More stories

  • in

    UK government names economist Alan Taylor to join BoE rate committee

    British-born Taylor is currently a professor at Columbia University in New York and alongside his academic career has worked as a senior advisor at Morgan Stanley, PIMCO and McKinsey.Taylor will start at the BoE on Sept. 2 and succeeds Jonathan Haskel, a professor of economics at London’s Imperial College Business School, who will soon complete his second three-year term, the maximum for an external MPC member.One of the most hawkish members of the MPC, Haskel was in the minority of four out of nine members who voted to keep rates on hold for its Aug. 1 interest rate announcement, rather than cutting it from a 16-year high of 5.25%.”Professor Alan Taylor’s substantial experience in both the financial sector and academia will bring valuable expertise to the Monetary Policy Committee,” said finance minister Rachel Reeves, who made the appointment. British inflation returned to its 2% target in May after reaching a 41-year high of 11.1% in October 2022, but rose to 2.2% in July and the BoE expects it to reach 2.75% toward the end of this year.Taylor was born in the northern English city of Wakefield and studied at the University of Cambridge before receiving a doctorate in economics from Harvard University.In his academic work, Taylor researched the economic history of Argentina, credit booms, foreign exchange markets and what economists term a “trilemma” that makes it hard for a country simultaneously to have fixed exchange rates, open capital markets and independent monetary policy.In research published by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco in September 2023, Taylor and his co-authors concluded that tight monetary policy could weigh on a country’s economic potential for at least 12 years.”These long-run effects develop primarily through investment decisions that ultimately result in lower productivity and lower capital stock,” the paper said. More

  • in

    Global money market funds draw second weekly inflow amid US economic uncertainty

    According to LSEG data, investors purchased a net $14.24 billion in global money market funds during the week, adding to the $97 billion bought over the previous seven days. Government bond funds attracted $2.6 billion for a 15th consecutive weekly net inflow.A disappointing U.S. jobs report and manufacturing data had sparked concerns about the possibility of a U.S. recession and triggered last week’s global stock market rout.But since then, benign U.S. inflation figures and surprisingly strong retail sales have seen equities pick up again.Riskier equity funds reversed a downward trend, gaining about $857 million in net inflows in the week to Aug. 14, after losing a substantial net $4.56 billion the previous week.European funds attracted $6.57 billion in net purchases after two weeks of outflows, while Asian funds drew a net $2.09 billion. However, U.S. funds saw a net outflow of $8.92 billion.Investors allocated a net $938 million and $850 million into the tech and utilities sectors, respectively, but withdrew $426 million from consumer discretionary funds.Global bond funds secured a net $4.04 billion inflow, marking a 34th consecutive week of net purchases, sterling-denominated global bond funds attracted $2.34 billion, the highest since at least November 2020. Corporate and loan participation funds saw net outflows of $3.85 billion and $653 million, respectively.In commodities, energy funds saw net outflows of $193 million following five weeks of inflows, while precious metal funds flipped to a net purchase of $645 million from net selling of $713 million the previous week.Data covering 29,578 emerging market funds showed a net outflow of $1.21 billion from equity funds, continuing a 10-week trend, while bond funds drew net purchases of $92 million. More

  • in

    Fed’s Goolsbee: Don’t want to tighten longer than necessary – NPR

    “You don’t want to tighten any longer than you have to,” Goolsbee told National Public Radio in an interview. “And the reason you’d want to tighten is if you’re afraid the economy is overheating, and this is not what an overheating economy looks like to me.”Goolsbee declined to say whether he would press for an interest rate cut at the Fed’s coming meeting on Sept. 17-18. But his remarks were consistent with his recent comments that officials need to be increasingly attuned to signs like the rising unemployment rate and increases in credit card delinquencies that suggest the economy is slowing to a point where policy should not be as restrictive as it is now.The Fed has held its policy rate in the current range of 5.25% to 5.50% since July 2023 after raising to that level at a breakneck pace over the prior 16 months to combat the worst outbreak of inflation since the 1980s.Financial markets are now 100% priced for a rate cut next month, with the main debate being over what size – a quarter percentage point or a half point. Odds now favor the smaller cut, but a big signal on the Fed’s next move is likely to come next Friday when Fed Chair Jerome Powell delivers a keynote address at the Kansas City Fed’s annual economic symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. More

  • in

    Cash sweep scrutiny threatens wealth managers’ credit ratings, Moody’s says

    WHY IT’S IMPORTANTA potential ratings downgrade would increase the costs for wealth managers at a time when worries about the economy are growing, with some forecasting a downturn due to the tight monetary policy.CONTEXTCash sweep programs allow wealth managers to move un-invested cash in brokerage accounts to partner banks, enabling clients to earn returns on idle funds.However, these arrangements have led to disputes, as the interest paid by partner banks is typically lower than what customers could earn through other options, such as money market funds.To prevent these conflicts, wealth managers have started giving clients more choices. Customers can opt to park their un-invested money in tax-exempt funds or other vehicles instead of moving it to their brokers’ partner banks.Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Bank of America have also raised the interest rates they pay on some brokerage accounts.Despite these efforts, regulatory investigations remain a concern. Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley have disclosed their cash sweep programs are under review from the SEC, while Bank of America highlighted it as a potential risk factor in its quarterly filing. Moody’s said that having multiple revenue streams will help mitigate the risk for larger firms. However, private-equity owned wealth managers with high debt burdens and less diversified business models are likely to be more severely affected.The investigations could squeeze margins across the industry by prompting firms to increase the interest on brokerage accounts, the ratings agency added. More

  • in

    Fed likely to cut but not rush: BofA

    The bank expects a 25 basis point cut in September, followed by another in December, but cautions against expecting an aggressive series of reductions.Bank of America’s analysis suggests that solid retail sales and stable inflation will prevent the Fed from rushing into multiple cuts.July retail sales outperformed expectations, with a 1.0% increase overall and a 0.4% rise in the ex-autos component. This indicates that consumer spending remains resilient, even in a cooling inflation environment, which BofA believes is consistent with “a slowing but not weak economy.”On the inflation front, July’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) data also aligned with expectations, with both headline and core CPI inflation at 0.2% month-on-month.According to BofA, “a broad-based slowdown in inflation” supports the case for a measured rate cut in September.While the outlook is generally positive, the analysts warn of potential risks. They note that while layoffs remain low, the recent uptick in unemployment is largely due to an increase in the labor force rather than widespread job losses.”This time could be different,” the note says, but it acknowledges that risks are tilted to the downside, particularly given historical trends.Overall, Bank of America expects the Fed to adopt a “slow and steady” approach to rate cuts, balancing the need to support the economy with concerns about moving too quickly. More

  • in

    Jason Furman: ‘Immigration has been the most important factor’

    Standard DigitalWeekend Print + Standard Digitalwasnow $29 per 3 monthsThe new FT Digital Edition: today’s FT, cover to cover on any device. This subscription does not include access to ft.com or the FT App.What’s included Global news & analysisExpert opinionFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit appFirstFT: the day’s biggest stories20+ curated newslettersFollow topics & set alerts with myFTFT Videos & Podcasts20 monthly gift articles to shareLex: FT’s flagship investment column15+ Premium newsletters by leading expertsFT Digital Edition: our digitised print editionWeekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysisFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysisGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit appFirstFT: the day’s biggest stories20+ curated newslettersFollow topics & set alerts with myFTFT Videos & Podcasts10 monthly gift articles to shareGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit appFirstFT: the day’s biggest stories20+ curated newslettersFollow topics & set alerts with myFTFT Videos & Podcasts20 monthly gift articles to shareLex: FT’s flagship investment column15+ Premium newsletters by leading expertsFT Digital Edition: our digitised print editionEverything in PrintWeekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysisPlusEverything in Premium DigitalEverything in Standard DigitalGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresFirstFT newsletterVideos & PodcastsFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit app10 gift articles per monthExclusive FT analysisPremium newslettersFT Digital Edition10 additional gift articles per monthMake and share highlightsFT WorkspaceMarkets data widgetSubscription ManagerWorkflow integrationsOccasional readers go freeVolume discountFT Weekend Print deliveryPlusEverything in Standard DigitalFT Weekend Print deliveryPlusEverything in Premium Digital More

  • in

    Trump’s economic plans would hurt US business, report claims

    Standard DigitalWeekend Print + Standard Digitalwasnow $29 per 3 monthsThe new FT Digital Edition: today’s FT, cover to cover on any device. This subscription does not include access to ft.com or the FT App.What’s included Global news & analysisExpert opinionFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit appFirstFT: the day’s biggest stories20+ curated newslettersFollow topics & set alerts with myFTFT Videos & Podcasts20 monthly gift articles to shareLex: FT’s flagship investment column15+ Premium newsletters by leading expertsFT Digital Edition: our digitised print editionWeekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysisFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysisGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit appFirstFT: the day’s biggest stories20+ curated newslettersFollow topics & set alerts with myFTFT Videos & Podcasts10 monthly gift articles to shareGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit appFirstFT: the day’s biggest stories20+ curated newslettersFollow topics & set alerts with myFTFT Videos & Podcasts20 monthly gift articles to shareLex: FT’s flagship investment column15+ Premium newsletters by leading expertsFT Digital Edition: our digitised print editionEverything in PrintWeekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysisPlusEverything in Premium DigitalEverything in Standard DigitalGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresFirstFT newsletterVideos & PodcastsFT App on Android & iOSFT Edit app10 gift articles per monthExclusive FT analysisPremium newslettersFT Digital Edition10 additional gift articles per monthMake and share highlightsFT WorkspaceMarkets data widgetSubscription ManagerWorkflow integrationsOccasional readers go freeVolume discountFT Weekend Print deliveryPlusEverything in Standard DigitalFT Weekend Print deliveryPlusEverything in Premium Digital More

  • in

    How much will higher tariffs hurt China?

    Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.The writer is chief Asia economist at Morgan StanleyInvestors hoping that volatility eases for the rest of the year may not like what they see on the calendar. As attention turns towards the US elections in November, investors in Asia are trying to understand how US-China trade relations could evolve.The experience of the 2018-19 round of US tariffs on China may be instructive. What we learned was that the indirect effect of tariffs on corporate confidence, global capital expenditure and hence trade put more pressure on China’s growth than the direct effects on flows of exports and imports. Although only China faced tariffs, these indirect effects weighed equally on the rest of the world and the drag on China was not disproportionate. China’s GDP growth did slow by 1 percentage point over 2018-19, but its contribution to global growth over that interval generally remained stable. This time around, the extent of damage to growth from corporate confidence will depend on whether, if re-elected as president, Donald Trump follows through on ideas he has floated to impose tariffs of 50 per cent on imports from China alone and also levies of 10 per cent on the rest of the world. It will be better for cyclical growth prospects in China if the US doesn’t raise tariffs on the rest of the world.I would argue that companies around the world have been alert to possible tariff increases, and supply diversification efforts are well under way. But tariffs on the rest of the world would pose a bigger challenge, as they could compromise supply chain diversification efforts over the past few years.What about the direct effects of tariffs and their implications for China’s exports? Last time, China took several steps to ensure that it did not lose market share in global exports, and these measures may provide offsets.First, currency movements played a key role in softening the effect of tariffs. In 2018-19, renminbi depreciation offset as much as 65 per cent of the weighted average increase in tariffs. On the flipside, the appreciation of the trade weighted US dollar index more than offset tariffs’ impact on total imports and mitigated potential inflationary pressures in the US.Second, what began as a rerouting evolved into a much deeper integration into global supply chains. Mexico and Vietnam have seen their trade surpluses with the US grow significantly since trade tensions emerged in early 2018, but we estimate that only 30 per cent of that increase can be explained by a rise in net imports from China. This implies that the domestic value added in their exports has grown. China has made further inroads into global supply chains by providing components and investing in these economies.You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.Third, China has carved out new products to export and new geographies to export to, shifting away from the US to emerging markets. While China’s share of US imports has slipped to 13.5 per cent today from 21.6 per cent in December 2017, its overall market share in global goods exports has risen from 12.8 to 14.4 per cent over the same period.  To be sure, China will find it a challenge to sustain the 15-20 per cent export growth needed to use its excess capacity. External conditions are shifting, as the US is not alone in imposing tariffs. The EU and several emerging markets are planning if not already placing tariffs selectively on imports from China. Tariffs, when imposed, will weigh on trade and corporate confidence and exert pressure on growth globally and China.Moreover, China’s supply-centric growth model has only made exports more critical in managing deflation. To maintain its export market share, it must compress profit margins.This means China’s deflation challenge will persist. Domestic demand remains weak, and China will not be able to export its way out of the debt-deflation loop. We forecast that nominal GDP growth will remain subdued at 4.3 per cent and 4.8 per cent in 2024 and 2025 respectively and that debt-to-GDP ratios will keep rising.As it is, we project China’s debt-to-GDP ratio to reach 312 per cent by end 2024, a level that is higher than the US and some 30 percentage points higher from where it was in end 2021. We think its current policy stance of targeting real GDP growth with high investment will create more excess capacities and is unlikely to resolve China’s economic woes anytime soon. The solution lies in boosting domestic consumption via raising social security related spending such as healthcare, education and housing and in the process reducing household precautionary saving. The small steps taken in that direction are unlikely to be enough. More