment rate, which fell to 3.9% in December, is now lower than it was four years ago, when Mr. Powell became Fed chairman. That is despite the upheaval wrought by the pandemic, which sent joblessness to a post-World War II record of 14.7% in April 2020.

Of the 84 lawmakers who voted to confirm Mr. Powell, a Republican, four years ago, 68 are still in office, equally split between the two party caucuses. Several lawmakers of both parties expressed support for Mr. Powell at Tuesday’s hearing.

Mr. Powell has focused significant time on meeting with elected officials to maintain close communication, and Mr. Powell pledged in his testimony Tuesday to continue that practice if he is confirmed to a second term.

Mr. Powell, who spent his career in investment banking and private equity, was first nominated for a Fed board seat 10 years ago by President Obama. President Trump tapped him to serve as chair four years ago.