logo
Why are bond vigilantes holding back their fire?

Why are bond vigilantes holding back their fire?

Reuters03-07-2025
July 2 (Reuters) - A core tenet of sovereign debt investment is that strong institutions keep down a country's borrowing costs and vice versa. So then why has the bond market's response to U.S. President Donald Trump's institutional norm-busting been so tame?
Sovereign borrowers are hard to sue and harder still to enforce claims against. And because they are sovereign, they can do things that private companies can't, like pass laws and inflate their currencies. Investors, and particularly foreign investors, therefore, should naturally be wary of lending to sovereigns.
And yet, in many cases, they do. For example, roughly a third of U.S. Treasuries were held in foreign hands as of March.
Why take the risk? The answer given by academic theory is that investors typically lend to sovereign borrowers when the country has institutions in place to protect against the threat of expropriation. Conversely, if a country's institutions are weak, or weakening, creditors will significantly increase the sovereign's borrowing costs to compensate for the rising risk.
The classic academic article, opens new tab on this topic was written by Douglas North and Barry Weingast in 1989. It considered the issue by examining constitutional arrangements in 17th century England.
The country was able to borrow significantly more, they argued, after putting in place effective institutions intended to assure investors that parliament could, and would, check the monarch's temptation to expropriate. And that, in turn, helped England become a global superpower, North and Weingast said.
A large literature has subsequently been built on this paper. Scholars have hypothesized - and shown - that having institutions that can constrain an overreaching sovereign, such as a strong and independent judiciary, central bank and press, do indeed help keep down borrowing costs.
That is why the countries that carry the biggest risk premia, opens new tab in debt markets, such as Belarus, Lebanon, and Sudan, are far from models of institutional stability.
So what about the United States? Since January, Donald Trump's administration has challenged many domestic institutional norms, opens new tab long considered key constraining mechanisms on the executive. This has included confrontations with judges, legislators, the central bank, bureaucrats, academics, protesters, law firms and even provisions of the U.S. Constitution itself, opens new tab.
And then there are the numerous international agreements the administration has backed out of or undermined, including the Paris Agreement on climate change and the World Health Organization. Moreover, the announcement of broad-based 'reciprocal tariffs' challenges the foundation, opens new tab of the modern trade system as regulated by the World Trade Organization.
Put all of the foregoing together, and we would have expected to see a significant move upward in U.S. Treasury yields.
But that hasn't happened.
There have certainly been some signs of discontent among bond investors, including after Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff announcement and following his musings that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's termination 'cannot come fast enough.'
In both cases, the bond market moves were notable but not earth-shattering. They did appear to have the desired effect, as the administration responded by either softening its language or postponing controversial policies, and these pivots led to market recoveries. But given the stakes, jumps of less than 75 basis points in the 10-year Treasury yield seem rather contained.
It's also true that the term premium on the 10-year U.S. Treasury note – a measure of compensation investors demand for holding longer-dated U.S. government debt – hit a 10-year high in May, though that's far from elevated by historical standards.
Why are the infamous bond vigilantes holding back?
There are several possible explanations.
First, the theory about the link between institutional strength and borrowing costs could be wrong. Things like the rule of law and central bank independence are nice to have, but, ultimately, bondholders care about one thing: getting paid.
And the risk of a U.S. default remains low. While investors have been getting antsy about the potential for Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill to add around $3.3 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the dollar remains the world's reserve currency, so the U.S. has more room for fiscal profligacy than most.
Indeed, U.S. Treasuries' long-held role as the global risk-free asset may be why yield spikes have been contained. The $28 trillion U.S. Treasury market remains a key pillar of the global financial architecture, and there is no ready substitute with the same size, liquidity and depth.
So it's understandable why investors are loath to flee. No one wants to pull the alarm if there is a significant risk that doing so will cause a part of the building to fall on one's head.
But 'too big to fail' is a short-run story. If the current global risk-free asset isn't living up to its name, substitutes will emerge. In fact, there is already talk, opens new tab of increased debt issuance in Europe offering investors a risk-free alternative.
Moreover, today's bond market indifference may encourage the Trump administration to continue pursuing policies that challenge U.S. institutions and, in turn, undermine long-run growth and weaken the global rules-based economic system it once led.
And if that occurs, North and Weingast's theory could yet play out, and the cost of U.S. borrowing could rise meaningfully.
As economist Rudiger Dornbush famously said, 'In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and they happen faster than you think they could.'
(The views expressed here are those of Ugo Panizza and Mitu Gulati, professors at the Geneva Institute (International Economics) and the University of Virginia (Law). These are their views and not those of their institutions).
Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X., opens new tab
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Epstein's former lawyer wants Ghislaine Maxwell released so that she can testify
Epstein's former lawyer wants Ghislaine Maxwell released so that she can testify

The Independent

time24 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Epstein's former lawyer wants Ghislaine Maxwell released so that she can testify

A former attorney for convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein says his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, should be granted immunity so she can testify about his crimes. In an interview on Fox News Sunday, Epstein's former lawyer Alan Dershowitz said Maxwell 'absolutely' should testify as she was most closely involved with Epstein. 'She knows everything. I mean, she is everything,' Dershowitz said. 'She was the one who arranged all the trips and travel of all the people who went to the island, who went to the house and went to the place in New Mexico, who went to his place in Paris,' Dershowitz said of Maxwell. 'So she's key to everything, and there's no reason why they shouldn't give her use immunity, which means she can still be prosecuted if she commits perjury, but she would then have to testify about everything, and she should.' On Friday, the Justice Department filed a motion in a Manhattan federal court to unseal transcripts from the grand jury that investigated Epstein before he died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial. Dershowitz also warned that the grand jury transcripts that Attorney General Pam Bondi asked a federal judge to unseal on Friday would not yield the list of Epstein's clientele that many of President Donald Trump's supporters are eagerly anticipating. 'I think the judge should release it, but they are not in the grand jury transcripts,' Dershowitz said. "I've seen some of these materials. For example, there is an FBI report of interviews with alleged victims in which at least one of the victims names very important people," he said, adding that those names have been redacted. Trump has come under growing pressure from his MAGA base to release information related to the government's inquiry into Epstein – something he said he would do during the 2024 presidential campaign. Earlier this month, the Trump administration did a complete 180 on the Epstein files, releasing a joint memo with the FBI claiming there was 'no incriminating client list' or any evidence of blackmail. The memo also reiterated the FBI's previous investigation that concluded Epstein died by suicide, and was not murdered in his jail cell as some conspiracy theorists have speculated. Maxwell, a former British socialite and ex-girlfriend of Epstein, was found guilty in December 2021 of conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, among other charges, related to her role in a scheme to abuse minor girls with the wealthy financier for a decade. The now-63-year-old was sentenced to 20 years in prison, though her lawyers have been trying to get her out by appealing her case, arguing she was exempt from prosecution under a clause in Epstein's 2008 non-prosecution agreement. The release of the grand jury documents may fall short of what many of Trump's supporters are seeking. The transcripts are a fraction of the Epstein documents, as bank, phone, and surveillance records remain under seal along with his autopsy results. Because Epstein's circle included royals, presidents, and billionaires, the case gained massive attention and fueled some of the biggest conspiracy theories driving Trump's supporters, even as Trump himself was a close friend of Epstein. After the memo from Trump's administration and the FBI, the Wall Street Journal published an alleged birthday card from Trump to Epstein that was described as including a sexually suggestive drawing and a birthday wish that says, 'may every day be another wonderful secret.' In response, Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal 's parent companies, News Corp and Dow Jones. Trump claims the newspaper 'failed to attach the letter, failed to attach the alleged drawing, failed to show proof that President Trump authored or signed any such letter, and failed to explain how this purported letter was obtained,' according to the lawsuit. 'The reason for those failures is because no authentic letter or drawing exists,' the complaint claims. "We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit,' a spokesperson for Dow Jones said in a statement.

Trump tells Washington NFL team to revert to ‘Redskins' name
Trump tells Washington NFL team to revert to ‘Redskins' name

Times

time25 minutes ago

  • Times

Trump tells Washington NFL team to revert to ‘Redskins' name

President Trump has said Washington's American football team should revert to its original name of the 'Washington Redskins'. The US president said sports teams that had changed names to avoid offending Native Americans in recent years should readopt their former branding. He said there was 'a big clamouring for this'. 'The Washington 'Whatever's' should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team,' he wrote on Truth Social. Later, Trump threatened to block the Commanders' application to build a new stadium in Washington and said his campaign was called Miga, or Make Indians Great Again. 'I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington,' he wrote in a second post on Truth Social. 'The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone. Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians. The Owner of the Cleveland Baseball Team, Matt Dolan, who is very political, has lost three Elections in a row because of that ridiculous name change. What he doesn't understand is that if he changed the name back to the Cleveland Indians, he might actually win an Election. Indians are being treated very unfairly. MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA)!' The Washington Commanders changed their name during the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd in 2020 when sports teams came under pressure from sponsors to ditch culturally insensitive names and logos. For two years, the NFL team, which last won a Super Bowl in 1992, went without a name before they were rebranded the 'Commanders' in 2022. The team has replaced its logo, which previously showed the head of a native American wearing feathers, with a large 'W'. While some teams have changed their names because of protests from fans, including the Cleveland Indians — a baseball team that became the Cleveland Guardians — others have refused to bow to pressure. The Kansas City Chiefs, one of the most successful NFL teams in recent years whose players include Travis Kelce, boyfriend of Taylor Swift, have rejected demands from Native American groups to change their name. The Chiefs' fans often perform a 'tomahawk chop', waving their arms to mimic a Native American warrior. But fans were banned from attending games daubed in face paint and wearing headdresses in 2020. After a former Washington Commanders player called on his old team to return to its original name, Trump endorsed his campaign and urged other owners of sports teams to follow suit. 'Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen,' he wrote. 'Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS, GET IT DONE!!!'

Hegseth abandoned by aides as Pentagon left in turmoil
Hegseth abandoned by aides as Pentagon left in turmoil

Telegraph

time25 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Hegseth abandoned by aides as Pentagon left in turmoil

Pete Hegseth has lost his sixth senior aide in as many months, with the defence secretary's struggle to retain key staff leaving the Pentagon in limbo. Justin Fulcher, who resigned on Saturday, was named as an adviser to Mr Hegseth in April after joining the Trump administration as part of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge). Mr Fulcher said he only planned to work for the government for six months, but his departure is the latest of a string of top Hegseth aides to quit the Pentagon. Mr Fulcher had been involved in a confrontation with Doge staff members assigned to the Pentagon in April, the Washington Post reported, but officials insisted his departure was amicable. Sean Parnell, the chief Pentagon spokesman, said: 'The Department of Defense is grateful to Justin Fulcher for his work on behalf of President Trump and Secretary Hegseth.' It comes following reports that Mr Hegseth is in 'full paranoia' mode after a series of Pentagon leaks, and that he now only trusts his wife and inner circle. The defence secretary was said to have entered 'full paranoia, back-against-the-wall mode' following a slew of stories accusing him of incompetence, unprofessionalism and sharing sensitive military information, according to CNN. Mr Hegseth came under intense pressure to step down after details about US strikes on Yemen were sent to a journalist who had been inadvertently added to a group chat on the Signal platform. He was also accused of posting the same details about strike plans in another Signal group. The defence secretary fired several members of his senior staff following the leak investigation, including Dan Caldwell, a senior adviser, and Dan Selnick, the deputy chief of staff. Joe Kasper, Mr Hegseth's chief of staff, was also moved to another role within the department after coming under pressure over toxic workplace allegations. Colin Carroll, another senior adviser, was ousted after being identified during an investigation into the leaks. Mr Fulcher suggested there was no ill will behind his departure. 'Working alongside the dedicated men and women of the Department of Defense has been incredibly inspiring,' Mr Fulcher said. 'Revitalising the warrior ethos, rebuilding the military, and re-establishing deterrence are just some of the historic accomplishments I'm proud to have witnessed. 'None of this could have happened without Secretary Hegseth's decisive leadership or President Trump's continued confidence in our team.' Last month, it was reported that the department was struggling to fill positions, with at least three people turning down jobs to work for Mr Hegseth, an official told NBC News. Mr Parnell denied the claims, saying that the 'anonymous sources cited in this article have no idea what they're talking about.'

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