Singapore's annual core inflation rate 0.6% in May, matching poll forecast
The core inflation rate, which excludes private road transport and accommodation costs, was in line with a forecast rate of 0.6% in a Reuters poll of economists.
Headline inflation was 0.8% in annual terms in May, also matching the median poll forecast of 0.8%.
It was the fifth consecutive month where the annual core rate was below 1%.
Singapore's growth outlook has dimmed due to the economic uncertainty from U.S. tariffs. In April, the central bank loosened monetary policy for the second time this year and lowered forecasts for both core and headline inflation to 0.5% to 1.5%.
Singapore has also downgraded its GDP forecast for 2025 to 0% to 2% growth, with officials saying the city-state faces a risk of recession and job losses.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Bank expected to cut interest rates for fifth time this year
The Bank of England is poised to cut interest rates for the fifth time in a year next week in what is likely to be a tightly contested decision among its officials. Members of the nine-strong monetary policy committee (MPC), the group that sets the base rate in the UK every six weeks, are expected to vote 5-4 in favour of lowering borrowing costs to 4 per cent from 4.25 per cent on Thursday. Rates peaked at 5.25 per cent in August 2023 and have gradually fallen since August last year. A slim majority of five panellists, including Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank, are set to back the quarter-point rate reduction. Two members, probably Huw Pill, the Bank's chief economist, and Catherine Mann, an external MPC member, are anticipated to favour leaving rates unchanged. Two other external members, Swati Dhingra and Alan Taylor, may call for a larger 50-basis point downward move. The MPC is deeply divided over how much emphasis it respectively assigns to inflation, the labour market and economic growth. Members who have favoured a more cautious approach to loosening policy have pointed to higher inflation expectations among consumers and a resurgence in food prices. Those who have backed rate cuts are more concerned about weakness in the labour market and soft pay growth. • House prices rise after stamp duty holiday slowdown Analysts at Bank of America, the Wall Street investment bank, said: 'The tone of the meeting is likely to strike a delicate balance between the trade-off the BoE is facing of still elevated inflation/inflation expectations and softening growth/pay and labour market.' In April and May the economy contracted by 0.3 per cent and 0.1 per cent respectively. In the spring the unemployment rate climbed to 4.7 per cent, a four-year high, while payrolled employment has contracted for five months in a row after the £25 billion increase in employers' national insurance contributions. • Andrew Bailey blocks Rachel Reeves's meeting with Revolut However, inflation leapt to an 18-month high of 3.6 per cent in June and Bank of England officials think that the rate will remain above 3 per cent for the remainder of the year. The Bank is required to keep inflation at 2 per cent. Nomura, a Japanese investment bank, said: 'Policy easing can be justified even without particularly weak data because rates are restrictive. When this justification (of getting policy back to neutral) for lowering rates no longer holds, further cuts should become even more data-dependent.' Markets think that the MPC will probably lower rates in November and eventually take them down to 3.5 per cent, but Ruth Gregory, deputy chief UK economist at Capital Economics, a consultancy, said that they will settle at 3 per cent. 'It's only a matter of time before the weakness in employment leads to wage growth and inflation falling back to target consistent rates,' she said. On Thursday the MPC will also publish new economic forecasts for the next three years and update investors on whether it believes the gilt market is being affected by sales of government bonds.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
South Africa's finance minister and central bank governor at odds over inflation target
JOHANNESBURG, Aug 1 (Reuters) - The South African central bank's decision to lower its inflation target on Thursday without the sign-off of the finance ministry has raised questions among investors about policymaking cohesion in Africa's largest economy. South African Reserve Bank Governor Lesetja Kganyago and Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana rarely disagree in public, but they have been at odds on this issue. Godongwana on Friday dismissed expectations that he would quickly endorse the bank's preference to aim for 3% inflation rather than the middle of the 3%-6% target range. Kim Silberman, portfolio manager at Matrix Fund Managers, said Thursday's SARB announcement raised "questions around where the mandate for inflation targeting sits". Markets nevertheless cheered the decision, with South African government bonds outperforming and yields at five-year lows. They are set for a 2.2% return this week, outstripping Turkey, Chile, Brazil and Mexico. Piotr Matys, senior FX analyst at InTouch Capital, said the SARB's commitment to anchor inflation would have long-term benefits. "But over the short term it could prove a risky move, being an additional burden on the economy that faces the prospect of tariffs to the U.S." Many investors' base case was that the target would eventually be lowered, but Kganyago going it alone gave investors a jolt. "The decision itself was no surprise to the market. It was the SARB's explicit preference to aim for the lower 3% band of its existing 3-6% CPI target, ahead of the National Treasury formally adjusting the target lower, that caught most by surprise," said Jeffrey Schultz, Head of CEEMEA Economics at BNP Paribas Markets 360. Kganyago says the current target band is too wide and erodes competitiveness, while Godongwana says decisions on the target should not be taken without the necessary technical and political engagements. Inflation has moved below the current 4.5% target, and inflation expectations have dropped below that figure. Kganyago said on Thursday that the bank could lock in these gains and make sure that South Africans benefit from them. Godongwana, without openly disagreeing about inflation, said he wanted to stick to procedures for making any target changes. "Any adjustments to our inflation-targeting framework will follow the established consultation process," he said in a statement on Friday. "This means comprehensive consultation between National Treasury, the Reserve Bank, Cabinet, and relevant stakeholders – not unilateral announcements that pre-empt legitimate policy deliberation." Lowering the inflation target could cause some short-term pain. Some analysts, like those at Goldman Sachs, expect the central bank may front-load interest rate cuts. That's based on inflation forecasts more benign than those of the central bank. But equally, it may find itself constrained and need to keep them higher for longer to combat global risks and to force prices lower. Wages and prices also adjust slowly, likely resulting in lower spending, faltering investment, and job losses before benefits can be felt. Trade unions have previously voiced their objections. Governor Kganyago pointed to Section 224 of the constitution, which states the bank must protect the value of the currency, Silberman said. "According to the MPC (Monetary Policy Committee), this decision is procedurally equivalent to when the SARB announced in 2017 that it would explicitly target 4.5%," said Silberman at Matrix Fund Managers. "Despite any possible tensions between the two institutions, we do not expect that the latest change in the MPC's reaction function with respect to targeting 3.0% will be retracted," she added. At Thursday's briefing, Kganyago said: "Changing policy is never easy." "What you can't do is to refuse to make a decision, because there are costs to a policy. There are costs in sticking to the existing target as well," he said. The finance ministry has previously voiced concerns about the impact on consumers, said Annabel Bishop, chief economist at Investec. "But the MPC has said it will be flexible in aiming to achieve 3% sustainably."
Reuters
6 hours ago
- Reuters
Dissenting Fed officials Bowman, Waller link votes to job market concerns
Aug 1 (Reuters) - The two Federal Reserve governors who favored an interest rate cut at the U.S. central bank's policy meeting this week said on Friday they did so largely due to rising concerns about the job market, while noting their expectations that any tariff-related price increases will not lead to lasting inflation pressures. "With economic growth slowing this year and signs of a less dynamic labor market, I saw it as appropriate to begin gradually moving our moderately restrictive policy stance toward a neutral setting," Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman said in a statement. "In my view, this action would have proactively hedged against a further weakening in the economy and the risk of damage to the labor market," she said. Fed Governor Christopher Waller said in a separate statement that "with underlying inflation near target and the upside risks to inflation limited, we should not wait until the labor market deteriorates before we cut the policy rate." Waller said the job market is nearing stall speed and the central bank's policy rate should be closer to the neutral level where economic activity is neither stimulated nor restrained. Waller said of the Fed's broader approach to monetary policy right now that "I believe that the wait-and-see approach is overly cautious, and, in my opinion, does not properly balance the risks to the outlook and could lead to policy falling behind the curve." The statements explaining the two Fed officials' dissents were released just before the U.S. government issued its employment report for July, which appeared to give credence to the hiring concerns flagged by Bowman and Waller. The Labor Department reported that nonfarm payrolls rose by a smaller-than-expected 73,000 jobs last month, with big downward revisions to the job growth numbers in May and June. The unemployment rate edged up one-tenth of a percentage point to 4.2% in July. The report appeared to give credence to the hiring concerns flagged by the two Fed dissenters. Meanwhile, the Trump administration ramped up its trade war by imposing a new range of steep import tax increases on many U.S. trading partners. The latest tariff-related announcement helped send global stock markets lower. Bowman and Waller weighed in on Friday after casting dissenting votes against the Federal Open Market Committee's decision on Wednesday to hold its benchmark interest rate in the 4.25%-4.50% range. The dissents marked the first time since late 1993 that two Fed governors had opposed the central bank's consensus view. Comments made by Bowman and Waller going into the meeting had led many observers to expect their dissents. Waller has been most explicit in arguing for lower rates, saying the risks are rising for the job market while tariff-related inflation increases are likely to be a one-time shift the Fed could ignore. Bowman also expressed skepticism that tariffs would cause sustained inflation problems. The Bowman and Waller dissents also garnered interest because of the broader political currents buffeting the Fed. President Donald Trump has been pushing aggressively for rate cuts, excoriating Fed Chair Jerome Powell for failing to heed the White House's demands for lower borrowing costs. Trump weighed in again on Friday, saying in post on his Truth Social media platform that Powell is "a stubborn MORON" and that the central bank "must substantially lower interest rates," and if Powell doesn't do it, other central bank officials should take control and force the matter. Waller, who noted last month that his view was not "political," is widely considered to be in the running to succeed Powell when his term expires next May. Bowman, who was recently elevated to the Fed's bank overseer role by Trump, had previously been on the more hawkish end of the monetary policy spectrum, having dissented last fall in favor of a smaller rate cut than what the Fed delivered. Nodding toward the potential ambitions of the dissenters, Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at JP Morgan, described their votes on Wednesday as "two job applications attached" to the FOMC statement, even as he noted, "we don't read too much into these dissents for the future direction of policy." As for the rest of the Fed's policymakers, they voted on Wednesday in favor of holding rates steady because even as some risks to the outlook are emerging, they are still wary of what Trump's tariffs will do to price pressures. "The economy is in a solid position" and "for the time being, we're well positioned to learn more about the likely course of the economy and the evolving balance of risks before adjusting our policy stance," Powell said at a press conference after the end of the Fed's two-day policy meeting this week. Powell appeared to see no downsides to the dissents. He described the FOMC gathering as a "good meeting" and added, "what you want from everybody, and also from a dissenter, is a clear explanation of what your thinking is and what are the arguments you're making ... We had that today." Powell did not indicate whether the dissenters had moved the consensus. "We haven't made any decisions about September. We'll be monitoring all the incoming data and asking ourselves whether the federal funds rate is in the right place." The Fed's next policy meeting is scheduled for September 16-17.
