Group 1 - Federal Reserve Chairman Powell indicated a potential monetary policy easing in September if inflation continues to decline, marking a significant shift in policy direction [2][3] - The market reacted strongly, with gold prices surging 3.2% to over $2500 per ounce, Brent crude oil surpassing $95, and the offshore RMB appreciating over 500 basis points in a single day [2][4] - The probability of a rate cut in September jumped from 32% to 78%, with expectations for cumulative cuts in 2023 increasing from 75 basis points to 125 basis points [3] Group 2 - Powell acknowledged a clear trend of declining inflation, with the core PCE price index remaining between 2.3% and 2.5% for five consecutive months [3] - The current interest rate of 5.25%-5.5% may exceed the neutral rate, raising concerns about the risks of over-tightening [3] - The U.S. economy is showing signs of slowing, with non-farm payrolls adding only 185,000 jobs in July, below the expected 220,000 [3] Group 3 - Global asset prices began a "repricing" phase, with gold and oil markets experiencing significant gains due to expectations of lower real interest rates and geopolitical risks [4] - The oil market is supported by expectations of a weaker dollar, with UBS estimating that a 1% drop in the dollar index typically leads to a 1.5%-2% increase in oil prices [4] - The stock market showed mixed results, with the Nasdaq reaching a record high while the Dow Jones faced slight declines due to banking sector pressures [4] Group 4 - Central banks worldwide are adjusting their policies in response to the Fed's shift, with the European Central Bank and Swiss National Bank signaling potential rate cuts [5] - Emerging markets are also accelerating their easing measures, with Brazil and India taking notable actions [5] - The trend towards "de-dollarization" is evident, with countries like Russia increasing their yuan reserves and Argentina replacing the dollar in trade settlements [5] Group 5 - Investment strategies may need recalibration, with gold mining stocks and industrial metals being favored due to their benefits from a weaker dollar and increased demand for new energy [6] - Long-term U.S. Treasury bonds are seen as an attractive option, with the 10-year yield potentially dropping to 3.8% [6] - Technology growth stocks, particularly in AI and quantum computing, remain preferred investments in a loosening monetary environment [6]

联系人 | 陈达飞 摘要 美联储被喻为美国政治中的"第四权力"和"金融最高法院"，但当下已成为特朗普改造深层政府这场"权力 游戏"的风暴中心。这场"政治危机"背后，更根本的问题是美联储能否"操纵"利率？何为美债利率曲线陡 峭化的根源、"宽财政+宽货币"的政策路径会否生变？ 一、美联储的"政治危机"：美联储换届与特朗普引导降息预期的"三张王牌" 6月初以来，美国总统特朗普何时提名以及提名谁为"影子美联储主席"的话题热度不减。 截止到8月9 日，市场预计的前三位"影子主席"候选人分别为：美联储理事沃勒（26.6%）、白宫国家经济委员会 （NEC）主任哈赛特（13.7%）和前美联储理事沃什（7.9%）。 影子主席已经成为市场定价的一条"主线"。 对市场而言，提名谁或并非矛盾的主要方面，本质上都是特 朗普的"影子"，且货币政策立场都偏"鸽派"。特朗普"解雇"鲍威尔和鲍威尔提前辞职均属"尾部风险"事 件，但特朗普"借题发挥"引导市场降息预期是真实有效的。 特朗普最多或有"三张王牌"引导降息预期 ：第一，由于Kugler提前辞职，特朗普提名米兰（Miran）代 理；第二，年内提名一位"鸽派"的影子主席；第三，如果鲍威尔不 ...

Group 1 - The core issue behind the current "political crisis" surrounding the Federal Reserve is whether it can "manipulate" interest rates and the implications of a steepening U.S. Treasury yield curve [3][4] - Market expectations for the next "shadow Fed chair" candidates are led by Chris Waller (26.6%), Kevin Hassett (13.7%), and Kevin Warsh (7.9%), all of whom are perceived as having dovish monetary policy stances [10][16] - The Federal Reserve's ability to "set" but not "manipulate" policy rates is emphasized, with long-term interest rates being more influenced by macroeconomic factors than short-term rates [5][47] Group 2 - The transition from "loose fiscal + loose monetary" to "tight fiscal + loose monetary" is suggested as necessary for sustainable fiscal reform, with a historical correlation indicating that a 1% reduction in the fiscal deficit could lower 10-year Treasury yields by 12-35 basis points [7][9] - The U.S. government's fiscal and debt situation is described as being in a "quasi-war state," necessitating fiscal consolidation to manage rising deficits and leverage ratios [9][19] - The Federal Reserve's long-term ability to influence the yield curve is limited, with market pricing often being overly dovish during rate hike cycles and overly hawkish during rate cut cycles [6][41]

Group 1: Federal Reserve's Political Crisis - The Federal Reserve is at the center of a political crisis influenced by Trump's efforts to reshape the deep government, raising questions about its ability to manipulate interest rates[2] - As of August 9, the top three candidates for the "shadow Fed chair" are Waller (26.6%), Hassett (13.7%), and Warsh (7.9%) based on market expectations[2][3] - Trump's potential influence includes nominating a "dovish" shadow chair and possibly replacing Powell if he does not remain[3][4] Group 2: Interest Rate Manipulation - The Fed can set but not manipulate policy rates or the yield curve, as rates are endogenous and influenced by macroeconomic factors[4] - The neutral interest rate in the U.S. has risen from around 0% to approximately 1-1.5%, indicating that the Fed's rate cuts may have a terminal point around 300-350 basis points[4] - By July 2025, the Fed's target for the federal funds rate should be between 3.8% and 6.3%, with the current rate at 4.3%, suggesting no restrictive policy at present[4] Group 3: Fiscal Policy and Monetary Coordination - The Fed's ability to cut rates depends more on fiscal consolidation than on board changes, as government deleveraging can lower the neutral rate and support the Fed's anti-inflation efforts[5] - Historically, a 1% reduction in the fiscal deficit can lead to a 12-35 basis point decrease in the 10-year Treasury yield[5] - Sustainable fiscal consolidation can be achieved through economic growth or budget cuts, each with different political costs and implications[5]

Summary of Key Points from Conference Call Industry Overview - The bond market has rapidly expanded, significantly impacting the macro economy, making it crucial to understand its driving factors [1][2][3] - The bond market's size has grown from approximately 20% of GDP in 2005 to over 120% by 2025, indicating a much greater influence on the economy [2] Core Insights and Arguments - Interest rate fluctuations are driven by multiple factors including economic fundamentals, liquidity, policy, supply-demand relationships, and market sentiment [5][6] - Capital returns fundamentally determine interest rates, which are closely linked to the intensity of debt leverage [14][15] - The decline in the real estate market has reduced financing demand, exerting downward pressure on interest rates, as the financial system is heavily reliant on real estate [27] - External income from trade surpluses and fiscal deficits affects capital return rates, which in turn influences stock market performance [32] - Increased government financing needs have led to a systematic rise in the proportion of bonds in social financing, raising concerns about the government's interest burden [46][47] Important but Overlooked Content - The structure of bond investors has diversified over recent years, now including non-bank institutions such as funds, insurance, and foreign entities, complicating market dynamics [4] - The relationship between financing demand and supply can be measured using indicators like loan demand indices and M2 growth rates, which typically lead actual interest rates by one to two quarters [20] - The impact of debt leverage on interest rates is significant; historical data shows a strong correlation between the two, with leverage changes often preceding shifts in capital returns and bond rates [16] - The bond market's performance is also influenced by macroeconomic conditions, with price fluctuations reflecting supply-demand imbalances [9][10] - The recent slowdown in private non-financial sector debt leverage expansion has limited the ability to significantly raise overall interest rates despite ongoing economic stimulus [19] Future Expectations - The economic growth rate in China is expected to slow down in the second half of 2025, potentially dropping from over 5% to around 4.5% due to declining trade surpluses and weak domestic demand [58][59] - Inflation and price levels are anticipated to remain low, with CPI possibly continuing to show negative growth, necessitating further reductions in real interest rates to stimulate consumption [60] - The government is likely to continue using fiscal policy to support economic activity, with a focus on lowering market interest rates to alleviate debt burdens [50][63] This summary encapsulates the essential insights and implications from the conference call, highlighting the bond market's critical role in the broader economic landscape and the factors influencing its dynamics.

证券研究报告 | 宏观经济研究*专题报告 2025 年 08 月 04 日 宏观经济研究 价格的财政决定理论 在以前 DSGE 模型讨论财政政策的文章里，我们均没有讨论到物价在其中的 作用。这里存在着一个区别于李嘉图等价理论的现代观点——价格的财政决 定理论（FTPL）。该理论是对应"通货膨胀是货币现象"货币数量理论的， 其认为在宏观调控中财政政策占主导，经济波动和物价走势均由财政支出的 活动来决定，货币政策只是起到配合和协助作用。 本文基于 Leeper（1991）的理论模型将财政政策和货币政策区分为主动（积 极）和被动（消极），通过 DSGE 模型将李嘉图等价理论和 FTPL 分类到 其中的两种组合。FTPL 是积极的财政政策和消极的货币政策组合。 通过比较可以发现，FTPL 模型（a=1，γ=0.01）让货币政策接近失效（a<1 就会失效），财政纪律临近缺失（γ越小、债务越失控），债务容易发散增 长，通胀持续上行。泰勒规则要求 a>1，这样央行才有能力控制通胀，不 让货币脱锚；γ>r-g（实际利率-经济增速，这里实际利率=1/β-1=0.0101⋯, 经济增速 g=0），这是财政纪律的保障，也是财政可持 ...

关注、加星，第一时间接收推送！ 文 | 赵伟、陈达飞、王茂宇、李欣越、赵宇 联系人 | 王茂宇 摘要 近期，特朗普可能"解雇"鲍威尔的"传言"再度引发股债汇"三杀"。"影子联储主席"再度成为焦点话题。特 朗普解雇鲍威尔的动机、流程、潜在影响如何，鲍威尔会否提前离任？ 热点思考："解雇"鲍威尔？ 一问：传言特朗普或"解雇"鲍威尔，如何定价美联储失去"独立性"？ 美联储总部大楼翻新超支问题，或 成为特朗普"解雇"鲍威尔的依据。7月16日-17日盘中，资本市场再现股债汇"三杀"局面，或是定价美联储 货币政策失去"独立性"。 二问：特朗普为什么要解雇鲍威尔？ 一方面，特朗普强调关税对通胀影响有限，寄希望于低利率刺激经 济，缓和关税对经济冲击，为明年中期选举积累政治资本；另一方面，特朗普希望美联储降低利率可缓 解财政付息压力。2025年6月，美国财政利息支出已占财政支出的16.9%。 三问：法律角度，特朗普能否解雇鲍威尔？ 特朗普须证明鲍威尔存在"渎职"行为，鲍威尔也有权提起诉 讼、申请临时禁令继续任职；特朗普意图解除的是"理事会主席"还是"理事"尚不明确，但副主席杰斐逊 （Jefferson）均将代理主席（若成功解雇 ...

关注、加星，第一时间接收推送！ 文 | 赵伟、陈达飞、王茂宇、李欣越、赵宇 联系人 | 王茂宇 摘要 近期，特朗普可能"解雇"鲍威尔的"传言"再度引发股债汇"三杀"。"影子联储主席"再度成为焦点话题。特 朗普解雇鲍威尔的动机、流程、潜在影响如何，鲍威尔会否提前离任？ 热点思考："解雇"鲍威尔？ 一问：传言特朗普或"解雇"鲍威尔，如何定价美联储失去"独立性"？ 美联储总部大楼翻新超支问题，或 成为特朗普"解雇"鲍威尔的依据。7月16日-17日盘中，资本市场再现股债汇"三杀"局面，或是定价美联储 货币政策失去"独立性"。 二问：特朗普为什么要解雇鲍威尔？ 一方面，特朗普强调关税对通胀影响有限，寄希望于低利率刺激经 济，缓和关税对经济冲击，为明年中期选举积累政治资本；另一方面，特朗普希望美联储降低利率可缓 解财政付息压力。2025年6月，美国财政利息支出已占财政支出的16.9%。 三问：法律角度，特朗普能否解雇鲍威尔？ 特朗普须证明鲍威尔存在"渎职"行为，鲍威尔也有权提起诉 讼、申请临时禁令继续任职；特朗普意图解除的是"理事会主席"还是"理事"尚不明确，但副主席杰斐逊 （Jefferson）均将代理主席（若成功解雇 ...

宏 观 研 究 海外周度观察 2025 年 07 月 20 日 "解雇"鲍威尔？ ——"流动性笔记"系列之二 大类资产&海外事件&数据：美国 6 月核心 CPI 弱于预期，美国或将提高对欧关税 近期，特朗普可能"解雇"鲍威尔的"传言"再度引发股债汇"三杀"。"影子联储主席"再 度成为焦点话题。特朗普解雇鲍威尔的动机、流程、潜在影响如何，鲍威尔会否提前离任？ 热点思考："解雇"鲍威尔？ 一问：传言特朗普或"解雇"鲍威尔，如何定价美联储失去"独立性"？美联储总部大楼翻新 超支问题，或成为特朗普"解雇"鲍威尔的依据。7 月 16 日-17 日盘中，资本市场再现股债汇 "三杀"局面，或是定价美联储货币政策失去"独立性"。 二问：特朗普为什么要解雇鲍威尔？一方面，特朗普强调关税对通胀影响有限，寄希望于低利 率刺激经济，缓和关税对经济冲击，为明年中期选举积累政治资本；另一方面，特朗普希望美 联储降低利率可缓解财政付息压力。2025 年 6 月，美国财政利息支出已占财政支出的 16.9%。 三问：法律角度，特朗普能否解雇鲍威尔？特朗普须证明鲍威尔存在"渎职"行为，鲍威尔也 有权提起诉讼、申请临时禁令继续任职；特朗普意图解除 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent inflation trends in Western countries, attributing them to a series of unfortunate events rather than a single cause, suggesting that inflation may be temporary and could dissipate quickly as seen in historical precedents [1][2]. Group 1: Historical Context of Inflation - The article references historical instances of inflation spikes, such as post-World War II and during the Korean War, where inflation rates surged but were short-lived due to subsequent stabilization [2][4]. - It highlights the importance of understanding the macroeconomic context, including institutional and political factors, that contributed to inflationary pressures in the 1970s [4][5]. Group 2: Inflation Targeting Challenges - The challenges of inflation targeting are discussed, particularly the lag in monetary policy effects and the difficulties in predicting future inflation based on current data [5][6]. - The article critiques the reliance on the Taylor Rule, which adjusts policy rates based on past inflation and output, suggesting it may not adequately address current economic conditions [10][12]. Group 3: Forward-Looking Approaches - The article introduces the concept of forward-looking monetary policy frameworks, such as Svensson's "predictive targeting," which aims to adjust policy based on future inflation and unemployment forecasts [15][16]. - It emphasizes the limitations of such approaches, likening them to driving with a rearview mirror, which may not effectively navigate future economic challenges [14][16]. Group 4: Lessons from Inflation History - The article outlines key lessons from inflation history, emphasizing the critical role of monetary policy, public trust in central banks, and the potential for government actions to influence inflation [23][24]. - It warns against complacency regarding inflation, noting that historical stability does not guarantee future price stability, and highlights the need for proactive policy measures [26][30]. Group 5: Socioeconomic Implications of Inflation - The article discusses the social implications of inflation, noting that it disproportionately affects different socioeconomic groups, creating winners and losers in the economy [31][32]. - It stresses the importance of addressing the root causes of inflation rather than merely providing compensatory measures to those adversely affected [32][38].