cover of episode UBS On-Air: Paul Donovan Daily Audio 'Competence matters'

UBS On-Air: Paul Donovan Daily Audio 'Competence matters'

2025/4/7
logo of podcast UBS On-Air: Market Moves

UBS On-Air: Market Moves

AI Deep Dive AI Chapters Transcript
People
P
Paul Donovan
Topics
@Paul Donovan : 我是瑞银全球财富管理的首席经济学家Paul Donovan。4月7日星期一伦敦时间早上7点,亚洲股市暴跌,香港股市下跌超过10%。周末有什么新的信息?对投资者来说,最大的担忧可能是来自美国政府的政策能力。周末,一系列政府官员对异常的贸易关税上调发表了相互矛盾的观点,这表明并不存在一个总体规划。政府对赫德岛企鹅的敌意被解释为防止企鹅建立一个逃避关税的自由贸易港,这一评论似乎并不理解全球贸易是如何运作的,也突显了最初关税公式中的荒谬之处。美国总统特朗普利用他们在周末打高尔夫球的间隙,两次在社交媒体上发帖称,股市下跌是一种蓄意的策略。投资者可能会看到,这与财政部长梅隆在1929年股市崩盘后著名的“清除体系中的腐败”的言论类似。金融市场长期以来一直将特朗普的贸易关税视为一种粗糙的谈判工具,这基本上是特朗普第一任期时的立场。然而,情况发生了转变,在一些政府官员看来,关税似乎已经成为一件好事(全部大写)。尽管如此,胜任的政策制定者准确地平衡风险和回报的想法,被视为对关税政策过度的制衡。如果市场质疑这种能力,那么他们就会质疑需要造成多少经济损失才能改变这种政策。欧盟预计今天将宣布其报复性关税,并将于周三投票实施。媒体讨论的数字是280亿美元的税收。这是对美国消费者的税收,当然也是经济上的负面因素。然而,由于这是特定国家的税收,欧盟消费者更容易用其他国家的商品来替代被征税的美国商品。美国消费者没有这种选择。这与20世纪30年代的一个重要区别在于,当时所有国家都对广泛的贸易伙伴征收关税,形成了一种破坏性的恶性循环,这是一场全球贸易战。这是一场美国贸易战,美国对所有其他国家的进口商品征税,而世界其他国家目前仍在正常地相互贸易。例如,中国和欧盟之间可能发生贸易争端的风险,但由于美国的行动,这样做所付出的代价已经上升,这应该会降低这种风险。显然,金融市场变得混乱的风险也很大。考虑到美国经济衰退和全球经济放缓的可能性增加,是一种合乎逻辑的反应。考虑到美国持续的政策错误,也是合理的。但如果市场超出这个范围,那么,就像英国的信托丑闻一样,就需要某种干预。强制性抛售不会产生公平的市场价格,但公平的市场价格需要反映出当前美国政策立场给经济,特别是美国经济造成的损害。

Deep Dive

Shownotes Transcript

Translations:
中文

Good morning. This is Paul Donovan, Chief Economist at UBS Global Wealth Management. It's seven o'clock in the morning London time on Monday, the 7th of 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. Financial 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 policymakers 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. Pricing in an increased probability of a US recession and a global slowdown is a logical response to what has happened. Pricing in ongoing policy errors from the United States may also be reasonable.

But if markets go beyond that, then, as with the UK's trust debacle, it will become necessary for some kind of intervention. Forced selling does not generate a fair market price, but a fair market price will need to reflect the damage to economies, particularly the US economy, arising from the current US policy position. That's all for today. Have a good day.

This material has been prepared and published by the global wealth management business of UBS Switzerland AG, regulated by FINMA in Switzerland. Its subsidiaries, or affiliates, collectively referred to as UBS. In the USA, UBS Financial Services Inc. is a subsidiary of UBS AG and a member of FINRA SIPC.

The investment views have been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research. This material is for your information only and it is not intended as an offer or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any investment or other specific product.

The analysis contained herein does not constitute a personal investment recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, investment strategies, financial situation and needs of any specific recipient. This material may not be reproduced or copies circulated without prior authority of UBS.

Please visit www.ubs.com forward slash CIO hyphen disclaimer to read the full legal disclaimer applicable to this material.