The most important thing to know about the US data on foreign holdings of US Treasury securities is that the US doesn't really know who holds US Treasuries --
The biggest holders (after Japan and China) are ...
1/x
US Treasury holders, in rank order
Japan, China, the UK, Belgium, the Caymans, Luxembourg, Switzerland and Ireland
Only Japan and China (and to a degree Switzerland) are real holders, the rest are financial and custodial centers.
2/
The second most important thing to know -- apart from the continued (apparent) purchases of Treasuries from private investors abroad (even if the buyers are the Caymans and the UK in the transactional data) -- is that China isn't selling ...
3/
Neither the transactional data nor the custodial data fully capture China's activity.
But the transactional data showed Oct. purchases of Agencies and (surprisingly) Treasuries. The fall in the holdings data more or less disappears if you adjust for Agencies and Belgium
4/
It is in fact rather remarkable that after adjusting for the Belgian holdings (a euroclear account used by the PBOC it seems) China's fairly visible holdings of US bonds have stayed constant for the last 5ys (at ~ $1.6 trillion)
5/
Japan's holdings of US securities are dropping like a rock -- a lot of it is valuation, so that will change with the November data tho.
But there is no doubt that the MoF sold in September and October (more in September it seems)
6/
Japan reports the market value of the securities it holds in its reserves (as well as its actual intervention) and the US data shows the market value of Japan's holdings --
guess what, the changes recently have lined up nearly perfectly.
7/
The flow (transactional) numbers for Japan tend to be fairly accurate (at least for the MoF) -- they show $24b in Treasury sales for Oct v $37-38b in September
8/
The TIC data tho doesn't tend to capture Japanese (or for that matter Taiwanese) holdings of US corporate bonds all that well tho, so it clearly has some important gaps -- Japanese private investors holds more US securities than show up in the custodial numbers for JP.
9/
The October TIC data shows official sales of Treasuries, but ongoing private buying --
it is thus consistent with the flow of funds data for the year, which shows ongoing foreign purchases of Treasuries through q3 (even with China not buying and Japan selling)
10/
last note -- beware of any reports that just use the headline numbers for foreign holdings of Treasuries.
The holdings data is the most accurate part of the TIC data, but it really does need to be adjusted for valuation changes this year.
10/10
Bonus chart --
the big increases in foreign holdings recently have come from the UK, Belgium (likely China) and the Caymans ...
It is really hard to know who has been really buying abroad, tho someone has been.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Treasury has indicated that it will look at the activities of China's state banks in its next assessment of China's currency policies--
It is hard to see how this doesn't become a bit of an issue ... unless of course summitry gets in the way of analysis 1/
It is quite clear that state bank purchases (and in 23/ early 24 sales) of fx have replaced PBOC purchases and sales and the core technique China uses to manage the band around the daily fx -- i.e. settlement looks like an intervention variable
2/
My latest blog looks both at how fx settlement (a measure that includes the state banks) has displaced the PBOC's own reported reserves as the best metric for Chinese intervention & lat some of SAFE's balance sheet mysteries
The blog is detailed and technical -- and thus probably best read by those with a real interest in central bank balance sheets, the balance of payments and how to assess backdoor foreign currency intervention
2/
Drawing on historical data, I propose that the gap between fx settlement and the foreign assets on the PBOC's balance sheet (fx reserves + other f. assets) is a good indicator of hidden intervention --
Obviously overshadowed by the news about a Fed nomination, but the Treasury released its delated October 2025 FX report today and it is worth reading -- not the least b/c of a clear warning to SAFE.
1/
This seems clear
"An economy that fails to publish intervention data or whose data are incomplete will not be given any benefit of the doubt in Treasury’s assessment of intervention practices."
This report only covers the period between July 24 and June 25, so it misses the bulk of the 2025 surge in fx settlement (December = $100b plus). But this chart suggests the use of more sophisticated analytical techniques than those used in past reports --
A bit of background. Taiwan's lifers hold $700 billion in foreign currency assets abroad (more counting their holdings of local ETFs that invest heavily in foreign bonds) v ~ $200 billion in domestic fx policies -- so fx gap (pre hedging) of $500 billion
2/
Taiwan's regulator (perhaps the most complicit regulator on earth) not allows the lifers NOT to mark their fx holdings to the fx market -- so the lifers are incentivized not to hedge (and they are rapidly reducing their hedge ratio)
Japan is an interesting case in a lot of ways. It has a ton of domestic debt (and significant domestic financial assets) which generates heated concerns about its solvency/ ability to manage higher rates. But it is also a massive global creditor --
1/
Japan's net holdings of bonds (net of foreign holdings of JGBs) is close to 50% of its GDP (a creditor position as big v GDP as the US net det position). That includes $1 trillion in bonds held in Japan's $1.175 trillion in reserves, + over $2 trillion in other holdings
2/
That translates into big holdings of US debt -- the MoF's Treasuries all show up in the US TIC data, but the corporate bonds held by the lifers, postbank and the GPIF are only partially captured in the US data b/c of third party management/ the use of EU custodians
14m cars would be roughly 1/4th of the global market for cars outside China (the Chinese market is ~ 25m cars) ... no way that doesn't have a disruptive impact.
China would go from 6 to 14m cars in a two year period if 2025 isn't an outlier ...
2/
Not clear that German/ European politics can caught up to the scale of China's export tsunami. And some European firms think they can profit from China's subsidies and strong local supply chain by producing in China for the European market