logo
High-priced stocks and bonds raise tariff threat for markets

High-priced stocks and bonds raise tariff threat for markets

Mint11-07-2025
Shares on Wall Street have hit record highs
Bond markets price in slower growth
Clearer picture will emerge in second half, say investors
Either stocks or bonds could see steep correction, they say
By Naomi Rovnick and Amanda Cooper
LONDON, July 11 (Reuters) - Global markets are telling conflicting stories about the possible longer-term impact of U.S. tariffs on growth, a schism that investors say means either stocks or bonds could see a steep correction once it's clear which is right.
U.S. President Donald Trump's erratic approach to trade policy that generated so much volatility earlier this year seems to have left markets wary of reacting to his near-daily announcements on who, or what, might get hit with tariffs.
The latest target is Canada, which on Thursday Trump said will face a 35% duty, while most other trading partners will get blanket tariffs of 15% or 20%, eliciting barely a flutter in the broader markets. An announcement on Europe is imminent.
Investors say this apparent composure is less about confidence in an ultimately benign longer-term outlook, and more typical of a late-stage bull market, where the optimists scramble to catch the rally before it fizzles out, while the pessimists quietly prepare for trickier times ahead.
In one corner are riskier assets like stocks and cryptocurrencies. Shares on Wall Street have hit record highs, powered by enthusiasm around artificial intelligence and the prospect of a string of interest-rate cuts from the Federal Reserve as the economy gradually slows and the hit to inflation from tariffs proves mild so far. Bitcoin is near a record $112,000.
In the other corner are government bonds, gold and even crude oil, all of which are reflecting a belief that tariffs could derail the U.S. economy and growth everywhere will falter.
Premier Miton chief investment officer Neil Birrell said the second half of this year will be when the impact of Trump's tariffs becomes obvious.
"It's difficult for me to look at all this with any form of confidence or certainty," he said, referring to the unpredictability of Trump's policymaking and the possible impact of his "One Big Beautiful Bill".
His main concern about stocks was U.S. households' high participation in Wall Street, where a decline could quickly spread globally.
"Any stress in the U.S. economy that impacts the consumer and then impacts equity markets becomes a rather brutal and bloody downward spiral."
Trump's 90-day pause after April 2's "Liberation Day" tariff announcement has been replaced by a scattergun application of levies on trading partners large and small, right ahead of the second-quarter earnings season which may yield the first clues about how severe the hit to corporate profits could be.
"Things have settled down but not in a positive way," Amundi's head of global macro Mahmood Pradhan said.
"The effective tariff rate for all imports coming into the U.S., if you calculated an average across the board, would be about 15%," he said. "This is broadly negative for growth in every country that is involved in world trade."
The World Bank last month cut its global growth forecast for 2025 by four-tenths of a percentage point to 2.3%, saying that higher tariffs and heightened uncertainty posed a "significant headwind" for nearly all economies.
With so much uncertainty hanging over U.S. assets, investors' cash has flowed elsewhere for much of this year, into the likes of European stocks and bonds, gold, Chinese tech stocks or emerging market currencies.
Greasing the wheels of the stock market rally has been anticipation that Fed Chair Jerome Powell will cave to pressure from Trump to deliver a rapid string of rate cuts.
Yet the data has been too strong to justify an aggressive loosening of monetary policy and too soft to argue that tariffs are having no effect. U.S. employment figures show the economy is still creating jobs at a firm clip, while business activity surveys show factories and services are flagging.
In the meantime, Trump's landmark tax cut and spending bill will add an extra $3.3 trillion to the national deficit.
Benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yields have retreated from January's 15-month peaks at 4.8% to 4.35%.
"Bonds are much more focused on growth (falling) than on inflation so when you see an upturn in trade war announcements bond yields tilt towards lower growth and rate cuts. But equities are emboldened because tariffs haven't shown up in the inflation numbers yet," Joost van Leenders, senior investment strategist at Dutch asset manager Van Lanschot Kempen, said.
"We don't think this can continue," he said, adding he remains neutral on equities, with a small overweight position in government bonds.
Gold has staged a blistering 26% rally this year, topping $3,300 an ounce, serving as a hedge against macro and geopolitical uncertainty, as well as an alternative to the dollar, the biggest tariff casualty, which has lost over 10% in value this year against a basket of currencies.
Kevin Thozet, investment committee member at French asset manager Carmignac, said he is hedging against a fall in the U.S. stock market, but believes this is unlikely right now because retail traders are diving in to buy market dips.
Further out, he said Trump's tax cut bill might offset some of the impact of tariffs, but the extra debt it could take to fund those cuts could drive the 10-year Treasury yield to 5% in the coming three months, a level that policymakers worry about given its impact on households, companies and the government.
"We see significant cracks in U.S. markets, even though the Fed has ample room to cut," he said. (Reporting by Amanda Cooper and Naomi Rovnick; Editing by Elaine Hardcastle)
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Gold prices may see consolidation next week as focus shifts to Fed, US data
Gold prices may see consolidation next week as focus shifts to Fed, US data

News18

time29 minutes ago

  • News18

Gold prices may see consolidation next week as focus shifts to Fed, US data

New Delhi, Aug 17 (PTI) Gold prices are likely to witness a phase of consolidation in the coming week as traders weigh a mix of global economic indicators, cues from central banks and shifting geopolitical dynamics, analysts said. Traders will monitor US housing numbers, consumer price data from the UK and Eurozone, and provisional PMI releases from key economies. Also, investors will closely track European Central Bank's President Christine Lagarde speech as well as commentary by Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell at the Jackson Hole Symposium, which will provide further insights for the broader trajectory of the bullion prices, they added. 'Gold prices are likely to see some consolidation/correction in the coming week as focus now remains on the incoming US macroeconomic data and the Federal Reserve's meeting next month with interest rate cuts in focus. 'In the week ahead the focus will be on US housing data, CPI numbers from the UK and the Euro zone and the provisional data on manufacturing/ services PMI from across regions," Pranav Mer, Vice President, EBG – Commodity & Currency Research, JM Financial Services, said. Pranav Mer noted that safe-haven demand has eased after Washington and Beijing agreed to extend trade negotiations for another 90-days. According to Mer, weaker US macroeconomic data have highlighted a slowdown in the economic activity, but a firm producer and import price data have kept inflation concerns alive, leaving Fed officials divided on the timing of interest rate cuts. Last week, the most traded gold futures for October contract declined by Rs 1,648 per 10 grams or nearly 2 per cent on the Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX). Prathamesh Mallya, DVP-Research, Non-Agri Commodities and Currencies at Angel One, said gold prices retreated last week as futures on the MCX slipped nearly 2 per cent. He added that 'prices declined from highs of Rs 1,02,000 to lows of Rs 1,00,000 per 10 grams after US President Donald Trump clarified that gold imports into the US would not face tariffs, in turn threatening the upside momentum of the precious metal". Going forward, Mallya added, developments from US-Russia discussions will be critical. 'If not, the possibility of increased tariffs on India will dent the macros and in turn lift gold prices in the week ahead," he added. On Saturday, Comex gold futures for December contracts ended lower at USD 3,382.60 per ounce in New York. Manav Modi, Analyst – Precious Metal Research, Motilal Oswal Financial Services, said gold prices lost ground last week as safe-haven demand eased amid shifting geopolitical and economic developments. The White House clarified that reports of US tariffs on Swiss gold were inaccurate, reversing a brief price rally that had been driven by confusion following a Customs and Border Protection note. At the same time, optimism surrounding a potential ceasefire in Ukraine gained traction, particularly after a high-profile meeting between US President Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Also, the extension of the US-China tariff truce signalled easing trade tensions further capping demand for gold as a safe-haven asset. On the supportive side, Modi said a weaker dollar and rising expectations of a US rate cut in September provided a cushion. 'Soft inflation data spurred dovish bets and Treasury Secretary Bessent hinted at a deeper 50-basis-points reduction. Modi also stated that physical gold demand in Asia, usually a seasonal driver, remained subdued due to elevated prices. Investors are turning their focus on preliminary US PMI data and Fed Chair Powell's upcoming speech at the Jackson Hole Symposium and the broader trajectory of Washington-Moscow discussions, he added. Overall, the near-term outlook for gold will hinge on how incoming data and central bank commentary shape market sentiment, analysts said. PTI HG HVA (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Politics beats the market in Trump's pay-for-play chip scheme
Politics beats the market in Trump's pay-for-play chip scheme

Mint

time34 minutes ago

  • Mint

Politics beats the market in Trump's pay-for-play chip scheme

The Trump administration's recent reversal of export restrictions on certain Nvidia and AMD's AI chips to China marks a major shift in U.S. policy and has raised legal concerns. But the deeper risks are political and economic—and warrant scrutiny. His administration decided in July to re-allow Nvidia and AMD to sell their H20 and MI308 chips to China—conditional on a 15% revenue remittance to the U.S. government. Export controls on AI chips were initially implemented by the Biden administration in 2022 to curb China's access to advanced processors critical for artificial intelligence and supercomputing, citing national security concerns. But Nvidia's H20 chip was specifically designed for the Chinese market. Even though it is reportedly incapable of training large AI models, the H20 chip is effective for inference tasks—allowing AI systems to respond to queries based on pre-trained data. Chinese engineers have leveraged the H20 chips for applications using open-source models such as DeepSeek and Alibaba's Qwen, which are increasingly popular in China's AI ecosystem. Trump continued these controls—until recently. Critics, such as Rep. Don Bacon (R., Neb.) and Liza Tobin, who served as China director at the National Security Council under the first Trump and Biden administrations, have argued that the sale of these chips, even under revenue-sharing constraints, undermines the strategic intent of the original export controls. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D., Ill.) likened it to gambling with national security. The Trump administration's reversal appears motivated by revenue generation. Bernstein Research estimates that Nvidia could sell approximately 1.5 million H20 chips in China in 2025, generating $23 billion in revenue; a 15% cut would yield more than $3 billion for the U.S. government. It aligns with Trump's broader strategy of using tariffs and trade deals to bolster government income. However, this revenue-centric approach raises concerns about the erosion of principled policymaking. The arrangement resembles a 'pay-to-play" scheme, where export licenses are granted in exchange for financial contributions. Legal scholars argue that this violates the Export Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits taxes or duties on exports. Moreover, the Export Controls Reform Act of 2018—signed by Trump himself—explicitly forbids charging exporters for licenses. The deal with Nvidia and AMD may also reflect a broader diplomatic calculus. China dominates the global supply chain for rare earth materials, which are essential for military technologies like guided missiles, fighter jets, and radar systems. These materials are also used in manufacturing key components for smartphones and electric vehicles—including batteries, touch screens, and camera lenses. The U.S. is investing in domestic mining and processing of rare earth minerals, such as at the Mountain Pass mine in California, which is the only rare-earth mining and processing facility in the U.S. But it remains heavily reliant on Chinese exports. By easing chip restrictions, the Trump administration may be signaling goodwill in hopes of securing a stable supply of rare earths. This strategic compromise, however, risks emboldening China. If Beijing perceives U.S. export controls as negotiable or monetizable, it may be less inclined to make concessions in other areas of trade or security. The precedent set by this deal could weaken the credibility of future U.S. restrictions, making it harder to enforce technology bans or secure allied cooperation. And then there are the corporate interests. The role of Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang in shaping this policy shift cannot be overlooked. Huang reportedly argued that restricting Nvidia's access to the Chinese market would inadvertently benefit domestic Chinese competitors like Huawei. He emphasized that China's AI development is deeply intertwined with Nvidia's chips and software ecosystem, suggesting that continued engagement would allow the U.S. to retain some influence over China's technological trajectory. Nvidia also maintains a research center in Shanghai. While Huang's argument has merit, it reveals the tension between corporate interests and national security. Nvidia's dependence on the Chinese market and talent pool may compromise its ability to align with U.S. strategic interests. Investors may view all of this as a slippery slope, in which political considerations begin overriding free-market principles, potentially undermining confidence in U.S. financial markets. Ultimately, the reversal of export restrictions on Nvidia and AMD's AI chips to China reflects a transactional approach to national security—one that prioritizes revenue over resilience. About the author: Christopher Tang is a distinguished professor at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barron's newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit feedback and commentary pitches to ideas@

Indian spirit makers flag discrimination against foreign brands by states' excise policies
Indian spirit makers flag discrimination against foreign brands by states' excise policies

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

Indian spirit makers flag discrimination against foreign brands by states' excise policies

Indian spirit makers have raised concerns over alleged discriminations by several states, saying their excise polices are biased in favour of imported alcoholic beverages as compared to domestic brands including those with global recognitions. Independence Day 2025 Modi signals new push for tech independence with local chips Before Trump, British used tariffs to kill Indian textile Bank of Azad Hind: When Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose gave India its own currency The Confederation of Indian Alcoholic Beverage Companies (CIABC) has approached several state governments pointing that anomalies in their excise policies put the Indian spirit manufacturers at a disadvantage compared to their foreign counterparts. The Indian brands face "exorbitantly high brand registration fees" compared to imported BIO (bottled in origin), hampering product entry in a number of states, said CIABC, which is an apex body of Indian alcoholic beverage makers. The industry body further said that with new free trade agreements coming into effect, the customs duty is going to be reduced further on BIO products , and the prevalent high excise duties by the state government on the Indian premium brands will make the home-grown industry "less competitive". "Ironically, when Indian premium and luxury brands are winning accolades across the globe, they face taxation hurdles and discrimination in duties in the domestic market. Such discrimination in favour of imported products over comparable Indian products belies the Prime Minister Narendra Modi's call for an ' Atmanirbhar Bharat '," said CIABC. Live Events BIO refers to those whiskies/spirits which are bottled in their country of origin and imported into India with their branding and packaging. This discrimination in the excise policy is in around dozen states. It's highest in the large alcoholic beverage-consuming states like Maharashtra, Delhi, Kerala, Haryana, besides states like Odisha, Assam, and Madhya Pradesh, among others. CIABC has been "writing to various state governments flagging various anomalies in their excise policies which put Indian spirits manufacturers at a disadvantage compared to their foreign counterparts, which import various brands", it added. In Maharashtra, the excise duty imposed on IMFL (India made foreign liquor) players is double than that on BIO. Until 2021 the Maharashtra government used to charge 300 per cent excise duty on BIO products, which was reduced to half in 2021, whereas IMFL continues to pay 300 per cent excise duty. "This reduced duty has led to surge in BIO sales (from 5,000 cases per month in 2021 to 42,000 cases per month in 2024). This has given BIO products an unfair edge over domestic brands and has also led to a reduction in state revenue due to a fall in sales of IMFL. High duties on Indian premium brands make them less competitive," said CIABC Director General Anant S Iyer. After a reduction in duty on BIO, growth in premium IMFL sales has dropped to 6 per cent in FY24 from 24 per cent in FY23. Giving an example, the association said in Maharashtra, a case (12 bottles of the standard 750ml) of Amrut Fusion (a premium Indian single malt whisky) has to pay Rs 6,799 as excise duty, while duty in each case of JW Black Label (blended scotch whisky) is Rs 4,785. Similarly in Delhi, imported brands have to pay a lower fee and taxes to sell their products compared to their IMFL competitors. "While an Indian producer has to shell out anywhere between Rs 8 lakh to Rs 25 lakh to register and sell one brand, for BIO products, this fee is just Rs 15 lakh for 5 spirit brands (Rs 3 lakh per brand). Similar is the case for BIO wines versus wines produced in India. Indian wines face higher taxes and registration fee compared to imported brands," CIABC said. For IMFL, the Delhi government charges Rs 25 lakh per brand for all whisky and rum, Rs 15 lakh for beer, Rs 12 lakh for rum, gin, vodka, Rs 8 lakh for brandy, and Rs 2 lakh for wine etc. "New Indian brands, particularly premium, luxury, niche products, face prohibitive costs, thus hampering their entry. There are several premium Indian single malts, which are popular in other states and also overseas, which have stayed away from Delhi due to the exorbitant registration fee," says Iyer. In Kerala, discrimination between IMFL and BIO brands exists in "excise duty, sales tax, retail margin, cash discounts, and STN charges (special transfer note)," the association alleged. IMFL products face a heavy tax burden due to higher excise duty, sales tax, cash discounts (both on GTN & STN) and also the retail margin, it said. "On the other hand, BIO brands enjoy much lower taxation and levies, thus pushing their sales due to the fact that the MRPs of BIO brands are much cheaper than Indian premium brands for the similar supply prices," said CIABC.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store