关税通胀风险

Search documents
美联储9月会降息吗?中金两个团队意见相反
Hua Er Jie Jian Wen· 2025-07-31 01:27
7月按兵不动后,关于美联储是否会在9月降息的辩论,正变得日益激烈。 7月31日,中金宏观经济分析师肖捷文等认为,最新的信号指向美联储倾向于维持耐心,美联储不会因特 朗普施压而降息。7月会议上,美联储主席鲍威尔与多数官员倾向于维持紧缩立场,认为关税带来的通胀 风险尚未解除,且劳动力市场依然稳固,因此不具备降息条件。鲍威尔还强调了美联储的独立性,暗示不 会屈服于政治压力。 然而,9月降息的理由同样充分。中金首席海外策略分析师刘刚等认为指出,市场可能误解了美联储的决 策前提。降息并非必须等到通胀回落,只要关税对通胀的"一次性"影响路径基本确定,美联储就可以行 动。随着美国近期与多国达成关税协定,这一路径正变得愈发清晰,为9月降息保留了可能性。 中金公司对美联储9月降息前景给出的这两种截然不同的判断,反映出当前市场对货币政策走向的深度分 歧。 通胀路径明朗化 9月降息窗口仍在 中金公司研究部首席海外策略分析师刘刚等认为,美联储采取行动的条件正在成熟。市场普遍存在一个误 解,即认为美联储必须等到通胀数据明确回落后才能降息。但实际上,只要关税对通胀的影响路径基本确 定,美联储就可以提前行动。 首先,美联储本身存在降息的内 ...
美联储巴尔金:不急于降息,不能忽视关税带来的通胀风险
news flash· 2025-06-20 16:36
Core Viewpoint - The Federal Reserve's Barkin indicates that there is no urgency to cut interest rates due to unresolved inflation risks from new tariffs and a strong job market [1] Group 1: Inflation and Tariffs - Barkin highlights that new import tariffs may increase inflation risks, which remain unresolved [1] - Businesses in the Richmond area expect prices to rise later this year as new tariffs take effect, with potential for further increases in import tariffs in the coming months [1] Group 2: Employment and Economic Outlook - The unemployment rate remains low at 4.2%, with no significant signs of large-scale layoffs among businesses [1] - Barkin emphasizes the need for a cautious approach, stating that the response should be to observe rather than to accelerate economic measures [1]
"雅诗兰黛女婿",成大热门!下任美联储主席人选,还有谁?
券商中国· 2025-06-07 16:00
本周末,下任美联储主席热门人选及美联储降息预期降温,引发市场关注。 当地时间6日,美国总统特朗普接受媒体采访称,下一任美联储主席的任命结果将很快公布。据悉,前美联储 理事凯文·沃什是热门人选,而他备受关注的另一个身份是高端护肤品牌雅诗兰黛继承人简·兰黛的丈夫。值得 注意的是,凯文·沃什的岳父罗纳德·兰黛还是特朗普的前金主。 此外,多位美联储官员近日相继就降息问题表态。美联储官员、圣路易斯联邦储备银行行长穆萨莱姆接受媒体 采访时说,假如美国贸易和财政政策的不确定性能在"7月消散",美联储才可能筹备9月降息。美联储理事库格 勒也表示,关税可能带来更高的通胀风险,因此她支持目前维持利率不变。 本周五,在强于预期的就业和薪资增长数据公布后,交易员开始下调美联储今年降息的押注。利率互换数据显 示,交易员预计9月降息25个基点的概率约为70%,而周四预期的概率约为90%。当前,交易员普遍预计美联 储将在6月17—18日会议维持利率不变,7月降息可能性仅为10%。 美联储主席热门人选妻子是雅诗兰黛继承人 本周末,关于下一任美联储主席人选问题,再度引发市场关注,这与特朗普的最新表态有关。 媒体报道显示,由于美联储迟迟不肯降息 ...
美联储官员“集体放风”:警惕关税通胀风险 不急于降息
智通财经网· 2025-05-10 03:04
Core Viewpoint - Federal Reserve officials are not eager to lower the benchmark interest rate due to concerns over the prolonged impact of tariffs on consumer prices and employment growth, which could hinder the Fed's dual mandate of controlling inflation and maintaining high employment levels [1][4][6]. Group 1: Economic Outlook - Economists predict that the tariffs implemented by the Trump administration, effective from April, will lead to higher consumer prices and potentially hinder job growth, complicating the Fed's ability to manage inflation and employment [1][3]. - The FedWatch tool indicates a 51% probability that the Fed will lower the benchmark interest rate in July, with markets pricing in three potential rate cuts of 25 basis points this year [1][2]. Group 2: Inflation Concerns - St. Louis Fed President Bullard emphasized the uncertainty surrounding the tariffs' impact on inflation, suggesting that the Fed should not commit to further rate cuts until the effects are clearer [3][6]. - New York Fed President Williams highlighted the importance of maintaining stable inflation expectations to ensure public confidence in the Fed's ability to return inflation to the 2% target [3][4]. Group 3: Trade Policy Implications - Fed Governor Cook warned that the uncertainty surrounding Trump's trade policies could suppress U.S. productivity and necessitate higher interest rates to combat inflation stemming from inefficiencies [5][6]. - Cleveland Fed President Mester noted that the Fed requires more time to observe the economic response to tariffs before determining appropriate policy measures, acknowledging the current resilience of the U.S. economy [6][7]. Group 4: Employment and Economic Growth - Despite a low unemployment rate of 4.2%, Fed officials recognize risks to the labor market as businesses assess the implications of new tariffs [6][7]. - Fed officials agree that the current economic conditions warrant maintaining the policy interest rate in the range of 4.25% to 4.5% until the effects of government policy decisions are clearer [4][7].