Connect with us

Economics

Spike in UK borrowing costs raises specter of public spending cuts

Published

on

Markets realize Britain is stuck in a ‘slow-growth trap,’ former UK business secretary says

The march higher in U.K. government bond yields since the launch of the Labour government’s debut budget plan in October sparked widespread concern last week, as borrowing costs rose to breach numerous decade highs.

The prospect of public spending cuts or further tax rises came into focus as 30-year gilt yields hit their highest level since 1998. Despite initially falling after Labour’s election victory in July, 2-year gilt yields have also climbed back above 4.5%, while the 10-year yield reached levels not seen since 2008.

Waning investor confidence in the U.K. was particularly highlighted by a concurrent fall in sterling, which on Friday hit its lowest level against the U.S. dollar since November 2023.

Borrowing costs are also rising in the euro area and the U.S., and economists point out that and the U.K. is being weighed on by external factors including the return of Donald Trump to the White House and expectations for broadly higher interest rates than previously expected this year.

But the surge in U.K. yields are nonetheless a major headache for the U.K. government, which has pledged to reboot economic growth while ensuring debt declines as a share of the economy within five years. U.K. public sector net debt currently stands at nearly 100% of GDP.

“The rise in gilt yields has a self-reinforcing feedback loop through the U.K.’s debt sustainability, by increasing borrowing costs used for budgeting purposes,” ING Senior European Rates Strategist Michiel Tukker said in a Friday note.

Tukker cited analysis by the independent Office of Budget Responsibility which indicates that the recent rise in yields — if sustained — would wipe out the government’s estimated headroom of £9.9 billion ($12.1 billion) for meeting its self-declared fiscal rules. As well as a goal of moving toward a decline in the U.K.’s debt to GDP ratio on a longer timeframe, those rules commit Labour to covering day-to-day government spending with revenues.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank said Friday there is a “knife edge,” chance of the U.K. achieving the latter fiscal rule, but that Finance Minister Rachel Reeves could “get lucky.”

She otherwise faces an “unenviable set of options,” said IFS Associate Director Ben Zaranko, including bringing forward upcoming changes to how debt is calculated to free up more headroom; paring back current spending plans; announcing more tax rises, which could be conditional on changes within the coming years; or doing nothing and breaking her rule.

Economists Ruth Gregory and Hubert de Barochez at research group Capital Economics also said U.K. gilts may be trapped in a “vicious circle,” in which “the rise in U.K. yields puts a strain on public finances, therefore calling for an even bigger tightening of fiscal policy, but in turn putting additional strain on the economy.”

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

Pound vs dollar.

Bank of America Global Research strategists said Friday that it was unlikely Labour would breach its rules, and would instead announce further fiscal consolidation — measures to reduce public debt, generally public spending cuts or tax hikes — in the spring or earlier.

That would potentially be through spending cuts, they added, coming off the back of the £40 billion in tax hikes that Labour announced in October.

CNBC has contacted the Treasury for comment.

UK in ‘slow growth trap’ — but not a mini-budget crisis

Bank of England in the City of London on 6th November 2024 in London, United Kingdom. The City of London is a city, ceremonial county and local government district that contains the primary central business district CBD of London. The City of London is widely referred to simply as the City is also colloquially known as the Square Mile. (photo by Mike Kemp/In Pictures via Getty Images)

Britain’s economy flatlined in the third quarter, revised figures show

Cable also downplayed comparisons with the U.K. mini-budget crisis in 2022, when then-Prime Minister Liz Truss’s announcement of sweeping tax cuts triggered massive volatility in the bond market.

“The Truss moment was a prime minister just taking a reckless leap into the dark with a big increase in the budget deficit on the assumption this will somehow trigger economic growth. Well, that clearly isn’t what’s happened this time. The argument is about whether they’ve done enough tightening and whether they’ve done it in the right way, but it’s a different kind of problem,” Cable told CNBC.

That sentiment was broadly reflected in wider analysis. Bank of America strategists called comparisons with the mini-budget “overblown,” noting that the bar for the Bank of England to intervene in the gilt market, as it did at the time, was high.

Capital Economics said last week’s higher gilt yields were an economic headwind but not a crisis, with smaller and slower moves than after the mini-budget; while David Brooks, head of policy at consultancy Broadstone, said there did not appear to be any “systemic issues at play” in the liability-driven investment (LDI) funds which were the biggest concern back in 2022.

Economics

‘He should bring them down’

Published

on

U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.

Win McNamee | Annabelle Gordon | Reuters

President Donald Trump on Friday lobbed his latest criticism at Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, as the White House’s discontent for the economic policy leader hits a fever pitch.

During a Friday afternoon question-and-answer session with reporters, Trump pointed to examples of prices going down.

“If we had a Fed Chairman that understood what he was doing, interest rates would be coming down, too,” Trump said. “He should bring them down.”

Trump has long argued that the Fed, which sets monetary policy in the U.S., should cut down interest rates. His latest comments come as the White House has ratcheted up its attacks on Powell in recent days.

White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett said Friday that Trump and his team are assessing whether they can remove the Fed chair. Powell has said previously that he cannot be fired under law and intends to serve through the end of his term as chair in May 2026.

“The president and his team will continue to study that matter,” Hassett said at the White House after a reporter questioned if firing Powell “is an option in a way that it wasn’t before,” according to Reuters.

Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday that “Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough.” His post included the nickname of “Too Late” for Powell, a continuation of Trump’s habit of giving satirical titles to political rivals.

His use of the word “termination” raised questions around if Trump was referring to Powell’s potential removal from his post ahead of schedule. Hassett said on Friday the administration will look at if there’s “new legal analysis” that would allow for Powell’s firing.

Powell appeared to irk Trump after saying Wednesday that the president’s contentious tariff plan could drive up inflation in the near-term and create challenges for the central bank in managing goals of high employment rates and price stability. Powell said Trump’s levies — many of which are currently on pause — are “likely to move us further away from our goals.”

“We may find ourselves in the challenging scenario in which our dual-mandate goals are in tension,” Powell said in prepared remarks before the Economic Club of Chicago. “If that were to occur, we would consider how far the economy is from each goal, and the potentially different time horizons over which those respective gaps would be anticipated to close.”

Powell also said that the Fed was “well positioned to wait for greater clarity before considering any adjustments to our policy stance.”

The Federal Open Market Committee has its borrowing rate currently targeted in a range between 4.25% and 4.5%, where it has sat since December. Fed funds futures are pricing in a more than 90% likelihood that the central bank holds rates steady again at its policy meeting next month, according to CME’s FedWatch tool.

As Trump’s team has scaled up criticisms, some Democrats have gone on defense. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., warned on Thursday that a president firing the Fed chief would be dire for U.S. financial markets.

“Understand this: If Chairman Powell can be fired by the president of the United States, it will crash markets in the United States,” Warren said on CNBC.

Continue Reading

Economics

China targets U.S. services and other areas after decrying ‘meaningless’ tariff hikes on goods

Published

on

Dilara Irem Sancar | Anadolu | Getty Images

China last week announced it was done retaliating against U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs, saying any further increases by the U.S. would be a “joke,” and Beijing would “ignore” them.

Instead of continuing to focus on tariffing goods, however, China has chosen to resort to other measures, including steps targeting the American services sector.

Trump has jacked up U.S. levies on select goods from China by up to 245% after several rounds of tit-for-tat measures with Beijing in recent weeks. Before calling it a “meaningless numbers game,” China last week imposed additional duties on imports from the U.S. of up to 125%.

While the Trump administration has largely focused on pressing ahead on his tariff plans, Beijing has rolled out a series of non-tariff restrictive measures including widening export controls of rare-earth minerals and opening antitrust probes into American companies, such as pharmaceutical giant DuPont and IT major Google.

Before the latest escalation, in February Beijing had put dozens of U.S. businesses on a so-called “unreliable entity” list, which would restrict or ban firms from trading with or investing in China. American firms such as PVH, the parent company of Tommy Hilfiger, and Illumina, a gene-sequencing equipment provider, were among those added to the list.

Its tightening of exports of critical mineral elements will require Chinese companies to secure special licenses for exporting these resources, effectively restricting U.S. access to the key minerals needed for semiconductors, missile-defense systems and solar cells.

In its latest move on Tuesday, Beijing went after Boeing — America’s largest exporter — by ordering Chinese airlines not to take any further deliveries for its jets and requested carriers to halt any purchases of aircraft-related equipment and parts from U.S. companies, according to Bloomberg.

Having deliveries to China cut off will add to the cash-strapped plane maker’s troubles, as it struggles with a lingering quality-control crisis.

In another sign of growing hostilities, Chinese police issued notices for apprehending three people they claimed to have engaged in cyberattacks against China on behalf of the U.S. National Security Agency.

Chinese state media, which published the notice, urged domestic users and companies to avoid using American technology and replace them with domestic alternatives.

“Beijing is clearly signaling to Washington that two can play in this retaliation game and that it has many levers to pull, all creating different levels of pain for U.S. companies,” said Wendy Cutler, vice president at Asia Society Policy Institute.

“With high tariffs and other restrictions in place, the decoupling of the two economies is at full steam,” Cutler said.

Targeting trade in services

China is seen by some as seeking to broaden the trade war to encompass services trade — which covers travel, legal, consulting and financial services — where the U.S. has been running a significant surplus with China for years.

China Beige Book CEO: U.S. needs to articulate what they want from China

Earlier this month, a social media account affiliated with Chinese state media Xinhua News Agency, suggested Beijing could impose curbs on U.S. legal consultancy firms and consider a probe into U.S. companies’ China operations for the huge “monopoly benefits” they have gained from intellectual-property rights.

China’s imports of U.S. services surged more than 10-fold to $55 billion in 2024 over the past two decades, according to Nomura estimates, driving U.S. services trade surplus with China to $32 billion last year.

Last week, China said it would reduce imports of U.S. films and warned its citizens against traveling or studying in the U.S., in a sign of Beijing’s intent to put pressure on the U.S. entertainment, tourism and education sectors.

“These measures target high-visibility sectors — aviation, media, and education — that resonate politically in the U.S.,” said Jing Qian, managing director at Center for China Analysis.

While they might be low on actual dollar impact given the smaller scale of these sectors, “reputational effects — such as fewer Chinese students or more cautious Chinese employees — could ripple through academia and the tech talent ecosystem,” he added.

Nomura estimates $24 billion could be at stake if Beijing significantly step up restrictions on travel to the U.S.

Weekly analysis and insights from Asia’s largest economy in your inbox
Subscribe now

Travel dominated U.S. services exports to China, reflecting expenditure by millions of Chinese tourists in the U.S., according to Nomura. Within travel, education-related spending leads at 71%, it estimates, mostly coming from tuition and living expenses for the more than 270,000 Chinese students studying in the U.S.

Entertainment exports, encompassing films, music and television programs, accounted for just 6% of U.S. exports within this sector, the investment firm said, noting that Beijing’s latest move on film imports “carries more symbolic heft than economic bite.”

“We could see deeper decoupling — not only in supply chains, but in people-to-people ties, knowledge exchange, and regulatory frameworks. This may signal a shift from transactional tension to systemic divergence,” said Qian.

Can Beijing get more aggressive?

Analysts largely expect Beijing to continue deploying its arsenal of non-tariff policy tools in an effort to raise its leverage ahead of any potential negotiation with the Trump administration.

“From the Chinese government’s perspective, the U.S. companies’ operations in China are the biggest remaining target for inflicting pain on the U.S .side,” said Gabriel Wildau, managing director at risk advisory firm Teneo.

Apple, Tesla, pharmaceutical and medical device companies are among the businesses that could be targeted as Beijing presses ahead with non-tariff measures, including sanction, regulatory harassment and export controls, Wildau added.

Shoppers and staff are seen inside the Apple Store, with its sleek modern interior design and prominent Apple logo, in Chongqing, China, on Sept. 10, 2024.

Cheng Xin | Getty Images

While a deal may allow both sides to unwind some of the retaliatory measures, hopes for near-term talks between the two leaders are fading fast.

Chinese officials have repeatedly condemned the “unilateral tariffs” imposed by Trump as “bullying” and vowed to “fight to the end.” Still, Beijing has left the door open for negotiations but they must be on “an equal footing.”

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump is open to making a deal with China but Beijing needs to make the first move.

“In the end, only when a country experiences sufficient self-inflicted harm might it consider softening its stance and truly returning to the negotiation table,” said Jianwei Xu, economist at Natixis.

Continue Reading

Economics

Donald Trump’s approval rating is dropping

Published

on

EVEN WHEN Donald Trump does something well, he exaggerates. He won the popular vote last November for the first time in three tries, by a 1.5 point margin. “The mandate was massive,” he told Time. In fact it was the slimmest margin since 2000, but it was an improvement on Mr Trump’s two previous popular-vote losses, by 2.1 points in 2016 and 4.5 points in 2020. (He was elected in 2016 through the vagaries of the Electoral College.)

Continue Reading

Trending