Electricity pricing: Power plays

One notices that aspirant independent and alternative power generators are not only willing to add generating capacity to the SA grid, but are willing to do so at prices per kilowatt hour (KWH) that are little above the regulated prices offered to Eskom. As encouraging, is that there would appear to be no lack of foreign and domestic capital to fund these projects designed to add to capacity or to replace Eskom as the economic supplier.

This makes an important point. It is not a lack of capital that constrains SA economic growth. Global capital has never been more abundant or indeed cheaper. The constraint is the lack of growth itself that reduces the expected return on capital and so the incentive to invest more capital in SA projects. Clearly the energy sector at current wholesale prices for electricity is an attractive investment destination.

Hence the energy regulator Nersa must have set prices high enough, despite all of Eskom’s protestations to the contrary. Clearly also, at current prices, there is no reason to have to depend on Eskom to add further generating capacity and for the government to have to borrow on its behalf or what comes to the same thing – to guarantee more of Eskom debt at the cost of its credit rating. The private sector has demonstrated it is willing to build and fund all the electricity South Africans would be willing to buy at current prices, adjusted for inflation. Eskom is to receive an extra 8% a year per KWH for the next four years.

The latest entry to the ranks of alternative suppliers of electricity is ArcelorMittal, which sees an opportunity to reduce its considerable energy costs at its Saldanha Steel Plant by generating its own, using imported gas as its feedstock. Its economics depends on selling 600 of the 800 planned Megawatt capacity to the grid – ie to Eskom, which may not be enthusiastic about the idea.

A more obvious customer would be the City of Cape Town which might well be able to negotiate a below Eskom price for a guaranteed takeoff. The City officials tell me (with perhaps a typical lack of enthusiasm for innovation) that the law makes such a deal impossible or that somehow Nersa would not allow it. This would mean perhaps that the law is an ass that needs to be turned in a different direction. Nersa surely would have no objection to wholesale electricity prices below regulated levels?

Or, perhaps, such reactions reveal that the electricity sector has yet to come to terms with the reality that Eskom’s regulated prices are not too low to discourage additional capacity building, but are in fact more than high enough to encourage expensive alternatives to coal or gas fired alternatives. And perhaps even so high as to discourage demands for electricity upon which a competitive economy depends. Surely the lower the price of electricity, the better for the SA economy? Or am I missing something?

Interest rates: Giving pause to the hawks

The Governor of the Reserve Bank, Gill Marcus, saw fit in her Q&A session after the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) meeting to adopt a more hawkish tone about the direction of interest rates. This came after the MPC decided to leave short rates on hold.

Perhaps the MPC needs to be reminded that raising short term rates will not do anything useful for the inflation rate unless the rand responded favourably to such a move.

Judged by the relationship between daily changes in short rates and daily moves in the rand since 2007, there is in fact as much chance of the rand weakening as strengthening when short rates rise. This relationship since 2008 is shown below in a scatter plot and has a correlation of zero.

Higher rates however can be expected to slow down domestic spending that, as the Reserve Bank is well aware, is growing very slowly and is putting deflationary, rather than inflationary, pressure on prices. The risk is that higher rates will damage the economy without having any favourable impact on inflation or inflation expectations.

It is a risk not worth taking. The Reserve Bank should have lowered interest rates long ago but in current circumstances of “tapering” risk on US rates and the rand, the best approach the Reserve Bank could take is to do nothing at all. It almost appears, from the body language of the Governor, as if doing nothing about interest rates or the exchange rate is a hard act for the MPC. Doing nothing for now and until domestic demand has picked up momentum, which it shows no signs of doing, is highly recommended.

Just in case the Bank thought its tough talk had any favourable impact on the rand it should know that any strength in the rand on late Thursday and Friday was due to a favourable upward move in emerging equity markets that helped the rand as much as it did other emerging market currencies. Absent SA political risks (over which the Bank has no influence) the rand remains exposed to global economic forces for which emerging market (EM) equity and bond markets are a very good proxy. We show the links between the rand and the MSCI EM Equity Index and also those between EM credit spreads over US Treasuries and the rand below. Clearly global forces are driving the rand and will continue to do so – independently of short rates set by the Reserve Bank.

The recent Brazilian experience with hiking short rates – to which reference was made at the MPC meeting – should be salutary for the SA Reserve Bank. In response to dollar strength and weakness in the Brazilian real, the Brazilian central bank hiked short term rates aggressively in mid year. As we show below, such aggression) no doubt harmful to the domestic economy) has not has any favourable impact on the Brazilian real/rand exchange rate. The weak rand has more than held its own with the real without support from higher interest rates as we show below.

The reason that currencies weaken in the face of higher short rates is because higher interest rates can damage longer term growth prospects and frighten capital away.

The path to a stronger rand and lower inflation is faster SA growth – this will encourage portfolio inflows and foreign direct investment to SA. Slowing down growth can be highly counterproductive: by discouraging foreign capital, it can weaken the rand and lead to more, not less inflation. Such possibilities should give strong pause to thoughts of higher short term interest rates.

JSE industrial earnings: 1960s nostalgia

Some SA financial history

You would have to go back to 1969 to find the JSE Industrial Index as demandingly valued as it is today. The Industrial sector of the JSE is now valued at nearly 24 times reported earnings. The market is clearly demanding or expecting the earnings of JSE listed industrial companies to continue to grow strongly and consistently – as they have succeeded in doing in recent years.

 

For those with long memories or knowledge of SA financial history, that episode of very demanding valuation in the mid 1960s did not turn out well for shareholders who entered the market in 1965. As we show below, it took until 1995 for the JSE Industrial Index, adjusted for inflation, to regain its 1965 levels. Thereafter, as we also show below, real share prices on average fell back again and only decisively exceeded the average 1965 real valuations in 2005. Since then we have seen spectacular real increases. Between 2005 and 2013 the JSE Industrial the Index has increased by nearly six times in real value to reach its current record levels.

 

 

 

 

 

This time has been different – The explosion of share prices and earnings after 2005

These improvements in share market valuations since 2005 have been supported by almost equally strong advances in reported earnings, adjusted for inflation. While share prices have increased by six times in real terms since 2005, real index earnings have increased by nearly five times over the same period, with only one temporary set back associated with the global financial crisis. This very impressive growth, if sustained, would be well worth paying up for in higher share prices. In other words, it is economic fundamentals, not irrational exuberance, that can explain the market in JSE listed Industrials.

It should be noted that after a period of strong growth in real earnings between 1960 and 1980, real industrial earnings in 2004 were no higher than they had been in the mid 1970s. The surge in earnings and earnings growth, as with share prices, began in 2005 and has been sustained since then. It represented a sea change in the circumstances of SA industrial companies. What is to be observed is a remarkable transformation of the real profitability of JSE-listed industrial companies.

 

Since January 2011 the growth in real industrial earnings has averaged 12.9% a year, while real dividends have grown significantly faster – by nearly 30% a year on average. These, it will be appreciated, are very impressive recent real growth rates. As may also be seen below, while both growth rates have slowed down, a time series forecast predicts that the growth in real dividends will pick up momentum while the growth in real earnings will remain positive in real terms in 2014. But all of this will have to be proved and investors will be watching the earnings and dividend news particularly closely.

 

 

Industrial earnings dissected – global and SA economy plays

Among the large industrial companies listed on the JSE it is the group of the Industrial Hedges that have made the running on the JSE. These are companies that depend on the global economy rather than the SA economy. We have created an Index of these companies weighted by their SA share holdings. The Index is made up of British American Tobacco, Aspen, SABMiller, Naspers, Steinhoff, Richemont, MTN, Netcare and Medicilinic. This group of companies generated a total return of close to 50% over the 12 months to the end of October 2013, compared to 23% for the All Share Index and a 42% return for the Industrial Index (the latter includes the Industrial Hedges as well as the SA economy-dependent large industrial companies).

Unsurprisingly, the Industrial Hedges have also outperformed on the earnings growth front. Yet it should be noticed that in recent months the SA Industrials have increased their reported earnings, in money of the day rands, at about the same rate as the global group.

 

The state of the global economy will prove decisive for corporate performance

It will take good support from the global and SA economies to realise the growth in earnings required to justify current market valuations. The global economy plays will benefit directly from US growth. With faster US growth will come higher long term interest rates though. For now this makes US rates a bigger threat to emerging market economies, their currencies and their stock markets than to the US economy and US equities – as we observe from market reactions to higher and lower US long term rates. Rand weakness adds to the case for the global plays relative to the SA Industrials. Rand strength improves the case for industrials dependent on the SA economy.

 

In due course faster US growth should feed through to emerging market economies and the companies dependent on them – including the SA Industrials. In the long run good news about the US economy means good news for the global economy; but not necessarily immediately. For now the ideal scenario for emerging markets would be modest increases in long term US rates – as the US economy consistently gains momentum and drags global growth along with it. The more delayed and slower the tapering of the extra cash injected into the US economy, the better for emerging market equities, including the JSE.

African Bank (ABL): Getting to grips with the rights issue

(For more details, view the PDF here)

African Bank Limited (ABL) announced its intention to proceed with a rights issue of up to R4bn on 5 August. The terms of this rights issue were decided in early November: the company now plans to raise R5.48bn from its shareholders by issuing 685.28m shares at R8.00 in the ratio of 21 shares for every 25 shares held.

We will offer a method to measure the success of this rights issue for current ABL shareholders who may follow their rights or alternatively dispose of the shares that will carry these rights to their new owners.

Some detail

Shareholders or potential shareholders have until close of business on the JSE on Friday 8 November to qualify for these rights as registered shareholders. The rights will trade between 11 November and 29 November 2013. The last day to follow these rights, that is to pay R8 for the additional shares to be allotted, is 6 December.

The rights issue is fully underwritten and so it is certain the capital will be raised and the extra number of shares issued as intended. That is whatever happens to the share price of ABL between now and 6 December when all the shares can trade.

Some uncomfortable recent ABL history

The recent history of the ABL share price and its market value (share price multiplied by the number of shares in issue) is shown in the following chart. The bad news on 2 May took the form of a trading statement that indicated that earnings per share were expected to decline by between 25% and 29%.

The share price then immediately declined by 19.3% on the news. By the end of May the share price had declined still further to R16, reducing the market value of ABL by more than half of its pre-trading statement value, that is by nearly R13bn, over the month. Thereafter the share price varied from the R16 of 31 May to a high of R19 on 10 October. Clearly the company had grossly underestimated its bad debts, making a call on its shareholders to recapitalise the bank inevitable.

 

If the rights to subscribe new equity capital are taken up by established shareholders in the same proportion they currently hold shares, their share of the company is unaltered. They will be entitled to exactly the same share of dividends or the company (if liquidated) as before. In the case of a rights issue, established shareholders may however elect to sell all or part of their rights to subscribe to additional shares should these rights prove valuable, in which case they are giving up a share of the company but are fully compensated for doing so.

The key questions for shareholders and the market place are the following:

How well will the extra capital raised be employed by the managers of the company raising additional capital? Will the capital raised from old or new shareholders earn a return in excess of its opportunity costs? Will it earn a return in excess of the returns shareholders or potential shareholders might expect from the same amount of capital they could invest in businesses with a similar risk character?

Doing the numbers for the ABL rights issue

In the case of the ABL rights issue, the essential judgment to be made by the market place is whether or ABL will be worth more than the extra R5.482bn shareholders will have subscribed for in additional share capital, after 6 December. ABL had a market value of R12.33bn on 5 August when the rights issue was first announced. It would need to enjoy a market value of more than R17.88bn on 6 December (R12.34bn + R5.482bn = R17.88bn).

Given that 15.01m shares will have been issued by then, (the sum of the 685.28m new shares plus the 815.811m shares previously issued) the break even share price for the established shareholders would have to be approximately R11.88. A share price of more than this would confirm the success of the rights issue when the process has been finally concluded.

It is possible to infer the value of the rights implicit in the current R17.29 share price. R17.29 multipled by the 815m shares in issue gives a value of R14.09bn. If we add the additional capital of R5.5bn to this, we get an implicit post rights issue value for the company of R19.59bn. Dividing the R19.59bn by the 1501m shares gives an implicit post rights issue share price of R13.05. This is R1.17 ahead of the break even of R11.88. Hence the ABL capital raising exercise value has been value adding for shareholders.

Another way of measuring the value add is to compare the post rights value of ABL at R13.05 per share (R19.58bn) with the pre-rights issue value of R12.33bn to which the R5.5bn capital injection must be added. This amounts to R17.83bn and so the value add is R19.59bn – R17.83bn = R1.76bn.

The dilution factor – best to be ignored

The common notion is that issuing additional shares will “dilute” the stake of established shareholders, because more shares in issue reduces earnings per share. This assumes implicitly that the additional capital raised will not be used productively enough to cover the costs of the capital raised or earn more than the required risk adjusted return. But this is not necessarily so. Additional capital can be productively employed and can add, rather than reduce, value for shareholders.

 

In the case where balance sheets have been impaired, the ability to raise additional capital from shareholders in a rights issue adds value to the company by reducing its default risk. This would appear to be the main factor adding value to ABL. It is up to established shareholders in the first instance to approve any rights issue, on the presumption that it will add value to the stake they have in the company. If they approve and are willing to invest more it will be over to the market place to decide whether the gain in market value exceeds or falls short of the value of the additional capital subscribed.

 

In the case of a secondary issue of additional shares (rather than a rights issue) the answer is easily found by observing the share price after the capital raising. A gain in the share price would be evidence of a value adding capital raising exercise for both established shareholders who did not subscribe additional capital as well as for all those who did.

 

However to be a truly value adding exercise, these share price gains made after a secondary issue would have to be compared to market or sector wide gains or losses. If the share price gains were above market average, the success of the capital raising exercise would be unambiguous. 

 

Estimating the impact of a rights issue is complicated; a lower share price may be compensated for by more shares owned.

 

Estimating the value add in the case of a rights issue is more complicated. This is because the rights are typically priced at a large discount to the prevailing share price before the announcement. The share price after a rights issue is likely to go down, but this will be compensated for by the fact that the shareholders, subject to a lower share price, will have received more shares at a discounted price, in exchange for additional capital subscribed.

The reason for pricing the rights at a discount to the prevailing share price is to attract attention to the offer and by so doing, to make sure that the rights to subscribe additional capital will have market value and so will be followed and the additional capital secured.

 

Making the comparison with a sole owner of a business investing more capital in it.

 

For any sole owner of a business enterprise injecting more capital into his or her business, the nominal price attached to the shares in issue would be irrelevant. He or she still owns all the shares.

 

When a sole owner decides to add capital to the private unlisted business, the test over time will be whether or not the business comes to be worth more than the extra capital invested – to which an opportunity cost should be added. That is what the same capital might have realised in an equivalently risky alternative investment.

 

The same is true of a rights issue in a listed company except, that if the shares are actively traded, the judgment of the market place on the wisdom in raising additional capital is immediate and continuous. Shares in a rights issue are being issued to shareholders in the same proportion to which they own them. As with a 100% owner, they would be issuing shares to themselves and their share of the company, after the rights issue, will remain the same should they follow their rights.

 

The rights issue price therefore is largely irrelevant to the established shareholders. What matters is the amount of capital the shareholders are called upon to subscribe to and what this capital they have subscribed for will come to be worth, when the rights issue and the capital raising exercise is concluded.

 

Why a large discount to the prevailing share price can be helpful to the success of the rights issue

 

This capital intended to be raised can be divided into a larger or smaller number of shares by adjusting the price at which the rights are offered without any important consequence for current shareholders – other than those who are financially constrained and therefore unwilling to come up with additional capital. They therefore would prefer not to take up their rights and to sell part or all of their rights to subscribe additional capital, presuming these rights had a positive value.

 

The same would be true for any underwriter that presumably would prefer not to have to take up their rights. For the underwriter the larger the discount the better; the larger the discount the less likely they will be called upon. One wonders if the underwriting commission properly reflects this trade off (as it should). For the underwriter, as for any shareholders less willing to follow rights, the larger the discount (and so the more additional shares issued) the better. A large discount to the prevailing share price will ensure an active market for the rights they wish to give up.

 

Conclusion

 

So far so good for shareholders in ABL following their rights issue. By agreeing to support the rights issue they have added value to the shares they owned. The market, as well as the shareholders, have so far voted in favour of the rights issue. Had the shareholders decided not to support the rights issue and proved unwilling to risk additional capital, the future of the bank might well have been regarded as much less certain and the share price damaged even more than it was. The market would have regarded any failure to support a rights issue as negative for the future of the Bank. The decision by shareholders to re-capitalise the bank was their vote of confidence in the management to realise good returns on capital in the future, even though they may have blotted their copy book. Forgiveness can be divine – but also value adding.

US yields: Good news and bad for emerging markets

 

The importance of the US economy for the SA economy and its financial markets was again demonstrated last week. Some good news about the state of the US economy came in the form of the Institute of Supply Managers’ (ISM) latest report on manufacturing activity. This indicated good underlying growth, sending US long term interest rates higher on Friday.

SA yields moved in the same upward direction. More importantly, the gap between SA and US yields widened on Friday 1 November (as we show in the chart below), indicating that more rand weakness is expected over the next 10 years than was expected the day before.

 

US 10 year bond yields rose from 2.48% to 2.62% on Friday. These long term rates had earlier approached 3% after news of possible Fed tapering entered the markets in late May 2013. By tapering we mean reducing the monthly Fed injections of cash into the banking system, now running at US$85bn a month.

The manufacturing sector indicator was better news for the US economy than for emerging market (EM) economies. The US economy may be in a position to withstand higher interest rates when the Fed eventually begins tapering its injection of additional cash into the system. But higher interest rates are not called for in most emerging market economies, including the SA economy (at least not for now).

In the figure below we show how the S&P 500 Index outperforms the JSE (and the MSCI EM Index, the emerging market benchmark) when the gap between US and SA (and other EMs) interest rates widens and vice versa when the yield differences narrow.

 

 

In due course any sustained strength in the US economy will percolate through to the rest of the world and its stock and currency markets. But until such dispersed economic strength is apparent, investors in emerging markets must hope for a slow, steady recovery in the US and for not significantly higher US long term rates. The chart below shows that the recent weakness in the rand was shared by other emerging market currencies.

Thus it seems clear that for now, the more the Fed delays tapering, the better for EM economies and their stock and currency markets.

South Africans abroad: Return of the diaspora

 

The return of skilled South African from abroad has been a boon to the economy

SA may have made it difficult for firms to hire skilled foreigners. It has not done much, fortunately for the sake of the economy, to inhibit the flow of skilled South Africans back home. It should be doing all it can to encourage the diaspora to come back home.

The numbers of returning South Africans reversing the brain drain has been very impressive. I have been given an estimate of the number of returning professionals and managers by employment placement firm Adcorp, which is in a good position to know the details. The number Adcorp estimates is a very impressive 370 000 skilled migrants who have returned to SA since 2009. In recent years the SA economy has managed to do without attracting skilled foreigners in magnitude by absorbing large numbers of its own. Some sense of the importance of these returnees for the economy will be indicated below.

As may be seen in the figure below, the average real wage at which Adcorp was able to place young professionals or managers doubled through the SA economy boom years between 2003 and 2008, from R150 000 a year in 2003 to R350 000 in 2009. To convert these salaries to 2013 money, multiply by about 1.3 times. In recent years these real salaries at which Adcorp has been able to place clients has declined significantly. Clearly South African firms hiring skilled labour could have benefitted from access to immigrant skills before 2009 – just as they have benefitted from migrant skilled labour since.

 

Putting SA skilled migration trends in context

To give a better idea of the importance of 370 000 skilled entrants to the SA labour market we can refer to data supplied by SARS in its recently issued 2013 Tax Statistics, that can be found on the national Treasury web site. SARS reports 15 418 920 individuals as registered for PAYE. Not all potential income taxpayers earn enough to have to pay income tax (more than R60 000 a year in 2012). These numbers of registered taxpayers has increased dramatically in recent years as firms were forced to include all workers in their tax filings from 2011.

 

Of the 15.4m registered workers, some 5.1m actually paid income tax. 3.2m of these taxpayers earned a taxable income of more than R120 000 – perhaps qualifying them as skilled. These 370 000 returning migrants therefore represent more than 10% of the skilled labour force.

Who pays the tax – and some dissonance

It is of interest to note that 338 724 taxpayers reported taxable income of more than R500 000 in 2012. Of these, 73 250 taxpayers enjoyed taxable income of more than R1m in 2012, of whom 16 952 earned between R2m and R5m; while a mere 2 787 taxpayers reported taxable income of more than R5m.

What makes these statistics especially interesting is that the 15.4m taxpayers registered with SARS compare favourably with the employment numbers recorded by Stats SA in its Quarterly Labour Force Survey that records employment and unemployment from a survey of households. Stats SA reports a labour force of 18m of whom 10m only are estimated as formally employed.

 

Such grave dissonance between the numbers of employees recorded by SARS and by Stats SA needs to be urgently resolved if we are to say anything useful about the SA labour market and the impact of immigration and migration on it and design policies accordingly.

The greater the supply of skills the better the economy – and the poor stand to benefit most from skilled migrants.

For SA Jewish Board of Deputies,  The Big Immigration Debate- what type of immigration policy should South Africa adopt? With remarks from Naledi Pandor, Minister of Home Affairs, Mamphela Ramphele, Cris Whelan, Rapelanf Rabana and myself

Cape Town, 31st October 2013

Why immigrants are good for economic development

Increased supplies of any valuable resource, natural resources, fertile land, convenient waterways, minerals  etc as well as of labour or capital are helpful to an economy- they bring more output and incomes, including revenue for the Government. Immigrants not only add to the potential supply of labour they can add to the supply of capital as well as of enterprise. By capital one means not only their savings but of more importance the value of the skills they have acquired through education or training and through on the job learning in their home countries.

Immigrants are a self selected group – they have get up and go- a willingness to escape poverty or the lack of opportunity at home. They are therefore likely to have an above average degree of enterprise and risk tolerance.

The (present) value of their skills – realised in the production of goods and services – and represented by the employment benefits they earn – over and above those earned by unskilled workers with almost only their energy to offer – is described by economists as human capital. It can be calculated in a very similar way in which the present value of some flow of income from a machine or building can be estimated. Human capital is created through a process very much like that undertaken when more tangible capital, physical plant and equipment is added to the capital stock. It typically takes a willingness to save , to give up the current consumption of goods and services – while undergoing training or an education – for the sake of increased incomes and consumption in the future. In other words individuals save to invest in their skills the returns from which will be enjoyed over time in the form of extra income and additional consumption that comes with higher incomes. The returns from investing in human capital- the extra income associated with extra years of education- can  be very high indeed which is why such savings and investment activity is eagerly undertaken.

Often this training and education, the generation of human capital, will be highly subsidised by governments- that is by taxpayers hoping for a return on their contributions in addition to that realised by the better skilled individuals themselves. That is to say a better skilled or educated population generates positive externalities for the community at large.

The case for encouraging the immigration of skilled labour is for the host society to benefit from these externalities. That is to gain benefits beyond those realised by the migrants themselves, when given the opportunity to apply their skills or enterprise in the economy to which they have migrated .

Migration has income (output) effects but also influences income differences.

The extra supply of migrant skills or energy will have an influence on not only on total output (GDP) and incomes but also on real or relative employment benefits. That is on the relative or comparative incomes of the better off who benefit from human capital and the less well off who command very little of it. An increased supply of skilled workers will tend to reduce their scarcity value. By the same token an increased supply of skills will increase the relative scarcity of unskilled labour. The more capital, including the more human capital available to an  economy, the higher will tend to be the demand for and the so the real value of lower paid, less skilled labour

It seems clear that the value (real wages earned) earned by relatively unskilled labour local labour will benefit from an increased supply of human as well as physical capital. The more capital made available to an economy relative to its supplies of labour, the greater the scarcity of labour, the more demand for such labour, the more productive such labour and so the greater will be its rewards as employers compete for their services.  Workers with equal strength have long commanded a higher scarcity value in the US compared to China because of the relative abundance in the US of natural resources as well as of capital. Adding capital is very helpful to those with only their strength to offer employers – it is less obviously welcome by those advantaged with skills, human capital, who might resent the competition and the pressure on their employment benefits.

The political resistance to the migration of skilled workers would most obviously come from the economically advantaged, those with valuable education and skills – not those disadvantaged for want of education or training. The political resistance to the migration of unskilled labour will surely come from the relatively disadvantaged through lack of skills. Those in possession of scarce skills or capital more generally will have a strong economic interest in encouraging unskilled migrants. Less expensive labour intensive services for the homes of the better off, is an obvious benefit.

South Africa’s immigration practice has by design or practice been helpful to the advantage South Africans- and not helpful to the poor.

South Africa’s policies with respect to immigration- allowing by accident or design relatively free access for unskilled labour – from Zimbabawe or elsewhere in Africa- while by accident or design – raising barriers to the migration of skilled labour have surely been helpful to the those advantaged with skills or capital while being generally unhelpful to established unskilled labour.

Potential workers (unskilled and skilled) will migrate from regions with lower real employment benefits to those that offer more, if opportunity presents itself. By so doing all other things remaining the same they will add to the scarcity of labour in the home region and reduce it in the host region. Employers in the host region will welcome more labour and those in the home region will find their employment costs uncomfortable. The flow of people as the flow of capital is usually a response to growth and so the prospect of higher returns. Faster growing nations and regions attract workers and capital while slow growing regions repel labour and capital.

Push from conditions in the home country rather than the pull of an improved labour market in the host country can drive the flow of migrants

However there is the possibility of push rather than pull dominating outcomes in the labour and capital markets. Famine or failed nations can drive people and their savings away and help to depress returns in the host country that if growing slowly will find it more difficult to be hospitable. The case of people migrating away from Zimbabwe towards SA is a case more of push than pull. The case of skilled South Africans migrating away from the UK or the US after the Global Financial Crisis and its impact on employment opportunities is a further case of push more than pull.

South Africa may have made it difficult for firms to hire skilled foreigners. It has not done much, fortunately for the sake of the economy, to inhibit the flow of skilled South Africans back home. The numbers of returning South Africans reversing the brain drain has been very impressive. I have been given the number of returning professionals and managers by employment agency Adcorp- who are in a good position to know the details – as a very impressive 370,000 skilled migrants who have returned to SA since 2009. In recent years the SA economy has managed to do without attracting skilled foreigners in magnitude by absorbing large numbers of its own Diaspora. I will give some sense of the importance of these returnees for the economy at large below.

The impact on the remuneration of the professional classes in SA of this return is demonstrated by this figure shown below, also obtained from Adcorp. As may be seen the average real wage at which they were able to place young professionals or managers doubled through the SA economy boom years between 2003 and 2008 from R150,000 p.a in 2003 to R350,000 in 2009. To convert these salaries to 2013 money multiply by about 1.3 times. In recent years these salaries at which Adcorp have been able to place their clients has declined significantly. Furthermore the number of these placements by Adcorp has declined by as much as 60% No doubt in the face of the increased supply of skills provided by the returnees. Clearly South African firms hiring skilled labour could have benefitted from access to immigrant skills before 2009 – just as they have benefitted from migrant skilled labour since.

Source; Adcorp, Private Communication

 

Putting SA skilled migration trends in context

 

To give a better idea of the importance of 370 000 skilled entrants to the SA labour market we can refer to data supplied by SARS in their recently issued, 2013 Tax Statistics, that can be found on the national Treasury web site. SARS reports 15 418 920 individuals as registered for PAYE. Not all potential income taxpayers earn enough to have to pay income tax (more than R60,000 p.a. in 2012) These numbers of registered taxpayers have increased dramatically in recent years as firms were forced to include all workers in their tax filings from 2011. (See table below)

Of the 15.4m registered workers some 5.1m actually paid income tax. 3.2m of these taxpayers earned a taxable income of more than R120,000 – perhaps qualifying them as skilled. These 370 000 returning migrants therefore represent more than 10% of the skilled labour force. It will be of interest to note that 338,724 taxpayers reported taxable income of more than R500,000 in 2012, 73,250 taxpayers enjoyed taxable income of more than R1m in 2012 of whom 16,952 earned bwtween R2 and R5 million while a mere 2,787 taxpayers reported taxable income of more than R5m.

What makes these statistics especially interesting is that the 15.4 million taxpayers registered with SARS compare very favourably indeed with the employment numbers recorded by Stats SA in their Quarterly Labour Force Survey that records employment and unemployment from a survey of households . Stats SA reports a labour force of 18m of whom 10m only are estimated as formally employed. (See below)

Source; Stats SA QLFS

Such grave dissonance between the numbers of employees recorded by SARS and by Stats SA needs to be urgently resolved if we are to say anything useful about the SA labour market and the impact of immigration and migration on it.