logo
Global investors don't trust the U.S.

Global investors don't trust the U.S.

Axios11-04-2025

Treasury bonds and other U.S. dollar assets have acted as a global safe haven for generations. This week, global investors woke up to the possibility that they are not particularly safe, and not at all a haven.
The big picture: The last nine days will reverberate through economic history, as the kind of shifts in the global trade order and financial markets that usually play out over years were compressed into each news cycle.
People will write books about April 2025 the way they have about July 1944, August 1971 or September 2008.
The moves in trade policy have been dramatic, with the world's two largest economies now taxing each other's imports at over 100%. If sustained, this would essentially shut down commerce between the U.S. and China.
But it's the curious way bond and currency markets have interacted that gives the most alarm about the trajectory of global confidence in the U.S.-centric financial order that has prevailed since the end of World War II.
State of play: In a week that stocks and other risky assets sold off, so did U.S. Treasury bonds and the U.S. dollar.
This is not normal. In past episodes of extreme tumult, like September 2008 and the early days of the pandemic in 2020, the dollar rallied as global investors sought safety.
A key element of those crises was, in effect, a global shortage of dollars so severe that the Federal Reserve had to intervene to satiate demand, through global swap lines and emergency lending to U.S. banks. No such shortages this time around.
Trading this week has displayed a "rare, ugly and worrying combination of market moves," Krishna Guha with Evercore ISI wrote.
By the numbers: The yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury note was 4.57% as of 11am ET Friday. That level is not worrying (rates were higher as recently as January) but the speed and direction of travel are.
The 10-year yield was under 4% one week ago.
Meanwhile, the dollar index — the dollar's value versus six other major currencies — is down 3.4% since Tuesday and 9.2% since mid-January. Those are massive swings by the standard of the most liquid global currency markets.
Between the lines: It suggests that erratic leadership, ballooning fiscal deficits, and rapidly eroding diplomatic ties are making global investors wary of being too exposed to the United States.
What they're saying: The market, Deutsche Bank currency strategist George Saravelos wrote, "is re-assessing the structural attractiveness of the dollar as the world's global reserve currency and is undergoing a process of rapid de-dollarization."
Of note: It kind of got lost in the news shuffle given the trade and market shifts, but also this week the House passed a budget blueprint that lays the groundwork to extend President Trump's 2017 tax cuts.
It allows Congress to raise fiscal deficits by up to $5.8 trillion over the next decade, relative to current law under which those tax cuts expire at year-end.
The Capitol Hill action wasn't an apparent catalyst for the bond market moves. Still, it underscores the risks investors are taking by lending to a nation with already high deficits and debt.
Zoom out: In the near term, it implies that investors can't benefit from the usual shelter-in-the-storm effect. If you have a portfolio of both stocks and bonds, it helps if one zigs while the other zags, but that hasn't happened this week.
In the medium term, it could mean structurally higher U.S. interest rates and more market pressure to reduce deficits.
In the long term, if this really does prove to be the start of a reshuffling of the global economic order, trade, and financial flows, the implications are so sweeping that they're hard to even predict.
The bottom line: Markets can behave weirdly, and maybe this will turn out to be just a few bumpy trading days. But the world's most important financial markets — for the dollar and Treasury securities — are signaling that something fundamental is shifting beneath our feet.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Half of the bond market is US Treasurys. Why it's 'not healthy.'
Half of the bond market is US Treasurys. Why it's 'not healthy.'

USA Today

timean hour ago

  • USA Today

Half of the bond market is US Treasurys. Why it's 'not healthy.'

Half of the bond market is US Treasurys. Why it's 'not healthy.' Show Caption Hide Caption Trump summons Fed's Powell to tell him he's wrong on rates U.S. President Donald Trump called Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to the White House on May 29 for their first face-to-face meeting since he took office in January and told the central bank chief he was making a "mistake" by not lowering interest rates. Over the past 12 months, about half of all debt in the U.S. bond market has been Treasurys – bonds and notes issued by the federal government. That's according to a June 8 research note from Torsten Sløk, the chief economist for money manager Apollo. 'This is not healthy,' Sløk wrote. 'Half of credit issued in the economy should not be going to the government.' As USA TODAY has previously reported, the growing U.S. budget deficit has caught the attention of investors in the bond market. The deficit is the consequence of revenue – taxes, mostly – not keeping up with spending. As it increases, the government issues more debt to plug the hole, and as supply rises, the government needs to pay more to attract demand from investors. President Donald Trump's proposed tax bill would exacerbate that dynamic, swelling the deficit by an estimated $2.4 trillion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. More: Treasury bond yields are surging as the Trump tax bill progresses. Here's why it matters. Since all kinds of credit products, such as mortgages, are linked to the important U.S. Treasury market, those higher borrowing costs ripple through the economy. Sløk has written previously about the concerns over the power dynamic between the government and bond investors. Some analysts are concerned that investors may become what's sometimes called 'bond vigilantes' – demanding certain fiscal conditions as a condition of buying a government's debt. Overseas investors own nearly one-third of outstanding Treasury debt. Sløk's June 8 analysis is a reminder that the Treasury's mounting debt has many ripple effects. 'The consequence is that investors need to allocate more and more dollars to finance the government rather than financing growth in the economy through loans to firms and consumers,' Sløk wrote. Read next: The White House's tax bill will consider SALT (again). What could that mean for you?

Marina von Neumann Whitman dies at 90; carved path for women in economics
Marina von Neumann Whitman dies at 90; carved path for women in economics

Boston Globe

time2 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

Marina von Neumann Whitman dies at 90; carved path for women in economics

'As a woman, she will be outnumbered on the council 2 to 1, but not in terms of brains,' the president said in the Oval Office with Dr. Whitman and her family by his side. (The council's other members at the time were Herbert Stein and Ezra Solomon.) Advertisement Dr. Whitman was an academic economist by training -- she taught at the University of Pittsburgh and later at the University of Michigan -- but she alternated her work in the classroom with extensive stints in the public and corporate sectors. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Before joining the Council of Economic Advisers, she had worked for it as a staff economist and then served on the president's board overseeing price controls. In 1979, she joined General Motors as a vice president and chief economist. She later rose to become group vice president for public relations, making her one of the highest-ranking women in corporate America at the time. 'One of the things about being an economist is that you seldom get the chance to practice your profession as well as teach,' she said in her own Oval Office comments, following Nixon's. Advertisement She was the daughter of mathematician John von Neumann, a polymath who developed game theory, made critical early advances in computer science, and played a central role in the development of the atomic bomb during World War II. He was one of several Hungarian Jewish emigres who worked on the Manhattan Project -- others included Leo Szilard and Edward Teller -- who came to be known, jokingly, as the Martians, for their intellectual brilliance and supposedly exotic personalities. In her 2012 memoir, 'The Martian's Daughter,' Dr. Whitman wrote that her father's immense intellectual accomplishments drove her to excel, especially as a woman in a male-dominated field like economics. Were it not for him, she wrote, 'I might not have pushed myself to such a level of academic achievement or set my sights on a lifelong professional commitment at a time when society made it difficult for a woman to combine a career with family obligations.' Marina von Neumann was born March 6, 1935, in New York City. Her parents, members of what she called 'the Jewish but highly assimilated haute bourgeoisie' of Budapest, had emigrated from Hungary in 1933, after her father received a professorship at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J. They divorced when Marina was 2. Her mother, Mariette (Kovesi) von Neumann, studied economics in college and later worked as the office administrator for a science consortium. After her divorce, she married James Kuper, a physicist who became a department chair at the Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island. Marina spent long stretches living with her father, whose Princeton home became a salon and way station for some of the country's leading intellectuals. Advertisement 'I was 15 before I realized this was not the normal American way of life,' she told The New York Times in 1972. The home, she added, was always filled with 'terribly interesting people and terribly interesting conversations.' She studied government at Radcliffe College, graduating at the top of her class in 1956. That same year, she married Robert F. Whitman, who was studying for his doctorate in English at Harvard. He died in 2024. Along with their son, Malcolm, a professor of developmental biology at Harvard, she leaves her half brother, George H. Kuper, and two grandchildren. Her daughter, Laura M. Whitman, an assistant professor of medicine at Yale University, died in 2023 at 59. Marina Whitman initially thought of becoming a journalist. But her first job after college, with the Educational Testing Service, ignited an interest in economics. She wanted to attend Princeton, but at the time, its acclaimed economics department did not accept female graduate students. Instead, she studied at Columbia University. After receiving her doctorate in 1966, she became a professor at Pittsburgh, where her husband taught English. They took leaves of absence in 1972, when she joined the Council of Economic Advisers, and moved to Washington with some intention of remaining there long term. But she resigned after just a year, disillusioned by the Watergate scandal that was beginning to unfold around Nixon. Dr. Whitman spent 13 years at General Motors. After she left in 1992, she taught at the University of Michigan's business and public policy schools. A lifelong Republican, she did not put herself forward as a feminist. But she did her part to prop open the doors she had gone through, for other women to follow. Advertisement 'There is a very small group of highly visible women who have now been offered a lot of boards,' Dr. Whitman told the Times in 1984. 'What has not developed as much as I hoped is going beyond that to a second wave. When I turn down offers, I sometimes have tried to suggest other women, but people do not react well to names they haven't heard before.' This article originally appeared in

Who's Paying For Trump's Tariffs? You Are, Businesses Say
Who's Paying For Trump's Tariffs? You Are, Businesses Say

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Who's Paying For Trump's Tariffs? You Are, Businesses Say

Companies are raising prices in response to President Donald Trump's tariff campaign, according to surveys. Some companies are passing the full cost to customers, while others are eating some of the costs themselves. Some companies have begun emailing customers to let them know prices are rising because of tariffs. One luggage company emailed its customers to say they were raising prices in response to the "dumpster fire" there was any doubt about who would ultimately pay the cost of Donald Trump's new import taxes, businesses have a clear answer: according to recent surveys and anecdotes collected by Federal Reserve banks and released this week. Separate survey results released this week from a few regional Fed outposts found that companies in their area are passing on at least some of their tariff costs to consumers. Most businesses in New York and northern New Jersey passed at least some of their tariff costs on to customers—a third of manufacturers and 45% of service firms passed along the entire cost, a survey by the New York Fed in May found. An April survey of regional businesses by the Atlanta Fed found that most firms would pass at least some of the tariff costs on to customers, with nearly 20% saying they'd pass on the entire cost of a hypothetical 10% top of that, the Fed's "beige book" compilation of reports from around the country was full of stories about businesses raising prices to make up for the increased cost of surveys and report shed light on a question with major implications for household budgets and the economy: how much will Trump's tariffs push up prices for everyday goods and services? Since February, Trump has imposed a dizzying and frequently changing array of import taxes, including a 10% tariff on items from most countries and a 25% tariff on many foreign cars. Averaged together, goods imported from overseas are facing a 15.6% tariff, the Yale Budget Lab calculated last issue of who, exactly, will pay the cost of those tariffs has been politically explosive. Amazon drew a barrage of criticism from the White House in April after it floated plans to show the cost of tariffs on the price tags in its online store. Similarly, Trump blasted Walmart after its executives said tariffs would push up prices, and the president demanded the retailer "eat" the cost of the tariffs. As recent surveys suggest customers will be chowing down on at least some of the tariff costs, companies are giving their customers the bad news up front. Companies in various industries are emailing their customers and alerting them to price increases, blaming example, Typology, a company that sells imported skincare products from France, emailed its customers to say it was absorbing much of the cost of the tariffs, but was implementing a "modest price adjustment" between 0.5% and 4.5%. Tonies, a maker of an audio player for children, said it was raising prices for some of its figurines to $19.99 from $14.99. BÉIS, which sells imported luggage, went viral on LinkedIn last month for its notably candid email about the unpredictable tariff policies. "This tariff situation is a complete dumpster fire, and we're all getting burned," the company's marketing team wrote. "Costs are up, and unfortunately our prices will have to follow suit." Read the original article on Investopedia Sign in to access your portfolio

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