Malpass told a World Bank conference on Ukraine’s financial assistance needs that the early estimate of “narrow” damage costs does not include the growing economic costs of the war to Ukraine.”Of course the war is still ongoing, so those costs are rising,” Malpass said. More
Zelenskiy, in a virtual address to a World Bank forum, said the global community needed to exclude Russia immediately from international financial institutions, and urged all countries immediately to break up relations with Moscow. He said the Russian blockade of Black Sea ports has blocked Ukrainian exports, impacting world food safety. More
The governor of the Bank of England said he was concerned about the risks of persistent inflationary pressure from a strong labour market, even though he expects economic activity to slow over the rest of the year.Speaking on the sidelines of the IMF and World Bank spring meetings in Washington on Thursday, Andrew Bailey said he feared that the economy might fall into recession if the central bank raised interest rates too far. Although the governor insisted that he was not sending precise signals about which way he would vote at a meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee in two weeks’ time, his comments suggest that he thinks interest rates need to rise further. “We are walking this very, very fine line,” the governor said, describing the twin pitfalls that threatened the UK economy. One was the potential failure of the BoE to “tackle inflation” and the other was “the risk that [the rising cost of living and higher interest rates] creates a recession and pushes too far down on inflation”. His comments about the possibility of recession suggested that he did not think interest rates needed to rise as fast as financial markets are anticipating. Traders are betting on the BoE raising rates aggressively from 0.75 per cent to 2.5 per cent by this time next year.Speaking to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Bailey said that the high UK inflation rate, which hit 7 per cent in March, was caused both by US-style overheating and strong demand, and the European affliction of high energy prices that could ultimately curb spending and inflationary pressure. With these opposing threats, Bailey said he did not want to give too much forward guidance on the likely path of interest rates because economic conditions were changing so quickly. “If we live in a world where one core energy price can fall 20 per cent in one afternoon, as it did last week, you feel pretty humble about the amount of guidance you can give on where policy will go,” he said.
The governor made clear his concerns that the series of upward price shocks over the past year, alongside a tight labour market, would fuel persistent inflationary pressures. This combination, he suggested, required more attention than normal from the central bank.If there was “shock after shock” to prices, the central bank would have to worry more that companies would push through price rises to defend profit margins and employees would demand higher wages to compensate.Bailey said the tightness of the labour market would add to immediate inflationary pressures. “This combination of supply shocks and a tight labour market tends to give us more of a problem [of persistent inflation],” he said. “We think that the real income shock at the scale it is [currently], is going to cause a slowdown in growth . . . but the question is whether the labour market is going to slow down.”He added: “We have to ask ourselves the question, well: is that going to cause the labour market to be stronger for longer, notwithstanding a decline in growth?” More
Jay Powell sent his strongest signal so far that the Federal Reserve is prepared to raise interest rates by half a percentage point at its meeting next month as it steps up efforts to fight soaring inflation. “It is appropriate in my view to be moving a little more quickly,” the chair of the US central bank said at a panel hosted by the IMF. “We make these decisions at the meeting and we’ll make them meeting by meeting, but I would say that 50 basis points will be on the table for . . . May.”Powell’s comments underscore a shift in tone from several Fed officials, who have recently embraced the need for the central bank to take more forceful action to tame the highest inflation in 40 years. The view that the Fed should “front load” increases to it main policy rate so it quickly reaches a “neutral” level that does not stimulate growth was held only by the most hawkish officials, but it has become more widely accepted. Powell on Thursday indicated tacit support for that approach, suggesting multiple half-point rate increases could be implemented this year. “We’re really going to be raising rates and getting expeditiously to levels that are more neutral and then that are actually tightening policy if that turns out to be appropriate once we get there,” he said.Markets are pricing in three half-point rate rises for the next three policy meetings leading up to July, with the central bank moving to quarter-point increases after that point so that the federal funds rate reaches 2.77 per cent by the end of the year.Its current target range is 0.25 per cent to 0.50 per cent, a level reached in March after the Fed delivered its first rate increase since 2018.“It’s absolutely essential to restore price stability,” Powell said at the panel, which also included Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, and Kristalina Georgieva, managing director of the IMF. “Economies don’t work without price stability.”The Fed is also set to soon begin shrinking its $9tn balance sheet, aiming for a monthly reduction of as much as $95bn that is likely to officially kick off in June.Lagarde suggested the ECB would be less aggressive than the Fed in acting to quell inflation, especially in light of mounting risks to the bloc’s growth and the fact that price pressures in Europe broadly stem from supply-related constraints.
“It needs to be addressed in a sequential, flexible, gradual way, which is what we have begun doing,” she said, with the ECB deciding in June at what point in the third quarter it will stop purchasing government bonds.“That will then lead us to assess whether or not an interest [rate] hike is needed,” Lagarde said.She added: “For goodness sake, let’s wait until we have the data and then we move on to decide.”Powell on Thursday also pushed back on concerns that the effort to tighten monetary policy will result in a recession, pointing to the historically strong labour market, which he said was “unsustainably hot”. But he acknowledged it would be difficult to achieve a so-called soft landing. “I don’t think you’ll hear anyone at the Fed say that that’s going to be straightforward or easy,” he said. “It’s going to be very challenging.” More
Janet Yellen, US Treasury secretary, urged Europe to be “careful” about imposing a complete ban on Russian energy imports, warning of the potential harm such a move could inflict on the global economy. “Medium-term, Europe clearly needs to reduce its dependence on Russia with respect to energy, but we need to be careful when we think about a complete European ban on say, oil imports,” Yellen said during a press conference in Washington on Thursday. She said an immediate ban by the EU would “clearly raise global oil prices” and “would have a damaging impact on Europe and other parts of the world”. Yellen added that “counter-intuitively”, a total embargo may not have such a negative impact on Moscow’s finances, with Russia benefiting from higher prices. The focus of western allies should instead be on trying to reduce “proceeds from sales of oil and gas” for Russia. “If we could figure out a way to do that, without harming the entire globe through higher energy prices that would be ideal. And that’s a matter that we’re all trying to get through together,” she said. EU members are considering a ban on Russian oil imports as evidence mounts of atrocities committed by Moscow’s forces against Ukrainian civilians. A ban on gas imports is more politically and economically difficult but could be on the table at a later stage. The US has imposed a total ban on Russian energy imports, as well as curbs on new US investment in Russia’s energy sector. But it has far less at stake economically than Europe. US officials have consistently said they were not pushing Europe to follow their lead but instead wanted to help the continent wean itself off Russian energy over time, including by arranging more American deliveries of liquefied natural gas. Yellen spoke on the sidelines of the IMF and World Bank’s spring meetings, which were dominated by the war on Ukraine and its economic impact. Yellen and some of her western counterparts walked out of a G20 gathering on Wednesday in protest against Russia’s presence in the group. “It simply cannot be business as usual for Russia in terms of its participation in our global forums,” she said.
Yellen also rang alarms about the danger of rising prices for food and fertiliser, saying they could lead to “more people going hungry, further exacerbate inflation and harm government fiscal and external positions”. “We’re doing everything we can both bilaterally and through the international financial institutions to address food security risks,” she said, adding that more specific details of the response would be coming in the next few weeks. Yellen said the US was committed to providing Kyiv with an additional $500mn in economic aid on top of $500mn already pledged by US president Joe Biden last month. She also said Washington was considering funding some of Ukraine’s reconstruction with about $300bn-worth of Russian central bank assets, which the US and its allies froze at the start of the invasion. Such a move may require legislation, however. “We would carefully need to think through the consequences . . . before we’re taking [this step] I wouldn’t want to do so lightly,” Yellen said. “It’s something that I think our coalition and partners would need to feel comfortable with and be supportive of.” More
[The stream is slated to start at 1 p.m. ET. Please refresh the page if you do not see a player above at that time.]
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell speaks Thursday on a panel presented by the International Monetary Fund. CNBC’s Sara Eisen will moderate the talk.
The event is part of the IMF’s Debate on the Global Economy. Participants also will include European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde along with representatives from the IMF, Indonesia and Barbados.
With inflation running at 40-year highs, rising prices are seen as the biggest danger to economic growth in the pandemic era. Like other global central banks, the Powell Fed is expected to tighten monetary policy considerably this year, with a series of interest rate hikes and a reduction in asset holdings.
Other Fed officials this week mostly said they want to combat inflation without going so far as to derail the recovery. Markets expect a series of rate hikes and a reduction in assets at a pace that eventually could reach $95 billion a month.
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.
WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More
As the latest tech earnings season gets under way in the US, macro issues loom large.An industry that likes to focus on the micro — where the next disruptive change will come from, or which incumbent is about to get its lunch eaten — suddenly finds itself wrestling with an unusually large number of geopolitical and macroeconomic challenges.Inflation and the turn in the interest rate cycle have raised questions about both rising costs (particularly in the strained labour market of information technology) and weakening demand. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has trimmed sales at the margin for many companies, but more importantly hit supplies of key materials and injected a new level of uncertainty into the global economy. China’s drastic response to Covid-19 outbreaks is only the latest issue to threaten global supply chains — and another reason to worry about a slowdown in the country’s economy.However, while this has brought a bumpy start to the year, IT demand has settled at an unusually robust level coming out of the pandemic. It all looks like a recipe for huge volatility, as companies try to withstand external shocks to their global supply chains and operations, with varying degrees of success. But it also suggests that some of the main engines of the IT industry are still firing on all cylinders.One concern is the strength of consumer demand. Exhibit A for the worriers came in the form of this week’s shocking new subscriber numbers at Netflix. Competition from new video streaming rivals has been looming for a while, but other forces have also taken hold this year. Netflix executives pointed to “spillover effects” from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in central and eastern European countries, along with “macro strain” in a number of economies, including in Latin America.It’s unclear how much these factors contributed to the shortfall. But as higher energy prices eat into more consumers’ wallets, how many more will decide this year that it is time to limit their spending on streaming? And which other consumer services will start to show the strain?Another straw in the wind has been the sharp turn in the personal computer market since the start of 2022. Moribund before the pandemic, PC sales sprang back to life as workers logged in from home. The number of machines sold last year jumped by 15 per cent to 341mn, according to Canalys, the most in almost a decade. But figures from Gartner show sales fell around 7 per cent in the first quarter of 2022.
New hardware purchases are usually the first thing that gets put on hold when consumers and businesses start to feel uncertain. In other parts of the IT market, on the other hand, the picture looks very different.IBM, long a laggard in the shift to cloud computing, issued a surprisingly buoyant outlook on its earnings call this week following an overhaul that has included the spin-off of a large part of its services business. According to Arvind Krishna, IBM’s chief executive, IT demand is running at 4-5 percentage points above the rate of gross domestic product growth. Barring “something much more catastrophic”, he predicted it would continue at that rate, even through a mild recession.The optimistic view is that the shock of the pandemic has, if anything, led companies and governments to accelerate plans to digitise their operations. IT buyers started out this year with plans for bigger spending growth than they did at the start of 2020 before the pandemic, even though the economic outlook is now more uncertain, according to John-David Lovelock, chief forecaster at Gartner.The year 2020 turned out to be a bust. But it was followed by a near-10 per cent surge in IT spending last year, and Gartner is predicting that the $4.3tn global IT market will expand at a faster rate than in the years leading up to the pandemic, with growth of 4 per cent this year rising to 6.6 per cent in 2024.The effects of this growth will be very unevenly felt. Spending on new tech has always been channelled disproportionately into areas where companies see the biggest impact on their business. In recent years, that has meant things like cloud computing, analytics and security, which they hope will make them operationally more resilient and more responsive to both customers and new market opportunities.The forecasts, if correct, point to a solid backdrop for the industry as a whole, and a springboard for continued very high growth rates in the hottest corners of IT. Whether investors will accord these growth rates the same high multiples they did before the recent stock market correction is another [email protected] More
This week, as western governments pondered sending aircraft to Ukraine, the Kyiv government embarked on a novel financing step: it launched a website #buymeafighterjet to crowdsource donations for jets from the world’s mega-rich.Once that might have seemed a laughably bizarre thing to do. But today it no longer appears quite so odd. Never mind the fact that events in Ukraine show we live in a world where networks, not institutions, wield power; today the ultra wealthy increasingly wield riches and power, with some billionaires controlling budgets comparable to those of small countries. And while it is unclear whether #buymeafighterjet will deliver planes, the symbolism is worth noting. It highlights a trend that deserves far more attention from economists and political scientists alike — and in spheres that have nothing to do with war. Consider one radically different context: this week’s World Economic Outlook report from the IMF. The message in this tome that grabbed most attention this week was that the world faces rising inflation, high debt and stalling growth — stagflation, in other words, although the IMF tactfully downplays that term.But on page 62 of the report there was also an intriguing little sidebar about the “Saving Glut of the Rich”. A decade ago, the concept of a “savings glut” was something usually discussed in relation to China. When market interest rates plunged in the early 21st century, economists argued that rates were being suppressed because emerging market countries were recycling their vast export earnings into the financial system.Or, as Ben Bernanke, former Federal Reserve chair, wrote in 2015: “A global excess of desired saving over desired investment, emanating in large part from China and other Asian emerging market economies and oil producers like Saudi Arabia,” had created a “global savings glut”.But, this week, the IMF highlighted another, little-noticed contributing issue: the ultra-rich. It pointed out that a “substantial rise in saving at the very top of the income distribution in the United States over the past four decades . . . has coincided with rising household indebtedness concentrated among lower-income households and rising income inequality”.And while economists used to look at this through an American lens, “the phenomenon may not be limited to the United States”, the Fund notes. It seems to be global. And since the rich cannot possibly spend all their wealth — unlike the poor, who usually do — this savings glut has almost certainly “contributed to the secular decline of the natural rate of interest”.Moreover, while the IMF downplays this, the actions of western central banks have made the pattern worse. Years of quantitative easing have raised the value of assets held by the rich, thus expanding inequality — and with it the rich persons’ savings glut.How much has this affected rates? In truth, no one knows, not least because information about this shadowy world of ultra wealth is sparse. Or, as the World Inequality Laboratory notes in its 2022 report: “We live in a data-abundant world and yet we lack basic information about inequality.” Furthermore, western central bankers have limited incentive to study these issues too publicly, since many feel privately embarrassed that quantitative easing has made inequality worse. But one sign of the trend can be found in the 2022 Wealth Inequality Index report: not only have the richest 1 per cent across the world apparently taken 38 per cent of all wealth gains since the mid 1990s, but also the private share of national wealth has soared, while public wealth has shrunk. Another striking clue emanates from reports collated by Campden consultants, experts on the family office ecosystem. In 2019, they calculated that there were 7,300-odd family offices in the world, controlling $6tn in funds, a 38 per cent increase from 2017. Between 2020 and 2021, during the latest wave of QE, funds under management increased on average by 61 per cent. It is possible that this trend in inequality will slow if QE — and with it asset inflation — comes to an end in 2022 and beyond. Or maybe not — as the IMF report also points out, a world of stagflation risks and rising rates is one that will hurt the indebted poor far more than it will the rich.Either way, the pattern deserves far more debate among economists and political scientists. We need to know, for example, whether ultra-wealthy funds will step in to buy assets like Treasuries as central banks wind down QE. The way family offices are contributing to a secular shift from public capital markets to private ones should get more attention — particularly since economists such as Mohamed El-Erian predict that this will accelerate in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.We also need to pay more attention to governance issues. The expanding private pots are generating innovative forms of philanthropy (which is good). But they can also subvert democracy via dark money donations (which is bad). Either way, #buymeafighterjet is one tiny symbol of an increasingly networked but unequal world. We ignore this at our [email protected] More
