Category

Investing

Category

(Reuters) -Major brokerages stuck to their predictions on interest rate cuts in 2025, after U.S. inflation data came in line with expectations on Wednesday, easing investor nerves, following a surprisingly strong U.S. employment report last week.

Wells Fargo (NYSE:WFC), however, lowered its forecast to two rate cuts by the Federal Reserve from three after U.S. consumer price index (CPI) showed a marginal rise to 0.4% last month and advanced 2.9% on an annual basis. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the CPI gaining 0.3% and rising 2.9% from a year earlier.

Market participants are betting on a 34.5 basis point cut by the end of this year, as per data compiled by LSEG.

After cutting rates by a quarter of a percentage point at the Dec. 17-18 meeting, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said policymakers could now be “cautious” about further reductions.

Here are the forecasts from major brokerages after inflation data:

Rate cut estimates (in bps)

Brokerages Jan 2025 2025 Fed Funds Rate

No. of cuts

in 2025

BofA Global No rate cut No rate cut 4.25-4.50%(end of

Research 0 December)

Barclays (LON:BARC) No rate cut 25 (in June) 4.00-4.25% (end of

1 2025)

BNP Paribas (OTC:BNPQY) No rate cut No rate cut 4.25-4.50%(end of

0 December)

Goldman Sachs No rate cut 50 (June and 3.75-4.00% (through

December) 2 December)

J.P.Morgan No rate cut 50(June and 3.75-4.00% (through

September) – September 2025)

Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) No rate cut 50 (through 3.75-4.00% (through

June 2025) 2 June 2025)

Deutsche Bank (ETR:DBKGn) No rate cut No Rate Cuts 4.25-4.50% (end of

0 2025)

ING No rate cut 75 3.50-3.75%

3

UBS Global No rate cut 50 3.75-4.00% (end of

Wealth – 2025)

Management

Citigroup (NYSE:C) No rate cut 125 (starting 3.00-3.25% (end of

in May) 5 2025)

Macquarie No rate cut 25 4.00-4.25%

1

Berenberg No rate cut No rate cut 4.25-4.50% (end of

0 2025)

No 50

Wells Fargo rate cut (September and 2 3.75-4.00% (end of

December) 2025)

Nomura No rate cut – –

1

Here are the forecasts from major brokerages before inflation data:

Rate cut estimates (in bps)

Brokerages Jan 2025 2025 Fed Funds Rate

BofA Global No rate cut No rate cut 4.25-4.50%(end of

Research December)

Barclays No rate cut 25 (in 4.00-4.25% (end of

June) 2025)

Goldman Sachs No rate cut 50 (June 3.75-4.00% (through

and December)

December)

J.P.Morgan No rate cut 75(starting 3.50-3.75% (through

in June) September 2025)

Morgan Stanley No rate cut 50 (through 3.75-4.00% (through

June 2025) June 2025)

Deutsche Bank No rate cut No Rate 4.25-4.50% (end of

Cuts 2025)

ING No rate cut 75 3.50-3.75%

UBS Global No rate cut 50 3.75-4.00% (end of

Wealth 2025)

Management

Citigroup No rate cut 125 3.00-3.25% (end of

(starting 2025)

in May)

Macquarie No rate cut 25 4.00-4.25%

Berenberg No rate cut No rate cut 4.25-4.50% (end of

2025)

Scotiabank (TSX:BNS) No rate cut 50 3.75-4.00% (end of

2025)

Wells Fargo No rate cut – –

* UBS Global Research and UBS Global Wealth Management are distinct, independent divisions in UBS Group

This post appeared first on investing.com

Investing.com — Capital Economics analysts have maintained their forecast for Norges Bank, predicting that the central bank of Norway will start reducing its policy interest rate in March 2023, despite December’s inflation figures coming in lower than expected. The firm anticipates a gradual rate reduction, with cuts occurring once per quarter until the key policy rate reaches 3% by mid-2026.

In its December meeting, Norges Bank kept the policy rate steady at 4.5%. The bank had indicated a potential reduction in the policy rate come March if the economy developed as projected. However, the December inflation data showed a decrease to 2.2% from November’s 2.4%, contrary to the central bank’s expectation of an increase to 2.8%. Core CPI-ATE also declined from 3.0% to 2.7%, slightly below the forecasted 2.8%.

Despite the lower-than-expected inflation, Capital Economics does not believe this will lead Norges Bank to accelerate its planned rate cut to the upcoming week. Historically, even when inflation rates were below the bank’s forecasts, the policy rate remained unchanged, influenced by factors such as strong wage growth and the weak Norwegian krone. Current wage growth trends and the trade-weighted exchange rate support the analysts’ view that the central bank will stick to its March timeline for the rate cut.

The pace and extent of future rate cuts by Norges Bank after March are less certain, according to Capital Economics. The bank’s own forecasts suggest a more conservative approach, with the policy rate hitting 3% by early 2027. However, the firm cautions against relying too heavily on these projections, citing the historical inaccuracy of central banks’ forecasts for their own policy rates.

Capital Economics expects the Norwegian economy to grow steadily in the coming years, implying that there is no urgency for aggressive rate cuts. Policymakers have expressed concerns about maintaining overly tight monetary policy, aiming to avoid undue economic restrictions while achieving inflation targets within a reasonable timeframe.

The firm also forecasts a decline in core inflation, albeit at a slower rate than last year, as the labor market eases and wage growth potentially slows. This, combined with a predicted strengthening of the krone, is expected to contribute to lower services inflation.

Considering these factors, Capital Economics believes Norges Bank will move towards a more neutral monetary stance, with the equilibrium real rate estimated to be between -0.5% and +0.5%, according to a central bank research paper published in 2022.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.

This post appeared first on investing.com

The European Central Bank (ECB) released the minutes of its December meeting, revealing a growing inclination towards monetary easing. The discussion mainly revolved around the necessity of rate cuts to stabilize inflation, with ECB staff projections indicating that achieving the forecasts would require rate reductions in line with market expectations.

The minutes highlighted an increasing easing bias, with the ECB concentrating on the pace of future rate cuts rather than their general necessity. The central bank also moved away from its strict 2.0% inflation target, now aiming for inflation to “stabilize sustainably at the target,” reflecting a shift in its communication strategy.

Concerns were raised regarding the optimism of growth forecasts in the staff projections. The baseline scenario, which anticipated unchanged trade policies and stronger foreign demand bolstering euro area exports, was considered potentially too positive given the unpredictable trade policies of key trading partners, particularly the United States.

The term “undershooting” was noted three times in the minutes, pointing to an increased likelihood of inflation falling short of the target if the economy fails to gain momentum.

The debate over the size of the rate cut was intense, with some members advocating for a 50 basis point reduction to provide insurance against the downside risks to growth that are exacerbated by global and domestic political uncertainties.

In summary, the ECB’s minutes from December underscore the central bank’s readiness to cut rates more swiftly to counter the risks of inflation undershooting and to address doubts about the growth outlook amid various uncertainties.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.

This post appeared first on investing.com

By David Lawder

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Donald Trump came to Washington eight years ago vowing to rewrite U.S. trade relationships, shrink a massive goods trade deficit and rebuild America’s industrial base with new tariffs.

The president-elect is about to embark on an even more aggressive effort in his second term, pledging to impose 10% duties on all U.S. imports and 60% on goods from China. 

Just how that will play out is unclear, but data from his first run at upending the trade landscape show it did shift U.S. imports away from China to other countries, especially Mexico and Vietnam. Still, the U.S. trade deficit continued to grow, topping $1 trillion over the last four years, and factory employment has flatlined amid an overall jobs boom since the COVID-19 pandemic.

STEEL SLIDE

Steel producers in the U.S. benefited the most from Trump’s tariffs, winning a 25% global duty while aluminum producers saw a 10% duty. Those were somewhat diminished after Trump’s first administration negotiated quota deals with Mexico and Canada and the Biden administration followed up with quota deals for the European Union, Britain and Japan.

Meanwhile, China’s dominance of these sectors globally has kept prices low, contributing to lower capacity use rates.

Some plants initially revived by the duties, including a U.S. Steel mill in Granite City, Illinois, visited by Trump in 2018 to herald the industry’s resurgence, have shut down blast furnaces. A Missouri aluminum smelter revived by the tariffs also was idled last year by Magnitude 7 Metals.  

Trump’s biggest first-term trade impact was to shatter decades of political consensus favoring ever-lower trade barriers that had allowed China to become the world’s largest goods producer. Indeed, when Trump left office in 2021, the theme was taken up and amplified by President Joe Biden. 

“Waking the world up to the economic threat from China was one of the top accomplishments of Trump’s first-term trade agenda, as was the renegotiation of some of our major trading relationships,” including a North American free trade deal, said Kelly Ann Shaw, a trade adviser during Trump’s first term.

“We’re now having a healthy debate in America about what industries we want to keep, which supply chains are critical and where we should focus our trading relationships,” said Shaw, a trade lawyer at law firm Hogan Lovells in Washington.

Trump’s tariffs of 25% on $370 billion of Chinese imports helped reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China from $418 billion in 2018 to $279 billion in 2023. But as companies shifted production elsewhere, new winners emerged: Mexico and Vietnam. The growth of their U.S. trade surpluses more than made up for China’s decline.

RETALIATION, PRICING COSTS

This shift came at considerable cost. China hit back with retaliatory tariffs of 25% on U.S. soybean exports and largely shifted aircraft purchases away from Boeing (NYSE:BA) to rival Airbus for years.

U.S. whiskey distillers were hit by EU retaliation over metals tariffs, but exports rebounded when those tariffs came off, said Chris Swonger, CEO of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States.  

In the 2020 “Phase 1” trade deal that ended the U.S.-China trade war, Beijing pledged to boost its purchases of U.S. goods and services by $200 billion over two years, but failed to do so as COVID-19 hit.

China’s promised increases in U.S. soybean volumes instead went to Brazil and Argentina. Scott Gerlt, the chief economist for the American Soybean Association, said that’s a permanent shift. 

“We never recovered the volume of China soybean exports since that trade war,” Gerlt said. “A lot of land came into production in Brazil. Brazil surpassed us in exports to China.”   

The shift could help China weather a new trade war, but the crop remains the top U.S. export to China.

Commercial aircraft once held the top spot but have been slow to recover, while motor vehicle shipments to China also declined as China’s electric vehicle industry has surged. Displacing them is crude oil, going from zero a decade ago to $13 billion in 2023.   

The U.S. remains highly dependent on China for technology imports, including smartphones, laptop computers and video game consoles. Many of these products were spared Trump’s first-term tariffs, but duties of 60% or more would raise costs considerably.     

China’s vast scale and efficiencies in sectors such as electronics and toys cannot be easily replicated elsewhere, creating difficult choices for companies facing steep tariffs, said Mary Lovely, a trade economist who is a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 

“These are enormous enterprises. How do you recreate that in another country that’s a tenth of the size of China? You don’t,” Lovely added.

Trump’s first-term tariffs did not cause a spike in consumer price inflation, but they were limited in scope and caused only one-time price increases, said Doug Irwin, an economics professor at Dartmouth College who specializes in trade.

“Tariffs are just a tax, and so they lead to a one-off level increase in the price of those goods,” Irwin said. “They’re not this continuous rise in the general price level, which is inflation.”

The price impact from further tariffs also depends on factors such as U.S. fiscal and monetary policy that may lift the dollar’s value, trade retaliation that could lower other domestic goods prices, and whether or not importers or exporting firms absorb some of the tariff costs.

TARIFF REVENUE

Trump also has pledged to pay down U.S. debt with tariff revenues. On Tuesday, he promised to create an “External Revenue Service” to collect tariffs, duties and all revenue from foreign sources. Collections from his punitive duties since 2018 suggest a vast increase would be needed to make a dent in U.S. deficits now approaching $2 trillion a year before an expected extension of expiring tax cuts, estimated to add more than $4 trillion in new debt over a decade.

Total (EPA:TTEF) collections from the China, steel, aluminum and solar panel tariffs have totaled $257 billion over seven years, a rounding error amid cumulative deficits of $12.57 trillion during that time. 

The conservative-leaning Tax Foundation estimates that a 10% universal Trump tariff would raise about $1.7 trillion over 10 years, including accounting for a negative impact on economic growth.

This post appeared first on investing.com

Investing.com — The yields on U.K. government bonds have seen an increase following the revelation of slow GDP growth in November and stagnant growth over the three months leading up to November.

This increase comes after a significant drop in gilt yields on Wednesday, which was a response to lower-than-expected inflation data from both the U.K. and U.S.

Despite the lower inflation data, analysts maintain that concerns about inflation continue to persist.

Data from Tradeweb indicates that the 10-year gilt yield has risen 1.5 basis points to 4.730%. This movement in bond yields reflects the current economic conditions and the ongoing concerns regarding inflation.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.

This post appeared first on investing.com

BEIJING (Reuters) -China will launch an investigation into U.S. government subsidies to its semiconductor sector at the request of China’s mature node chip industry, the commerce ministry said on Thursday.

Unlike the cutting-edge chips used to power artificial intelligence, mature node chips are larger and used for less complex tasks, including home appliances and communications systems.

“The Biden administration has given a large amount of subsidies to the chip industry, and U.S. enterprises have thus gained an unfair competitive advantage and exported relevant mature node chip products to China at low prices, which has undermined the legitimate rights and interests of China’s domestic industry,” China’s commerce ministry said in a statement.

The U.S. Department of Commerce did not respond to a request for comment on the Chinese investigation.

Beijing’s accusation echoes the Biden administration’s reasoning for announcing a tariff hike on all Chinese chip imports in September, and a probe into China’s mature chip node industry last month, which U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said had expanded capacity, artificially lowered prices and hurt competition using Chinese state funds.

While it is unclear what retaliatory action will come out of the Chinese government’s probe, U.S. firms such as Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) that derive a large portion of their revenue from selling mature node chips to the Chinese market could be affected.

Washington has over the past 3 years tightened export controls targeting the sale of advanced U.S.-made AI chips to China.

This post appeared first on investing.com

Investing.com – The Federal Reserve is not anticipated to slash interest rates again before June following a softer-than-anticipated core inflation reading earlier this week, according to analysts at UBS.

Headline consumer prices increased by 0.4% last month, accelerating slightly from 0.3% in November, the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics said on Wednesday. In the twelve months through December, the CPI climbed by 2.9%, faster than the prior reading of 2.7%.

Meanwhile, the so-called “core” measure, which strips out volatile items like food and fuel, edged up by 0.2% month-on-month and 3.2% year-over-year. Economists had estimated the numbers would match November’s pace of 0.3% and 3.3%, respectively.

The three main averages on Wall Street all surged in the wake of the report, notching their biggest daily percentage climbs since November 6, as hopes for more Fed rate reductions this year were bolstered. Fed officials noted that while uncertainty swirls around the policies of the incoming Trump administration, the figure helped the outlook for inflation.

US government bond yields — which had recently touched multi-month highs, weighing on stocks — also retreated. In a note to clients, the UBS analysts led by Mark Haefele said the release “appeared to come as a relief to investors” who had been scaling back their expectations for Fed cuts in 2025.

“[T]he softer inflation figures are a reassuring sign for markets, particularly after a period of elevated bond yields and retreating equity prices,” the analysts wrote.

Still, they argued that because the core consumer price reading was “only fractionally lower” than the consensus forecast and last week’s employment report pointed to a “robust” labor market, overall US economic activity has remained “strong by historical standards.”

“Against this backdrop, we don’t expect the latest inflation release to notably alter the Fed’s monetary policy trajectory,” the analysts said. They reiterated their prediction that the Fed — which lowered rates by a full percentage point last year — will roll out another 50-basis points in cuts in 2025, although they flagged the drawdowns “may only resume closer to the middle of the year.”

The resilience of the data has also given them “no reason” to expect the Fed will alter rates at its next two-day meeting later this month, the analysts said.

This post appeared first on investing.com

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Just days before Donald Trump returns to power, some of his Republican allies in the U.S. Congress are warning that the president-elect’s aggressive tax-cut agenda could fall victim to signs of worry in the bond market.

At a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill, Republicans in the House of Representatives aired concerns that the estimated $4 trillion cost over the next 10 years of extending the 2017 Trump tax cuts could undermine the U.S. government’s ability to service its $36 trillion in debt, which is growing at a pace of $2 trillion a year.

“The buyers of our bonds are getting nervous that we’re at the point that we cannot pay it back. That affects every one of us,” Republican Representative Ralph Norman told reporters. “If we can’t sell bonds, guess what? We’re in a ditch.”

The U.S. bond market has become ultra-focused on what the incoming Trump administration and its allies in Congress may deliver as they strive to enact a wide-ranging Trump agenda that also includes the deportation of immigrants living in the country illegally and new tariffs on imports.

Congress also faces a mid-year deadline to address the nation’s debt ceiling or risk a default, after rejecting a Trump attempt last month to get lawmakers to do so before he takes office on Monday.

Longer-dated U.S. Treasury yields jumped to their highest levels since November 2023 this week, with the 10-year bond hitting a high of 4.79%. It traded lower to 4.66% on Wednesday afternoon.

“Congress has to reduce the deficit,” Republican Representative Andy Barr said. “The bond market is telling Congress that if we don’t get our fiscal house in order, everybody’s mortgage rates, everybody’s credit card rates, everybody’s auto loan rates, are going to continue to go up.”

Democrats warn that extending the Trump tax cuts will mainly benefit corporations and the wealthy, while further undermining the nation’s fiscal position.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy described Trump’s repeated comments about his desire to take over Greenland, Canada and the Panama Canal as a distraction from the implications of the tax cuts.

“They’re going to try to distract the press and the public and the information ecosystem away from the thievery that is going to happen with this massive tax cut,” Murphy said.

Trump has tapped Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) Chief Executive Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, to find ways to sharply cut federal spending. Musk set an initial goal of $2 trillion per year that he this month called a “long shot,” saying that $1 trillion may be more achievable.

Even that lower figure represents almost one-sixth of all federal spending, a goal that will be very difficult to meet given that Trump has ruled out cutting the popular Social Security and Medicare retirement programs, that Republicans typically resist cuts to defense spending, and that interest payments alone cost the nation $1 trillion per year.

In recent days, House Republicans have begun circulating a list of potential spending cuts totaling as much as $5.7 trillion over a decade – nearly 10% of current spending levels – that includes spending on Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act.

Republicans in the House and Senate expect to use a parliamentary tool known as reconciliation to move legislation containing the Trump agenda through Congress while circumventing Democratic opposition and the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster for most bills.

Barr said such a reconciliation package would need to contain a combination of economic stimulus and spending cuts credible enough to persuade investors that Congress is addressing the U.S. fiscal woes.

“Will this reconciliation bill actually reduce the deficit? If they think that it will, that has the very real potential of lowering Treasury yields,” Barr said.

“What we need to say to the American people is, look, this is not austerity. This is not painful cuts. This is about lowering your mortgage payment.”

This post appeared first on investing.com

By Lawrence Delevingne, Yoruk Bahceli, Davide Barbuscia and Dhara Ranasinghe

NEW YORK/LONDON (Reuters) – When Bill Clinton began his first term as president in 1993, he faced a challenge to his authority from an unexpected adversary: bond traders. Low taxes and high defense spending over the prior decade had contributed to U.S. debt doubling as a share of economic output.

Clinton and his advisers worried that ‘bond vigilantes’ – so called because they punish governments’ profligacy – would target the new Democratic administration. A run on U.S. Treasury bonds, they feared, could sharply raise borrowing costs, hurting growth and jeopardizing financial stability. A frustrated Clinton was forced to make the unpopular decision to raise taxes and cut spending to balance the budget.

“He went away pretty disgusted with the idea that here he had just won an election by a pretty nice margin in a difficult three-way race, and now he was subservient to a bunch of bond traders,” said Alan Blinder, one of Clinton’s closest economic counselors who later served as the vice chair of the Federal Reserve. “A lot of us are wondering if the bond market vigilantes are going to come back for a second chapter.”

As Donald Trump takes office on January 20, concerns over bond vigilantes in the United States have resurfaced, according to several market experts. And this time, the economic indicators are even more alarming, they said.

The U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio is pushing 100%, double the level in Clinton’s time. Left unchecked, by 2027 it’s projected to exceed the records set after World War II, when the government borrowed heavily to fund the war effort.

Bond yields, which move inversely to prices, have been climbing. The yield on 10-year U.S. Treasury bonds has risen more than a percentage point from a September low, a whopping increase for a measure where even hundredths of a percent matter.

Like Clinton before him, Trump now faces the prospect of bond vigilantes becoming a potent check on his policy agenda, according to several former U.S. and foreign policymakers who faced market turmoil while in office.

Reuters interviewed nearly two dozen policymakers, economists and investors – including Trump advisers, a former Italian prime minister and former Greek and British finance ministers – and examined bouts of bond market routs around the world since the 1980s to assess the risk of turbulence after Trump takes office. 

The review found several indicators watched by bond traders are flashing red. U.S. federal debt has increased to more than $28 trillion, from less than $20 trillion when Trump took office in 2017. Debt is also piling up in other countries, with the world’s total public debt expected to cross $100 trillion for the first time in 2024, leaving investors nervous.

“There’s a risk of the bond vigilantes stepping up,” said Matt Eagan, portfolio manager at Loomis (LON:0JYZ) Sayles, a fund manager with $389 billion under management. “The unanswerable question is when that would occur.”

The experts believe Trump has some cover, thanks to the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency and the Fed’s now well-established ability to intervene in markets in moments of crises, which means there are always buyers of U.S. debt.

Other nations may be at more imminent risk, partly because of worries that Trump’s trade policies would dampen their growth, the experts said. Some of Europe’s biggest economies, including Britain and France, have come under pressure in bond markets recently. 

The Reuters analysis of past crises showed it’s hard to predict what will spark a bond market selloff. Part of the problem is market signals are open to interpretation. But once panic sets in, conditions can quickly spiral out of control, often requiring sizable intervention to re-establish stability.

Robert Rubin, Clinton’s Treasury Secretary and a former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs, said the bond market “could very quickly make it very difficult” for Trump to do what he wants if a steep rise in interest rates triggered a recession or financial crisis. “Unsound conditions can continue for a long time until they correct, rapidly and savagely. When the tipping point might come, I have no idea,” he said.

Trump has said he wants to lower taxes and stimulate economic growth, but many of the policymakers, economists and investors who spoke to Reuters viewed with skepticism his promises for draconian cuts to government spending and pay for his plan with trade tariffs.

Combined with worries that Trump might weaken U.S. institutions like the Fed, these people said, the Republican’s policies could provoke a violent market reaction that would force him to reverse course. Stephen Moore, a longtime Trump economic adviser, singled out the risk of “massive tariffs” that could harm global growth as one possible trigger.

Anna Kelly, a spokesperson for Trump’s transition team, said in a statement: “The American people re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin, giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail, and he will deliver by ushering in a new Golden Age of American Success on day one.”

She did not answer specific questions about current bond market conditions and the risk of a flare-up from Trump’s plans.     

BETTING ON TAX CUTS

Economist Ed Yardeni, who coined the term bond vigilantes, said Trump had bought some time by promising to cut spending and naming market-savvy people to his team such as his Treasury Secretary pick, Scott Bessent, a long-time hedge fund manager familiar with debt markets. 

Such people could play the same role that Rubin did for Clinton, Yardeni said, “in making him realize that whatever he does, it’s got to come out as relatively fiscally conservative on balance.”

Bessent said in June he’d urge Trump to slash the federal deficit to 3% of economic output by the end of his term, from 6.4% last year. In prepared testimony for his confirmation hearing in Congress on Thursday, he praised Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and his tariff plans, and said Washington must ensure the dollar remained the world’s reserve currency.

He didn’t respond to requests for comment on the bond market.

However, another long-time economic adviser to Trump, the economist Arthur Laffer, said the budget deficit is not the right focus. His Laffer Curve theory, dating back to the 1970s, posits that tax cuts can actually lead to higher tax revenues by stimulating economic activity.

Laffer said the recent rise in bond yields was a positive sign for the new administration: it reflected bets that Trump’s policies would boost growth. 

“They’re going to borrow the funds they need to borrow to increase the productivity of goods and services in the U.S. economy and encourage work, effort and productivity, and participation rates,” Laffer said. “That’s what we did under Reagan, and that’s what Trump [will do] right now.”

Laffer was an economic adviser to former President Ronald Reagan, whose tax cuts and higher spending in the 1980s caused deficits to balloon – policies that Clinton had to reverse.

Bill Gross, a prominent bond investor who was in the vigilante posse that faced down Clinton, dismissed Laffer’s prediction that growth would resolve the substantial U.S. deficit.

“Didn’t happen. Won’t happen now,” Gross said in an email. 

“ATMOSPHERE OF CHAOS”

Reuters’ review of bond vigilantism since the 1980s showed that once markets stop having confidence in policy, politicians can quickly lose control.

Alarm (NASDAQ:ALRM) over unfunded tax cuts in the UK budget – meant to spur economic growth – roiled Britain’s debt markets in the fall of 2022. Gilts suffered their biggest one-day rout in decades and the pound sank to record lows, forcing the Bank of England to intervene.

“My main recollection was the atmosphere of chaos,” said then-finance minister Kwasi Kwarteng, who was fired by his boss, prime minister Liz Truss, after only 38 days in his job.

“The market essentially forced the prime minister to remove me, and also as a consequence of that, I mean she just couldn’t hold the line, and she resigned literally six days later,” Kwarteng said.

Truss, the shortest serving prime minister in British history, did not respond to an interview request. She has defended her budget, saying she tried to implement the right policies. 

Traders’ decisions to buy or sell debt reflect a range of factors such as what they think of a country’s growth prospects, inflation trajectory and the supply and demand for bonds. 

Some metrics are now suggesting that lending money over a longer period is getting riskier, prompting investors to charge more interest on bonds.

One such metric is how a country’s borrowing costs compare to its growth potential. If they are higher than growth in the long term, the debt-to-GDP ratio would increase even without new borrowing, meaning it risks becoming unsustainable over time.

The Fed sees long-term U.S. real growth at 1.8%, which translates to 3.8% in nominal terms once the central bank’s inflation target of 2% is taken into account. The U.S. 10-year bond yields are already higher, at around 4.7% currently. If that continues, it would suggest the current growth trajectory will not be enough to sustain the debt levels.

The story is similar in Europe. For example, Britain’s budget watchdog estimates real growth averaging 1.75% in the long term, which including a 2% inflation target would lag the 10-year gilt yield of around 4.7%. 

US POLICY, GLOBAL IMPACT

Much rides on how bond markets respond to the Trump administration. A surge in interest rates in the United States – the world’s biggest economy and the lynchpin of the global financial system – would send shockwaves globally.

Sovereign debt markets are already jittery. In recent days, the UK has come under pressure from bond traders who at one point pushed the yield on 30-year British government bonds to a 26-year high. The additional yield France pays for 10-year debt over Germany rose in November to the highest since 2012 when Europe was engulfed in a sovereign debt crisis.

Higher borrowing costs for governments trickle down to consumers and companies, curtailing economic growth, increasing debt defaults and leading to sell offs in stock markets.

Regaining the confidence of bond markets can require painful steps that hit Main Street – such the series of austerity measures that Greece had to implement, starting in 2010, to stem the European sovereign debt crisis.

Mario Monti, an economist who was tapped in 2011 as prime minister to rescue Italy from financial implosion, said a major difference now is that the largest European economies are under pressure, whereas in the past it was the smaller ones.

Monti said the leadership of the United States, under then-President Barack Obama, was vital to help contain the euro zone crisis.

In May 2012, Obama held a two-hour meeting with Monti, and his German and French counterparts at Camp David, in Maryland, during a G8 gathering. “Curiosity and pressure from Obama was extremely helpful,” Monti said.

TRIGGER POINTS

Economists disagree over to what extent higher U.S. bond yields are currently being driven by factors like growth and inflation expectations, versus the demand and supply of new bonds, or the sustainability of government debt.

Moore, the Trump adviser, attributed the rise in yields to investors getting nervous about inflation creeping up. He blamed that on the Fed’s move to cut rates at the end of last year: he said that had sent a message to the market that the central bank was not serious about bringing inflation down to its 2% target.

Fed officials have repeatedly said they want to hit that objective.

Moore said that some investors’ worries about government spending were weighing on yields, too, and that it was unclear how effective the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency would be. “There’s some concern about whether Republicans are serious about cutting spending,” Moore said.

Musk has acknowledged that his goal of cutting $2 trillion in spending from the $6.2 trillion federal budget is a long shot. 

Bond markets are waiting to see the impact of Trump’s spending cuts and tax reductions, and disappointments could trigger the vigilantes, several experts said. Persistent wrangling over the U.S. debt ceiling, further downgrades to the U.S. credit rating or a fall in foreign demand for U.S. Treasuries due to reasons like sanctions and wars could make matters worse.

“There are many possible sparks,” said Ray Dalio, the founder of macro hedge fund firm Bridgewater Associates, in an email.

This post appeared first on investing.com