More stories

  • in

    Improved risk sentiment and high commodity prices help Aussie, hurt yen

    HONG KONG (Reuters) – The Australian dollar marched higher and the Japanese yen continued its slide on Wednesday, as markets turned more positive on riskier assets and high commodity prices drove developments.The Australian dollar hit its highest level since December 2015 versus the yen, having gained 8% in March so far. Versus the dollar, the Australian dollar touched a four and-a-half month high of $0.7477 in early trade, having gained 0.95% overnight, while the yen slipped to as low as 121.4 per dollar after the dollar had climbed 1.1% on the Japanese currency overnight. The Aussie’s breaking of resistance at $0.745 was due to gains in equities and commodities, said ANZ analysts adding that “global risk sentiment continues to direct the AUD’s outlook. European and U.S. equity markets rallied on Wednesday, as – aside from commodities – investors shrugged off worries about the market and economic impact of the war in Ukraine. [MKTS/GLOB] High commodity prices are bad news for the yen, however, as Japan imports the bulk of its energy, widening the country’s trade deficit. “USD-JPY has nowhere to go but up,” said analysts at TD securities, who pointed to the differential between U.S. and Japanese rates and the yen’s vulnerability to the ongoing shock in commodities. The yield on U.S. benchmark 10 year yields rose to 2.4026% in early Asian hours on Wednesday, still supported by U.S. Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell’s speech on Monday which opened the door for raising interest rates by more than 25 basis points at upcoming policy meetings in order to combat inflation. “A number of other Fed speakers are jumping on Chair Powell’s aggressive hiking bandwagon,” said analysts at ING. Powell himself is due to speak again later today in a busy week for public remarks by Fed policy markers. However, rising U.S. yields have had little effect on the dollar, as investors say much of the increase is already in the price. The dollar index, with measures the greenback against six major peers, was at 98.456, with the euro little changed at $1.1022. Sterling touched $1.3279 its highest against the dollar in nearly three weeks, as focus turns to UK inflation data and British finance minister Rishi Sunak’s Spring Statement, both scheduled later on Wednesday. [GBP/]In cryptocurrency markets bitcoin was around $42,400, holding on to its overnight gains, and ether was just under $3,000. More

  • in

    Analysis-Trump is a fundraising giant but his miserly spending raises questions

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Former President Donald Trump’s Save America group has quickly become one of the top Republican fundraising organizations ahead of the Nov. 8 congressional elections. But so far it has been stingy with its spending on Republican efforts to win in November compared to the expenditures of other groups, according to a Reuters analysis of financial disclosures made to the Federal Election Commission.Trump has already drawn attention for giving only small amounts to Republican candidates, but the findings of the Reuters analysis showing the sharp contrast in spending have not been previously reported.Since Trump founded Save America in November 2020, the group has raised $124 million — the largest war chest ever built by an ex-president — but spent only about $14 million, or around 11%. Much of that has gone to funding rallies and ads that ostensibly promote Republicans running for Congress but focus more on Trump himself. By comparison, his party’s main fund for supporting Senate candidates has spent about 80% of the $135 million it raised since the start of 2021, while its main fund for House of Representatives candidates spent more than half of the $162 million it raised in the same period, FEC filings show. Save America’s limited spending has raised questions among campaign finance experts and political observers, who say it might signal that he is reserving cash for a presidential run.     Taylor Budowich, the director of communications for both Save America and Trump, said the former president was supporting candidates through direct contributions, rallies, and joint fundraisers.   “Save America will not be telegraphing specific tactics or expenditures through the press,” Budowich said in a statement to Reuters. “Every dollar raised will go to ensuring President Trump’s America First agenda is advanced through his endorsed candidates and causes.” Trump registered Save America as a leadership PAC, or political action committee. Under election laws, it can only spend on election campaigns of people other than Trump but campaign finance experts said there may be ways of tapping into the PAC’s war chest if Trump makes another bid for the White House.Trump has not announced his candidacy for 2024, which would require him to set up a separate fundraising account for his campaign, but he regularly hints at his political rallies that he intends to run for president again.ODD SPENDING PATTERN It is still early in the election cycle and Trump could ramp up his spending between now and November to support his Republican Party, which hopes to win control of Congress. But at this point in a midterm election year, leadership PACs are typically already spending generously on candidates, said Michael Beckel, research director at Issue One, a nonpartisan group that advocates for campaign finance reform. “It’s atypical for someone to amass such a large political war chest in their leadership PAC and not be spending very much directly on elections,” Beckel said. Justin Sayfie of Ballard Partners, a Florida-based lobbying firm with ties to Trump, said it was smart to hold off on spending now so Trump could have a bigger impact closer to election day.”I would determine which 30 seats are the best pickup opportunities for Republicans once the primaries are over,” said Sayfie. “And then pour all my money into those races from August to Election Day.”CONSULTING, ADS AND HOTELSTrump’s biggest outlays have been to pay for his rallies, which many political observers see as potential preparation for 2024 as he connects with crowds and collects data about attendees. Save America spent more than $3 million on events through February, according to FEC financial disclosures filed ahead of a March 20 reporting deadline.Save America also spent more than $2 million on consulting services, close to $300,000 on ads and about $200,000 in contributions to Republican congressional candidates. At least $170,000 has been spent at hotels owned by Trump, covering Save America expenses on lodging, meals and the renting of hotel facilities.The Republican Party’s main congressional funds gave about $300,000 to congressional candidates but they spent massive sums elsewhere, including more than $20 million on ads and more than $25 million on text messaging and access to voter lists, which they use to target voters for political mailings and door-knocking campaigns.”TWO WORDS” Trump has used his rallies to urge supporters to vote for Republican congressional candidates but they mainly focus on him.At a frigid gathering in a South Carolina airport on March 12, Trump paused his remarks so that Russell Fry, a state representative endorsed by Trump to challenge incumbent Republican U.S. Representative Tom Rice, could speak. “Why don’t you just say two words and we’ll then get the hell out of here because it’s cold,” Trump said. After Fry spoke briefly, Trump continued for about 20 minutes, describing how his agenda would transform the country after the next presidential election. “In 2024 we are going to take back that beautiful White House,” he said. “I wonder who will do that. I wonder, I wonder.”A Democratic fundraising group filed a complaint last week with the Federal Election Commission alleging Save America’s spending on rallies amounted to presidential campaigning, a violation of election laws. The FEC is unlikely to crack down on Trump, even if he announces a presidential run and tries to channel Save America money to his campaign, according to Beckel and other campaign finance experts.The FEC’s leadership is split evenly between commissioners aligned with Republicans and Democrats and has deadlocked on most contentious issues in recent years. “It’s a free for all,” said Ann Ravel, a Democrat who was a commissioner at the FEC from 2013 to 2017.Trump spokesperson Budowich said complaints raised by Democrats were “frivolous” and had “zero merit.” One legal strategy Trump could employ to use Save America money on a presidential campaign would be to sever his formal ties with the group, Ravel and other experts said. Trump could also transfer Save America funds to an allied group. More

  • in

    Russia's G20 membership under fire from U.S., Western allies

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The United States and its Western allies are assessing whether Russia should remain within the Group of Twenty (G20) grouping of major economies following its invasion of Ukraine, sources involved in the discussions told Reuters on Tuesday.The likelihood that any bid to exclude Russia outright would be vetoed by others in the club – which includes China, India, Saudi Arabia and others – raised the prospect of some countries instead skipping G20 meetings this year, the sources said.The G20 along with the smaller Group of Seven – comprising just the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan and Britain – is a key international platform for coordinating everything from climate change action to cross-border debt.Russia is facing an onslaught of international sanctions led by Western nations aiming to isolate it from the global economy, including notably shutting it out of the SWIFT global bank messaging system and restricting dealings by its central bank.”There have been discussions about whether it’s appropriate for Russia to be part of the G20,” said a senior G7 source. “If Russia remains a member, it will become a less useful organization.”Asked whether U.S. President Joe Biden would move to push Russia out of the G20 when he meets with allies in Brussels this week, national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters at the White House Tuesday: “We believe that it cannot be business as usual for Russia in international institutions and in the international community.” However, the United States plans to consult with its allies before any other pronouncements are made, he said. A European Union source separately confirmed the discussions about Russia’s status at forthcoming meetings of the G20, whose rotating chair is currently held by Indonesia.”It has been made very clear to Indonesia that Russia’s presence at forthcoming ministerial meetings would be highly problematic for European countries,” said the source, adding there was however no clear process for excluding a country.The G7 was expanded to a new “G8” format including Russia during a period of warmer ties in the early 2000s. But Moscow was indefinitely suspended from that club after its annexation of Crimea in 2014.Earlier on Tuesday, Poland said it had suggested to U.S. commerce officials that it replace Russia within the G20 group and that the suggestion had received a “positive response.”A U.S. Commerce Department spokesperson said that a “good meeting” had been held last week between Polish Economic Development and Technology Minister Piotr Nowak and U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo but added:”She (Raimondo) welcomed hearing Poland’s views on a number of topics, including the operation of the G20, but did not express a position on behalf of the U.S. Government with respect to the Polish G20 proposal.”The G7 source said it was seen as unlikely that Indonesia, currently heading the G20, or members like India, Brazil, South Africa and China would agree to remove Russia from the group.”It’s impossible to remove Russia from G20″ unless Moscow makes such a decision on its own, said an official of a G20 member country in Asia. “There’s simply no procedure to deprive Russia of G20 membership.”If G7 countries instead were to skip this year’s G20 meetings, that could be a powerful signal to India, the source said. It has drawn the ire of some Western nations over its failure to condemn the Russian invasion and support Western measures against Russian President Vladimir Putin.Russia’s status at other multilateral agencies is also being questioned.In Geneva, World Trade Organization officials said numerous delegations there were refusing to meet their Russian counterparts in various formats.”Many governments have raised objections to what is happening there and these objections have manifested themselves in a lack of engagement with the member concerned,” WTO spokesperson Keith Rockwell said.One source from a Western country said those not engaging with Russia at the WTO included the European Union, the United States, Canada and Britain. No confirmation from those delegations was immediately available. More

  • in

    U.S., Britain to continue trade dialogue in Scotland in April

    BALTIMORE, Md. (Reuters) -Top trade officials from the United States and Britain will meet in Scotland in April after two days of talks in the U.S. port city of Baltimore on forging deeper and more inclusive trade relations, and a surprise deal on cutting tariffs.British trade minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan told reporters on Tuesday the meetings had energized efforts by the two historic allies to work together more closely and “stay ahead of the game in a fast-changing global economy.”Trevelyan and U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai met with industry executives and labor unions, toured the Baltimore port, and visited a minority-owned digital technology firm as part of wide-ranging dialogues aimed at finding new ways to expand trade and investment between the two countries.”America is at its best when we are working closely with our allies,” Tai told a news conference. “Secretary Trevelyan and I want to preserve the historic nature of our special relationship while ensuring it properly addresses the urgent challenges of today’s world.”They both noted that close cooperation between Washington and London in their response to Russia for its invasion of Ukraine underscored the power of cooperation by democracies.The two trade officials spoke shortly before Trevelyan met with U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and sealed an agreement that lifted U.S. tariffs on UK steel and aluminum, and retaliatory British tariffs on U.S. motorcycles, whiskey and other products.In a joint statement on the trade dialogues, Tai and Trevelyan said they had identified areas for deeper cooperation, including protecting labor rights and the environment, promoting supply chain resilience, and supporting the low-carbon transition.They said it was also vital to make it easier for small- and medium-sized businesses to take part in global trade, including through enhanced access to financing, and ensure that the benefits of trade were distributed across their countries.Asked about resuming formal negotiations on a bilateral free trade agreement, Tai said such deals were “very 20th century tools” and it was important to look for creative, innovative solutions given new challenges.While the United States and the European Union had set up a trade and technology council, Tai cautioned that “one size does not fit all,” and said the United States and Britain had their own particular shared values. Trevelyan said Britain stood ready to pull together a free trade agreement, but added that the purpose of the U.S.-UK current dialogue was “to really be able to think about where we want to be going with our relationship.” More

  • in

    Japan PM likely to order new stimulus by end-March – Yomiuri

    The move would follow Tuesday’s parliamentary approval of a record $900 billion state budget for the 2022 fiscal year.The Nikkei newspaper reported separately that the government will likely tap 5.5 trillion yen ($45.41 billion) in reserves set aside under the fiscal 2022 budget to fund the package, instead of compiling an extra budget.Under pressure by politicians to ramp up spending ahead of an upper house election scheduled this summer, Kishida has said his administration is ready to take further stimulus steps to ease the pain of surging fuel and food costs on households and companies.($1 = 121.1300 yen) More

  • in

    Mortgage rates are surging faster than expected, prompting economists to lower their home sales forecasts

    The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed mortgage hit 4.72% on Tuesday, moving 26 basis points higher since just Friday, according to Mortgage News Daily.
    As a result of the recent spike in rates, economists are now lowering their home sales forecasts for this year.
    Most estimates at the end of last year had the average 30-year mortgage rate hitting 4.5% by the end of 2022, but the war in Ukraine, rising oil prices and inflation have all lit a fire under interest rates.

    A home is offered for sale on January 20, 2022 in Chicago, Illinois.
    Scott Olson | Getty Images

    The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed mortgage hit 4.72% on Tuesday, moving 26 basis points higher since just Friday, according to Mortgage News Daily.
    As a result of the recent spike in rates, economists are now lowering their home sales forecasts for this year.

    Most estimates at the end of last year had the average 30-year mortgage rate hitting 4.5% by the close of 2022, but the war in Ukraine, rising oil prices and inflation have all lit a fire under interest rates. At this time in 2021, rates were about 3.45%
    A shift in the policy outlook from the Federal Reserve, suggesting far more rate increases than expected, is pushing bond yields higher. The 30-year fixed mortgage loosely follows the yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury, which is now at the highest level since May 2019.
    “Rates have a small chance to top out before hitting 5% and a good chance of topping out before hitting 6%,” said Matthew Graham, chief operating officer at Mortgage News Daily. “It is a rapidly moving target in this environment, where we legitimately and unexpectedly find ourselves needing to be concerned with inflation for the first time since the 1980s.”
    Economists had expected the rate to rise only slightly this year, but now that is changing.
    Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the National Association of Realtors, now says he expects the rate to hover around 4.5% this year, after previously predicting it would stay at 4%. NAR’s latest official prediction is for sales to drop 3% in 2022, but Yun now says he expects they will fall 6%-8% (NAR has not officially updated its forecast).

    The rise in rates comes on top of an already sizzling housing market. Demand remains strong, and supply remains historically low. This has pressured home prices, which were already up 19% in January year over year, the latest read from CoreLogic.
    “That is a double whammy that erodes affordability for homebuyers, especially first-timers,” said Frank Nothaft, chief economist at CoreLogic. “First-time buyers are a sizable part of prospective shoppers and their share of purchases has slipped from one year ago. We will be revising our home sales forecast a bit lower.”
    Home sellers may also be adjusting their expectations. Asking prices slipped slightly last week, according to Realtor.com, despite the competitive market.
    “In a potential sign that sellers are mindful of buyers’ tightening budgets as mortgage rates climb, last week’s data showed the first slowdown in asking price growth since January,” wrote Danielle Hale, chief economist at Realtor.com.
    Hale said she may revise her sales forecast lower as well but hasn’t yet. She points out that while rising costs could cut into home sales, there are several offsetting factors, such as rent.
    “Fast-rising rents aren’t offering any relief and may keep some would-be buyers on the hunt for a home, so that they can lock-in the bulk of their housing costs before inflation raises the bar yet again,” said Hale. 
    “Demographics are also favorable for the housing market this year, with more than 45 million households in the 26-35 age range, which are key years for household formation and first-time home buying. However, the economic considerations for those households are going to be challenging,” she added.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Ukraine War and Pandemic Force Nations to Retreat From Globalization

    WASHINGTON — When the Cold War ended, governments and companies believed that stronger global economic ties would lead to greater stability. But the Ukraine war and the pandemic are pushing the world in the opposite direction and upending those ideas.Important parts of the integrated economy are unwinding. American and European officials are now using sanctions to sever major parts of the Russian economy — the 11th largest in the world — from global commerce, and hundreds of Western companies have halted operations in Russia on their own. Amid the pandemic, companies are reorganizing how they obtain their goods because of soaring costs and unpredictable delays in global supply chains.Western officials and executives are also rethinking how they do business with China, the world’s second-largest economy, as geopolitical tensions and the Chinese Communist Party’s human rights abuses and use of advanced technology to reinforce autocratic control make corporate dealings more fraught.The moves reverse core tenets of post-Cold War economic and foreign policies forged by the United States and its allies that were even adopted by rivals like Russia and China.“What we’re headed toward is a more divided world economically that will mirror what is clearly a more divided world politically,” said Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “I don’t think economic integration survives a period of political disintegration.”“Does globalization and economic interdependence reduce conflict?” he added. “I think the answer is yes, until it doesn’t.”Opposition to globalization gained momentum with the Trump administration’s trade policies and “America First” drive, and as the progressive left became more powerful. But the pandemic and President Vladimir V. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine have brought into sharp relief the uncertainty of the existing economic order.President Biden warned President Xi Jinping of China on Friday that there would be “consequences” if Beijing gave material aid to Russia for the war in Ukraine, an implicit threat of sanctions. China has criticized sanctions on Russia, and Le Yucheng, the vice foreign minister, said in a speech on Saturday that “globalization should not be weaponized.” Yet China increasingly has imposed economic punishments — Lithuania, Norway, Australia, Japan and South Korea have been among the targets.The result of all the disruptions may well be a fracturing of the world into economic blocs, as countries and companies gravitate to ideological corners with distinct markets and pools of labor, as they did in much of the 20th century.Mr. Biden already frames his foreign policy in ideological terms, as a mission of unifying democracies against autocracies. Mr. Biden also says he is enacting a foreign policy for middle-class Americans, and central to that is getting companies to move critical supply chains and manufacturing out of China.The goal is given urgency by the hobbling of those global links over two years of the pandemic, which has brought about a realization among the world’s most powerful companies that they need to focus on not just efficiency and cost, but also resiliency. This month, lockdowns China imposed to contain Covid-19 outbreaks have once again threatened to stall global supply chains.The Chinese city of Shenzhen was shut down due to Covid concerns last week, threatening the global supply chain.Kin Cheung/Associated PressThe economic impact of such a change is highly uncertain. The emergence of new economic blocs could accelerate a massive reorganization in financial flows and supply chains, potentially slowing growth, leading to some shortages and raising prices for consumers in the short term. But the longer-term effects on global growth, worker wages and supplies of goods are harder to assess.The war has set in motion “deglobalization forces that could have profound and unpredictable effects,” said Laurence Boone, the chief economist of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.For decades, executives have pushed for globalization to expand their markets and to exploit cheap labor and lax environmental standards. China especially has benefited from this, while Russia profits from its exports of minerals and energy. They tap into enormous economies: The Group of 7 industrialized nations make up more than 50 percent of the global economy, while China and Russia together account for about 20 percent.Trade and business ties between the United States and China are still robust, despite steadily worsening relations. But with the new Western sanctions on Russia, many nations that are not staunch partners of America are now more aware of the perils of being economically tied to the United States and its allies.If Mr. Xi and Mr. Putin organize their own economic coalition, they could bring in other nations seeking to shield themselves from Western sanctions — a tool that all recent U.S. presidents have used.“Your interdependence can be weaponized against you,” said Dani Rodrik, a professor of international political economy at Harvard Kennedy School. “That’s a lesson that I imagine many countries are beginning to internalize.”The Ukraine war, he added, has “probably put a nail in the coffin of hyperglobalization.”China and, increasingly, Russia have taken steps to wall off their societies, including erecting strict censorship mechanisms on their internet networks, which have cut off their citizens from foreign perspectives and some commerce. China is on a drive to make critical industries self-sufficient, including for technologies like semiconductors.And China has been in talks with Saudi Arabia to pay for some oil purchases in China’s currency, the renminbi, The Wall Street Journal reported; Russia was in similar discussions with India. The efforts show a desire by those governments to move away from dollar-based transactions, a foundation of American global economic power.For decades, prominent U.S. officials and strategists asserted that a globalized economy was a pillar of what they call the rules-based international order, and that trade and financial ties would prevent major powers from going to war. The United States helped usher China into the World Trade Organization in 2001 in a bid to bring its economic behavior — and, some officials hoped, its political system — more in line with the West. Russia joined the organization in 2012.But Mr. Putin’s war and China’s recent aggressive actions in Asia have challenged those notions.“The whole idea of the liberal international order was that economic interdependence would prevent conflict of this kind,” said Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis, a research group in Washington. “If you tie yourselves to each other, which was the European model after the Second World War, the disincentives would be so painful if you went to war that no one in their right mind would do it. Well, we’ve seen now that has proven to be false.”“Putin’s actions have shown us that might have been the world we’ve been living in, but that’s not the world he or China have been living in,” she said.The United States and its partners have blocked Russia from much of the international financial system by banning transactions with the Russian central bank. They have also cut Russia off from the global bank messaging system called SWIFT, frozen the assets of Russian leaders and oligarchs, and banned the export from the United States and other nations of advanced technology to Russia. Russia has answered with its own export bans on food, cars and timber.The penalties can lead to odd decouplings: British and European sanctions on Roman Abramovich, the Russian oligarch who owns the Chelsea soccer team in Britain, prevent the club from selling tickets or merchandise.Ticket sales for Chelsea Football Club games were stopped after Britain and the European Union imposed sanctions on the club’s owner, Roman Abramovich, a Putin ally. Andy Rain/EPA, via ShutterstockAbout 400 companies have chosen to suspend or withdraw operations from Russia, including iconic brands of global consumerism such as Apple, Ikea and Rolex.Russia-Ukraine War: Key DevelopmentsCard 1 of 4Russia’s shrinking force. More

  • in

    Fed policymakers call for bigger rate hikes to fight inflation

    (Reuters) -Federal Reserve officials are helping shape market expectations for sharper interest-rate hikes to curb the surge in inflation, but have not managed to dispel fears the tightening cycle could blow a hole in the economy and labor market.”The Fed needs to move aggressively to keep inflation under control,” St. Louis Fed President James Bullard told Bloomberg TV on Tuesday, calling for the central bank to raise its benchmark overnight interest rate to 3% this year. Bullard dissented last week as the rest of his colleagues agreed to raise the federal funds rate by just a quarter of a percentage point from the near-zero level it had been since March 2020. “Faster is better,” he said Tuesday, and that view now appears to be gaining traction.On Monday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said the central bank must move “expeditiously” to raise rates. When asked what would prevent the central bank raising rates by half a percentage point at the May 3-4 policy meeting, he responded: “Nothing.” Big rate hikes will probably be needed at “some” of the remaining six Fed meetings this year, Cleveland Fed President Loretta Mester said Tuesday, as noted the ongoing impact of snarled supply chains on prices and echoed Powell’s concerns that Russia’s Ukraine war will push up on already too-high inflation. “I find it appealing to front-load some of the needed increases earlier rather than later in the process because it puts policy in a better position to adjust if the economy evolves differently than expected,” she said. By year end, Mester said, rates should be about 2.5%, and rates need to rise further next year to bring inflation down. San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly, among the more dovish of the U.S. central bank policymakers, was not asked about a possible half-point rate hike in a virtual event at the Brookings Institution earlier Tuesday. But she did say she wants to march rates higher, to a neutral level and perhaps above, to prevent high inflation from getting embeddedAll said they believed higher borrowing costs could also cool super-hot demand for labor without biting into jobs growth.The comments have prompted a flood of bets in futures markets on half-point interest rate increases in May and June. Traders now see the federal funds rate rising to the 2.25%-2.5% range by the end of the year – short of Bullard’s view but higher than the 1.9% suggested by Fed forecasts last week. Powell argued the economy is strong enough to withstand higher borrowing costs without damaging the labor market and argued the best thing the Fed could do to ensure continued labor market strength is to get inflation under control. But traders are now also building bets that the Fed will start cutting interest rates by 2024, pricing of futures contracts shows. “The fixed income market squarely does not believe Powell’s economic optimism: It is telling us that a soft landing, if the Fed goes down Powell’s path, will not only be challenging – it will be impossible,” wrote Roberto Perli, an economist at Piper Sandler. ‘HAWKISH PIVOT’It’s shaping up to be a rocky start for the Fed’s first round of rate hikes in three years, and particularly for the way its policymakers are communicating it.Ahead of last week’s interest rate increase, Powell had said the Fed would proceed “carefully” due to high uncertainty about the impact on the U.S. economy of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.In his news conference following the release of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) policy statement and projections, Powell said the Fed must be “nimble” in responding to the evolving outlook.And this week the Fed chief downplayed worries over the potential dent to economic growth and focused far more sharply on the likelihood the war in Ukraine could worsen U.S. inflation, which has hit a 40-year high and is about three times the central bank’s 2% target. The changes, wrote NatWest economist Kevin Cummins (NYSE:CMI), could reflect Powell’s ongoing personal “hawkish pivot” that began in late 2021. “In the near-term, Powell’s comments are obviously not the last word as for the size of the expected rate hike in May, especially since the May FOMC meeting is not for another six weeks and Fed actions will be driven by the data,” Cummins wrote.They may also reflect a broader sense inside the Fed that rates can rise quite far and not push the economy into a downturn, a feat the Fed achieved in the 1990s — especially with labor markets as strong as they are now.Job openings are at a near-record high, and employers are fighting so hard to hire employees, even from competitors, that Mester says one of her directors calls it the “Great Poaching.”Mester said she is “very optimistic” that the Fed can reduce excess demand for workers without reducing economic activity or jobs. More