Stock markets fall as trade relief fades, eyes on data and earnings
While Donald Trump's agreement with the European Union on Sunday was seen as better than a tariff standoff, observers pointed out that the US president's 15 percent levies — with none on American goods — were still much higher than before.
The pact, which followed a similar one with Japan last week, still left many worried about the economic consequences, with auto companies particularly worried.
'The 15 percent blanket levy on EU and Japanese imports may have helped markets sidestep a cliff, but it's no free pass,' said Stephen Innes at SPI Asset Management.
'With the average effective US tariff rate now sitting at 18.2 percent… the barrier to global trade remains significant. The higher tail risk didn't detonate, but its potential impact on the global economy hasn't disappeared either.'
And National Australia Bank's Ray Attrill added: 'It hasn't taken long for markets to conclude that this relatively good news is still, in absolute terms, bad news as far as the near term (through 2025) implications for eurozone growth are concerned.'
Traders are also keeping an eye on US talks with other major economies, including India and South Korea.
After a tepid day on Wall Street — which still saw the S&P and Nasdaq hit records — Asia turned negative.
Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sydney, Singapore, Wellington, Taipei, Manila and Jakarta were all in the red.
The euro held its losses from Monday, having taken a hit from worries about the effects of the trade deal on the eurozone.
The first of two days of negotiations between top US and Chinese officials in Stockholm concluded Monday with no details released, though there are hopes they will agree to extend a 90-day truce that ends on August 12.
The two imposed triple-digit tariffs on each other earlier this year in a tit-for-tat escalation, but then walked them back under the temporary agreement reached in May.
Investors are also looking ahead to a busy few days that includes earnings from tech titans Apple, Microsoft, Meta and Amazon, as well as data on US economic growth and jobs creation.
That all comes as the Fed concludes its policy meeting amid increasing pressure from Trump to slash rates, even with inflation staying stubbornly high.
While it is expected to stand pat on borrowing costs, its post-meeting statement and comments from boss Jerome Powell will be pored over for clues about its plans for the second half of the year in light of the tariffs.
Oil prices extended Monday's rally after Trump shortened a deadline for Russia to end its war in Ukraine to August 7 or 9, following which he vowed to sanction countries buying its crude.
– Key figures at around 0230 GMT –
Tokyo – Nikkei 225: DOWN 0.9 percent at 40,623.32 (break)
Hong Kong – Hang Seng Index: DOWN 1.1 percent at 25,290.03
Shanghai – Composite: DOWN 0.1 percent at 3,595.46
Euro/dollar: DOWN at $1.1592 from $1.1597 on Monday
Pound/dollar: DOWN at $1.3354 from $1.3356
Dollar/yen: UP at 148.61 yen from 148.52 yen
Euro/pound: UP at 86.81 pence from 86.80 pence
West Texas Intermediate: FLAT at $66.72 per barrel
Brent North Sea Crude: UP 0.1 percent at $70.11 per barrel
New York – Dow: DOWN 0.1 percent at 44,837.56 (close)
London – FTSE 100: DOWN 0.4 percent at 9,081.44 (close)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Iraq Business
4 hours ago
- Iraq Business
Beyond Tariffs: Building a Win-Win Relationship with the US
By Ahmed Tabaqchali for the Atlantic Council. Any opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Iraq Business News. Beyond tariffs: Building a win-win relationship between the US and Iraq Iraq was among the countries that received a letter from US President Donald Trump on July 9th advising its prime minister that Baghdad's trading relationship with Washington was far from reciprocal-and thus its exports to the United States would be subject to a 30 percent tariff starting August 1. This is lower than the initial rate of 39 percent that the Trump administration announced on " Liberation Day " back in April, but higher than the revised 10 percent base rate that applied to all countries when the Trump administration paused "Liberation Day" tariffs for ninety days, allowing room for negotiations that expired in July. Click here to read the full report. To browse our comprehensive library of reports on Iraq, click here.
Memri
11 hours ago
- Memri
What Washington Can Learn From The India-UK Free Trade Agreement
India's recent achievement in concluding a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United Kingdom stands in stark contrast to the tense and protracted negotiations that continue to mark its trade dialogue with the United States.[1] The India-UK FTA, signed in July 2025, is not merely a trade pact, it reflects mutual understanding, strategic alignment, and a shared vision for inclusive growth. It was forged through three years of fractured but ultimately fruitful negotiations between two mature economies that chose pragmatism over posturing. The UK, navigating its post-Brexit economic identity, saw in India not just a market but a partner whose economic ascent could complement its own industrial ambitions. Britain's modern industrial strategy, with its focus on advanced manufacturing, clean energy, and digital technologies, found resonance with India's reform-driven growth trajectory and its aspiration to become a $5 trillion economy by 2027. "US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order for new tariffs on almost 70 countries which is set to go into effect in 7 days. The list includes India which will have to pay a 25% tariff effective 7 days from now. Earlier Trump had announced that India's tariff rate would be effective August 1, but the Executive order signed for 69 countries - with India on the list - says the new tariff rates will be applicable from August 7. He has imposed a 25% tariff on India with an additional unspecified penalty for India's trade with Russia for defense equipment and crude oil…" (Source: Times of India, August 1, 2025) The Indo-U.S. Trade Negotiations Remain Mired In Structural Disagreements The India-UK agreement was not confined to tariff reductions. It offered zero-duty access to 99 percent of Indian exports, streamlined mobility for professionals, and addressed social security contributions through the Double Contribution Convention. It was, in essence, a pact of mutual respect and forward-looking trust. The UK acknowledged India's developmental priorities, its Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSME)-driven economy, and its strategic ambitions. It approached the deal not as a zero-sum game, but as a collaborative opportunity to harness complementary strengths. The result is a framework that promises to double bilateral trade to USD 120 billion by 2030, catalyzing investment, job creation, and industrial competitiveness. In contrast, the Indo-U.S. trade negotiations remain mired in structural disagreements and ideological friction. The disagreements, whether on agricultural subsidies, digital trade, or Special and Differential Treatment at the WTO, are not new. But what exacerbates them is the persistent perception gap. The U.S. views India's insistence on Managed Service Provider (MSP)-based procurement and its digital sovereignty measures as protectionist, while India sees them as essential instruments of social equity and economic resilience. The Equalisation Levy,[2] often dubbed the "Google Tax," a tax introduced in India to tax the digital economy, is emblematic of this clash: a measure born of India's attempt to ensure fair taxation in the digital age, but interpreted by Washington as a targeted affront to American tech giants. Underlying these tensions is a fundamental misreading of India's developmental context. Despite its macroeconomic strength and global ambitions, India remains a country where MSMEs form the backbone of employment, where agriculture is still vulnerable to price shocks, and where per capita consumption lags far behind developed economies. The U.S. administration, in its pursuit of reciprocal concessions, often overlooks these structural realities. It perceives India's rise as a zero-sum game, every gain for India, it fears, comes at the expense of American manufacturing. This mindset not only stifles progress but risks alienating a partner whose strategic alignment with the U.S. is otherwise robust. India's principled stance at the WTO, whether in defending Special and Differential Treatment or opposing plurilateral deals, has often been misunderstood by the U.S. as obstructionism. Yet these positions are rooted in India's historical commitment to the solidarity of developing economies. India's refusal to join the Government Procurement Agreement, for instance, stems from its belief that public procurement is a vital tool for social development. Its opposition to the WTO Moratorium on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions is not a rejection of digital trade, but a call for equitable taxation in a rapidly evolving digital landscape. The Divergence In Perception Between The U.S. And India Has Created A Negotiation Environment Fraught With Suspicion And Rigidity The agricultural sector remains a particularly thorny issue. While both countries provide domestic subsidies under WTO-approved provisions, the U.S. argues that India's MSP-based procurement distorts global markets. India, however, sees it as a lifeline for farmers and a bulwark against inflation. The Food Corporation of India's procurement mechanism is not a trade tool, it is a social safety net. The U.S. must recognize that in a country where agriculture employs nearly half the workforce, such mechanisms are not negotiable luxuries but developmental necessities. The digital economy, too, has become a battleground of perceptions. The U.S. views India's Digital Public Infrastructure and initiatives like Atmanirbhar Bharat ("Self-reliant India")[3] as inward-looking, while India sees them as enablers of inclusive growth. Ironically, both countries are global tech hubs with deep investment linkages. Yet instead of building on this synergy, the negotiations have been marred by mistrust and misinterpretation. The root of these differences lies not in the specifics of trade policy but in the broader lens through which each country views the other. India sees itself as a developing economy with legitimate needs for policy space and protective measures. The US, by contrast, sees India's economic rise as a signal that it should relinquish such privileges. This divergence in perception has created a negotiation environment fraught with suspicion and rigidity. The U.S. Has An Opportunity To Reframe Its Engagement With India, Not As A Competitor, But As A Strategic Partner The lesson, then, lies in the UK's approach. Britain did not dilute its interests; it simply chose to engage with India on equal terms, acknowledging its sensitivities and aspirations. The result was a comprehensive, high-quality agreement that promises to unlock significant opportunities for both sides. The US, if it wishes to conclude a meaningful FTA with India, must shed its transactional lens and adopt a more nuanced, empathetic posture. It must recognize that India's insistence on developmental safeguards is not obstructionism, it is a principled stand rooted in lived realities. Trade, at its best, is not a contest of concessions but a choreography of shared growth. The India-UK FTA exemplifies this spirit. The India-U.S. negotiations, if they are to succeed, must rediscover it. The current U.S. administration has an opportunity to reframe its engagement with India, not as a competitor, but as a strategic partner whose growth can amplify shared prosperity. It must move beyond the arithmetic of tariffs and embrace the algebra of trust. Only then can the Indo-U.S. trade deal transcend its impasse and become a beacon of 21st-century economic diplomacy.
Shafaq News
20 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Gold set for third weekly loss amid stronger dollar, reduced Fed rate cut hopes
Shafaq News Gold prices held steady on Friday, but is poised for a third consecutive weekly loss pressured by a stronger dollar and diminished expectations for U.S. rate cuts, while uncertainty from U.S. tariffs on trading partners offered support. Spot gold was steady at $3,288.89 per ounce, as of 0733 GMT. Bullion is down 1.4% so far this week. U.S. gold futures edged down 0.3% to $3,339.90. The dollar index hit its highest level since May 29, making gold more expensive for other currency holders. "Gold remains weighed by reduced bets for Fed rate cuts for the rest of 2025. This week's U.S. GDP, weekly jobless claims, and PCE figures also shored up the Fed's reluctance to commit to a rate cut," said Han Tan, chief market analyst at Fed held rates steady in the 4.25%-4.50% range on Wednesday and dampened expectations for a September rate cut. U.S. President Donald Trump slapped steep tariffs on exports from dozens of trading partners, including Canada, Brazil, India and Taiwan, pressing ahead with his plans to reorder the global economy ahead of a Friday trade deal deadline. "The precious metal should, however, remain supported amid the still-uncertain impact from U.S. tariffs on global economic growth," Tan said. U.S. inflation increased in June as tariffs on imports started raising the cost of some goods. Focus now shifts to U.S. jobs data, due later on Friday, as investors assess the Federal Reserve's policy trajectory, with July job growth expected to have slowed and the unemployment rate projected to rise to 4.2%. Gold, often considered a safe-haven asset during economic uncertainties, tends to perform well in a low-interest-rate environment. Physical gold demand in key Asian markets improved slightly this week as a pullback in prices sparked buying interest, though volatility kept some buyers cautious. Spot silver fell 0.7% to $36.50 per ounce, platinum lost 0.8% at $1,278.40 and palladium was down 0.2% to $1,188.28. All three metals were headed for weekly losses.
