More stories

  • in

    Trump-Vance Administration Could Herald New Era for Dollar

    Both candidates on the Republican ticket have argued that the U.S. currency should be weaker to support American exports.Donald J. Trump’s selection of Ohio Senator J.D. Vance to be his vice-presidential nominee pairs him with a kindred spirit on trade, taxes and a tough stance on China. But it is their shared affinity for a weak dollar that could have the most sweeping implications for the United States and the global economy.In most cases, Mr. Trump likes his policies to be “strong,” but when it comes to the value of the dollar, he has long expressed a different view. Its strength, he has argued, has made it harder for American manufacturers to sell their products abroad to buyers that use weaker currencies. That’s because their money is worth so much less than the dollars that they need to make those purchases.“As your president, one would think that I would be thrilled with our very strong dollar,” Mr. Trump said in 2019, explaining that U.S. companies like Caterpillar and Boeing were struggling to compete. “I am not!”The dollar has been the world’s dominant currency since World War II, and central banks hold about 60 percent of their foreign exchange reserves in dollars, according to the Congressional Research Service.The United States has maintained a “strong dollar” policy since the 1990s, when Robert E. Rubin, the Treasury secretary at the time, declared that he did not view it as a threat to the ability of American business to compete abroad. The United States avoids taking measures to steer the strength of the dollar, and Treasury secretaries tend to argue that currency values should be determined by market forces. When countries, such as China, have acted to weaken their currencies, the U.S. has shamed them as currency manipulators.It is not clear how Mr. Trump would go about weakening the dollar. His Treasury Department could try to sell dollars to buy foreign currency or try to persuade the Federal Reserve to just print more dollars.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. and Europe Eye Russian Assets to Aid Ukraine as Funding Dries Up

    Despite legal reservations, policymakers are weighing the consequences of using $300 billion in Russian assets to help Kyiv’s war effort.The Biden administration is quietly signaling new support for seizing more than $300 billion in Russian central bank assets stashed in Western nations, and has begun urgent discussions with allies about using the funds to aid Ukraine’s war effort at a moment when financial support is waning, according to senior American and European officials.Until recently, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen had argued that without action by Congress, seizing the funds was “not something that is legally permissible in the United States.” There has also been concern among some top American officials that nations around the world would hesitate to keep their funds at the New York Federal Reserve, or in dollars, if the United States established a precedent for seizing the money.But the administration, in coordination with the Group of 7 industrial nations, has begun taking another look at whether it can use its existing authorities or if it should seek congressional action to use the funds. Support for such legislation has been building in Congress, giving the Biden administration optimism that it could be granted the necessary authority.The talks among finance ministers, central bankers, diplomats and lawyers have intensified in recent weeks, officials said, with the Biden administration pressing Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan to come up with a strategy by Feb. 24, the second anniversary of the invasion.The more than $300 billion of Russian assets under discussion have already been out of Moscow’s control for more than a year. After the invasion of Ukraine, the United States, along with Europe and Japan, used sanctions to freeze the assets, denying Russia access to its international reserves.But seizing the assets would take matters a significant step further and require careful legal consideration.President Biden has not yet signed off on the strategy, and many of the details remain under heated discussion. Policymakers must determine if the money will be channeled directly to Ukraine or used to its benefit in other ways.They are also discussing what kinds of guardrails might be associated with the funds, such as whether the money could be used only for reconstruction and budgetary purposes to support Ukraine’s economy, or whether — like the funds Congress is debating — it could be spent directly on the military effort.The discussions have taken on greater urgency since Congress failed to reach a deal to provide military aid before the end of the year. On Tuesday, lawmakers abandoned a last-ditch effort amid a stalemate over Republican demands that any aid be tied to a crackdown on migration across the U.S. border with Mexico.The Financial Times reported earlier that the Biden administration had come around to the view that seizing Russia’s assets was viable under international law.A senior administration official said this week that even if Congress ultimately reached a deal to pay for more arms for Ukraine and aid to its government, eroding support for the war effort among Republicans and Ukraine’s increasingly precarious military position made it clear that an alternative source of funding was desperately needed.American officials have said that current funding for the Ukrainians is nearly exhausted, and they are scrambling to find ways to provide artillery rounds and air defenses for the country. With Europe’s own promise of fresh funds also stuck, a variety of new ideas are being debated about how to use the Russian assets, either dipping into them directly, using them to guarantee loans or using the interest income they earn to help Ukraine.“This amount of money that we’re talking about here is simply game-changing,” said Philip Zelikow, a State Department official in both Bush administrations and a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. “The fight over this money which is occurring is actually in some ways the essential campaign of the war.”Seizing such a large sum of money from another sovereign nation would be without precedent, and such an action could have unpredictable legal ramifications and economic consequences. It would almost certainly lead to lawsuits and retaliation from Russia.Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, referred to the discussions in a video address to his country last week, saying that “the issue of frozen assets was one of the very important decisions addressed” during his recent talks in Washington. He seemed to suggest that the funds should be directed to arms purchases, adding, “The assets of the terrorist state and its affiliates should be used to support Ukraine, to protect lives and people from Russian terror.”In a sign that some European countries are ready to move forward with confiscating Russian assets, German prosecutors this week seized about $790 million from the Frankfurt bank account of a Russian financial firm that was under E.U. sanctions.The Biden administration has said little in public about the negotiations. At the State Department on Tuesday, Matthew Miller, a spokesman, said: “It’s something that we have looked at. There remains sort of operational questions about that, and legal questions.” He said he did not have more information.Very little of the Russian assets, perhaps $5 billion or so by some estimates, are in the hands of U.S. institutions. But a significant chunk of Russia’s foreign reserves are held in U.S. dollars, both in the United States and in Europe. The United States has the power to police transactions involving its currency and use its sanctions to immobilize dollar-denominated assets.President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine at the Capitol this month. A Biden administration official said that even if Congress ultimately reached a deal to send more aid to Ukraine, an alternative source of funding was still desperately needed.Kent Nishimura for The New York TimesThe bulk of the Russian deposits are believed to be in Europe, including in Switzerland and Belgium, which are not part of the Group of 7. As a result, diplomatic negotiations are underway over how to gain access to those funds, some of which are held in euros and other currencies.American officials were surprised that President Vladimir V. Putin did not repatriate the funds before the Ukraine invasion. But in interviews over the past year, they have speculated that Mr. Putin did not believe the funds would be seized, because they were left untouched after his invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014. And bringing the funds home to Russia would have been another tipoff that an invasion was imminent, at a time Mr. Putin was vigorously denying American and British charges that he was preparing for military action.One Group of 7 official said the coalition had been considering a variety of options for how to use Russia’s assets, with the goal of putting forward a unified proposal around the second anniversary of the war, when many top officials will be gathering in Germany for the Munich Security Conference. The first debates have focused on what would be permissible under international law and under each nation’s domestic laws, as they consider Russia’s likely legal responses and retaliatory measures.Earlier in the year, American officials said they thought the frozen assets could be used as leverage to help force Russia to the negotiating table for a cease-fire; presumably, in return, Moscow would be given access to some of its assets. But Russia has shown no interest in such negotiations, and now officials argue that beginning to use the funds may push Moscow to move to the negotiating table.Among the options that Western countries have discussed are seizing the assets directly and transferring them to Ukraine, using interest earned and other profits from the assets that are held in European financial institutions to Ukraine’s benefit or using the assets as collateral for loans to Ukraine.Daleep Singh, a former top Biden administration official, suggested in an interview this year that the immobilized reserves should be placed into an escrow account that Ukraine’s Ministry of Finance could have access to and be used as collateral for new bonds that Ukraine would issue.If Ukraine can successfully repay the debt — over a period of 10 to 30 years — then Russia could potentially have its frozen assets back.“If they can’t repay, my hunch is that Russia probably has something to do with that,” said Mr. Singh, who is now the chief global economist at PGIM Fixed Income. “And so in that way, Russia has a stake in Ukraine’s emergence as a sovereign independent economy and country.”Settling on a solid legal rationale has been one of the biggest challenges for policymakers as they decide how to proceed.Proponents of seizing Russia’s assets, such as Mr. Zelikow and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, have argued that nations that hold Russian assets are entitled to cancel their obligations to Russia and apply those assets to what Russia owes for its breach of international law under the so-called international law of state countermeasures. They note that after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, $50 billion of Iraqi funds were seized and transferred through the United Nations to compensate victims in Iraq and other countries.Robert B. Zoellick, the former World Bank president, has been making the case to Group of 7 finance ministers that as long as they act in unison, seizing Russian assets would not have an impact on their currencies or the status of the dollar. He suggested that other countries were unlikely to rush to put their money into another currency, such as China’s renminbi.“With reserve currencies, it’s always a question of what your alternatives are,” said Mr. Zoellick, who was also a Treasury and State Department official.One of the obstacles in the United States for seizing Russian assets has been the view within the Biden administration that being able to lawfully do so would require an act of Congress. At a news conference in Germany last year, Ms. Yellen highlighted that concern.“While we’re beginning to look at this, it would not be legal now, in the United States, for the government to seize those statutes,” Ms. Yellen said. “It’s not something that is legally permissible in the United States.”Since then, however, Ms. Yellen has become more open to the idea of seizing Russia’s assets to aid Ukraine.Factions of Congress have previously tried to attach provisions to the annual defense bill to allow the Justice Department to seize Russian assets belonging to officials under sanction and funnel the proceeds from the sale of those assets to Ukraine to help pay for weapons. But the efforts have faltered amid concerns that the proposals were not thoroughly vetted.With Ukraine running low on funds and ammunition, the debate about how to provide more aid could shift from a legal question to a moral question.“One can understand the precedential point made by those who do not believe the assets should be seized,” said Mark Sobel, a former longtime Treasury Department official who is now the U.S. chairman of the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum. “Given skirmishes and wars in many spots, one could easily argue such a precedent could get out of hand.”However, Mr. Sobel argued that the barbarity of Russia’s actions justified using its assets to compensate Ukraine.“In my mind, humanity dictates that those factors outweigh the argument that seizing the assets would be unprecedented simply because Russia’s heinous and unfathomable behavior must be strongly punished,” he said.Eric Schmitt More

  • in

    Yellen Is First Female Treasury Secretary With Signature on U.S. Dollar

    Two women — the first female Treasury secretary and the first Native American to serve as U.S. treasurer — now have their signatures on America’s currency.WASHINGTON — During a recent appearance on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen faced an awkward question: After nearly two years in the job, why was the signature of her predecessor, Steven T. Mnuchin, still scrawled across the nation’s currency?The answer, she explained, was a quirk of currency design that required a new treasurer of the United States to be in place before the money could be remade with both of their signatures.That finally happened on Thursday when the first bank notes bearing the name of America’s first female Treasury secretary were unveiled. The occasion was another crack in the glass ceiling for Ms. Yellen and the notoriously male-dominated field of economics.The bills will also bear the name of Marilynn Malerba, the first Native American to hold the role of treasurer. The first $1 and $5 notes with their signatures will enter circulation next month.Ms. Yellen, who has previously served as the Federal Reserve chair and the head of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers, said on Thursday that having her name on the currency was more than a personal career achievement.“Today is not about me or a new signature on our currency,” Ms. Yellen said during a visit to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing in Fort Worth, Texas. “It’s about our collective work to create a stronger and more inclusive economy.”Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • in

    Global Fallout From Rate Moves Won’t Stop the Fed

    The Federal Reserve, like many central banks, sets policy with an eye on the domestic economy. Its battle to control prices is causing pain abroad.The Federal Reserve has embarked on an aggressive campaign to raise interest rates as it tries to tame the most rapid inflation in decades, an effort the central bank sees as necessary to restore price stability in the United States.But what the Fed does at home reverberates across the globe, and its actions are raising the risks of a global recession while causing economic and financial pain in many developing countries.Other central banks in advanced economies, from Australia to the eurozone, are also lifting rates rapidly to fight their inflation. And as the Fed’s higher interest rates attract money to the United States — pumping up the value of the dollar — emerging-market economies are being forced to raise their own borrowing costs to try to stabilize their currencies to the extent possible.Altogether, it is a worldwide push toward more expensive money unlike anything seen before in the 21st century, one that is likely to have serious ramifications.Higher rates slow inflation by cooling consumer demand and allowing supply to catch up, paving the way for more moderate price increases. But in the process, they slow down hiring, weaken wage growth, prompt job losses and ripple through financial markets in sometimes disruptive ways.How much pain today’s moves will ultimately cause remains unclear: So many countries are raising rates so quickly — and so in sync — that it is difficult to determine how intense any slowdown will be once it takes full effect. Monetary policy takes months or years to kick in completely.But many economists and several international bodies have warned that there’s a pronounced danger or overdoing it, including a United Nations agency that warned the damage could be particularly acute in poorer nations. Developing economies had already been dealing with a cost-of-living crisis because of soaring food and fuel prices, and now their American imports are growing steadily more expensive as the dollar marches higher.The Fed’s moves have spurred market volatility and worries about financial stability, as higher rates elevate the value of the U.S. dollar, making it harder for emerging-market borrowers to pay back their dollar-denominated debt.It is a recipe for globe-spanning turmoil and even recession. Despite that, the Fed is poised to continue raising interest rates. That’s because the Fed, like central banks around the world, is in charge of domestic economy goals: It’s supposed to keep inflation slow and steady while fostering maximum employment. While occasionally called “central banker to the world” because of the dollar’s foremost position, the Fed goes about its day-to-day business with its eye squarely on America.“Of course, as a human, you care about the pain other countries are experiencing — but as a policymaker, I have a single tool,” Mary C. Daly, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, said in an interview on Tuesday. “It’s a blunt tool, even for the U.S. goals of full employment and price stability.”Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • in

    Why the British Pound Continues to Sink

    Britain’s pound coin — rimmed in nickel and brass with an embossed image of Queen Elizabeth II at the center — could always be counted on to be significantly more valuable than the dollar.Such boasting rights effectively came to an end this week when the value of the pound sank to its lowest recorded level: £1 = $1.03 after falling more than 20 percent this year.The nearly one-to-one parity between the currencies sounded the close of a chapter in Britain’s history nearly as much as the metronomic footfalls of the procession that carried the queen’s funeral bier up the pavement to Windsor Castle.“The queen’s death for many people brought to an end a long era of which the soft power in the United Kingdom” was paramount, said Ian Goldin, professor of globalization and development at the University of Oxford. “The pound’s demise to its lowest level is sort of indicative of this broader decline in multiple dimensions.”The immediate cause of the pound’s alarming fall on Monday was the announcement of a spending and tax plan by Britain’s new Conservative government, which promised steep tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthiest individuals along with expensive measures to help blunt the painful rise in energy prices on consumers and businesses.The sense of crisis ramped up Wednesday when the Bank of England intervened, in a rare move, and warned of “material risk to U.K. financial stability” from the government’s plan. The central bank said it would start buying British government bonds “on whatever scale is necessary” to stem a sell-off in British debt.The Bank of England’s emergency action seemed at odds with its efforts that began months ago to try to slow the nearly 10 percent annual inflation rate, which has lifted the price of essentials like petrol and food to painful levels.Rising Inflation in BritainInflation Slows Slightly: Consumer prices are still rising at about the fastest pace in 40 years, despite a small drop to 9.9 percent in August.Interest Rates: On Sept. 22, the Bank of England raised its key rate by another half a percentage point, to 2.25 percent, as it tries to keep high inflation from becoming embedded in the nation’s economy.Energy Bills to Soar: Gas and electric charges for most British households are set to rise 80 percent this fall, further squeezing consumers and stoking inflation.Investor Worries: The financial markets have been grumbling with unease about Britain’s economic outlook. The government plan to freeze energy bills and cut taxes is not easing concerns.The swooning pound this week has carried an unmistakable political message, amounting to a no-confidence vote by the world’s financial community in the economic strategy proposed by Prime Minister Liz Truss and her chancellor of the Exchequer, Kwasi Kwarteng.To Mr. Goldin, the pound’s journey indicates a decline in economic and political influence that accelerated when Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016. In many respects, Britain already has the worst performing economy, aside from Russia, of the 38-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.“It’s just a question of time before it falls out of the top 10 economies in the world,” Mr. Goldin said. Britain ranks sixth, having been surpassed by India.Eswar Prasad, an economist at Cornell University, said this latest plunge had delivered a bracing blow to Britain’s standing. A series of “self-inflicted wounds,” including Brexit and the government’s latest spending plan, have accelerated the pound’s slide and further endangered London’s status as a global financial center.Dozens of currencies, including the euro, the Japanese yen and the Chinese renminbi, have slumped in recent weeks. Rising interest rates and a relatively bright economic outlook in the United States combined with turmoil in the global economy have made investments in dollars particularly appealing.But the revival by the Truss government of an extreme version of Thatcher and Reagan-era “trickle-down” economic policies elicited a brutal response.“The problem isn’t that the U.K. budget was inflationary,” wrote Dario Perkins, a managing director at TS Lombard, a research firm, on Twitter. “It’s that it was moronic.”To some, the pound’s journey indicates a decline in Britain’s economic and political influence.Suzie Howell for The New York TimesDuring the more than 1,000 years in which the pound sterling has reigned as Britain’s national currency, it has suffered its share of ups and downs. Its value in the modern era could never match the value of an actual pound of silver, which in the 10th century could buy 15 cows.Over the centuries, British leaders have often gone to extraordinary lengths to protect the pound’s value, viewing its strength as a sign of the country’s economic power and influence. King Henry I issued a decree in 1125 ordering that those who produced substandard currency “lose their right hand and be castrated.”In the 1960s, the Labour government under Harold Wilson so resisted devaluing the pound — then set at a fixed rate of $2.80, high enough to be holding back the British economy — that he ordered cabinet papers discussing the idea to be burned. In 1967, the government finally cut its value by 14 percent to $2.40.Other economic crises thrashed the pound. In the 1970s, when oil prices skyrocketed and Britain’s inflation rate topped 25 percent, the government was compelled to ask the International Monetary Fund for a $3.9 billion loan. In the mid-1980s, when high U.S. interest rates and a Reagan administration spending spree jacked up the dollar’s value, the pound fell to a then record low.The pound’s dominance has been waning since the end of World War II. Today, the global economy is experiencing a particularly tumultuous time as it recovers from the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic, supply chain breakdowns, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, an energy shortage and soaring inflation.As Richard Portes, an economics professor at London Business School, said, currency exchanges have enormous swings over time. The euro was worth 82 cents in its early days, he recalled, and people referred to it as a “toilet paper” currency. But by 2008, its value had doubled to $1.60.What might cause the pound to revive is not clear.The Truss government’s economic program has forcefully accelerated the pound’s slide — the latest in a series of what many economists consider egregious economic missteps that peaked with Brexit.Much depends on the Truss government.“The plunge in the pound is the result of policy choices, not some historical inevitability” said Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics. “Whether this is a new, grim era or just an unfortunate interlude depends on whether they reverse course or are kicked out at the next election.”As it happens, the Bank of England is preparing to issue new pound bank notes and coins featuring King Charles III, at the very moment that the pound has dropped to record lows.“The death of the queen and the fall of the pound do seem jointly to signify decisively the end of an era,” Mr. Prasad of Cornell said. “These two events could be considered markers in a long historical procession in the British economy and the pound sterling becoming far less important than they once were.” More

  • in

    U.S. Scrutinizes Swiss Currency Practices

    The Treasury Department declined to label any country a currency manipulator, but singled out Switzerland as an offender in its semiannual foreign exchange report.WASHINGTON — The Treasury Department said on Friday that it was concerned that some of America’s trading partners were taking actions to weaken their currencies and gain unfair trade advantages against the United States — but declined to label any country a currency manipulator.In its semiannual foreign exchange report, the department singled out Switzerland, which in 2020 was deemed a manipulator, as a worst offender and said it was closely watching the foreign exchange practices of Taiwan and Vietnam. Department officials have been involved in “enhanced bilateral engagement” with all three countries in recent months.“The administration continues to strongly advocate for our major trading partners to carefully calibrate policy tools to support a strong and sustainable global recovery,” Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said in a statement. “An uneven global recovery is not a resilient recovery.”The United States uses three sets of thresholds to determine if a country is weakening the value of its currency. It has broad discretion to determine if a country is manipulating the exchange rate between its currency and the dollar to gain a competitive advantage in international trade.A government can suppress the value of its currency by selling it in foreign exchange markets and stockpiling dollars. By depressing the value of its own currency, a country can make its exports cheaper and more competitive to sell on global markets.The Trump administration labeled Switzerland and Vietnam currency manipulators in 2020, but the Biden administration, seeking a more diplomatic approach, removed the designation.A Treasury official said the United States has had constructive talks with Switzerland over the last year, noting that its economy is facing unusual factors because it is a small and open European economy with a currency, the franc, that is considered a safe haven.Currency manipulation labels are supposed to set off talks with the United States and can involve input from the International Monetary Fund. If the concerns of the Treasury Department are not resolved, the United States can impose an array of penalties, including tariffs.Mark Sobel, the chairman of the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum, noted that the more pressing issue in global currency markets was the strength of the dollar.“The real issue these days is the sharp dollar appreciation, which has clearly been generated by monetary policy divergences between a tightening Fed and others who are less aggressive,” Mr. Sobel said. “It would be hard to fault others.”The United States added Vietnam and Taiwan to its currency “monitoring lists,” a tally that includes China, Japan, South Korea, Germany, Italy, India, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Mexico.The Treasury Department said it was closely watching the foreign exchange activities of China’s state-owned banks. It criticized China for providing “very limited transparency” over how it managed its currency. More

  • in

    A Weak Euro Heads to an Uncomfortable Milestone: Parity With the Dollar

    The list of ailments troubling the eurozone economy was already stark: the highest inflation rate on record, energy insecurity and increasing whispers about a recession. This month, another threat emerged. The weakening euro has raised expectations that it could reach parity with the U.S. dollar.Europe is facing “a steady stream of bad news,” Valentin Marinov, a currency strategist at Crédit Agricole, said. “The euro is a pressure valve for all these concerns, all these fears.”The currency, which is shared by 19 countries, hasn’t fallen to or below a one-to-one exchange rate with the dollar in two decades. Back then, in the early 2000s, the low exchange rate undercut confidence in the new currency, which was introduced in 1999 to help bring unity, prosperity and stability to the region. In late 2000, the European Central Bank intervened in currency markets to prop up the fledgling euro.Today, there are fewer questions about the resilience of the euro, even as it sits near its lowest level in more than five years against the dollar. Instead, the currency’s weakness reflects the darkening outlook of the bloc’s economy.Since Russia invaded Ukraine in late February, the euro has fallen more than 6 percent against the dollar as governments seek to cut Russia from their energy supplies, trade channels are disrupted and inflation is imported into the continent via high energy, commodity and food prices.While a weak euro is a blessing for American holidaymakers heading to the continent this summer, it is only adding to the region’s inflationary woes by increasing the cost of imports and undercutting the value of European earnings for American companies.Many analysts have determined that parity is only a matter of time.One euro will be worth one dollar by the end of the year and fall even lower early next year, according to analysts at HSBC, one of Europe’s largest banks. “We find it hard to see a silver lining for the single currency at this stage,” they wrote in a note to clients in early May.Traders are watching to see if the euro will drop below $1.034 against the dollar, the low it reached in January 2017. On May 13 it came close, falling to $1.035.Diners in a restaurant in Milan, Italy. American vacationers in Europe can enjoy the benefits of a weak euro, but imported goods will cost more.Luca Bruno/Associated PressBelow that level, the prospects of the euro reaching parity become “quite material,” according to analysts at the Dutch bank ING. Analysts at the Japanese bank Nomura predict that parity will be reached in the next two months. For the euro, “the path of least resistance is lower,” analysts at JPMorgan wrote in a note to clients. They expect the currency to reach parity in the third quarter.Economists at Pantheon Macroeconomics said last month that an embargo on Russian gas would push the euro to parity with the dollar, joining other analysts linking the sinking euro to the efforts to cut oil and gas ties with Russia.“The outlook for the euro now is very, very tied to the energy security risk,” said Jane Foley, a currency strategist at Rabobank. For traders, the risks intensified after Russia cut off gas sales to Poland and Bulgaria late last month, she added. If Europe’s supplies of gas are shut off either by a self-imposed embargo or by Russia, the region is likely to tip into recession as replacing Russian energy supplies is challenging.

    The strength of the U.S. dollar has also dragged the euro close to parity. The dollar has become the haven of choice for investors, outperforming other currencies that have also been considered safe places for money as the risk of stagflation — an unhealthy mix of stagnant economic growth and rapid inflation — stalks the globe. Last week, the Swiss franc fell below parity with the dollar for the first time in two years, and the Japanese yen is at its lowest level since 2002, bringing an unwanted source of inflation to a country that is used to low or falling prices.There are plenty of reasons investors are looking for safe places to park their money. Economic growth is slow in China because of shutdowns prompted by the country’s zero-Covid policy. There are recession risks in Europe and growing predictions of a recession in the United States next year. And many so-called emerging markets are being battered by rising food prices, worsening crises in areas including East Africa and the Middle East.“It’s a pretty grim outlook for the global economy,” Ms. Foley said. It “screams safe haven and it screams the dollar.”Also in the dollar’s favor is the aggressive action of the Federal Reserve. With inflation in the United States hovering around its highest rate in four decades, the central bank has ramped up its tightening of monetary policy with successive interest rate increases, and many more are predicted. Traders are betting that U.S. interest rates will climb another 2 percentage points by early next year to 3 percent, the highest level since 2007.The Russia-Ukraine War and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 7A far-reaching conflict. More

  • in

    Weakened Euro May Become Equal to the U.S. Dollar

    The list of ailments troubling the eurozone economy was already stark: the highest inflation rate on record, energy insecurity and increasing whispers about a recession. This month, another threat emerged. The weakening euro has raised expectations that it could reach parity with the U.S. dollar.Europe is facing “a steady stream of bad news,” Valentin Marinov, a currency strategist at Crédit Agricole, said. “The euro is a pressure valve for all these concerns, all these fears.”The currency, which is shared by 19 countries, hasn’t fallen to or below a one-to-one exchange rate with the dollar in two decades. Back then, in the early 2000s, the low exchange rate undercut confidence in the new currency, which was introduced in 1999 to help bring unity, prosperity and stability to the region. In late 2000, the European Central Bank intervened in currency markets to prop up the fledgling euro.Today, there are fewer questions about the resilience of the euro, even as it sits near its lowest level in more than five years against the dollar. Instead, the currency’s weakness reflects the darkening outlook of the bloc’s economy.Since Russia invaded Ukraine in late February, the euro has fallen more than 6 percent against the dollar as governments seek to cut Russia from their energy supplies, trade channels are disrupted and inflation is imported into the continent via high energy, commodity and food prices.While a weak euro is a blessing for American holidaymakers heading to the continent this summer, it is only adding to the region’s inflationary woes by increasing the cost of imports and undercutting the value of European earnings for American companies.Many analysts have determined that parity is only a matter of time.One euro will be worth one dollar by the end of the year and fall even lower early next year, according to analysts at HSBC, one of Europe’s largest banks. “We find it hard to see a silver lining for the single currency at this stage,” they wrote in a note to clients in early May.Traders are watching to see if the euro will drop below $1.034 against the dollar, the low it reached in January 2017. On May 13 it came close, falling to $1.035.Diners in a restaurant in Milan, Italy. American vacationers in Europe can enjoy the benefits of a weak euro, but imported goods will cost more.Luca Bruno/Associated PressBelow that level, the prospects of the euro reaching parity become “quite material,” according to analysts at the Dutch bank ING. Analysts at the Japanese bank Nomura predict that parity will be reached in the next two months. For the euro, “the path of least resistance is lower,” analysts at JPMorgan wrote in a note to clients. They expect the currency to reach parity in the third quarter.Economists at Pantheon Macroeconomics said last month that an embargo on Russian gas would push the euro to parity with the dollar, joining other analysts linking the sinking euro to the efforts to cut oil and gas ties with Russia.“The outlook for the euro now is very, very tied to the energy security risk,” said Jane Foley, a currency strategist at Rabobank. For traders, the risks intensified after Russia cut off gas sales to Poland and Bulgaria late last month, she added. If Europe’s supplies of gas are shut off either by a self-imposed embargo or by Russia, the region is likely to tip into recession as replacing Russian energy supplies is challenging.

    The strength of the U.S. dollar has also dragged the euro close to parity. The dollar has become the haven of choice for investors, outperforming other currencies that have also been considered safe places for money as the risk of stagflation — an unhealthy mix of stagnant economic growth and rapid inflation — stalks the globe. Last week, the Swiss franc fell below parity with the dollar for the first time in two years, and the Japanese yen is at its lowest level since 2002, bringing an unwanted source of inflation to a country that is used to low or falling prices.There are plenty of reasons investors are looking for safe places to park their money. Economic growth is slow in China because of shutdowns prompted by the country’s zero-Covid policy. There are recession risks in Europe and growing predictions of a recession in the United States next year. And many so-called emerging markets are being battered by rising food prices, worsening crises in areas including East Africa and the Middle East.“It’s a pretty grim outlook for the global economy,” Ms. Foley said. It “screams safe haven and it screams the dollar.”The Russia-Ukraine War and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 7A far-reaching conflict. More