
Trump's aid cuts imperil emerging market investment cash
Summary
US aid pullback threatens efforts to secure private cash
Investments in health, agriculture at risk
Countries' creditworthiness in question over medium term
LONDON, Feb 6 (Reuters) - The United States' decision to freeze and potentially scrap its core aid agency jolted countries receiving its funding and could make it harder for emerging economies to attract private cash, investors said.
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) not only disbursed $44 billion in fiscal 2023, but anchors private investment in everything from healthcare to small businesses, and underpins the creditworthiness of bigger emerging markets borrowing money on sovereign debt markets.
Its elimination could undermine investment in countries from Sri Lanka to South Africa and make it more expensive for them to borrow on international markets.
Money from the agency, investors say, enables start-ups in the world's poorest countries to grow to the point they can lure private investors.
Elsewhere, relatively small amounts of its money help lower the risk for banks and other lenders looking to invest in efforts to expand irrigation, or build hospitals, leveraging the cash into millions more. Its support can boost the ability of governments to repay debts, bolstering their economies.
"They do have implications for the medium and long-term creditworthiness of a country," said Giulia Pellegrini, senior portfolio manager for emerging market debt at Allianz Global Investors, referring to the cuts.
The near-total U.S. foreign aid funding freeze took effect last month and President Donald Trump said he would like to wind down USAID.
For Simon Schwall, chief executive of Africa-focused startup Oko - which is backed by Morgan Stanley and Newfund Capital and facilitates and designs crop insurance for farmers in Mali, Ivory Coast and Uganda - the impact has been immediate.
He said the company is at risk of closure without USAID money which would have accounted, directly and indirectly, for 80% of Oko's cashflow this year.
"We cannot raise the investment we were planning to," without replacing USAID, he said. "We are very much at risk of having to close the business if we don't find any alternative partners."
Alternatives are limited. The United States provided 42% of all humanitarian aid tracked by the United Nations in 2024, and other countries have also sought to cut aid spending.
The rapid pull-back could also knock some struggling nations like Ethiopia immediately and erode other economies.
"It could be a big setback for these frontier markets," said Seaport Global emerging market credit analyst Himanshu Porwal.
IMMEDIATE AND EXTENSIVE
Emerging markets were poised for an investor comeback after years of punishing outflows due to the COVID-19 pandemic, high global interest rates and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Debt restructurings in Ghana, Sri Lanka and Ukraine boosted hopes that private cash inflows could help meet growing - and expensive - needs for everything from climate change to infrastructure.
The outlook is now murkier.
Florian Kemmerich, managing partner with impact investment specialist firm KOIS, said the speed and depth of the U.S. cuts could diminish the number of investable projects.
"You need not-for-profit capital... otherwise it wouldn't work, because the mismatch of risk and return is something which makes no sense," he said.
USAID typically offers grants and technical support, but it has also enabled some blended finance, and its $70 million investment fund with Norway aimed to spur hundreds of millions of investment dollars for farmers and agricultural businesses in Africa.
CREDITWORTHY IMPACTS
Bond investors said they were closely monitoring the cuts and implications for countries like Ethiopia, the second-largest recipient of USAID after Ukraine.
The East African country is in the midst of restructuring its sole sovereign dollar bond and working to recover from a punishing civil war.
"In terms of overall financing needs, the U.S. aid is a lot more meaningful for the likes of Ethiopia," said abrdn portfolio manager Edwin Gutierrez, adding that it "doesn't have a lot of funding sources available to it".
Ethiopian officials did not immediately comment.
Ukraine, embroiled in three years of war with Russia, got over $16 billion from USAID last year - nearly 10% of its GDP.
Timothy Ash, senior sovereign strategist with RBC BlueBay Asset Management, noted that former U.S. President Joe Biden front-loaded about $50 billion of funding for Ukraine this year - and Europe also provided money.
"They have a war chest of about $100 billion that should insulate them," Ash said. But "it's damaging, definitely."
Other recipients, such as Nigeria or Kenya, can replace lost aid with borrowing. Kenya's finance minister told Reuters the country would need to reallocate spending if the freeze becomes permanent, while Nigeria increased the size of its 2025 budget to 54.2 trillion naira ($36.4 billion) on Wednesday, from 49 trillion naira.
South Africa, a Trump target over a land expropriation law, gets 17% of its HIV/AIDS programme funding from the United States. Not replacing it risks causing an economic drag if those living productively with the illness fall sick.
Pellegrini noted that borrowing - and building up potentially expensive debt - comes at a cost.
"That will imply, in turn, that they will go to the capital markets, they will issue bonds, perhaps at higher yields, which will in turn again impact their budgets and what they can do with the money," she said. "So it's a vicious cycle."
Get a look at the day ahead in U.S. and global markets with the Morning Bid U.S. newsletter. Sign up here.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
19 minutes ago
- Reuters
OpenAI has discussed raising money from Saudi Arabia, Indian investors, The Information reports
June 11 (Reuters) - OpenAI has talked to Saudi's PIF, Indian conglomerate Reliance Industries ( opens new tab and existing shareholder United Arab Emirates' MGX about its $40 billion financing, The Information reported on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the fundraise.


Reuters
23 minutes ago
- Reuters
Michael Knaap resigns as CEO of Australia's Monash IVF
June 12 (Reuters) - Australian fertility business Monash IVF ( opens new tab said on Thursday its chief executive officer and managing director, Michael Knaap, had resigned. The news comes days after the firm reported a second fertility clinic mix-up over a span of two months, raising concerns around an industry that did not have much active government attention until recently. The IVF provider's finance chief, Malik Jainudeen, has taken over as acting CEO. The company did not give out a reason behind Knaap's resignation and it did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. He previously served as Monash CFO for over three years and took over the CEO role in April 2019.


Daily Mail
41 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Firm linked to Baroness Bra 'must pay back £122m for faulty PPE': Government suing over Covid contract 'initiated' by Tory peer
A firm linked to Michelle Mone must repay £122million for allegedly breaching a Covid PPE contract, a court heard yesterday. The bra tycoon had recommended PPE Medpro, which went on to provide 25 million 'faulty' surgical gowns. The consortium, led by the Tory peer's husband Doug Barrowman, was awarded contracts by the former Conservative administration during the pandemic. PPE Medpro is now being sued by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), with Government lawyers claiming the gowns couldn't be used because they were not sterile. Baroness Mone and the firm both deny any wrongdoing. The Government is seeking to recover the costs of the contract, plus an additional £8,648,691 for transporting and storing the items. PPE Medpro said it 'categorically denies' breaching the contract, with its lawyers claiming the company has been 'singled out for unfair treatment'. Opening the trial, Paul Stanley KC, for the DHSC, said: 'This case is simply about whether 25 million surgical gowns provided by PPE Medpro were faulty. It is, in short, a technical case about detailed legal and industry standards that apply to sterile gowns.' Mr Stanley said in written submissions the 'initial contact with Medpro came through Baroness Mone', with contract discussions then going through one of the firm's directors, Anthony Page. Baroness Mone remained 'active throughout' negotiations, he said, with the peer stating Mr Barrowman had 'years of experience in manufacturing, procurement and management of supply chains'. But he said Baroness Mone's communications were not part of this case, which was 'simply about compliance'. He added: 'The department does not allege anything improper happened, and we are not concerned with any profits made by anybody.' In court documents from May this year, the DHSC said the gowns were delivered to the UK in 72 lots between August and October 2020, with almost £122million paid to PPE Medpro between July and August that year. The department rejected the gowns in December 2020 and told the firm it would have to repay the money, but this has not happened and the gowns remain in storage. Mr Stanley said 99.9999 per cent of the gowns should have been sterile under the terms of the contract. The DHSC claims the deal also specified PPE Medpro had to sterilise them using a 'validated process', attested by CE marking, which indicates a product has met certain medical standards. He said 'none of those things happened', and that of 140 gowns tested for sterility, 103 failed. He added that the DHSC 'was entitled to reject the gowns, or is entitled to damages, which amount to the full price and storage costs'. Charles Samek KC, for PPE Medpro, said the 'only plausible reason' for the gowns becoming contaminated was due to 'the transport and storage conditions or events to which the gowns were subject' after delivery. He said testing was done several months after the gowns were rejected, and that the samples were not 'representative of the whole population'. Mr Samek described the DHSC's claim as 'contrived and opportunistic', with PPE Medpro 'made the fall guy for a catalogue of failures... and uncontrolled buying spree with taxpayers' money'. Neither Baroness Mone nor Mr Barrowman is due to give evidence during the five-week trial. A PPE Medpro spokesman said it 'categorically denies breaching its obligations' and will 'robustly defend' the claim.