Carlyle's Jeff Currie Sees Downside Risk on Oil That Could Hit Shale
Jeff Currie, Chief Strategy Officer for Energy Pathways at Carlyle, says there's a lot of downside risk, with oil and commodities 'in the cross-hairs' of the trade war. 'I think oil probably has this right in re-pricing the risk again this morning,' he said. Currie joins "The Pulse with Francine Lacqua" on Bloomberg Television. (Source: Bloomberg)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Effort to strip Fed of interest paying power seen likely to bring upheaval to markets
By Michael S. Derby NEW YORK (Reuters) -A Republican senator's plan to take away the Federal Reserve's power to pay banks interest on cash they park on central bank books could cause chaos for monetary policy implementation if it were implemented, market participants said. In recent days, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has been speaking about this power and his desire to see it ended as part of what he views as an effort to save money by the federal government. Stripping the Fed of the longstanding power would save the government $1 trillion, Cruz said in a CNBC interview last week. The senator said then that he did not know if it was likely his effort would work but that it was certainly possible. On Wednesday, Bloomberg reported that Cruz had also lobbied President Donald Trump, who has long been at odds with the Fed, as well as Republican colleagues, about his idea. 'We're agonizing trying to find a $50 billion cut here and there. This is over a trillion dollars, big dollars in savings,' Cruz told Bloomberg, saying of the payments, 'half of it is going to foreign banks, which makes no sense.' Cruz's office did not respond to a request for comment. The Fed declined to comment. Cruz's effort is being treated cautiously by Senator Tim Scott, the Republican from South Carolina who chairs the Senate Finance Committee. "While the desire to return to pre-crisis monetary policy operating procedures is understandable," the matter must be considered under normal Senate procedures, Scott said in a statement. Any move on this must start with a hearing, Scott said, adding, "this is not a decision to be rushed – it must be carefully considered and openly debated." The Fed's power to pay banks interest, granted by Congress, took effect in 2008 as the financial crisis dawned. It quickly gained prominence as part of a large-scale overhaul of the monetary policy architecture, as the Fed confronted the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. As it now stands, the Fed pays deposit-taking banks 4.4% for reserves. It uses another tool called the reverse repo facility to take in cash from money market funds and others, paying them 4.25%. Together, the two rates are designed to keep the federal funds rate, the central bank's main tool for influencing the economy, within the desired range. Paying financial firms for de facto loans of cash is essential for interest rate control due to the very large amount of liquidity created by bond buying stimulus efforts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Fed more than doubled the size of its balance sheet to a peak of $9 trillion, with asset purchases providing support to the economy beyond what the then near-zero short-term rates could deliver. If the Fed did not have the power to pay interest on deposits, the still substantial amount of liquidity sloshing around in markets would prevent it from controlling short-term rates. That said, concerns have long existed, even among some former central bankers, that paying banks money to deposit cash at the Fed is effectively a subsidy to banks. The other issue with paying interest on reserves is that it has led the Fed into an unprecedented period of loss-making. The Fed has been operating in the red because the interest rate it now has in place outstrips the income it earns off bonds it owns. Most analysts expect the loss-making to occur for some time to come. Fed losses mean that it is not handing over profits back to the Treasury, as it is required to do when it is in the green. Sums handed back to the Treasury over recent years contributed modestly to lowering deficits. Experts believe Cruz's plan would completely fail to achieve its goals and would instead cause huge upheaval in money markets. Barclays Capital economists said on Tuesday that ending the power would simply push the cash into the reverse repo facility, which means the central bank would still be paying lots of interest to financial firms, thus negating any deficit savings. J.P. Morgan strategists said in a note last week that under Cruz's plan, 'the Fed's ability to control money market rates may be compromised, complicating its efforts to guide broader financial conditions via the fed funds rate and other money market rates.'
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wall Street's New Power Couple: Citi and Carlyle Target Fintech's $5.2 Trillion Goldmine
Citigroup (NYSE:C) and Carlyle Group are teaming up in a way that could reshape how early-stage fintechs raise capital. Their new agreement lets them co-invest in young lending platformsand in the financial assets those platforms originate, like consumer loans, auto financing, or even solar power contracts. Carlyle will focus on private credit, while Citi's SPRINT venture teamalready known for backing fintechs like Pyloncould eventually help take those loans public via securitization. The goal? Back promising fintechs from seed to scale, across both private and public markets. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 7 Warning Sign with C. This isn't Carlyle's first move in the space. Last year, it took a minority stake in residential solar lender Sungage Financial and bought some of its loans. Blackstone has made similar plays. What's new here is the structure: by linking up with Citi, Carlyle gets access to deal flow that might not meet a bank's typical risk appetite, while Citi gains a partner that can go deeper into private lending. According to Citi's Rajiv Amlani, startups without enough credit history might be steered to Carlyle insteadespecially those pushing the envelope on AI and specialty finance. And the stakes are rising fast. Asset-backed finance is a $5.2 trillion arena, and private credit managers are aggressively expanding into it. This deal marks Citi's third such partnership in just 18 monthsafter similar tie-ups with Apollo and LuminArx. As Akhil Bansal of Carlyle put it, fintechs don't want to keep reintroducing themselves every time they raise capital. With this setup, Citi and Carlyle are offering a long-term capital partnerfrom Series A to ABS. It's a full-stack strategy for the next wave of tech-enabled lenders. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. 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
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Canadians' Support for Counter-Tariffs Dips, but Still Strong, as Trade War Persists
(Bloomberg) -- Canadians continue to support retaliating against US President Donald Trump's wave of tariffs, but their fervor has waned as the trade war wears on. Shuttered NY College Has Alumni Fighting Over Its Future Trump's Military Parade Has Washington Bracing for Tanks and Weaponry NYC Renters Brace for Price Hikes After Broker-Fee Ban Do World's Fairs Still Matter? NY Long Island Rail Service Resumes After Grand Central Fire Seven in 10 Canadians still favor counter-tariffs even if they increase the cost of goods imported from the US, according to a poll conducted by Nanos Research Group for Bloomberg News. That's down from almost eight in 10 in January. Sentiment has also shifted, with the percentage of those who 'somewhat support' the measures rising to 29% from 24% at the beginning of the year. Nearly 44% of respondents expressed unqualified support for retaliatory levies, down from 55%. 'Further uncertainty and new tariffs on Canadian goods by the US will reinforce appetite for a Canadian tariff response,' said Nik Nanos, the polling firm's founder. Atlantic Canada was the region that most favored counter-tariffs, with 81% expressing some form of support. The Prairies expressed the least support (67%). The Prairie provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta recently said they would resume buying and distributing American alcohol to retailers, months after they halted purchases in response to Trump's tariffs. US booze remains banned from government-store shelves in many other provinces, including Ontario. Prime Minister Mark Carney's government scaled back its retaliatory tariffs in April, leaving about 70% of its counter-measures in place. That means Canada currently has 25% levies on about C$42 billion ($31 billion) in imports from the US, plus some tariffs on automobiles. Carney held off on retaliating further in response to Trump's doubling of tariffs on steel and aluminum last week. The prime minister has said he sees progress in trade talks between the US and Canada, but new counter-measures remain an option. Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem said last week that the levies aren't yet having a significant impact on prices. 'The retaliatory tariffs put in place, that is not yet in the consumer price index data that we have,' Macklem said. 'You will see that start to come in the months ahead.' The latest Nanos survey of 1,120 Canadians was conducted by phone and online between June 1 and 3. It's considered accurate within 2.9 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. --With assistance from Erik Hertzberg. American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination New Grads Join Worst Entry-Level Job Market in Years The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software US Tariffs Threaten to Derail Vietnam's Historic Industrial Boom The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio
