logo
German fiscal boost won't outweigh tariff drag for euro zone, IMF's Europe head says

German fiscal boost won't outweigh tariff drag for euro zone, IMF's Europe head says

CNBC28-04-2025

Higher German infrastructure spending will boost Europe's economic growth in the coming years — but not enough to outweigh the expected drag from U.S. tariffs, according to Alfred Kammer, director of the European department at the International Monetary Fund.
The IMF last week cut its growth outlook for the euro area, also making downgrades for the U.S., U.K. and many Asian countries due to President Donald Trump's volatile tariff policy.
The institution cut its euro area growth forecasts for each of the next two years by 0.2 percentage points, to 0.8% in 2025 and 1.2% in 2026.
"It's the tariffs and the trade tensions which weigh on the outlook rather than the positive effects on the fiscal side," Kammer told CNBC's Carolin Roth in an interview at the IMF-World Bank Spring Meetings last week.
"What we see is we have a meaningful downgrade for Europe advanced economies... and for the emerging euro area countries double as much over this two-year period."
The negative impact of tariffs will be slightly offset by Germany's recent infrastructure spending bill, which will boost growth in the euro area over those two years, Kammer said.
Exemptions passed to Germany's longstanding debt rules have unlocked higher defense spending and enabled creation of a 500 billion euro ($548 billion) infrastructure and climate fund. The move has been described by economists as a potential "game changer" for the sluggish economy — the largest in the euro zone.
However, optimism has been shaken by U.S. tariffs, which are widely expected to dampen global growth and trade flows.
Several policymakers at the European Central Bank told CNBC last week that while the inflation path appeared positive — with tariffs potentially bringing inflation in the bloc down further — their broader outlook was now significantly more uncertain.
The IMF's Kammer said that the ECB should only cut interest rates once more this year, by a quarter percentage point, despite growth risks.
The ECB has so far reduced rates seven times in quarter-percentage-point increments, starting in June 2024. Its most recent move lower in April took the deposit facility, its key rate, to 2.25%.
"We have a very clear recommendation for the ECB. What we saw so far is a huge success in the disinflation effort and monetary policy has worked ... so we are expecting to sustainably hit the 2% inflation target in the second half of 2025," Kammer told CNBC.
"Our recommendation is there is room for one more 25-basis-point cut, in the summer, and then the ECB should hold that 2% policy rate unless major shocks hit and there is a need for recalibrating monetary policy," he added.
Overnight index swap pricing on Monday pointed to market expectations for two more quarter-point cuts this year.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Elon and Trump's Breakup Results In Hilarious Consequences For Dogecoin
Elon and Trump's Breakup Results In Hilarious Consequences For Dogecoin

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Elon and Trump's Breakup Results In Hilarious Consequences For Dogecoin

Elon Musk and Donald Trump's nasty feud has had some unintended consequences for the meme coin that inspired the Department of Government Efficiency. As CNBC reports, Dogecoin fell 10 percent on Thursday, the day that the Musk and Trump spat spilled over onto social media, and was down 22 percent week-over-week at its lowest point last night, when it was worth less than 17 cents per token (don't gasp too hard, but it's now soared back up to 18 cents.) Given that it's a meme coin, Doge has never been worth all that much to begin with. At its absolute peak in 2021, the coin traded just under 75 cents thanks to Musk's endorsement — and despite regular peaks and valleys, it's never again surpassed that all-time high. Despite its near-worthlessness, Dogecoin has been a useful metric for tracking the way Musk affects market. As CNBC notes, the meme coin spiked 15 percent in a day when Tesla began accepting it for merchandise in 2022, and jumped 35 percent later that same year when Musk bought Twitter. Just as Doge giveth, Doge seems to taketh away. The unelected billionaire has entirely squandered the gains he garnered for the meme coin when riding on Trump's coattails, first with the announcement of the agency's creation and again when its official website was launched just after the president's inauguration. As Cointelegraph reports, the coin could be poised to slip even further. Dogecoin's three-week Trump slump suggests, per the site's analysis, that it could fall to as little as six cents per coin if its bearish streak continues. Should it continue to fall, a massive selloff event may occur as itchy investors seek to rid themselves of the tarnished token. Over on the everything app, Doge bros are, as usual, acting absolutely bonkers about the coin's chances of survival. "Looks like yesterday was just another bear trap for Dogecoin," one such investor tweeted alongside a chart showing projected "euphoric" highs that almost certainly will not be attained. "Let's go!" In another unrealistic prognostication that borders on tragic, one account shared a graphic explaining that if investors "hold together, nobody will fall." "I'll keep reposting till we hit the Dollar," the delulu poster exclaimed. In Washington, the fiery feud between Musk and Trump has shaken the status quo — but for crypto types, it's just another weekend. More on meme coins: You'll Never Guess What Happened to Trump's Meme Coin After He Announced His Tariffs

What Elon Musk's feud with Trump means for Tesla shareholders
What Elon Musk's feud with Trump means for Tesla shareholders

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

What Elon Musk's feud with Trump means for Tesla shareholders

For Tesla investors, Elon Musk's involvement with Donald Trump has been a car wreck that's unfolded in two chapters, one in slow motion, the next on dizzying fast-forward. During Musk's 130 days running DOGE, a crusade whose dogged aggression virtually defined the administration's mindset in the early months, the EV chief infuriated European customers by backing far-right politicians, and as sales dropped in the likes of Germany and France, and severe competition shrank its market share in China, neglected tackling Tesla's mounting problems by doubling down by famously battling to slash departments and headcount from the White House. In his absence, Tesla's stock and earnings tanked. Bad as that episode proved for Tesla, it at least provided a potential upside. 'Even before DOGE, Musk clearly had too many spoons in too many pots through SpaceX, Neuralink, X and his other ventures, then he got even more preoccupied by putting another spoon in another pot,' says Eric Talley, a professor of law and business at Columbia University. 'But being in the White House also included a bit of an insurance policy for Tesla….sitting close to the seat of decision making was a big potential advantage.' Now, says Talley, Musk has singlehandedly turned that 'insurance policy' into a liability—the threat that the administration will penalize the EV-maker, or at best do nothing to protect it. When Musk departed DOGE on May 30 amid the fanfare of Trump's Oval Office sendoff, Tesla shareholders still had little to toast, since the CEO wasn't offloading his empire's myriad duties to refocus on the troubled manufacturer. Then, the Musk-Trump feud that exploded on June 5th, triggered by the former's lacerating takedown of the President's signature budget bill, put Tesla overnight into a spot where it's threatened not only by poor finances but the insults unleashed at his former sponsor that both invite retaliation by Trump and endanger Musk's survival as the enterprise's leader that's so critical to its gigantic valuation. 'The thing that's different in the last 24 hours,' says Talley, 'is that Musk not only walked away from an insurance policy of having a CEO situated high in government. He took out an anti-insurance policy. Any moment could erupt in a flameout from either side over social media that puts a target on Tesla's back.' He notes that Tesla's rivals are confronting the same headwinds from the wind-down in EV subsidies to purchasers subsidies proposed the so-called 'Great Big Beautiful Bill,' but the the overhang from antagonizing the president 'is a target its competitors don't have.' Indeed, the day it detonated, the blowup sent Tesla shares reeling 14.3% in a freefall that erased $153 billion in market cap, the biggest one-day drop in the company's history. Though it clawed back around a third of those losses the following day, the stock's still sitting 40% below its recent summit in mid-December. Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, and one of the leading experts on the rules and ethics governing boards, told Fortune that in any other major public company but Tesla, Musk would be gone—and the dumping would have happened well before the new hurricane. 'If his name had been Joe Dokes, he'd be gone in a nano-second,' says Elson, 'given the reputational damage he did alienating a good number of customers by going into politics at DOGE. It's a mess. No other board would have let a CEO get involved in that way. You don't have time to be a CEO!' What keeps Musk in the job is his iron grip on the board, says Elson. He notes that Musk controls 30% of the shares, and that his influence extends beyond the power of that stake due to the loyalty built, in part, by awarding directors large options grants that made many of them extremely rich. Elson reckons that it would be extremely difficult for disgruntled shareholders to prevail in lawsuits versus board members that might work toward forcing out Musk. 'The road to winning liability cases against directors is a twisting, bumpy one,' he avows. 'That Tesla re-incorporated from Delaware to Texas makes it much tougher. That's why Tesla moved to Texas. It was a race to the bottom and they ran all the way to the bottom of the barrel.' For Elson, Musk can't be forced to leave, and won't go unless he wants to, 'and there's nothing anybody can do about it.' Nevertheless, the size of Musk's ownership stake that's the source of his control, and his attachment to Tesla going forward that's attached to that position, are being tested by a landmark decisions in the Delaware courts. The rulings, handed down last year, negated the $56 billion stock package awarded by the board in 2018 that accounts for two-thirds of Musk's holdings. Tesla's now appealing to get that comp restored. If the Delaware Supreme Court upholds the decision, Tesla's certain to attempt getting that compensation reinstated. But that route courts much higher risks now. According to Talley, the board under Texas law could either attempt to restore the package unilaterally, or put the issue to a shareholder vote. He reckons that the former, more direct approach is now looking a lot less attractive to the directors than a few days ago. 'The board may prefer now to go with a shareholder vote,' he says, given the potential backlash from rewarding Musk so royally when Tesla's struggling, mainly because of his own actions. 'It might appeal to the board to go that way and count on a rejection,' he adds. A turn down raises another potentially ghoulish outcome. 'If they have a shareholder vote, and it goes negative, then you have a succession problem. You don't want a CEO to take vengeance on the company,' a path the mercurial legend could take. It's also unclear how Musk will react if the Delaware Supreme Court rules against him—same upshot, he owns far less of Tesla, and his incentive to rebuild his the greatest source of his wealth would be greatly diminished. Tesla enjoys a gigantic premium courtesy of Musk's iconic status and the serial promises of delivering self-driving technology that will transform Tesla from a metal-bender into a fabulously lucrative tech player. As I detailed after Tesla reported Q1 results, it actually lost money selling cars and batteries and only managed a tiny profit through the sales of regulatory credits. Its 'hardcore,' repeatable earnings from the auto and battery franchises over the previous four quarters totaled just $3.5 billion, down from $12 billion in 2022. At a PE of 30 that's three times the auto industry average, Tesla—based on bedrock fundamentals—might be worth $100 billion. But even after the recent selloff, its valuation stands at $960 billion. Hence, the difference of well over $800 billion arises from what I'll call the 'Musk magic premium,' created by his promises of epic innovations to come. If Musk were to depart, a big part of that magic premium exits with him. It may be fading already. So for Tesla shareholders, it's bad either way. Musk leaves and a hands-on leader arrives, but the genius' halo no longer shields the stock, or he stays and keeps starting fights that undermine the brand and spreads his time among half a dozen pioneering ventures that he may find more riveting. As Elson puts it, 'Anyone else would be fired after this but he feels he can't be. He has this aura that makes him feel untouchable. He's got a cult status that seems to follow him and make folks think it's okay that he doesn't operate in a normal way.' But, Elson cautions, as Musk's behavior gets more and more outrageous, the burden he's heaping on Tesla, now and what investors increasing perceive is looming, is catching up with him. We've just seen a shocking example of how fast that can happen, and how rapidly the myth can dissolve. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store