PrefBlog

OK, so it looks like this series on power storage has turned into a three-day rant; particularly disconcerting because it has nothing whatsoever to do with Canadian preferred shares or even financial markets in general. Sorry, guys, but in the first place it’s interesting and in the second place Assiduous Reader JP keeps sending me interesting links, unlike youse other bums, who never send me NUTHIN’.

One thing I found myself was the 2011 Ontario Auditor General’s Report on Renewable Energy:

Since the prevalence of SBG events could threaten the reliability of the electricity system, the IESO has been taking action to ease the power surplus. However, there are technical difficulties and cost implications of these actions. Among them:

• • Storing surplus power is difficult because of the seasonal nature of renewable energy and the need for unrealistically large storage capacity.
• …

…
However, intermittent renewable energy sources such as wind and solar require fast-responding backup power and/or storage capacity to keep the supply of electricity steady when the skies are cloudy or the wind dies down. The OPA informed us that because viable large-scale energy storage is not available in Ontario, wind and solar power must be backed up by other forms of generation.
…
Despite these concerns, the cost and environmental impacts of such backup generation capacity were not formally analyzed to ensure that this information would be available to policy decision-makers. We noted that:

• • Prior to the passage of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act in 2009, the Ministry did not quantify how much backup power would be required. It was not until February 2011 that the Minister issued a new supply-mix directive that asked the OPA to consider backup options, such as converting coal-fired plants to gas-fired operation, importing power from other jurisdictions, and developing storage systems. The OPA has not yet made any recommendations to the Ministry.
• • The only analysis on backup power that the Ministry cited was a study done by a third party engaged by the OPA as part of its 2007 IPSP development. The study noted that 10,000 MW of wind would require an extra 47% of non-wind sources to handle extreme drops in wind. We noted that the third party who carried out this study also operated an Ontario wind farm, raising questions about the study’s objectivity. In spite of this, the OPA and the Ministry did not confirm or update
  this study’s projections and did not determine how much backup power would be required.

The only question left in my mind is: Is Ontario energy policy determined by morons, or is it determined by dolts? Never mind. Don’t answer. I don’t want to know.

Assiduous Reader JP sends me a link to a US Department of Energy report: Grid Energy Storage:

At present, the U.S. has about 24.6GW (approx. 2.3% of total electric production capacity) of grid storage, 95% of which is pumped storage hydro. Europe and Japan have notably higher fractions of grid storage. Pursuit of a clean energy future is motivating significantly increased storage development efforts in Europe and Asia, as well as the U.S.
…
In the past few years, the urgency of energy storage requirements has become a greater, more pressing issue that is expected to continue growing over the next decade:

• California enacted a law in October 2010 requiring the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to establish appropriate 2015 and 2020 energy storage procurement targets for California load serving entities, if cost effective and commercially viable by October 2013 (AB 2514). In February 2013, the CPUC determined that Southern California Edison must procure 50 MW of energy storage capacity by 2021 in Los Angeles area. Additionally, in June 2013, the CPUC proposed storage procurement targets and mechanisms totaling 1,325 MW of storage. Other States are looking to the example that California is setting, and Congress has introduced two bills that establish incentives for storage deployment.
  …
  New capabilities of pumped hydro, through the use of variable speed pumping, is opening up the potential for the provision of additional services that may be used to assist in the integration of variable generation sources. Projects may be practically sized up to 4,000 MW and operate at about 76%–85% efficiency, depending on design. Pumped hydro plants have long lives, on the order of 50-60 years. As a general rule, a reservoir one kilometer in diameter, 25 meters deep, and having an average head of 200 meters would hold enough water to generate 10,000 MWh.

Japan is an emerging storage powerhouse:

Japan is emerging as a hot-spot for energy storage projects, as utilities and technology companies look to battery-based solutions in response to the surge in solar PV installations.

Two new battery storage projects have been announced in the past week, with Toshiba to install a 20MWh/40MW lithium-ion battery project in Tohuku, and the island of Okinawa announcing a 2MW battery storage project on Tuesday.

Japan is expected to be the largest market for solar PV installations in 2013, with around 9GW to be installed following the introduction of feed in tariffs last year in response to the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

… and Israel’s getting in on the action:

Alstom has signed two contracts totaling around €120 million1 with PSP Investment Ltd for the supply of two 150 MW pump-turbines with the associated balance of plant equipment and Alstom’s Distributed Control System (DCS) for the 300 MW Gilboa pumped storage power plant in Israel.

Alstom also signed an eighteen-year operation & maintenance (O&M) agreement, covering day-to-day operation and maintenance of the power plant. The project represents Alstom’s first entry into the Israeli hydro market and will be the country’s first pumped storage power station, Alstom already has a proven track record in the Israeli power generation market with respect to existing steam plants and gas plants.

The power plant, located 60 km east of Haifa, will be commissioned in 2018, and will increase the country’s installed power generation capacity by 2.5%. It will contribute to increasing the reliability of electricity supply and will provide an important tool to control the demand and distribution of electricity.

During off-peak hours, pumped storage uses the energy from other power stations to transfer water to a high storage reservoir. The stored water will later be reused to generate electricity to cover temporary peaks. This helps lower the overall operation cost of power production and levels the fluctuating output of intermittent power sources.

And what are we doing here in Ontari-ari-ari-owe, barely years after the Auditor-General’s report? Flywheels!

There’s nothing like a 4,000-kilogram spinning steel cylinder to smooth out the ups and downs of the power system.

At least, that’s what Temporal Power is betting on.

The fledgling firm showed off its technology to Ontario energy minister Bob Chiarelli on Wednesday.

Temporal is betting on flywheels as a solution to an increasing problem on Ontario’s power system: With an increasing amount of wind and solar power flowing onto the grid, you need systems that can counterbalance the natural ebbs and flows of renewables.
…
Temporal has an agreement with Ontario Power Generation and NRStore — a firm headed by Annette Verschuren —– for a flywheel facility to counter-balance the minute-by-minute voltage variations on the power grid.

As far as I can tell – from the DoE report – flywheels are good for conditioning power. For load-shifting … not so much.

But fear not! Time-of-Use Billing with our billion dollar smart meter programme will save us! Right? Right?

The most significant result of those presented below is that both the conventional impact analysis and the elasticity analysis report the same result for the estimated residential summer weekday On-Peak reduction, 3.3%.

The following is not a figure, it’s a table, but never mind.

Turning back to finance, just as a change of pace, it seems that while Canadian household income coverage is still lousy, asset coverage is much better:

In a new report from Merrill Lynch, economist Emanuella Enenajor says Canadian consumers have been undergoing a “stealth deleveraging” – a significant reduction in debt accumulation that has largely flown under the radar because of the focus on the market’s favoured measure of household debt loads, the debt-to-disposable-income ratio. This sat at a record 164 per cent at the end of 2013 – widely seen as evidence that Canadians simply can’t break their reckless and unsustainable debt habit.
…
Statistics Canada data show that household debt growth in the fourth quarter was just 4.5 per cent year over year, the slowest since 2001. Non-mortgage debt (credit plus loans) grew just 0.1 per cent last year.

The problem is, the other half of the equation has slowed as well. Disposable income has grown 4.3 per cent annually, on average, since 2010, compared with 5.1 per cent annually in the decade before the financial crisis.
…
Canadian households’ debt-to-net-worth ratio – which takes into account the value of the assets acquired with much of that debt, such as real estate, and thus may be a more complete measure of the household debt burden – has been generally declining since the recession, and ended 2013 at its lowest level since the middle of 2008. Ms. Enenajor said that while rising asset values (namely, the continued strength in the residential real estate market) have helped, the key has been the slowdown in household debt growth. People are also saving more as their borrowing has slowed.

Bloomberg has a story about how the ECB’s negative interest rates are bringing back the carry trade, but I was more interested in the gorgeous collection of trite slogans and thought-substitutes embodied in a single quote:

“The ECB has signaled risk is on again,” Eric Busay, a Sacramento-based money manager at the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the largest U.S. public pension fund with $294 billion in assets, said in a June 6 phone interview. “People are concerned when to exit the trade and they understand the rush to exit could be crowded. But at the same time, you have to be in it to win it.”

I love it! Say it with a straight face, win a CFA charter!

It was another positive day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts winning 14bp, FixedResets up 8bp and DeemedRetractibles gaining 5bp. Volatility was virtually nonexistent. Volume was a little above average.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index	Mean Current Yield (at bid)	Median YTW	Median Average Trading Value	Median Mod Dur (YTW)	Issues	Day’s Perf.	Index Value
Ratchet	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	0.4974 %	2,525.8
FixedFloater	4.56 %	3.81 %	29,955	17.78	1	0.0000 %	3,768.4
Floater	2.89 %	3.02 %	45,131	19.60	4	0.4974 %	2,727.2
OpRet	4.38 %	-10.11 %	26,719	0.08	2	-0.1167 %	2,710.0
SplitShare	4.81 %	4.24 %	62,170	4.14	5	0.1273 %	3,118.4
Interest-Bearing	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	-0.1167 %	2,478.0
Perpetual-Premium	5.52 %	1.43 %	82,308	0.08	17	0.0532 %	2,400.0
Perpetual-Discount	5.26 %	5.29 %	115,809	14.95	20	0.1393 %	2,545.8
FixedReset	4.51 %	3.74 %	220,218	6.78	78	0.0765 %	2,527.9
Deemed-Retractible	5.00 %	1.03 %	147,343	0.14	43	0.0521 %	2,527.6
FloatingReset	2.67 %	2.51 %	132,919	3.97	6	0.1525 %	2,483.7

Performance Highlights
Issue	Index	Change	Notes
PWF.PR.A	Floater	1.24 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 20.40 Evaluated at bid price : 20.40 Bid-YTW : 2.59 %
MFC.PR.K	FixedReset	1.77 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.75 Bid-YTW : 3.94 %

Volume Highlights
Issue	Index	Shares Traded	Notes
BMO.PR.T	FixedReset	125,224	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 23.15 Evaluated at bid price : 25.01 Bid-YTW : 3.75 %
RY.PR.H	FixedReset	120,030	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 23.16 Evaluated at bid price : 25.04 Bid-YTW : 3.76 %
TD.PF.A	FixedReset	110,150	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 23.15 Evaluated at bid price : 25.04 Bid-YTW : 3.74 %
RY.PR.I	FixedReset	82,215	RBC crossed 73,200 at 25.20. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2019-02-24 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.17 Bid-YTW : 3.41 %
ENB.PR.T	FixedReset	78,136	Scotia crossed blocks of 35,000 and 25,000, both at 24.35. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 22.91 Evaluated at bid price : 24.30 Bid-YTW : 4.13 %
SLF.PR.A	Deemed-Retractible	72,189	RBC crossed 60,000 at 23.84. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 23.88 Bid-YTW : 5.30 %
There were 37 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.

Wide Spread Highlights
Issue	Index	Quote Data and Yield Notes
CIU.PR.C	FixedReset	Quote: 20.93 – 21.69 Spot Rate : 0.7600 Average : 0.5882 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 20.93 Evaluated at bid price : 20.93 Bid-YTW : 3.66 %
GCS.PR.A	SplitShare	Quote: 24.90 – 25.24 Spot Rate : 0.3400 Average : 0.2200 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2019-07-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.90 Bid-YTW : 4.24 %
IAG.PR.A	Deemed-Retractible	Quote: 22.66 – 22.95 Spot Rate : 0.2900 Average : 0.2018 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 22.66 Bid-YTW : 5.79 %
PWF.PR.K	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 23.66 – 23.88 Spot Rate : 0.2200 Average : 0.1478 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 23.38 Evaluated at bid price : 23.66 Bid-YTW : 5.29 %
CU.PR.F	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 22.25 – 22.45 Spot Rate : 0.2000 Average : 0.1302 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 21.91 Evaluated at bid price : 22.25 Bid-YTW : 5.07 %
PWF.PR.E	Perpetual-Premium	Quote: 25.10 – 25.34 Spot Rate : 0.2400 Average : 0.1848 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-10 Maturity Price : 24.88 Evaluated at bid price : 25.10 Bid-YTW : 5.55 %

Assiduous Reader JP brings the following to my attention, in response to the bit about renewables’ effect on utilities:

Europe’s drive toward a power system based on renewable energy has gone so far that output will probably need to be cut within months because of oversupply.

Network operators are likely to curb solar and wind generation at times of low demand to prevent overloading the region’s 188,000 miles (302,557 kilometers) of power lines, Entso-e, the grid association in Brussels, said last month. Renewable output is poised to almost double to 18 percent by 2020, according to Energy Brainpool GmbH & Co. KG, a consulting firm in Berlin.

Europe’s fivefold surge in green energy in the past decade pushed prices to a nine-year low and wiped out $400 billion in market value of utilities from Germany’s RWE AG to GDF Suez SA in Paris.
…
European governments handed out $57 billion in 2012 for green energy projects, more than half of the global $101 billion, according to the International Energy Agency in Paris.

Investment in new European projects slowed to $43 billion last year from as much as $80.2 billion in 2012, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance in London.

The spending came even as EU’s power demand peaked in 2008 and is poised to slide 0.3 percent this year, according to IHS Inc., a consulting firm based in Englewood, Colorado.

At some point, grid operators and power suppliers are going to have to come up with some way to store electricity, de facto if not de jure. My guess is that the best way to do this is to increase surge capacity in hydroelectric plants, so you just turn off the generators and let the water build up a little bit more behind the dam, until you need the power and can let things run flat out. This happens every day at Niagara Falls; surely the method could be extended to cover intermittent wind and solar supply with minimal tinkering.

Anybody with more insights into this … eMail me! I have posted a question on the Straight Dope Message Board, which is always a good resource.

What with it being close to election day and all, I thought I’d pass along Assiduous Reader JP’s note about promises, promises:

In what appears to be a first, the Lisgar GO station in Mississauga is going green.

As of about April 1 [2009], if plans stay on track, about 80 per cent of the busy train station’s electrical needs will be powered by the wind, courtesy of a brand new turbine that will generate roughly 56,000 kilowatts a day.

GO Transit spokeswoman Jessica Kosmack suggests the turbine’s $620,000 price tag will prove a bargain and perhaps become a prototype for other eco-oriented initiatives across the 8,000-kilometre GO network, which comprises 59 rail stations and numerous bus routes.

… reality, reality:

A wind turbine pilot project at a GO station in Mississauga, built for $620,000, is producing 91 per cent less electricity than originally projected.

The turbine, unveiled at Lisgar GO station in April 2009, was expected to produce 98,550 kilowatt hours (kWh) per year — enough to power 80 per cent of the station’s electricity needs.

More than four years later, it is only producing around 9,000 kWh per year, or about 9 per cent of projections.

That’s enough electricity to power a single typical household in Toronto for nine months.

Metrolinx blamed “inconsistent localized wind levels” and new development in the area for the turbine’s underperformance. A spokeswoman still called it a “marginal success.”

Other marginal successes include Enron, Chrysler, Bre-X and Nortel.

It was a good day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts winning 14bp, FixedResets up 12bp and DeemedRetractibles gaining 8bp. Volatility was average and the Performance Highlights table is comprised entirely of FixedResets, which continue to adjust after the recent carnage and partial recovery. Volume was very low.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index	Mean Current Yield (at bid)	Median YTW	Median Average Trading Value	Median Mod Dur (YTW)	Issues	Day’s Perf.	Index Value
Ratchet	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	-0.2618 %	2,513.3
FixedFloater	4.56 %	3.81 %	30,237	17.78	1	0.0000 %	3,768.4
Floater	2.90 %	3.03 %	45,595	19.58	4	-0.2618 %	2,713.7
OpRet	4.38 %	-12.47 %	27,822	0.08	2	-0.1748 %	2,713.2
SplitShare	4.81 %	4.30 %	64,716	4.14	5	0.1753 %	3,114.4
Interest-Bearing	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	-0.1748 %	2,480.9
Perpetual-Premium	5.52 %	2.65 %	82,715	0.08	17	-0.0139 %	2,398.7
Perpetual-Discount	5.27 %	5.28 %	107,160	14.97	20	0.1374 %	2,542.2
FixedReset	4.51 %	3.74 %	220,259	6.78	78	0.1214 %	2,525.9
Deemed-Retractible	5.01 %	1.44 %	148,691	0.21	43	0.0773 %	2,526.2
FloatingReset	2.68 %	2.52 %	134,814	3.97	6	-0.0199 %	2,479.9

Performance Highlights
Issue	Index	Change	Notes
MFC.PR.K	FixedReset	-2.21 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.32 Bid-YTW : 4.14 %
CU.PR.C	FixedReset	-1.13 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2017-06-01 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.31 Bid-YTW : 3.61 %
MFC.PR.J	FixedReset	-1.10 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2018-03-19 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.28 Bid-YTW : 3.66 %
BAM.PR.T	FixedReset	1.10 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 23.34 Evaluated at bid price : 24.79 Bid-YTW : 4.01 %

Volume Highlights
Issue	Index	Shares Traded	Notes
BMO.PR.T	FixedReset	239,548	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 23.15 Evaluated at bid price : 25.00 Bid-YTW : 3.75 %
IFC.PR.A	FixedReset	215,207	RBC crossed blocks of 133,700 and 64,800, both at 23.75. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 23.75 Bid-YTW : 4.38 %
BAM.PF.F	FixedReset	135,410	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 23.14 Evaluated at bid price : 24.98 Bid-YTW : 4.39 %
RY.PR.H	FixedReset	113,905	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 23.15 Evaluated at bid price : 25.01 Bid-YTW : 3.76 %
BAM.PF.C	Perpetual-Discount	110,571	Scotia crossed blocks of 58,200 and 30,000, both at 22.10. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 21.82 Evaluated at bid price : 22.12 Bid-YTW : 5.57 %
TD.PF.A	FixedReset	106,020	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 23.15 Evaluated at bid price : 25.04 Bid-YTW : 3.74 %
There were 18 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.

Wide Spread Highlights
Issue	Index	Quote Data and Yield Notes
MFC.PR.K	FixedReset	Quote: 24.32 – 24.95 Spot Rate : 0.6300 Average : 0.4507 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.32 Bid-YTW : 4.14 %
HSB.PR.C	Deemed-Retractible	Quote: 25.46 – 25.70 Spot Rate : 0.2400 Average : 0.1604 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2014-07-30 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.46 Bid-YTW : -1.03 %
ELF.PR.H	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 24.75 – 25.03 Spot Rate : 0.2800 Average : 0.2075 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 24.33 Evaluated at bid price : 24.75 Bid-YTW : 5.63 %
RY.PR.I	FixedReset	Quote: 25.12 – 25.33 Spot Rate : 0.2100 Average : 0.1390 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2019-02-24 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.12 Bid-YTW : 3.46 %
VNR.PR.A	FixedReset	Quote: 25.65 – 26.00 Spot Rate : 0.3500 Average : 0.2827 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2017-10-15 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.65 Bid-YTW : 3.75 %
ENB.PF.A	FixedReset	Quote: 25.10 – 25.33 Spot Rate : 0.2300 Average : 0.1648 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-09 Maturity Price : 23.17 Evaluated at bid price : 25.10 Bid-YTW : 4.19 %

So the big news of the day was the US jobs number:

Payrolls pushed past their U.S. pre-recession peak for the first time in May, a milestone that’s been five years in the making.

The 217,000 advance in hiring followed a 282,000 gain in April, figures from the Labor Department showed today in Washington. It marked the fourth consecutive month employment increased by more than 200,000, the first time that’s happened since early 2000. The jobless rate unexpectedly held at an almost six-year low of 6.3 percent.
…
The report also showed incomes climbed, the ranks of the long-term unemployed decreased and businesses took on more full-time help, evidence of the type of economic progress that will keep the Federal Reserve paring record monetary stimulus.
…
The so-called participation rate, which indicates the share of working-age people in the labor force, held at 62.8 percent, matching the lowest since March 1978.

Drew DeSilver of Pew Research points out:

But while the country may have climbed out of the deepest jobs hole since the Depression, that hardly means everything is peachy. There are about 15 million more working-age people now than there were in January 2008, but essentially the same number of jobs. Only 58.9% of the adult population is employed, four percentage points below the level in January 2008.

As the above chart from the Economic Policy Institute (prepared before today’s jobs report) shows, the economy is still some 7 million jobs short of what it would need for the employment-to-population ratio to reach its pre-recession level. EPI economist Heidi Shierholz commented, “We are far, far from healthy labor market conditions.”

The morally pure among us will be thrilled that Christian Bittar has been fined megabucks for a back-dated crime:

Britain’s markets regulator is seeking to fine former Deutsche Bank AG (DBK) trader Christian Bittar about 10 million pounds ($17 million) for trying to rig benchmark interest rates, its largest ever penalty against an individual, said a person with knowledge of the situation.
…
The penalty would dwarf the $9.6 million imposed on Rameshkumar Goenka, a Dubai-based investor, for manipulating stocks in London, the regulator’s biggest to date. The FCA has said it’s preparing to fine at least seven other traders it didn’t identify for their roles in trying to rig the London interbank offered rate or similar benchmarks. At least two may be fined more than one million pounds each, according to people with knowledge of the talks.

Well, Zero Hedge will be happy, anyway:

So to summarize:

1.Deutsche tells an internal prop trader to invest billions in the Libor market,but tells him: “do everything legally and by the book or else.”
2.Bittar colludes with virtually everyone else under the sun (for a full roster of names all of which point to one place: Switzerland, and secondly Singapore, see here), to generate billions in profits;
3.Bittar makes tens if not hundreds of millions of bonuses for himself;
4.Finally, DB no longer can hide the deception and claws back a portion of Bittar’s bonuses, while washing its hands of the full affair;
5.Scapegoat punished, life goes on.
And then what happened to Bittar?

He now works for Bluecrest Capital Management LLP, Europe’s third- biggest hedge fund with $30 billion under management.

I.e., nothing changes.

It was a mixed day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts off 4bp, FixedResets up 15bp and DeemedRetractibles gaining 5bp. Volatility was minimal. Volume was extremely low.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index	Mean Current Yield (at bid)	Median YTW	Median Average Trading Value	Median Mod Dur (YTW)	Issues	Day’s Perf.	Index Value
Ratchet	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	0.1380 %	2,519.9
FixedFloater	4.56 %	3.81 %	30,598	17.79	1	0.0000 %	3,768.4
Floater	2.89 %	3.02 %	46,130	19.61	4	0.1380 %	2,720.8
OpRet	4.37 %	-13.36 %	28,178	0.08	2	0.2336 %	2,717.9
SplitShare	4.82 %	4.31 %	65,310	4.15	5	-0.1750 %	3,109.0
Interest-Bearing	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	0.2336 %	2,485.3
Perpetual-Premium	5.52 %	3.63 %	83,738	0.09	17	-0.0785 %	2,399.0
Perpetual-Discount	5.27 %	5.27 %	104,443	14.99	20	-0.0408 %	2,538.7
FixedReset	4.52 %	3.70 %	221,981	8.57	78	0.1465 %	2,522.9
Deemed-Retractible	5.01 %	1.38 %	149,083	0.15	43	0.0466 %	2,524.3
FloatingReset	2.68 %	2.53 %	136,565	3.98	6	0.0332 %	2,480.4

Performance Highlights
Issue	Index	Change	Notes
MFC.PR.K	FixedReset	1.10 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.87 Bid-YTW : 3.85 %
MFC.PR.J	FixedReset	1.27 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2018-03-19 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.56 Bid-YTW : 3.34 %

Volume Highlights
Issue	Index	Shares Traded	Notes
BMO.PR.T	FixedReset	1,105,469	New issue settled today. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.14 Evaluated at bid price : 24.97 Bid-YTW : 3.71 %
TD.PF.A	FixedReset	167,080	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.14 Evaluated at bid price : 25.02 Bid-YTW : 3.70 %
RY.PR.H	FixedReset	107,539	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.14 Evaluated at bid price : 24.98 Bid-YTW : 3.73 %
BAM.PF.F	FixedReset	83,105	Recent new issue YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.13 Evaluated at bid price : 24.97 Bid-YTW : 4.35 %
BAM.PR.T	FixedReset	77,881	TD crossed 67,700 at 24.50. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.23 Evaluated at bid price : 24.52 Bid-YTW : 4.02 %
BNS.PR.Z	FixedReset	29,540	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2022-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.03 Bid-YTW : 3.75 %
There were 16 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.

Wide Spread Highlights
Issue	Index	Quote Data and Yield Notes
FTS.PR.H	FixedReset	Quote: 21.13 – 22.25 Spot Rate : 1.1200 Average : 0.6481 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 21.13 Evaluated at bid price : 21.13 Bid-YTW : 3.64 %
GWO.PR.I	Deemed-Retractible	Quote: 22.35 – 23.10 Spot Rate : 0.7500 Average : 0.4865 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 22.35 Bid-YTW : 5.84 %
FTS.PR.F	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 23.85 – 24.47 Spot Rate : 0.6200 Average : 0.3938 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.57 Evaluated at bid price : 23.85 Bid-YTW : 5.16 %
CIU.PR.C	FixedReset	Quote: 20.93 – 21.70 Spot Rate : 0.7700 Average : 0.5972 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 20.93 Evaluated at bid price : 20.93 Bid-YTW : 3.60 %
TRP.PR.E	FixedReset	Quote: 25.06 – 25.44 Spot Rate : 0.3800 Average : 0.2243 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.16 Evaluated at bid price : 25.06 Bid-YTW : 3.90 %
ELF.PR.F	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 24.01 – 24.43 Spot Rate : 0.4200 Average : 0.3036 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-06 Maturity Price : 23.70 Evaluated at bid price : 24.01 Bid-YTW : 5.59 %

DBRS commented on the Quebec budget:

Following disappointing real GDP growth of just 1.1% in 2013, the new budget assumes accelerating growth of 1.8% in 2014 and 2.0% in 2015, supported by an improvement in domestic demand and the external environment. This is consistent with the private sector consensus tracked by DBRS. Despite a difficult first quarter, the outlook for the U.S. economy is encouraging and a lower Canadian dollar will add further support to Québec exports.

At the time of last year’s rating review, DBRS anticipated that the debt-to-GDP ratio had peaked around 61% in 2012-13 and would begin to decline in 2013-14. As a result of the deterioration in fiscal performance, the latest estimates again point to a debt burden of approximately 61% in 2013-14, with another modest increase projected in 2014-15. After which, the debt burden is forecast to gradually decline to roughly 56% by 2018-19, provided that the fiscal recovery remains on target and capital spending moderates as planned.

Assiduous Reader BC wrote in and said:

One other thing I was curious about and thought you might well be the best source to ask.

Years ago, in 2006, the government outlawed income trusts and in the aftermath, a lot of companies began paying eligible dividends that qualify for the dividend tax credit

What possibility might there be that in the future, a revenue hungry government might decide to take similar action in connection with the dividend tax credit.

Thanks very much for any input you can provide

Well, nothing’s guaranteed. For all I know, the Trotskyists will form the next federal government and then I’ll be harvesting potatoes for a living.

That being said, the dividend tax credit seems politically safe to me; none of the three major parties is making it an issue and the major influence on it since it was introduced in 1972 (over the past ten years, anyway) has been changes in corporate tax rates.

However, it should be noted that the explicit purpose of the DTC is to encourage equity investment:

There will be a major increase in the dividend tax credit. Starting January 1, 1978, the amount of dividends received from taxable Canadian corporations will be grossed-up by one-half, as opposed to the current one-third, and taxpayers will be allowed to claim against tax a credit equal to this higher amount.

This measure will provide benefits in a progressive manner in that the net tax on each dollar of cash dividend received will decline by a larger dollar amount the lower the income of the taxpayer. This is shown in the table included in the Supplementary Information. The table also illustrates how this measure will improve the return on equity investments. The proposed increase in the dividend tax credit should thus make it more attractive for investors in all income brackets to return to the equity market. The federal revenue loss from this measure is estimated to be $120 million in the first full year of operation and the measure will also affect provincial tax revenues.

Geez, those were the days, eh? When a tax expenditure of $120-million wasn’t just a rounding error?

However, there are rising concerns about income inequality and its cause:

More than a quarter (26%) of self-identified Democrats and those who lean Democratic cited the tax system as a main reason for the gap. Just 14% of self-identified Republicans and those who lean Republican said the same.

This is particularly evident at the very top of the tree:

But Mr. Zucman and Mr. Saez show a dramatic increase in wealth inequality at the very top of the distribution, among households with more than $20 million in wealth – and especially among those with more than $100 million.

… and we all remember Warren Buffet’s secretary:

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. “I don’t have a tax shelter,” he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who “clean our offices” are taxed, to loud applause.

And why does this happen:

You might wonder how Mr Buffett managed such a low tax rate. Most likely, it arose because corporate dividends and capital gains are taxed at only 15 percent. But the corporate income that funded those returns was already taxed at the corporate level, where the tax rate is 35 percent. Mr Buffett seems to be ignoring the first round of taxation. Is it possible that the world’s most successful has failed to pierce the corporate veil? (If you want to more reliable data on the progressivity of the tax code, see this old post for numbers from the CBO.)

Even more striking to me is a fact that Mr Buffett did not emphasize: how low his taxable income is. His income of $46 million represents a mere 0.1 percent of his reported net worth of over $50 billion. That is not an impressive rate of return!

Why is it so low? I can think of at least four possible ways investors like Mr Buffet can keep their taxable income, as opposed to their true income, low:
1.They hold stocks that pay minimal dividends.
2.They avoid realizing capital gains.
3.They hold some of their portfolios in tax-free municipal bonds.
4.They give appreciated assets to charity, getting a deduction for the current market value without ever having to realize and pay tax on the capital gain

… and at least some of the super-rich are indulging in conspicuous consumption:

Money managers may resent Prof. Piketty’s book but they appear to love its takeaway notion, especially the implication that the market for expensive goods is just going to keep on getting bigger.

Further evidence for that viewpoint came this week when McLaren Automotive reported that it had made a profit in only its third year of operation. The British auto maker, which was spun out of McLaren Group, the Formula One racer, sells high-performance but road-legal cars that go for about $1.8-million.

This is a company that considers Ferrari and Porsche to be downmarket. Yet it has had no trouble selling out production of its P1 supercar.

Call it the 0.01 per cent market. Before Prof. Piketty and colleagues such as Emmanuel Saez at the University of California in Berkeley came on the scene, economists tended to pooh-pooh concerns about wealth distribution, since the middle class was clearly getting richer and at a pace not wildly different from that of the top 10 per cent of society.

It’s the old story, one that particularly impressed me when I visited Russia a few times and saw the glorious architecture in Moscow and St. Petersburg and the awesome craftsmanship of the relics in the Hermitage. I was so overwhelmed in the Hermitage that I decided I needed to concentrate my attention on one thing and just wandered from room to room looking at tables. How do you get such awesome craftsmanship? Well, first you spend ten years training a guy to make tables of superb quality. And then you tell him to spend the next five years to make a table for you. You can only afford to do this in conditions of extreme income inequality.

So, given all the above, I think that at some point the Dividend Tax Credit and Gross Up will attract some populist political criticism, as will the capital gains inclusion rate. It might well be that people will decide that double-taxation of distributed corporate profits is a Good Thing, particularly if snooty rich folks on Bay Street are getting the benefit of the tax breaks instead of hard-working ordinary Canadians on Main Street.

On the other hand, perhaps one of the biggest macro-economic problems facing governments nowadays is that hard-working ordinary Canadians on Main Street are showing an increasing preference for personal real-estate as an investment rather than productive investment. So my political prediction is that eventually the DTC and the lower inclusion rate capital gains will be capped at some figure that is extremely high as far as the man in the street is concerned (say, income of $150,000) but is mere pocket change to the about-to-be-soaked rich. And remember: with one of my political predictions and $2.00, you can get a coffee at Timmy’s. After all, I didn’t expect the The Pickton-ization of Communities and Exploited Persons Act.

On a less philosophical note, Draghi has earned himself a chapter in future histories of monetary policy:

Mario Draghi unveiled an unprecedented round of measures to help the European Central Bank’s record-low interest rates feed through to an economy threatened by deflation.

The ECB today cut its deposit rate to minus 0.1 percent, becoming the first major central bank to take one of its main rates negative. In a bid to get credit flowing to parts of the economy that need it, the ECB also opened a 400-billion-euro ($542 billion) liquidity channel tied to bank lending and officials will start work on an asset-purchase plan. While conceding that rates are at the lower bound “for all practical purposes,” the ECB president signaled policy makers are willing to act again.
…
Draghi announced a new liquidity program designed to encourage lending. Financial institutions will be allowed to borrow money from the ECB equivalent to as much as 7 percent of their outstanding loans to non-financial corporations and households, excluding mortgages.
…
The negative deposit rate, which means charging banks that want to deposit excess funds with the ECB, has been heralded by Draghi as a way to stem unwarranted increases in money-market rates, as well as to curb euro strength that has contributed to slower inflation.

The measure has been used by a handful of smaller central banks in recent years, including Sweden’s, which conducted a 14-month experiment in 2009-2010. Denmark moved below zero in July 2012 — though the cut was aimed more at protecting its currency than stimulating growth — and ended the policy in April.

“It’s another whatever-it-takes moment in the life of the ECB and the euro zone,” said Carsten Brzeski, chief economist at ING-DiBa AG in Brussels “He threw in all he had.”

Excluding mortgages, mind you. Don’t spend no more damned money on your damned houses, people! Use it to collateralize your carry trades:

The policy divergences will widen even further over the next three years as the Fed and then the BOE raise rates, putting them on a course counter to the ECB and the BOJ, according to Andrew Kenningham, an economist at Capital Economics Ltd. in London. By 2017, he estimates, the gap between the U.S. benchmark and those of the euro area and Japan could be nearing four percentage points.

Such divides, he says, are unusual although not unprecedented. The split between U.S. and Japanese rates has often exceeded four percentage points in recent decades and between the U.S. and Germany it topped three percentage points for much of the 1980s.

There are some very interesting musings about solar power:

Deregulated electricity generators make most of their profits on hot summer afternoons, when air conditioners and offices force grid operators to call up their most expensive electricity: natural gas “peaker” plants. Cheap to build but expensive to operate, these plants are essentially jet engines, producing power on demand for a few hours at a time. However, the entire industry benefits when peaker plants kick in, because every other generator, including the cheapest hydropower operator, receives the same top dollar during those peak hours.

Solar panels — whether utility scale or residential rooftop — generate maximum power on exactly those hot afternoons when demand peaks. What’s more, they do so at no marginal cost; the sun is free. This reduces reliance on peakers, causing prices to fall across the board, including for customers without solar power.

This is what terrifies power companies. In California, the afternoon peak has effectively collapsed. CAISO, the state’s grid manager, projects that the peak will become an afternoon chasm, so low that even power plants designed to operate 24 hours a day as “baseload power” (nuclear energy is a good example) may face difficult decisions about when to operate.

The first victims among utilities will be generators that sell electricity from peakers and other plants in the open market. Soon, their plants will be needed only for the few hours around dusk when the sun is weak but demand is still relatively high.

Arizona has net metering, but is considering changes:

The future of solar net metering in Arizona is under attack, with the state’s largest utility Arizona Public Service (APS) proposing changes that undermine cost benefits for residential solar installations.

Under a plan submitted in July with the state’s public utility commission, APS proposes two options for future residential solar customers – both of which will reduce potential financial returns homeowners would receive on their investment.

One alternative would model net-metering contracts much the same as today but require residential customers to pay what APS calls a “convenience fee” – a monthly charge for sending power to the grid. The other option would give homeowners a small ongoing bill reduction, based on market rates APS pays to other power generators.

Seems to me a two-part electricity bill is what’s required – one part for actual electricity use, one part for access to the grid. This would be similar to Toronto Hydro’s charges, but ideally the grid access charge will be based on capacity rather that usage.

TransCanada, proud issuer of TRP.PR.A, TRP.PR.B, TRP.PR.C, TRP.PR.D and TRP.PR.E, was confirmed at Pfd-2(low) by DBRS:

DBRS has today confirmed the ratings of TransCanada Corporation (TCC or the Company) and its wholly owned subsidiary, TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL), both with Stable trends. The ratings primarily reflect (1) expected improvement in TCC’s overall business risk profile over the medium term, (2) potential medium term pressure on its credit metrics and (3) environmental, regulatory and political risks with respect to its natural gas and liquids pipelines segments.

It was a positive day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts gaining 3bp, FixedResets winning 19bp and DeemedRetractibles up 9bp. The longer-than-usual Performance Highlights table, still reflecting the dislocations of the past two weeks, is dominated by winning FixedResets. Volume was quite low and dominated by recent new issues.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index	Mean Current Yield (at bid)	Median YTW	Median Average Trading Value	Median Mod Dur (YTW)	Issues	Day’s Perf.	Index Value
Ratchet	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	0.6947 %	2,516.4
FixedFloater	4.56 %	3.81 %	30,670	17.79	1	0.2404 %	3,768.4
Floater	2.90 %	3.02 %	46,382	19.61	4	0.6947 %	2,717.1
OpRet	4.38 %	-14.38 %	29,338	0.09	2	0.0000 %	2,711.6
SplitShare	4.81 %	4.30 %	62,878	4.15	5	0.0159 %	3,114.4
Interest-Bearing	0.00 %	0.00 %	0	0.00	0	0.0000 %	2,479.5
Perpetual-Premium	5.52 %	1.99 %	84,673	0.09	17	-0.0669 %	2,400.9
Perpetual-Discount	5.27 %	5.27 %	104,272	14.99	20	0.0322 %	2,539.8
FixedReset	4.53 %	3.72 %	220,173	8.57	77	0.1852 %	2,519.2
Deemed-Retractible	5.01 %	1.55 %	150,678	0.22	43	0.0895 %	2,523.1
FloatingReset	2.68 %	2.51 %	138,158	3.99	6	0.1461 %	2,479.6

Performance Highlights
Issue	Index	Change	Notes
CIU.PR.C	FixedReset	-1.74 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 20.93 Evaluated at bid price : 20.93 Bid-YTW : 3.60 %
CU.PR.D	Perpetual-Discount	-1.35 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.79 Evaluated at bid price : 24.17 Bid-YTW : 5.08 %
ENB.PR.N	FixedReset	1.03 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.06 Evaluated at bid price : 24.60 Bid-YTW : 4.15 %
ENB.PR.T	FixedReset	1.09 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 22.80 Evaluated at bid price : 24.06 Bid-YTW : 4.14 %
CU.PR.C	FixedReset	1.15 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2017-06-01 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.41 Bid-YTW : 3.45 %
ENB.PR.P	FixedReset	1.18 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 22.84 Evaluated at bid price : 24.10 Bid-YTW : 4.13 %
BAM.PR.K	Floater	1.22 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 17.44 Evaluated at bid price : 17.44 Bid-YTW : 3.04 %
ENB.PR.B	FixedReset	1.26 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.03 Evaluated at bid price : 24.11 Bid-YTW : 4.06 %
ENB.PR.F	FixedReset	1.34 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 22.92 Evaluated at bid price : 24.15 Bid-YTW : 4.14 %
BAM.PR.B	Floater	1.50 %	YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 17.55 Evaluated at bid price : 17.55 Bid-YTW : 3.02 %

Volume Highlights
Issue	Index	Shares Traded	Notes
BAM.PF.F	FixedReset	598,107	New issue settled today. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.12 Evaluated at bid price : 24.94 Bid-YTW : 4.36 %
TD.PF.A	FixedReset	335,413	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.13 Evaluated at bid price : 24.97 Bid-YTW : 3.71 %
RY.PR.Z	FixedReset	178,865	Nesbitt crossed 150,000 at 25.15. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.22 Evaluated at bid price : 25.17 Bid-YTW : 3.68 %
RY.PR.H	FixedReset	126,844	Recent new issue YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.13 Evaluated at bid price : 24.95 Bid-YTW : 3.73 %
ENB.PF.C	FixedReset	88,294	Recent new issue. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.12 Evaluated at bid price : 25.00 Bid-YTW : 4.16 %
SLF.PR.H	FixedReset	61,777	Desjardins crossed 11,600 at 25.16; RBC crossed 26,400 at 25.09. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2016-09-30 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.10 Bid-YTW : 3.61 %
There were 21 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.

Wide Spread Highlights
Issue	Index	Quote Data and Yield Notes
MFC.PR.K	FixedReset	Quote: 24.60 – 25.07 Spot Rate : 0.4700 Average : 0.3243 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Hard Maturity Maturity Date : 2025-01-31 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 24.60 Bid-YTW : 3.98 %
MFC.PR.J	FixedReset	Quote: 25.24 – 25.63 Spot Rate : 0.3900 Average : 0.2734 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2018-03-19 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 25.24 Bid-YTW : 3.70 %
CU.PR.D	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 24.17 – 24.75 Spot Rate : 0.5800 Average : 0.4653 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 23.79 Evaluated at bid price : 24.17 Bid-YTW : 5.08 %
TD.PR.R	Deemed-Retractible	Quote: 26.33 – 26.61 Spot Rate : 0.2800 Average : 0.1853 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2014-07-05 Maturity Price : 25.75 Evaluated at bid price : 26.33 Bid-YTW : -14.65 %
CU.PR.G	Perpetual-Discount	Quote: 22.24 – 22.50 Spot Rate : 0.2600 Average : 0.1808 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 21.89 Evaluated at bid price : 22.24 Bid-YTW : 5.07 %
TRP.PR.C	FixedReset	Quote: 22.30 – 22.65 Spot Rate : 0.3500 Average : 0.2774 YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2044-06-05 Maturity Price : 21.80 Evaluated at bid price : 22.30 Bid-YTW : 3.59 %