&w=3840&q=100)
Uncertain dollar creates opportunity for euro, can the rally last?
The market tumult in which investors simultaneously sold off the US dollar, American stocks and US Treasury bonds eased last week as Trump backed off his threats to fire the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome H Powell, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent tried to reassure foreign officials that trade deals would be struck.
But many European officials attending the spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Washington last week were sceptical that the uncertainty over Trump's trade policy would dissipate any time soon. They said the unpredictable nature of the Trump administration's approach to setting policy would not easily be forgotten. Instead, they saw the potential to attract investors to European assets, from the euro to the bond market. 'We see that our stability, predictability and respect for the rule of law is already proving a strength,' Valdis Dombrovskis, the European commissioner responsible for the trade bloc's economy, said on Wednesday in a discussion on the sidelines of the IMF meetings. 'We already have stronger investor interest in euro-denominated assets.'
The most comprehensive indication that funds are flowing to Europe: Since the beginning of April, the euro has gained 5.4 per cent against the dollar, rising above $1.13, the highest level since late 2021.
The question among policymakers and investors is whether the recent jump in the euro and other euro-denominated assets is simply a short-term rebalancing of portfolios that heavily favored the dollar or the beginning of a long-term trend in which the euro firmly encroaches on the dollar's role as the world's dominant currency.
A troubled past
'There's a lot of enthusiasm about Europe,' Kristin J Forbes, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said in an interview. She said the excitement about the euro reminded her of the currency's founding in 1999, when some economists and policymakers raised the prospect of it replacing the dollar. In its early years, the euro's international use exceeded the combined use of the currencies it replaced.
But then the euro was hit by crises. Despite having a monetary union of a dozen members, including Germany, Europe's largest economy, the region remained politically fragmented, sapping confidence in the currency. The sovereign debt crisis in 2012, followed by a decade of ultra low interest rates, meant the region's bonds offered low returns.
The euro is now used by 20 member countries and represents about 20 percent of the world's central banks foreign exchange reserves, a figure that has barely budged in the past two decades. Thirty per cent of global exports are invoiced in euros, whereas more than half are in dollars. Improvements have been made on some of the issues that previously deterred foreign investors. Today, European bonds are providing better returns, and investors trust that the European Central Bank will be the lender of last resort, minimising the risk that one country's economic troubles could affect all euro assets.
For investors, the most promising new development is the prospect of Germany issuing about 1 trillion euros in additional government debt, known as bunds and considered the safest euro-denominated assets. For years, Germany's strict fiscal conservatism has restrained the supply of bunds. But last month, Parliament altered the borrowing limits anchored in its constitution, the so-called debt brake, to allow the government to borrow hundreds of millions of euros to invest in the military and infrastructure. 'There are cheers in Europe' because of Germany's fiscal stimulus, said Kristalina Georgieva, the IMF managing director. 'And it adds something that is not tangible, but it is important — confidence.'
Although there has been confusion and frustration with the Trump's trade policies, many European officials, including central bankers, emphasised the need for Europe to seize this moment. 'This will be a time of creativity and pragmatism, getting things moving,' Olli Rehn, the governor of the Finnish central bank, said in a speech. 'I am very much looking forward to this period as a positive challenge because we are very serious about reinforcing common defense in Europe. Which will, by the way, need safe assets.'
©2025 The New York Times News Service
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
28 minutes ago
- First Post
‘Everyone's a loser': From Canada to Laos, Trump's sweeping tariffs spare no one, not even the US
President Donald Trump's tariff onslaught this week left a lot of losers – from small, poor countries like Laos and Algeria to wealthy US trading partners like Canada and Switzerland. They're now facing especially hefty taxes – tariffs – on the products they export to the United States starting Aug. 7. read more President Donald Trump's latest wave of sweeping tariffs is shaking the foundations of global trade and leaving a trail of economic pain across rich and poor nations alike. Countries such as Laos, Algeria, Canada and Switzerland are now facing steep levies as Trump intensifies his protectionist agenda. But while allies scramble for exemptions and rivals brace for economic fallout, but analysts say no one has truly come out ahead not even the United States. 'In many respects, everybody's a loser here,'' Barry Appleton, co-director of the Center for International Law at New York Law School told AP. Since returning to the presidency six months ago, Trump has torn up traditional trade norms, replacing multilateral agreements with a unilateral approach driven by threats and economic clout. 'The biggest winner is Trump,' said Alan Wolff, former deputy director-general of the World Trade Organization. 'He bet that he could get other countries to the table on the basis of threats, and he succeeded dramatically.'' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump's tariff regime began on April 2, dubbed 'Liberation Day' when he imposed 'reciprocal' taxes of up to 50% on imports from countries with which the U.S. runs trade deficits, and a 10% baseline tax on others. Declaring the trade imbalance a national emergency under a 1977 law, Trump bypassed Congress to implement the sweeping changes, now being challenged in court. After an initial market selloff, Trump paused the new tariffs for 90 days to allow room for negotiations. Some countries took the opportunity to strike deals, though often under heavy pressure. The United Kingdom agreed to a 10% tariff, up from 1.3%, despite having maintained a trade surplus with the U.S. for nearly two decades. The European Union and Japan settled for 15%, lower than the threatened 30% and 25%, respectively. Other countries that agreed to higher tariffs include Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Even those with reduced levies compared to April levels remain far worse off than pre-Trump norms. Angola's tariffs dropped from 32% to 15%, but were below 1.5% in 2022. Taiwan saw its April rate of 32% lowered to 20%, but still faces a financial burden. '20% from the beginning has not been our goal, we hope that in further negotiations we will get a more beneficial and more reasonable tax rate,' Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te said Friday. Trump also rolled back Lesotho's tariff from 50% to 15%, but economic damage there may already be done. On the harsher end, nations that refused to bend or angered Trump in other ways got slammed. Laos and Algeria whose GDPs per capita are a fraction of America's now face tariffs of 40% and 30%, respectively. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Brazil was hit with a 50% tax, reportedly in retaliation for its treatment of former President Jair Bolsonaro. Despite a consistent U.S. trade surplus with Brazil, the tariff went ahead. Canada was slapped with a 35% import tax, a move some analysts tie to Ottawa's plan to recognise Palestinian statehood, a position contrary to Trump's strong support of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Switzerland, which didn't secure a deal, was struck with a 39% tariff, more than the 31% initially proposed. 'The Swiss probably wish that they had camped in Washington'' to make a deal, Wolff commented. 'They're clearly not at all happy.'' Trump's actions are now facing legal scrutiny. A group of American companies and a dozen states are suing, arguing that he overstepped his authority under the 1977 law. A New York court recently blocked the tariffs, but allowed collection to continue pending appeal, which may end up before the US Supreme Court. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Judges on the US Court of Appeals have expressed scepticism about the justification behind Trump's measures. 'If (the tariffs) get struck down, then maybe Brazil's a winner and not a loser,'' Appleton said. Although Trump frames tariffs as a way to tax foreign countries, in practice, U.S. importers bear the cost and pass it on to American consumers. Goldman Sachs estimates that foreign exporters have absorbed only a fifth of the tariff burden, leaving U.S. businesses and households to shoulder the rest. Major retailers and manufacturers including Walmart, Nike, and Ford — have raised prices in response. 'This is a consumption tax, so it disproportionately affects those who have lower incomes,'' said Appleton. 'Sneakers, knapsacks … your appliances are going to go up. Your TV and electronics are going to go up. Your video game devices, consoles are going to up because none of those are made in America.'' With average U.S. tariffs rising from 2.5% at the start of 2025 to 18.3% — the highest since 1934 — Yale's Budget Lab estimates the policy will cost the average American household $2,400 this year. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The U.S. consumer's a big loser,″ Wolff concluded. With inputs from agencies


NDTV
28 minutes ago
- NDTV
US Court Upholds Order Blocking Indiscriminate Targeting By Immigration Patrols In California
A US appeals court has upheld an order blocking immigration agents from carrying out patrols in California that led to indiscriminate detentions without reasonable grounds to suspect people of being undocumented. The ruling late Friday by a three-judge panel denies the federal government's appeal to overturn a temporary July order to halt the "roving patrols" in Los Angeles that immigration rights groups have described as illegally using racial profiling. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong had ordered an end to the arrests, arguing such actions by agents violate a person's constitutional rights that safeguard against unreasonable seizures by the government. She said the detentions were being made "based upon race alone," on whether a person was speaking Spanish or English with an accent or because of their place of work, and ordered them stopped. Friday's ruling by the US court of appeals for the Ninth Circuit described the case of plaintiff Jason Gavidia, a US citizen born and raised in East Los Angeles who was arrested outside a tow yard in Montebello on June 12 by agents carrying military-style rifles. "The agents repeatedly asked Gavidia whether he is American -- and they repeatedly ignored his answer: 'I am an American,'" the ruling said. Agents asked what hospital he was born in, and Gavidia responded he did not know, but said he was born in "East LA." It said Gavidia told the agents he could show them his government-issued ID. "The agents took Gavidia's ID and his phone and kept his phone for 20 minutes. They never returned his ID." California residents and advocacy groups sued the Department of Homeland Security over the detentions. Los Angeles and surrounding suburbs have been ground zero for President Donald Trump's aggressive immigration crackdown. He ordered the US military deployed there for weeks, and agents have rounded up migrants at car washes, bus stops, stores and farms. The ruling said the government's defense team argued that "certain types of businesses, including car washes, were selected for encounters because... they are likely to employ persons without legal documentation." Rights groups hailed the order as a victory for those seeking to bar the Department of Homeland Security and agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement from conducting such raids. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," said attorney Mohammad Tajsar of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. "We look forward to holding the federal government accountable for these authoritarian horrors it unleashed in Southern California."


NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Ukraine Uncovers Major Drone Procurement Corruption Scheme
Kyiv: Ukraine's anti-corruption bodies said on Saturday they had uncovered a major graft scheme that procured military drones and signal jamming systems at inflated prices, two days after the agencies' independence was restored following major protests. The independence of Ukraine's anti-graft investigators and prosecutors, NABU and SAPO, was reinstated by parliament on Thursday after a move to take it away resulted in the country's biggest demonstrations since Russia's invasion in 2022. In a statement published by both agencies on social media, NABU and SAPO said they had caught a sitting lawmaker, two local officials and an unspecified number of national guard personnel taking bribes. None of them were identified in the statement. "The essence of the scheme was to conclude state contracts with supplier companies at deliberately inflated prices," it said, adding that the offenders had received kickbacks of up to 30% of a contract's cost. Four people had been arrested. "There can only be zero tolerance for corruption, clear teamwork to expose corruption and, as a result, a just sentence," President Volodymyr Zelenskiy wrote on Telegram. Zelenskiy, who has far-reaching wartime presidential powers and still enjoys broad approval among Ukrainians, was forced into a rare political about-face when his attempt to bring NABU and SAPO under the control of his prosecutor-general sparked the first nationwide protests of the war. Zelenskiy subsequently said that he had heard the people's anger and submitted a bill restoring the agencies' former independence, which was voted through by parliament on Thursday. Ukraine's European allies praised the move, having voiced concerns about the original stripping of the agencies' status. Top European officials had told Zelenskiy that Ukraine was jeopardising its bid for European Union membership by curbing the powers of its anti-graft authorities. "It is important that anti-corruption institutions operate independently, and the law adopted on Thursday guarantees them every opportunity for a real fight against corruption," Zelenskiy wrote on Saturday after meeting the heads of the agencies, who briefed him on the latest investigation.