UBS On-Air: Paul Donovan Daily Audio 'Competence matters'
The desk's thesis is built around the concern that U.S. policy competence is under scrutiny, impacting market stability. Recent contradictory statements from U.S. administration officials regarding trade taxes have left investors questioning the coherence of economic strategies, exemplified by a notable 10% plunge in Asian equity markets, particularly in Hong Kong. Per the full note from UBS, the impending EU retaliatory tariffs of approximately $28 billion, set to be discussed within days, are expected to add pressure on U.S. consumers and the economy. With no high-impact data scheduled in the coming weeks, the lack of clarity surrounding U.S. trade policies could exacerbate current market tensions.
What the desk is arguing
The desk frames the recent volatility in Asian equities as a direct reflection of broader concerns about U.S. policy competence. UBS highlights a critical situation where mixed messages from U.S. officials are sowing doubt among investors about the administration's long-term economic strategy.
The magnitude of the Asian market decline, particularly the sharp drop in Hong Kong stocks, underscores the urgency of these concerns, with figures showing losses over 10%. As reported, the possibility of retaliatory tariffs from the European Union, amounting to $28 billion, is likely to further strain consumer spending and market confidence.
Where it sits in our coverage
Our current consensus target for USD/HKD is 1.075, with a range between 1.04 and 1.12. Specific firms include: - jpmorgan: 1.10, Mar26 - bofa: 1.04, Mar26
This perspective aligns closely with jpmorgan’s evaluations, while diverging from the more bearish stance of bofa, indicating a crucial balancing act in sentiment regarding trade impacts.
How other firms see it
The group of firms such as jpmorgan and others seems to share a more optimistic view of the dollar's strength, while bofa stands out with a more cautious outlook. This divergence underscores the uncertainty in international trade dynamics, especially in light of evolving tariff discussions.
Related pairs to monitor include USD/JPY as it may react to shifts in U.S. economic sentiment and trade policy adjustments. Watch the interplay between the Fed's perspective and the yen's response to the dollar's valuation as tensions heighten.
How firms align with this view
Aligned with the desk view
Contrary positioning
Key takeaways
- 01U.S. policy competence is creating uncertainty and volatility in global markets.
- 02Hong Kong equities have experienced sharp declines, losing over 10% amid trade concerns.
- 03EU's upcoming retaliatory tariffs of $28 billion may exert further pressure on the U.S. economy.
- 04Market reactions will likely hinge on clarity regarding U.S. trade policies in the coming days.
Market implications
Traders should watch the USD/HKD pair closely as the EU's decision on tariffs transmutes into market sentiment. Breaking above the 1.075 level could signal increased dollar purchasing, while a retreat signifies underlying weakness amid trade uncertainties.
Risks to this view
A significant reversal in this outlook could occur if fresh guiding statements from U.S. officials clarify trade policies or if economic data suggesting unforeseen resilience in consumer spending emerges. A break below critical support levels could signal deeper market discontent with U.S. trade strategies.
Good morning, this is Paul Donovan, Chief Economist at UBS Global Wealth Management. It's 7 o'clock in the morning London time on Monday 7th April. Equity markets in Asia have collapsed, with Hong Kong equities now down over 10%.
What new information has there been over the weekend? For investors, the biggest concern may be policy competence from the United States. Over the weekend, a series of administration officials gave contradictory views on the extraordinary trade tax increases, which does not suggest that a master plan exists.
The administration's hostility to the penguins of Heard Island was explained as preventing the penguins from setting up a free trade port that would evade tariffs, a comment that seemingly does not understand how global trade works and which underscores the absurdities within the original tariff formula. US President Trump took not one but two breaks from their weekend of golf to post on social media that the slump in equity markets was a deliberate strategy. Investors may see parallels to Treasury Secretary Mellon's famous purged-the-rottenness-out-of-the-system quote in the wake of the 1929 equity market crash.
Some markets have long viewed Trump's trade taxes as a crude negotiating tool, which was essentially the position of Trump's first term. There has been a shift, however, and tariffs seem to have become a good thing, all in capital letters, in the views of some in the administration. Nonetheless, the idea of competent policy makers accurately balancing risk and reward was seen as a check on the excesses of tariff policy.
If markets question that competence, then they will question how much economic damage will be required to bring about a change in that policy. The European Union is expected to announce its retaliatory tariffs today, with a vote to implement them on Wednesday. The number being discussed in the media is $28 billion of taxes.
This is a tax on US consumers and it is, of course, an economic negative. However, as this is a country-specific tax, it will be easier for EU consumers to substitute other countries' goods in exchange for the taxed US goods. The US consumer does not have that option.
This is an important difference from the 1930s. Then there was a destructive spiral as all countries imposed tariffs on a wide range of trading partners. That was a global trade war.
This is a US trade war, with the US taxing imports from everyone else and the rest of the world, for now, trading in a normal manner with one another. There are risks that China and the EU might get into a trade dispute, for instance, but the costs of doing so have risen as a result of US action and that should lessen the risk. There is also clearly a risk that financial markets become disorderly.
Sources & References
How we cover this story