logo
Trading Day: Nervous calm ahead of 'Liberation Day'

Trading Day: Nervous calm ahead of 'Liberation Day'

Reuters01-04-2025
ORLANDO, Florida, April 2 (Reuters) - Only 24 hours until Trump unveils new tariffs
The first trading day of the quarter on Tuesday was a nervy affair ahead of U.S. President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" on Wednesday, with markets struggling for clear direction as Trump's new trade barriers loomed into view.
Get a look at the day ahead in U.S. and global markets with the Morning Bid U.S. newsletter. Sign up here.
Stocks mostly rose but U.S. Treasury yields tumbled, while gold and the dollar broadly held steady. Talking of the greenback, I will dig deeper into the IMF's latest FX reserves data below, but first, here are the scores on the doors from Tuesday's trading around the world.
Today's Key Market Moves.
A late surge on Wall Street lifts the Nasdaq and S&P 500 out of the red. The Nasdaq rises 0.8%, the S&P 500 gains for a second day.
Tesla shares rebound 3.6% ahead of its first-quarter vehicle deliveries report on Wednesday.
U.S. Treasury yields fall across the curve. A 9 bps decline at the long end bull flattens the curve.
Benchmark European stocks rise more than 1% for their best day in two weeks.
The dollar index holds steady, with gains against the euro offset by losses against the yen and Australian dollar.
Bitcoin rises 3% back above $85,000, its best day in nearly three weeks.
The specter of Trump's new tariffs on Wednesday has sucked the oxygen out of world markets in recent weeks, and despite the generally positive performance on Tuesday, anyone hoping life will be injected back into them once the announcement is made is setting themselves up for disappointment.
There's simply too much uncertainty and too little visibility around how the new tariffs will work, how long they will be in place, what exemptions or concessions there may be, how other countries will react, and what the implications will be for specific sectors, markets and asset classes.
To paraphrase former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, that's a lot of known unknowns, and a fair sprinkling of unknown unknowns too. That fog of uncertainty won't lift on Wednesday, and indeed, is more likely to thicken - hardly the conducive environment for investors, consumers and businesses to get spending.
An announcement has been scheduled for 4 p.m. Eastern Time (2000 GMT) on Wednesday, and it wouldn't be surprising if investors try to maintain a holding pattern across markets until then as best they can.
The longer term dilemma they and policymakers face was encapsulated in a couple of U.S. economic indicators on Tuesday that showed manufacturing slipping back into contraction, and a measure of factory gate inflation jumping to the highest in nearly three years.
Stagflation risks are rising, markets are skittish, and the common denominator is Trump's tariff agenda.
Japanese stock futures point to the benchmark Nikkei 225 index rising around 0.4% at the open on Wednesday, a pretty small bounce considering the index had plunged 4% on Monday.
Dollar's record low FX reserves share not all bad news for Trump
In January, U.S. President Donald Trump warned the so-called BRICS nations against replacing, or backing any currency to take the place of, the "mighty U.S. dollar."
While the International Monetary Fund's latest foreign exchange reserves data for the fourth quarter of last year suggests central banks around the world continue to pull away from the greenback, there may be a silver lining for the president.
The IMF's Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves (Cofer) data, the gold standard for FX reserves information, show that countries have been gradually chipping away at their dollar holdings and diversifying for years.
Indeed, the greenback's nominal share of official FX reserve holdings in the third quarter of last year fell to a record low 57.3% from over 72.0% in 2001.
That crept up slightly to 57.8% in the fourth quarter, a rare rise, but the dollar surged 7.6% against a basket of major currencies in the period, its biggest quarterly appreciation in nearly a decade. All else equal, this reduces the dollar value of reserves held in non-dollar currencies such as the euro, sterling, or Japanese yen.
When adjusting for these FX changes, the dollar's share of reserves slid to a record low of 54.1% from 55.3%, according to Goldman Sachs. At the start of the millennium, that share was over 71%.
Importantly, the Cofer figures only go up to December 31, so do not take into account any reserve shifts made amid the historically high policy uncertainty and market ructions of recent months.
With military, diplomatic and trade ties going back decades now fraying at an alarming rate, reserve managers are bound to be rethinking their FX allocations. And that is unlikely to involve a sudden re-discovered love for the dollar.
STILL NUMBER ONE
Reserve managers do not typically make knee-jerk reactions to market gyrations or the headlines du jour. They're a cautious breed, prioritizing liquidity, stability and long-termism over yield, opportunity and a fast buck.
But further diversification of their FX reserves can hardly be considered an impulsive reaction, as the trend is pretty well entrenched. The emergence of any new world order in the coming years would likely only strengthen it.
No matter how you slice it, the dollar's overwhelming dominance in global FX reserves is weakening. But that doesn't mean the greenback's place as the world's preeminent reserve currency is under threat.
Its share is not being eaten up by its nearest rival, the euro, but by a bunch of smaller, "nontraditional" reserve currencies such as the Korean won, Australian and Canadian dollars, and China's renminbi.
"It's not just diversification out of the dollar. Euro reserve holdings have fallen in nominal and valuation-adjusted terms as well," notes Goldman's Michael Cahill.
This is a trend that has been underway for years, taking hold just after the Global Financial Crisis and accelerating again after the pandemic.
The Cofer data shows the aggregate share of "nontraditional" currencies in central banks' FX reserves was 12.6% in December, just off September's record high of 12.7%. Before 2009, that share had never exceeded 3%.
The euro's share since its launch more than 25 years ago has never fallen below 19% and only once, in late 2020, has it exceeded 21%. Any reduction in the difference between the dollar and euro shares has been caused by reserve managers shunning the greenback rather than taking a shine to the euro.
Their preference to build up holdings of several smaller currencies has created a somewhat curious equilibrium. The dollar is seeing its dominance gradually diminish, but it's in little danger of losing its role as the world's sole reserve currency.
Trump, who seems to want the dollar to remain dominant while no longer sucking in so much of the world's savings, may be happy with that.
What could move markets tomorrow?
If you have more time to read today, here are a few articles I recommend to help you make sense of what happened in markets today.
I'd love to hear from you, so please reach out to me with comments at jamie.mcgeever@thomsonreuters.com. You can also follow me at [@ReutersJamie and @reutersjamie.bsky.social.]
Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, opens new tab, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias.
sign up here.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Republicans slam Trump's firing of Bureau of Labor Statistics chief
Republicans slam Trump's firing of Bureau of Labor Statistics chief

The Guardian

time29 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Republicans slam Trump's firing of Bureau of Labor Statistics chief

Senior Republican lawmakers are condemning the decision of their party leader, Donald Trump, to fire the leading US labor market statistician after a report that showed the national economy added just 73,000 jobs – far fewer than expected – in July. The disappointing figures – coupled with a downward revision of the two previous months amounting to 258,000 fewer jobs and data showing that economic output and consumer spending slowed in the first half of the year – point to an overall economic deterioration in the US. Trump defended his decision to fire US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) commissioner Erika McEntarfer. Without evidence to back his claims, the president wrote on social media that were numbers were 'RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad' and the US economy was, in fact, 'BOOMING' on his watch. But the firing of McEntarfer, who had been confirmed to her role in January 2024 during Joe Biden's presidency, has alarmed members of Trump's own party. 'If the president is firing the statistician because he doesn't like the numbers but they are accurate, then that's a problem,' said Wyoming Republican senator Cynthia Lummis. 'It's not the statistician's fault if the numbers are accurate and that they're not what the president had hoped for.' Lummis added that if the numbers are unreliable, the public should be told – but firing McEntarfer was 'kind of impetuous'. North Carolina senator Thom Tillis, a Republican, said: 'If she was just fired because the president or whoever decided to fire the director just … because they didn't like the numbers, they ought to grow up.' Kentucky senator Rand Paul, another Republican, questioned whether McEntarfer's firing was an effective way of improving the numbers. 'We have to look somewhere for objective statistics,' he said. 'When the people providing the statistics are fired, it makes it much harder to make judgments that you know, the statistics won't be politicized.' According to NBC News, Paul said his 'first impression' was that 'you can't really make the numbers different or better by firing the people doing the counting'. Tillis and Paul were both opponents of Trump's recent economic legislative package, which the president dubbed the 'big, beautiful bill'. But Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, a Republican who supported the legislation after winning substantial economic support for her state, remarked that the jobs numbers could not be trusted – and 'that's the problem'. 'And when you fire people, then it makes people trust them even less,' she said. William Beach, a former BLS commissioner appointed by Trump in his first presidency, posted on X that McEntarfer's firing was 'totally groundless'. He added that the dismissal set a dangerous precedent and undermined the BLS's statistical mission. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Beach also co-signed a letter by 'the Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' that went further, accusing Trump of seeking to blame someone for bad news and calling the rationale for McEntarfer's firing 'without merit'. The letter asserted that the dismissal 'undermines the credibility of federal economic statistics that are a cornerstone of intelligent economic decision-making by businesses, families and policymakers'. The letter pointed out that the jobs tabulation process 'is decentralized by design to avoid opportunities for interference', adding that US official statistics 'are the gold standard globally'. 'When leaders of other nations have politicized economic data, it has destroyed public trust in all official statistics and in government science,' the letter said. Democrats have also hit out at Trump's decision. Vermont senator Bernie Sanders described it as 'the sign of an authoritarian type', and he said the decision would make it harder for the American people 'to believe the information that comes out of the government'. Paul Schroeder, executive director of the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, described the president's allegation against McEntarfer as 'very damaging and outrageous'. He said: 'Not only does it undermine the integrity of federal economic statistics, but it also politicizes data which need to remain independent and trustworthy. This action is a grave error by the administration and one that will have ramifications for years to come.'

Polarising Donald Trump's North Sea comments tapped into growing frustration
Polarising Donald Trump's North Sea comments tapped into growing frustration

Scotsman

timean hour ago

  • Scotsman

Polarising Donald Trump's North Sea comments tapped into growing frustration

It's time to listen to the point made by US president Donald Trump and turn his soundbite on the North Sea into a smart, sober policy, writes Ryan Crighton. Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Donald Trump's shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy was on full display in Aberdeen this week as he waded into the UK's energy debate, calling for lower taxes on North Sea oil and gas operators. The president's remarks – delivered both in person and online to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – will have raised eyebrows in Westminster. However, in the north-east of Scotland, where redundancies are mounting, his comments tapped into a growing sense of frustration. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad US President Donald Trump on the first tee during the official opening of the New Course, the second championship course at Trump International Golf Links, on the Menie Estate in Balmedie, Aberdeenshire | PA He may be a polarising messenger, but his advocacy for the repeal of the Energy Profits Levy (EPL) aligns with what the data, the workers and the businesses on the ground have been saying for over two years – that the windfall tax is killing off a vital British industry and a crucial national asset. According to data from Offshore Energies UK, 10,000 jobs have already been lost since the levy's introduction by the Conservative government in 2022. Harbour Energy, the UK's largest oil and gas producer, has since laid off 600 people in Aberdeen alone. These aren't abstract statistics — they are highly skilled individuals, families, and communities being sacrificed on the altar of fiscal short-termism. The failure of the north east green freeport bid is a major blow for a regional economy transitioning away from fossil fuels. Picture: Andy Buchanan/Getty Worse still, the economic wreckage isn't even delivering the returns that were promised. Independent analysis from Stifel shows EPL revenues have consistently come in at the low end of government forecasts. Why? Because the supposed "windfall" they are taxing does not exist. Oil prices are down 50 per cent since the peak of the Ukraine crisis. Gas prices have collapsed by 80 per cent. The result is a textbook case of policy failure. Tax hikes intended to boost revenues have instead triggered a collapse in investment, with over £20 billion of planned capital spending now cancelled or paused. Exploration activity has ground to a halt. Fields are being decommissioned prematurely. The UK is forfeiting not just jobs and tax income, but its energy security. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This shouldn't just be of concern to those living and working in Aberdeen - this should alarm everyone, because the UK still needs oil and gas. Even in the most ambitious net-zero scenario, the country will require between 13 and 15 billion barrels of oil equivalent by 2050. Right now, we're on track to produce less than four. And that energy shortfall isn't going to be filled by wind turbines and hydrogen pipelines overnight. The reality is that we are swapping cleaner, domestically produced energy for dirtier, imported alternatives. According to the North Sea Transition Authority, gas extracted in the UK has less than a quarter of the carbon footprint of imported LNG. Yet we are allowing that domestic capacity to decline while increasing our reliance on higher-emission imports from the US and Qatar. It is environmental hypocrisy at its worst. All the while, the UK government continues to claim we are 'maximising value' from our domestic resources. But how? By driving capital offshore? By gutting the supply chain that is also needed to deliver renewables, carbon capture, and green hydrogen? By forcing energy companies to pay tax rates that, in some cases, exceed 100 per cent? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ryan Crighton, policy director at Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce and a senior partner at True North Advisors. | True North Advisors In 2024, Harbour Energy reported a pre-tax profit of £950 million. However, after accounting for an effective tax rate of 108 per cent, the company posted no net profit for the year. This level of taxation is without parallel in the UK economy. It's not just unfair - it's economically suicidal. The UK's approach also compares poorly to our North Sea neighbours in Norway. While their headline tax rate is similar, the Norwegian government supports exploration and shares risk through its fiscal regime. That's why Norway continues to attract investment and why its energy sector is thriving. We, by contrast, have taken the opposite path – penalising production, scaring off capital, and hoping for different results. What's even more galling is that the levy is being used to fund Great British Energy – the new public clean energy company set-up by the Labour Party. According to Stifel, EPL revenues are set to collapse from £5.5bn to under £1bn by 2029. You cannot fund the future of energy by strangling the very sector that underpins it. So yes, President Trump is right to shine a spotlight on this issue. But the solution isn't a populist soundbite or a quick political win. It is a long-overdue dose of energy pragmatism. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad That means abolishing the EPL – now – and restoring a stable, competitive tax regime that can unlock investment, extend production and retain the critical skills base we will need for the next generation of energy infrastructure. It also means rejecting the false binary between fossil fuels and renewables. The future is not oil or wind. It is oil and wind. And hydrogen. And carbon capture. We need all of it. Everything, everywhere, all at once. The UK cannot build a low-carbon future while dismantling the industrial engine required to deliver it. A managed transition must be just that – managed. And that means recognising the continuing role of oil and gas, treating our energy sector with the strategic seriousness it deserves, and stopping the ideological war against the basin that still powers Britain. So, let's take Trump's call and translate it into smart, sober policy. Not because he said it, but because the facts demand it. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The North Sea doesn't need special treatment, but it does deserve fair treatment. The alternative isn't a greener future – it's a weaker Britain.

Pardons, positions and power: Trump's donor list raises questions about pay-for-access in his administration
Pardons, positions and power: Trump's donor list raises questions about pay-for-access in his administration

The Independent

time5 hours ago

  • The Independent

Pardons, positions and power: Trump's donor list raises questions about pay-for-access in his administration

A new financial disclosure from a super PAC supporting President Donald Trump contains the name of the deep-pocket donors who have gained access to the White House. MAGA Inc.'s donor list includes Trump appointees, a mom who managed to get Trump to pardon her son, and cryptocurrency traders, according to a new report by the New York Times. The super PAC managed to pull some major donations for the president; according to the disclosure, MAGA Inc. raised more than $177 million for Trump since January. Some names on the list wound up working for Trump in his administration. Anjani Sinha, a friend of Trump's, was nominated to be the ambassador to Singapore. He donated $1 million to MAGA Inc. He hasn't been approved for the position yet, possibly because he struggled to answer questions about Singapore during his confirmation hearing. Cody Campbell, who is now on Trump's Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition, donated half a million dollars to the super PAC. Josh Lobel, now sitting on Trump's Intelligence Advisory Board, donated $250,000. Several major donors are tied to the crypto industry, which has by and large found a friendly ally in Trump. According to the Times, Trump's inaugural committee raised an enormous $239 million, with approximately $18 million of that coming from crypto-related donors. According to the filing, donors working in cryptocurrencies accounted for $45 million of the donations reported through MAGA Inc. One donor alone — crypto entrepreneur Eric Schiermeyer — donated $1 million, and was given the chance to have dinner with Trump in Mar-a-Lago in March. The pair didn't just eat and chat — during the dinner, Schiermeyer apparently pitched Trump on an idea for a cryptocurrency called the "USA Token" that would be doled out to Americans for use in transactions. He reportedly wanted a government contract for his company to handle the task, according to the Times ' reporting. He told the paper that he managed to get his idea in front of Trump face-to-face, so he considers it a win. 'I was able to say my piece, and the idea is clearly making the rounds, so mission accomplished from my view.' he told the Times. And then there's Elizabeth Fago, who handed over $1 million to MAGA Inc. and got herself a dinner with Trump. Three weeks later, her son, Paul Walczak, who pleaded guilty to tax fraud, was pardoned. A White House spokesperson who talked to the Times anonymously said that Fago's words, rather than her cash, convinced the president to give her son a break. 'He spoke directly to a mother who pleaded for her son, and when you're talking to a mother pleading for her son, that's a pretty powerful thing,' the source reportedly said. The Independent has requested comment from The White House. According to MAGA Inc., all of the apparent benefits that come along with shoveling money at Trump are just a coincidence. It told the Times that Trump doesn't treat donors any different from normal Americans. 'President Trump values his supporters and donors, but unlike politicians before him, he cannot be bought and works toward the best interest of the country,' it told the paper.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store