Connect with us

News

Investors bet global central banks will be forced to delay rate cuts

Published

on

Investors bet global central banks will be forced to delay rate cuts

Investors are pushing back their expectations of interest rate cuts around the world, as the US Federal Reserve’s battle with price pressures complicates other central banks’ loosening plans.

As the US reported the latest in a string of poor inflation figures, markets reined in their forecasts for rate cuts by the European Central Bank and the Bank of England, as well as by the Fed itself.

“The Fed’s inflation problems have a global dimension and other central banks cannot ignore them,” said James Knightley, chief international economist at ING in New York. “In particular, if the Fed can’t cut rates soon it could stoke up dollar strength, which causes stress for the European economy and constrains other central banks’ ability to cut rates.”

He added: “Plus there is a worry that what is happening on inflation in the US could surface in Europe as well.” 

Senior officials at the ECB and BoE argue they are not confronting the same inflation problems as the US, implying they have more scope to cut rates earlier.

Advertisement

But shifts in the futures market indicate the global impact of the persistent US inflation problem.

Traders now expect the ECB to cut rates by an average of about 0.7 percentage points this year starting at its next policy meeting on June 6, while two weeks ago they expected cumulative cuts of 0.88 points.

At the beginning of the year, when US inflation appeared on a firmer downward path, they expected cuts of 1.63 points.

Markets now anticipate BoE cuts of 0.44 percentage points this year compared with 0.56 points two weeks ago and 1.72 points at the start of the year.

The backdrop for the shift has been the market’s reduced expectations for the Fed, which is set to keep rates at their 23-year-high at its meeting next week. While at the start of the year investors had expected as many as six quarter-point cuts, this year, they now expect one or two.

Advertisement
Line chart of Rate expectations in 2024 (%) showing Markets expect one or two rate cuts from the Fed and BoE this year, and three from the ECB

The US and its European counterparts have diverged in the past. But if other regions cut rates more aggressively than the Fed, they risk harming their own economies because of the impact on exchange rates, import costs and inflation.

“There’s a good macro case for divergence, but ultimately there’s a limit on how far it can go,” said Nathan Sheets, chief economist at US lender Citi. He added that it was “more challenging” for the ECB to “cut aggressively in an environment where the Fed is waiting”.

Fed chair Jay Powell conceded this month that US inflation was “taking longer than expected” to hit its target, signalling that borrowing costs would need to stay high for longer than previously thought.

In figures on Friday, the Fed’s preferred inflation metric came in higher than expected at 2.7 per cent for the year to March, and a minority of traders are now even betting on Fed rate rises in the next 12 months.

Marcelo Carvalho, global head of economics at BNP Paribas, said the ECB was neither “Fed-dependent” nor “Fed-insensitive”.

Despite the market’s expectations that high US borrowing costs will limit their freedom of manoeuvre, top European central bankers insist their less serious inflation problem requires a different response.

Advertisement
Line chart of Inflation rates (annual % change) showing Price pressures have fallen sharply across advanced economies

“It is a different kind of animal we are trying to tame,” ECB president Christine Lagarde said this month in Washington.

She said the “roots and drivers” of the two regions’ price surges were different — with Europe affected more by energy costs and the US by big fiscal deficits.

BoE governor Andrew Bailey has also argued that European inflation dynamics were “somewhat different” from the US.

Top officials from the ECB and BoE have signalled rates will still be cut this summer, despite the inflation data that has led investors to price in the first Fed rate reduction in November.

The shift is a marked contrast to earlier this year when the Fed was seen as leading the way down.

“The ECB and BoE are operating in a much weaker growth environment, so I suspect they will have no compunctions about cutting rates earlier,” said Mahmood Pradhan, head of global macroeconomics at Amundi Asset Management.

Advertisement

But ECB policymakers have given divergent indications on how big a rate gap with the Fed they can tolerate.

Banque de France governor François Villeroy de Galhau told Les Echos that he expects continued cutting “at a pragmatic pace” after June. However, Austria’s central bank head Robert Holzmann warned: “I would find it difficult if we move too far away from the Fed.”

The euro has fallen 3 per cent against the dollar since the start of the year to just above $1.07, but investors have increased bets it could drop to parity with the US currency.

Such a fall would add about 0.3 percentage points to eurozone inflation over the next year, according to recent ECB research. The bank’s vice-president, Luis de Guindos, said this week it would “need to take the impact of exchange rate movements into account”.

The far-reaching impact of US policy is already highly visible in Japan, where investors are increasing bets that the Bank of Japan will need to keep raising borrowing costs as a weaker yen fuels inflation. The yen has dropped to 34-year lows against the dollar, pushing up the price of imported goods.

Advertisement

But some EU policymakers argue that if a more hawkish Fed leads to tighter global financial conditions, it could bolster the case for easing in the eurozone and elsewhere.

“A tightening in the US has a negative impact on inflation and output in the eurozone,” Italy’s central bank boss Fabio Panetta said on Thursday, adding that this was “likely to reinforce the case for a rate cut rather than weakening it”.

Tighter US policy also affects global bond markets, with Germany’s 10-year Bunds often mirroring movements by the 10-year US Treasury.

BNP Paribas estimates that if European bond yields were driven half a percentage point higher by the fallout from US markets, it would require an extra 0.2 percentage points of rate cuts by the ECB to offset the impact of tighter financial conditions. Similarly, it would require 0.13 points of extra cuts by the BoE.

Tomasz Wieladek at T Rowe Price in London argued that the ECB and BoE “need to actively lean against this tightening in global financial conditions to bring their domestic financial conditions more in line with the fundamentals in their own economies”.

Advertisement

Additional reporting by George Steer in London

News

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Published

on

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Smoke rises from Port of La Guaira in Venezuela on Jan. 3, 2026 after U.S. forces seized the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images

Federal prosecutors on Thursday unsealed an indictment against a U.S. Army soldier, accusing him of using his insider knowledge of the clandestine military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January to reap more than $400,000 in profits on the popular prediction market site Polymarket.

The Justice Department says Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, who was stationed at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, was part of the team that planned and carried out the predawn raid in Caracas earlier this year that resulted in the apprehension of Maduro.

The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed the actions against Van Dyke, the first time U.S. officials have leveled criminal charges against someone over prediction market wagers.

Advertisement

According to the indictment, Van Dyke now faces counts of wire fraud, commodities fraud, misusing non-public government information and other charges.

Trading under numerous usernames including “Burdensome-Mix,” Van Dyke allegedly traded about $32,000 on the arrest of Maduro, resulting in profits exceeding $400,000.

“Prediction markets are not a haven for using misappropriated confidential or classified information for personal gain,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York. “Those entrusted to safeguard our nation’s secrets have a duty to protect them and our armed service members, and not to use that information for personal financial gain.”

Van Dyke’s defense lawyer is not yet publicly known. Polymarket did not return a request for comment.

The charges against Van Dyke come at a sensitive time for the prediction market industry, which has been growing exponentially, despite calls in Washington and among state leaders for the sites to be reined in.

Advertisement

Van Dyke is the first to be charged in the U.S. for suspected Polymarket insider trading, but Israeli authorities in February arrested several people and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets about military operations in Iran on Polymarket.

Continue Reading

News

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

Published

on

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

The Senate early Thursday morning adopted a Republican budget blueprint that would pave the way for a $70 billion increase for immigration enforcement and the eventual reopening of the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans pushed through the plan on a nearly party-line vote of 50 to 48. It came after an overnight marathon of rapid-fire votes, known as a vote-a-rama, in which the G.O.P. beat back a series of Democratic proposals aimed at addressing the high cost of health care, housing, food and energy. The debate put the two parties’ dueling messages on vivid display six months before the midterm elections.

Republicans, who are using the budget plan to lay the groundwork to eventually push through a filibuster-proof bill providing a multiyear funding stream for President Trump’s immigration crackdown, used the all-night session to highlight their hard-line stance on border security, seeking to portray Democrats as unwilling to safeguard the country.

Democrats tried and failed to add a series of changes aimed at addressing cost-of-living issues, seizing the opportunity to hammer Republicans as out of touch with and unwilling to act on the concerns of everyday Americans.

Here’s what to know about the budget plan and the nocturnal ritual senators engaged in before adopting it.

Advertisement

The budget blueprint is a crucial piece of Republicans’ plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security and end a shutdown that has lasted for more than two months. After Democrats refused to fund immigration enforcement without new restrictions on agents’ tactics and conduct, the G.O.P. struck a deal with them to pass a spending bill that would fund everything but ICE and the Border Patrol. Republicans said they would fund those agencies through a special budget bill that Democrats could not block.

“We can fix this with Republican votes, and we will,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and the Budget Committee chairman. “Every Democrat has opposed money for the Border Patrol and ICE at a time of great peril.”

In resorting to a new budget blueprint, Republicans laid the groundwork to deny Democrats a chance to stop the immigration enforcement funding. But they also submitted themselves to a vote-a-rama, in which any senator can propose unlimited changes to such a measure before it is adopted.

The budget measure now goes to the House, which must adopt it before lawmakers in both chambers can draft the legislation funding immigration enforcement. That bill will provide yet another opportunity for a vote-a-rama even closer to the November election.

Democrats took to the floor to criticize Republicans for supercharging funding for federal immigration enforcement rather than moving legislation that would address Americans’ concerns over affordability.

Advertisement

“This is what Republicans are fighting for,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the Democratic leader. “To maintain two unchecked rogue agencies that are dreaded in all corners of this country instead of reducing your health care costs, your housing costs, your grocery costs, your gas costs.”

Democrats offered a host of amendments along those lines, all of which were defeated by Republicans — and that was the point. The proposals were meant to put the G.O.P. in a tough political spot, showcasing their opposition to helping Americans afford high living costs. Fewer than a handful of G.O.P. senators crossed party lines to support them.

The G.O.P. thwarted an effort by Mr. Schumer to require that the budget measure lower out-of-pocket health care costs for Americans. Two Republicans who are up for re-election this year, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, voted with Democrats, but the proposal was still defeated.

Republicans also squelched a move by Senator Ben Ray Lujan, Democrat of New Mexico, to create a fund that would lower grocery costs and reverse cuts to food aid programs that Republicans enacted last year. Ms. Collins and Mr. Sullivan again joined Democrats.

Also defeated by the G.O.P.: a proposal by Senator John Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, to address rising consumer prices brought on by Mr. Trump’s tariffs and the war in Iran; one by Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, to require the budget measure to address rising electricity prices, and another by Mr. Markey to create a fund to bring down housing costs.

Advertisement

Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat who is up for re-election in Georgia, also sought to add language requiring the budget plan to address health insurance companies denying or delaying access to care, but that, too was blocked by Republicans.

While Republicans had fewer proposals for changes to their own budget plan, they also sought to offer measures that would underscore their aggressive stance on immigration enforcement and dare Democrats to vote against them.

Mr. Graham offered an amendment to allocate funds toward a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the apprehension and deportation of adult immigrants convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor after illegally entering the United States. It passed unanimously.

Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, sought to bar Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and other services, and criticized the organization for providing transgender care to minors. Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, also attempted to tack on the G.O.P. voter identification bill, known as the SAVE America Act. Both proposals were blocked when Democrats, joined by a few Republicans, voted to strike them as unrelated to the budget plan.

The Republicans who crossed party lines to oppose their own party’s proposals for new voting requirements were Ms. Collins along with Senators Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

Advertisement

Ms. Collins and Ms. Murkowski also opposed the effort to block payments to Planned Parenthood.

Continue Reading

News

Who is John Phelan, the US Navy Secretary fired by Pete Hegseth?

Published

on

Who is John Phelan, the US Navy Secretary fired by Pete Hegseth?

The firing of US Navy Secretary John Phelan is the latest in a shakeup of the American military during the war on Iran, now in its eighth week.

The Pentagon said Phelan would leave office immediately.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“On behalf of the Secretary of War and Deputy Secretary of War, we are grateful to Secretary Phelan for his service to the Department and the United States Navy,” said chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell. “We wish him well in his future endeavours”.

His firing comes at a critical moment, with US naval forces enforcing a blockade on Iranian ports and ships, and maintaining a heavy presence around the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas passes during peacetime.

Although the Pentagon gave no official reason for the dismissal, reports indicate the decision was linked to internal disputes, including tensions with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Advertisement

Phelan’s removal is part of a broader pattern of dismissals and restructuring within the US military under President Donald Trump’s administration – including during the current war.

So, who is John Phelan, and what impact could his firing have on US military strategy?

Who is John Phelan?

As the US Navy’s top civilian official, Phelan had various responsibilities, including overseeing recruiting, mobilising and organising, as well as construction and repair of ships and military equipment.

He was appointed in 2024 as a political ally of Trump, despite having no prior military or defence leadership experience.

Before entering government, Phelan was a businessman and investment executive, as well as a major Republican donor and fundraiser — a background that is fairly common among Trump appointees and advisers. The US president’s two top diplomatic negotiators, for instance, are Steve Witkoff — a real estate businessman with no prior diplomatic experience – and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Advertisement

According to the Reuters news agency, Phelan’s tenure quickly became controversial. He faced criticism for moving too slowly on shipbuilding reforms and for strained relationships with key Pentagon figures, including Hegseth and his deputy, Steve Feinberg.

rump with U.S. Marine Corps Lieutenant General Michael Borgschulte and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan (R) before the game between the Navy Midshipmen and the Army West Point Black Knights at M&T Bank Stadium [File: Tommy Gilligan/Imagn Images/Reuters]

In addition, Phelan was reportedly under an ethics investigation, which may have weakened his standing in the administration.

Navy Undersecretary Hung Cao, who was also reported to have a difficult relationship with Phelan, has become acting secretary. Fifty-four-year-old Cao is a 25-year Navy veteran who previously ran as a Republican candidate for the US Senate and House of Representatives in 2022 and 2024 respectively, but was unsuccessful on both occasions.

Democrats have criticised Phelan’s removal, calling it “troubling”.

“I am concerned it is yet another example of the instability and dysfunction that have come to define the Department of Defense under President Trump and Secretary Hegseth,” said Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Advertisement

Who else has the Trump administration fired since the war with Iran began?

Phelan’s removal is the latest in a series of senior military leaders being fired or are leaving during the US-Israeli war on Iran, in addition to others since Trump was re-elected.

Among the most notable dismissals was Army Chief of Staff General Randy A. George, in the first week of April. George was appointed in 2023 under former US President Joe Biden.

According to reports, Hegseth also fired the head of the Army’s Transformation and Training Command, a unit concerned with modernising the army, and the Army’s chief of chaplains. The Pentagon has not confirmed their dismissal.

Why is Phelan’s dismissal significant?

The 62-year-old’s removal comes during a fragile ceasefire with Iran, as the ⁠⁠US continues to move more naval assets into the region.

The Navy is central to enforcing Trump’s blockade of Iranian ports to restrict Iran’s oil exports and apply economic pressure on Tehran, as the US president looks eager to wrap up the war, which is deeply unpopular to many Americans.

Advertisement

However, there are no indications that Trump is willing to end the blockade or other naval operations in the Strait of Hormuz, as negotiations between Washington and Tehran have come to a standstill.

Tensions have escalated in recent days after the US military seized an Iranian container ship. The US claimed it was attempting to sail from the Arabian Sea through the Strait of Hormuz to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas.

Tehran responded by describing the attack and hijack as an act of “piracy”.

Iran has since captured two cargo ships and fired at another.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending