As US Stocks Hit Records, Experts See The Dollar Falling Further
The American currency is down more than 10 percent so far in 2025, a historic retreat that has overlapped with occasional spikes in long-term US Treasury yields.
The anomalous dynamic suggests investors are rethinking US holdings, once considered safe havens, as they take stock of President Donald Trump's unpredictable policy shifts.
While the dollar's status as the global reserve currency appears unshakeable in the near future, many currency experts expect the greenback to continue to weaken in the coming years, given expectations for slower growth after a long run of US out-performance.
"It's US exceptionalism basically falling by the wayside and the rest of the world playing catch-up," said Erik Nelson, a macro strategist at Wells Fargo, who predicts the dollar will continue to depreciate.
In April, global markets were shaken by "Sell America" gyrations in the stock, foreign exchange and US treasury markets, and analysts expect similar sentiment in the future.
"I think the world is becoming a little bit less stable politically, which is generally kind of problematic for economic and financial market volatility," Nelson said.
"We are witnessing the end of a 14-year bull run of the US dollar," said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM US, a consultancy, who expects a "multi-year unwinding of the dollar."
Harvard Economist Kenneth Rogoff, author of the 2025 book "Our Dollar Your Problem," said central banks in China and elsewhere were diversifying away from dollars even before 2025, but that Trump accelerated the trend.
"I think we'll see a period of a lot of financial volatility, largely centered around the chaos in the United States," Rogoff told AFP, pointing to factors that include uncertainty about US central bank independence and the rise of populism.
"We'll probably have a more volatile period in financial markets over the next 10 years than we have in the preceding."
Both Nelson and Rogoff pointed out that the dollar at the start of 2025 was unusually lofty after surging in the weeks following Trump's November 2024 victory.
Economists have since rethought assumptions that the US would continue to outperform rival economies.
According to the ICE US Dollar Index, a basket of seven currencies, the dollar fell 10.7 percent through the end of June, the biggest drop in the first six months of a year since 1973.
On Thursday, the dollar index rose modestly after solid US jobs data dimmed odds for imminent Federal Reserve interest rate cuts.
With a gain of more than 13 percent against the dollar, the euro has been among the biggest winners following Germany's big fiscal investments in defense, even as the European Central Bank continued to cut interest rates.
Besides a weaker US economic outlook, the shift in the dollar reflects expectations for looser US monetary policy. Trump has taken relentless aim at Jerome Powell, referring to the Federal Reserve Chair as "a stupid person" while calling for interset rates "at least two to three points lower" -- a huge shift in monetary policy.
While Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and other top officials have rejected suggestions they prefer a cheap dollar, a less expensive currency is beneficial to US exporters and consistent with the administration's stated goal of beefing up manufacturing.
"Lower interest rates and a weaker dollar would enable the US to strengthen its economic self-sufficiency and increase onshoring," said Jason Schenker of Prestige Economics, who argues that the moves align with a muscular national security posture towards China.
Market watchers have come to expect Trump to modulate his actions in response to big negative market swings.
On April 9, Trump backtracked on many of the most onerous tariffs from his "Liberation Day" announcement a week earlier after a spike in Treasury bond yields hammered stocks. Later that month, he said he has "no intention" of firing Powell after earlier comments set markets ablaze.
But equity markets so far appear unfazed by dollar weakness, with both the S&P 500 and Nasdaq ending Thursday's session at records.
"At some point it's going to get investors' attention," Cresset Capital Management's Jack Ablin said of the weak dollar.
"It signals foreign investors are less inclined to own US assets."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
Trump signs 'Big Beautiful Bill' into law – DW – 07/05/2025
The signature policy enacts key parts of Donald Trump's agenda and could cement his second-term legacy. US President Donald Trump signed a sweeping tax and spending bill into law on Friday, a day after Congress narrowly passed it. It makes his 2017 tax cuts permanent, slashes federal spending on federal safety-net programs, and funds a major expansion of border security and defense. "I've never seen people so happy in our country because of that, because so many different groups of people are being taken care of: the military, civilians of all types, jobs of all types," Trump said at the signing ceremony during a Fourth of July picnic at the White House. It passed the House by just four votes, with nearly all Democrats and two Republicans opposing over concerns about health care cuts and a projected $3 trillion (€2.5 trillion) increase to the national debt. After a hard-fought legislative process, Trump achieved his goal of signing the signature policy bill on US Independence Day. "America's winning, winning, winning like never before," Trump said. He thanked the Republican lawmakers who helped pass the bill in Congress, especially House Speaker Mike Johnson who was on hand to witness the signing. The bill, dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," calls for tax breaks and increases in defense spending and immigration enforcement. "So you have the biggest tax cut, the biggest spending cut, the largest border security investment in American history," Trump said. At the same time, it will shrink the federal food assistance program and force through the largest cuts to the Medicaid health insurance scheme for low-income Americans since its 1960s launch. According to some estimates, up to 17 million people could lose their insurance coverage under the bill. Analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office also suggests it will add more than $3 trillion to the nation's $36.2 trillion debt. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said in a statement that Trump's signature on the legislation "sealed the fate of the Republican Party, cementing them as the party for billionaires and special interests — not working families." He predicted the law would cost Republicans votes in next year's congressional elections in 2026. "This legislation will hang around the necks of the GOP for years to come," he said. Democrats are rolling out an ambitious campaign of rallies, voter registration drives, attack ads, bus tours, and even a multiday vigil, aimed at spotlighting the most controversial aspects of the legislation. "This was a full betrayal of the American people," Martin said. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
DW
16 hours ago
- DW
EU-US trade talks: Crunch time looms with no deal in sight – DW – 07/04/2025
EU and US negotiators are attempting to finalize a deal on tariffs before an impending deadline on July 9. Experts say a no-deal scenario is possible. July 9 is almost upon us. That's when 50% tariffs could kick in on EU goods sold to the US if the two sides don't strike a deal beforehand. US President Donald Trump hit EU goods with a baseline tariff of 10% on April 2, and a rate of 25% on imported cars and 50% on steel and aluminum. He threatened to ramp the 10% rate up to 50% by April 9, but a stock market selloff prompted by his tariffs led to a postponement. In the meantime, EU and US negotiators have been working to strike an agreement ahead of the looming deadline, amid doubt in European capitals that EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic will be able to strike a deal that satisfies the member states. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told a press conference on Thursday (June 3) that striking a comprehensive trade deal in 90 days was "impossible" but was hopeful of "an agreement in principle", specifically referring to the agreement the US and UK had struck as a model to aim for. Those watching the negotiations closely say there have been sharp divisions among European Union member states over what concessions are acceptable and on what the US side should offer. For example, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has spoken of the need to strike a deal quickly, criticizing the European Commission's "complicated" approach. "What is at stake here is the rapid resolution of a customs dispute, particularly for our country's key industries," he said. Yet, French President Emmanuel Macron has decried the idea of tariffs being levied by powerful countries as "blackmail", without specifically referring to Trump. Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, from the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington D.C., doesn't think the position of the German chancellor will be "acceptable" for all EU members. "Merz has said a number of times that we can live with a 10% across the board tariff. As long as we don't get a 25% sectoral tariff on cars, etc.," he told DW. While the comments of Sefcovic and von der Leyen have been somewhat conciliatory towards Trump and the US, Kirkegaard considers this to be an attempt to maintain unity amongst member states. "That's basically the Commission trying to protect itself against attacks from member states, because it's obviously they would have to bear the consequences of a trade war," he said. If the UK deal is a model, then the EU will likely have to live with 10% tariffs remaining in place on many goods, as the UK has done. The US-UK agreement cut the 25% tariff on UK cars to 10%, but the number of cars that can be imported on that duty is limited to 100,000 — roughly the amount of cars the UK sold to the US in 2024. Any cars exported above that quota will be subject to a 27.5% tax. The EU sold over 700,000 cars to the US last year. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video However, Kirkegaard believes if the steep car, steel and aluminium tariffs remain at the same level, it will hard for many on the EU side to accept. "As long as that's the case, there's not going to be a deal, in my opinion," he said. "It is ultimately not acceptable to the EU, which is an economy roughly comparable in size to the US, for US tariffs to go up and the EU's to not go up." Kirkegaard argues that in a trade confrontation between economies of the same size, tariffs should "go up together and down together." Bill Reinsch, a senior economics adviser with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), thinks a UK-style agreement is the most likely outcome. However, what is most important for Trump is the perception that he has "won" rather than what has actually been agreed, Reinsch told DW. "What matters for him is the Oval Office meeting, that so-and-so was agreed, and now everything's going to be fine. So it wouldn't surprise me if in the end there's a 'quote, unquote agreement' with the EU." He argues it would be prudent for the EU to focus on policy outcomes rather than perceptions of who has won. "Let him have the win. If you let him have the win, what he wins doesn't matter. So you don't have to give up very much if you handle it right." One area where there has been a lot of speculation around possible EU concessions, away from tariffs, is on its digital policy, particularly its Digital Services Act and possible digital sales taxes. Germany has been considering a 10% tax on the sales of US digital giants such as Google and Meta's Facebook in Europe. Trump has spoken out against such plans and this week Canada dropped a digital sales tax proposal to keep trade talks with the US alive. Reinsch thinks the EU should prevent member states introducing these taxes because "Trump is right" in his position, he argued, and that is "not even rhetoric." "I think they are clearly discriminatory against some American companies," he said, adding that from a policy standpoint "it's totally the wrong approach." "If you want to build European competitors, you don't do that by dragging down the competition this way. You do it by building European competitors and creating viable options," said Reinsch. As the July 9 deadline looms, serious consideration is being given to the implications of a negotiations blow-up. The EU has described thetrans-Atlantic trade relationship as "the most important commercial relationship in the world," as bilateral trade in goods and services reached €1.6 trillion ($1.88 trillion) in 2023, according to EU Commission data. Kirkegaard says a no-deal scenario could lead to the requirement for fiscal stimulus in some EU countries due to "short-term volatility." But the EU can cope with that, he believes. "We would not be back in [financial crisis of] 2008 or facing a situation similar to even the energy price shock that happened after the Russian invasion in 2022 — absolutely not," he said. He expects the EU to "lose half a percentage point of growth" this year and next year, which was "not trivial," but at the same time "nothing we couldn't live with." Reinsch has a different view, saying a failure would be "bad news" for everybody. "I think in terms of actual trade, it probably would not be as impactful as a blow-up with China because we buy so much more from China. But in terms of disrupting the relationship and particularly disrupting trans-Atlantic investment, I think it would be a huge problem."
DW
16 hours ago
- DW
Trump tariffs: Crunch time looms in US-EU trade talks – DW – 07/04/2025
EU and US negotiators are attempting to finalize a deal on tariffs before an impending deadline on July 9. Experts say a no-deal scenario is possible. July 9 is almost upon us. That's when 50% tariffs could kick in on EU goods sold to the US if the two sides don't strike a deal beforehand. US President Donald Trump hit EU goods with a baseline tariff of 10% on April 2, and a rate of 25% on imported cars and 50% on steel and aluminum. He threatened to ramp the 10% rate up to 50% by April 9, but a stock market selloff prompted by his tariffs led to a postponement. In the meantime, EU and US negotiators have been working to strike an agreement ahead of the looming deadline, amid doubt in European capitals that EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic will be able to strike a deal that satisfies the member states. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told a press conference on Thursday (June 3) that striking a comprehensive trade deal in 90 days was "impossible" but was hopeful of "an agreement in principle", specifically referring to the agreement the US and UK had struck as a model to aim for. Those watching the negotiations closely say there have been sharp divisions among European Union member states over what concessions are acceptable and on what the US side should offer. For example, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has spoken of the need to strike a deal quickly, criticizing the European Commission's "complicated" approach. "What is at stake here is the rapid resolution of a customs dispute, particularly for our country's key industries," he said. Yet, French President Emmanuel Macron has decried the idea of tariffs being levied by powerful countries as "blackmail", without specifically referring to Trump. Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, from the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington D.C., doesn't think the position of the German chancellor will be "acceptable" for all EU members. "Merz has said a number of times that we can live with a 10% across the board tariff. As long as we don't get a 25% sectoral tariff on cars, etc.," he told DW. While the comments of Sefcovic and von der Leyen have been somewhat conciliatory towards Trump and the US, Kirkegaard considers this to be an attempt to maintain unity amongst member states. "That's basically the Commission trying to protect itself against attacks from member states, because it's obviously they would have to bear the consequences of a trade war," he said. If the UK deal is a model, then the EU will likely have to live with 10% tariffs remaining in place on many goods, as the UK has done. The US-UK agreement cut the 25% tariff on UK cars to 10%, but the number of cars that can be imported on that duty is limited to 100,000 — roughly the amount of cars the UK sold to the US in 2024. Any cars exported above that quota will be subject to a 27.5% tax. The EU sold over 700,000 cars to the US last year. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video However, Kirkegaard believes if the steep car, steel and aluminium tariffs remain at the same level, it will hard for many on the EU side to accept. "As long as that's the case, there's not going to be a deal, in my opinion," he said. "It is ultimately not acceptable to the EU, which is an economy roughly comparable in size to the US, for US tariffs to go up and the EU's to not go up." Kirkegaard argues that in a trade confrontation between economies of the same size, tariffs should "go up together and down together." Bill Reinsch, a senior economics adviser with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), thinks a UK-style agreement is the most likely outcome. However, what is most important for Trump is the perception that he has "won" rather than what has actually been agreed, Reinsch told DW. "What matters for him is the Oval Office meeting, that so-and-so was agreed, and now everything's going to be fine. So it wouldn't surprise me if in the end there's a 'quote, unquote agreement' with the EU." He argues it would be prudent for the EU to focus on policy outcomes rather than perceptions of who has won. "Let him have the win. If you let him have the win, what he wins doesn't matter. So you don't have to give up very much if you handle it right." One area where there has been a lot of speculation around possible EU concessions, away from tariffs, is on its digital policy, particularly its Digital Services Act and possible digital sales taxes. Germany has been considering a 10% tax on the sales of US digital giants such as Google and Meta's Facebook in Europe. Trump has spoken out against such plans and this week Canada dropped a digital sales tax proposal to keep trade talks with the US alive. Reinsch thinks the EU should prevent member states introducing these taxes because "Trump is right" in his position, he argued, and that is "not even rhetoric." "I think they are clearly discriminatory against some American companies," he said, adding that from a policy standpoint "it's totally the wrong approach." "If you want to build European competitors, you don't do that by dragging down the competition this way. You do it by building European competitors and creating viable options," said Reinsch. As the July 9 deadline looms, serious consideration is being given to the implications of a negotiations blow-up. The EU has described thetrans-Atlantic trade relationship as "the most important commercial relationship in the world," as bilateral trade in goods and services reached €1.6 trillion ($1.88 trillion) in 2023, according to EU Commission data. Kirkegaard says a no-deal scenario could lead to the requirement for fiscal stimulus in some EU countries due to "short-term volatility." But the EU can cope with that, he believes. "We would not be back in [financial crisis of] 2008 or facing a situation similar to even the energy price shock that happened after the Russian invasion in 2022 — absolutely not," he said. He expects the EU to "lose half a percentage point of growth" this year and next year, which was "not trivial," but at the same time "nothing we couldn't live with." Reinsch has a different view, saying a failure would be "bad news" for everybody. "I think in terms of actual trade, it probably would not be as impactful as a blow-up with China because we buy so much more from China. But in terms of disrupting the relationship and particularly disrupting trans-Atlantic investment, I think it would be a huge problem."
