Turkish inflation projected to drop to 29.86% by 2025 end: CBRT survey
That is down from 30.35 per cent in the previous month's survey.
Inflation dipped to 35.4 per cent in May compared to around 75 per cent a year ago.
Turkish inflation is projected to drop to 29.86 per cent by the 2025 end, while the country's central bank (CBRT) is expected to return to rate cuts next month, a CBRT survey of market participants for June revealed. That is down from 30.35 per cent in the previous month's survey. Markets see inflation 12 months from now falling to 24.56 per centâ€'down from 25.06 per cent in the previous survey.
Treasury and finance minister Mehmet Simsek last week cited stickiness in services inflation, which, he said, was preventing further improvement in headline consumer price inflation.
Markets see inflation 12 months from now falling to 24.56 per cent, the survey showed. That is down from 25.06 per cent in the previous survey.
The 24-month-ahead forecast eased to 17.35 per cent, down from 17.77 per cent.
Market participants expect the central bank to keep its benchmark one-week repo rate unchanged this week, but project a three-percentage-point cut in July.
They see the rate falling to around 40 per cent in September, before ending the year at around 36 per cent. A year from now, the key policy rate is estimated to be around 29 per cent.
Survey participants now expect the lira-dollar exchange rate to be 43.57 by the end of 2025, slightly below the previous forecast of 43.70. However, the 12-month ahead forecast for the exchange rate increased to 47.04, up from 46.62 in the last survey.
Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DS)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
US stock market today: Dow falls over 100 points while Nasdaq up 0.3%; investors cautious ahead of US job data
US stocks started the day mixed on Wednesday as investors turned cautious ahead of a crucial US jobs report due on Thursday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped 111 points, or 0.25%, reaching 44,383.86. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now S&P 500 rose a marginal 1.79 points or 0.33%, trading at 6,199.80. Tech-heavy Nasdaq also reached 20,270.24, rising 67.35 points or 0.33%. The jitters come after data released from ADP showed an unexpected fall in private-sector employment last month. Employers outside the government reportedly cut 33,000 jobs, a stark contrast to economists' forecasts of a 115,000-job gain. 'Though layoffs continue to be rare, a hesitancy to hire and a reluctance to replace departing workers led to job losses last month,' said Nela Richardson, chief economist at ADP. Many of the planned tariffs, a key part of Trump's trade strategy, remain on hold but are expected to take effect within a week. Their potential to disrupt supply chains and drive up prices has left businesses wary, possibly leading to hiring freezes or slowdowns. Adding to the drag, the US government's recent termination of temporary protected status for roughly 350,000 Venezuelans could knock up to 25,000 jobs off the payroll, according to Goldman Sachs economist David Mericle. Bond markets reflected the mixed mood. The 10-year Treasury yield nudged up to 4.29% from 4.26%, while the more Fed-sensitive two-year yield dipped slightly to 3.77%. A weaker-than-expected jobs report could prompt the Federal Reserve to consider cutting interest rates sooner than planned. But so far, the Fed has signalled a wait-and-watch approach, preferring to assess the impact of Trump's tariff strategy before adjusting monetary policy.
Mint
3 hours ago
- Mint
Can Donald Trump end America's $1.8 trillion student-debt nightmare?
In recent years, America's student-loan policy has come to resemble an alphabet soup. During the covid-19 pandemic, relief came from the CARES, ARPA and HEROES acts. Repayment plans ranged from the appropriately named (SAVE and PAYE) to the less so (PSLF and TEPSLF). Even seasoned bureaucrats at the FSA will have struggled to keep track. Owing to these various policies, some $189bn in student debt was forgiven, and more than $260bn of payments waived. Such relief may have been welcome at the time, but America is now waking up to reality. The last of the pandemic-era forbearance ended in September 2023; defaults began to appear on credit records in the first quarter of this year. And the picture that is emerging is not pretty. Delinquencies have spiked (see chart 1). According to TransUnion, a credit-reporting bureau, some 21% of federal student-loan borrowers are in default, the most ever, up from 12% in February 2020. More difficulties may lie ahead. On May 5th President Donald Trump instructed the Treasury to resume collections from borrowers in default; by the end of the year loan forgiveness, which often occurs automatically after two decades of repayments, will once again be taxed at a federal level. America's repayment woes are the culmination of a trend that has been building for decades. In the 20 years before the arrival of covid, student loans were among the fastest-growing forms of household borrowing, having swollen from 10% of non-mortgage debt in 2003 to 33% by 2020 (see chart 2). By 2010 they had overtaken credit cards and car loans as the largest single slice of household liabilities. By 2012 they led in delinquencies, too. When covid struck, student debt was an obvious—if controversial—option for federal relief. The Biden administration's acronym barrage stopped delinquencies from rising still further. Defaults on federal student loans fell to nearly zero, and monthly payments to the Treasury more than halved. At the same time, the debt burden continued its relentless upwards march. The federal student-loan portfolio has grown to $1.8trn; the average borrower balance sits at $40,000, according to the Education Data Initiative, a research group. If the picture appears bleak for America's graduates, it is bleaker still for Uncle Sam. Student lending was once profitable for the federal government. Now it loses 25 cents on every dollar lent. All told, officials expect their student-loan portfolio to cost around $450bn in the next nine years. Why the shortfall? Graduates are doing worse, and so are less likely to repay their loans. They are also more likely to have borrowed for postgraduate courses, a growing number of which seem to provide poor value for money. Yet perhaps the most important factor is an underappreciated one: a shift from fixed repayment schedules to income-driven plans (see chart 3). Although these take various forms, with different repayment schedules, payment periods and more, all set payments as a share of wages. First introduced in 2009, such plans have surged in popularity and now account for 56% of outstanding federal-student-loan balances. For borrowers, they offer the promise of payments that are less likely to become unmanageable. For taxpayers, though, they are a burden. According to the Congressional Budget Office, a watchdog, the government earns a return on most fixed-repayment loans, but loses money on every dollar lent via such flexible options (see chart 4). In part, this may reflect adverse selection: borrowers who expect low wages are more likely to opt into an income-based plan than those confident of high salaries. Australia and England avoid this dynamic by mandating a single repayment structure. However, America's income-driven borrowing plans are also expensive for the taxpayer by design. Balances are forgiven after 20 or 25 years, regardless of the repayment progress, compared with a 40-year write-off period in England. And the required payments, which can be as little as 5% of discretionary income, were lowered by the Biden administration in lieu of outright debt forgiveness. If there is a glimmer of hope, it may lie in—of all places—Mr Trump's free-spending 'Big Beautiful Bill', which is currently making its way through Congress. The versions drawn up by the House of Representatives and Senate may differ, but they share the makings of sensible student-loan reform. Rather than maintaining the Biden administration's alphabet soup, the draft legislation proposes a streamlined system where students can choose between two options: fixed or income-driven. This would reduce administrative costs and limit carve-outs that are currently to the advantage of everyone from married couples to public-sector workers. There is bipartisan consensus on another front: the need to hold universities to account for how well their students do upon leaving campus. Both bills include penalties for colleges that produce graduates with low earnings relative to their debts. And both take steps—albeit cautious ones—towards curbing runaway balances for graduate students. Although such students represent just a fifth of borrowers, they account for half of outstanding debt. Much of that reflects pricey tuition at law and medical schools, where subsequent salaries often justify the cost. But a growing share stems from expensive, low-value courses that arguably should not qualify for federal lending. Both bills, to be sure, have room for improvement. For example, some of the accountability measures do not adequately target shorter courses that are often money-spinners for colleges; their loan limits for graduate students may be too stingy for those studying for professional qualifications. And even if the legislation rightly limits costs for the government, whatever emerges will be tougher for many borrowers. Yet streamlining repayment, limiting borrowing and cracking down on predatory courses could be a rare bipartisan achievement. After decades of drift, America's student loan system may at last be approaching a graduation of its own.
NDTV
4 hours ago
- NDTV
Deal Or No Deal: What Happens With Trump's July Tariff Deadline?
A week before US President Donald Trump reimposes steep tariffs on dozens of economies, including the EU and Japan, many are still scrambling to reach a deal that would protect them from the worst. The tariffs taking effect July 9 are part of a package Trump imposed in April citing a lack of "reciprocity" in trading ties. He slapped a 10 percent levy on most partners, with higher customized rates to kick in later in countries the United States has major trade deficits with. But these were halted until July to allow room for negotiations. Analysts expect countries will encounter one of three outcomes: They could reach a framework for an agreement; receive an extended pause on higher tariffs; or see levies surge. 'Framework' deals "There will be a group of deals that we will land before July 9," said Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent last Friday on CNBC. Policymakers have not named countries in this group, although Bessent maintains that Washington has been focused on striking deals with about 18 key partners. "Vietnam, India and Taiwan remain promising candidates for a deal," Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI) vice president Wendy Cutler told AFP. Without a deal, Vietnam's "reciprocal tariff" rises from the baseline of 10 percent to 46 percent, India's to 26 percent and Taiwan's to 32 percent. Josh Lipsky, international economics chair at the Atlantic Council, cited Indian negotiators' extension of their US trip recently in noting that it "seems like a frontrunner." "Japan was in that category, but things have set back a little," Lipsky said, referring to Trump's criticism Monday over what the president called Japan's reluctance to accept US rice exports. The deals, however, will unlikely be full-fledged trade pacts, analysts said, citing complexities in negotiating such agreements. Since April, Washington has only announced a pact with Britain and a deal to temporarily lower tit-for-tat duties with China. Extended pause Bessent has also said that countries "negotiating in good faith" can have their tariffs remain at the 10 percent baseline. But extensions of the pause on higher rates would depend on Trump, he added. "With a new government, (South) Korea looks well positioned to secure an extension," Cutler of ASPI said. Lipsky expects many countries to fall into this bucket, receiving an extended halt on higher tariffs that could last until Labor Day, which falls on September 1. Bessent earlier said that Washington could wrap up its agenda for trade deals by Labor Day, a signal that more agreements could be concluded but with talks likely to extend past July. Tariff reimposition For countries that the United States finds "recalcitrant," however, tariffs could spring back to the higher levels Trump previously announced, Bessent has warned. These range from 11 percent to 50 percent. Cutler warned that "Japan's refusal to open its rice market, coupled with the US resistance to lowering automotive tariffs, may lead to the reimposition of Japan's 24 percent reciprocal tariff." Trump himself said Tuesday that a trade deal was unlikely with Japan and the country could pay a tariff of "30 percent, 35 percent, or whatever the number is that we determine." Lipsky believes the European Union is at risk of having tariffs snap back to steeper levels too -- to the 20 percent unveiled in April or the 50 percent Trump more recently threatened. An area of tension could be Europe's approach to digital regulation. Trump recently said he would terminate trade talks with Canada -- which is not impacted by the July 9 deadline -- in retaliation for the country's digital services tax, which Ottawa eventually said it would rescind. This week, EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic is in Washington in a push to seal a trade deal, with the EU commission having received early drafts of proposals that officials are working on.
