II 全球机构情报

全球一周前瞻:市场重返课堂

前往官网原文 ↗
自动质量提示本研报仍可阅读,但 AI 分析或译文低于优选质量阈值,已进入改进队列。重要判断请同时核对官网原文。
完整研报正文
完整中文译文

全球一周前瞻:市场重返课堂

  • 加拿大与美国之间的贸易战可能升级……
  • ……随着加拿大积聚投资动能
  • 加拿大需要一份预算!
  • 加拿大银行业——澄清事实
  • 美国CPI——成败在此一举
  • 美联储静默期
  • 欧洲央行将加息,然后呢?
  • 智利央行——增长优先于通胀
  • 秘鲁央行——偏鹰派的按兵不动?
  • 土耳其央行——按兵不动但存在加息风险
  • 俄罗斯央行——转向偏鹰派?
  • 全球宏观——英国数据密集发布,全球通胀
  • 加拿大和美国市场周一休市

在度过最后一个劳动节长周末的狂欢后,又到了重返课堂的时候。孩子们可能会抱怨,但大人们或许会高兴——或者未必?

对于经济观察者和市场参与者而言,答案完全取决于这繁忙一周中一系列相对高风险事件的结果。在非农就业数据公布后(坦白说我不太相信这个数据,回顾在此),可能决定美联储9月加息风险的关键将是周五的CPI数据以及前一天的PPI数据。把重要数据放在周五发布,显然是一种折磨经济学家的新方式。

此外,特朗普政府发起的对加拿大贸易战有再次升级的风险。无论如何,卡尼政府正在转向投资驱动,并将积聚越来越多的动能。

多家央行将发表意见,其中影响最大的是欧洲央行,预计将于周四加息并发布新的预测,这可能为未来路径提供指引。

以下内容还涉及全球指标排程,并澄清关于加拿大银行体系的误解。

周二,加拿大预计将对约$28亿加元的美国进口商品征收15%、25%和50%的关税。图1显示了按关税区间划分的美国对加拿大进口份额。图2显示了在谈判破裂前后美国对加拿大加征关税的分解情况。美国威胁要对加拿大的报复措施进行反制,而加拿大的报复是针对美国对约$28亿加元的加拿大进口商品征收50%关税,这大致相当于加拿大对美出口的5%。

双方是否会有一方眨眼让步?幕后可能的发展难以判断。

一个更具建设性的并行发展即将到来,本周我们可能会听到更多相关消息。尽管加拿大投资峰会将于下周(9月14日至15日)在多伦多举行,但预计会提前发布公告以积聚势头。可以这样理解:加拿大正在以某种方式转过另一边脸,继续前行。

目标是在未来五年吸引$1万亿加元的投资,重点放在基础设施、能源、关键矿产和国家建设项目上。预计将有来自全球二十多个国家的约250位投资公司、主权财富基金、养老基金等机构的重量级人物与会。

这听起来像个大数字,那么这个目标能否实现?为什么不呢。自2024年9月以来,已有大量资金承诺投入。过去五年,加拿大的外国直接投资已增长超过$1万亿加元(图3)。尽管美国投资仍在增加,但其份额已从1990年代占加拿大外国直接投资总额约三分之二下降到现在的不足50%(图4)。世界其他地区早已纷纷涌向加拿大。此外,加拿大每年商业投资总额超过$600亿加元。

既然我们讨论的是名义投资,就需要将这个目标与名义GDP——即加拿大一年内生产的所有商品和服务的价值——进行比较。目前这一数值约为C$3½万亿。若以每年约4%的速度增长,加拿大的名义GDP可能在五年后升至约C$4¼万亿。未来五年的名义GDP总和可能超过C$23万亿。$1万亿不算差,但不会特别亮眼,尤其是考虑到其中有多少无论如何都会发生尚不确定。

与这些数字相比,未来五年$1万亿的投资,我们敢说可能更具雄心吗?或许卡尼政府遵循的原则是:宁可少承诺,多交付。

政府的目标是以总额$280亿的政府激励措施来引导这$1万亿的投资。它正在利用“生产力超级扣除”提供增强的税收优惠和资本支出的即时费用化。这使得加拿大在税收制度上对此类目的具有相对吸引力(图表5)。这一计划正通过重大项目办公室推进,该办公室已宣布了多个液化天然气、核能、关键矿产以及港口等交通基础设施领域的项目,涉及$126亿的潜在投资,横跨15个项目以及六项转型战略。有几个重点领域:其中之一是所谓的“国防工业战略”,旨在建设国内国防工业。

为什么要投资加拿大?首先,它便宜。加元可能被低估了约一角,按购买力平价计算可能更多。尽管自美国大选以来加拿大股市跑赢美国,但股票估值仍具吸引力(图表6)。TSX的一年期远期市盈率约为17¼;纳斯达克为28倍,标普500为21倍。融资具有吸引力,因为基础利率曲线远低于美国。如果你不信我的话,那看看图表7,显示加拿大作为投资目的地的吸引力排名第2,仅次于美国。

然而,在上述所有进展中,作为一家服务客户(他们纳税、在经济各部门工作、借贷和投资)的券商,我们有责任以平衡的方式质疑这些进展。存在许多尚未解决的警示和担忧。例如,$4.7亿用于客运铁路车辆,按700名员工计算,每个岗位成本近$7万,在大局上虽小,但这是此类公告中日益增多的一部分。

鉴于在当前实施的国家资本主义模式下,资金流失速度之快,加拿大需要一份预算,而且需要尽快出台。我们需要看到一份更新的融资和债务管理计划。我们需要看到对税收、其他支出项目、赤字和债务发行的潜在影响。

在联邦公开市场委员会下一周开会前几天,另一个CPI通胀数据可能对货币政策预期产生重大影响。目前,市场对9月16日会议定价的加息幅度约为17bp个基点。尽管近期取得了进展,但上行意外可能进一步使市场倾向于定价加息,而主席沃什对市场的尊重可能使他难以抗拒;而另一个疲软的数据可能不会。

周五整体CPI预计环比上涨0.4%(经季节调整)。核心CPI(不包括食品和能源)预计上涨0.3%。如果这些估计准确——且我对核心CPI的预测比共识高一个百分点——那么这可能会强化市场对9月加息的定价。

构成这一估计的因素包括:8月份汽油价格较7月略有上涨。租金和业主等价租金预计对价格的上行压力将比7月略为温和,且主要租金和业主等价租金均不构成热源(图表8, 9)。汽车价格预计不会成为重大贡献项。食品价格同样如此。预计成本压力将进一步传导至核心商品价格,核心服务价格(不包括住房和能源服务)将温和增长。

8月生产者价格指数将在CPI公布前一天更新,其中部分组成部分将作为核心PCE通胀预期的输入,同时我们也将根据方法差异调整后从CPI中获得信息。

尽管如此,核心服务和核心商品通胀的趋势仍然温和。在8月更新及任何修订之前,核心服务和核心商品的三个月移动平均分别为1%和0%。

这些情况中,大部分并未反映在美联储此前偏好的通胀指标——核心PCE通胀中。该指标在过去三个月的平均年化环比增速为3%。部分原因可能是PCE比CPI更频繁地更新权重,并且随着消费权重的上升,可能更快地捕捉到与人工智能相关的通胀。此外,如图表10所示,软件和投资组合管理服务贡献了核心PCE同比涨幅中约半个百分点,并推动其超过3%。

这在很大程度上是因为价格上涨的覆盖面较窄。作为这一点的证据,达拉斯联储的截尾平均PCE指标在3个月移动平均基础上,以2.2%的年化环比速度运行。图表11和12分别显示了CPI和PCE的截尾与官方指标。

问题在于,我们不知道在沃什主席领导下的FOMC如何看待核心通胀,尤其是在他设立五个工作组之一正在调查的领域中,这种看法是否可能改变。如果这个问题持续时间过长,市场对此根本问题答案的耐心可能会受到考验。

这是造成期限溢价上行压力的一部分不确定性,这种压力强化了近期长期TIPS盈亏平衡通胀率的上升,作为市场对通胀预期的指导。

同样,围绕美国数据质量的持续疑问,不仅体现在上周五的非农就业报告中,还体现在CPI篮子中通过代理方法而非直接数据估算的份额创纪录高位(图表13)。

中央银行——一次加息、三次未动与一次静默期

这个副标题几乎可以看作是拳击之夜的结局!可惜,我们谈论的是平静得多的央行世界。

FOMC将于周六进入沟通静默期,直至9月15日至16日的会议,因此预计官员们不会对通胀报告作出反应。无论如何,如果通过媒体秘密传递信息,将违背沃什主席反对前瞻指引的“我有秘密”信条。

智利中央银行将率先召开会议,周二可能会将隔夜政策利率维持在4½%不变。今年以来的每次会议均按兵不动。通胀同比为4.3%,高于3%的目标水平,但核心CPI更为温和,为2.5%,尽管有所上升。在决策前几小时将公布另一组数据。目前的倾向可能是支持增长,但增长已荡然无存,GDP在Q2收缩后,Q1持平。

欧洲央行已完全定价周四将存款利率上调25bp个基点。接下来的问题是,相对于市场对10月可能暂停加息、随后12月再次加息的定价,欧洲央行将提供何种指引。

欧洲央行目前2.25%的存款利率处于或接近中性水平,这与美联储和英国央行等其他一些央行不同,我们认为这些央行仍处于适度紧缩状态。这使得欧洲央行在实现物价稳定使命方面容错空间更小。

这一点与其他差异同样重要。一个关键差异是,大宗商品(即能源)价格冲击的第二轮效应在欧洲比其他地区更为显著。部分原因在于其劳动力市场的运作方式。集体谈判的主导地位以及工资对价格变化的反应,是比加拿大(其中三分之一的劳动力加入工会)更重要的考虑因素,尤其与美国相比,美国只有10%的工人加入工会。美国的工资更多地实时设定,而非像欧洲那样产生第二轮及后续效应。

现在来看证据。欧洲央行的工资追踪指标再次攀升(图表14)。支付更多工资并不会降低通胀。

另一个反对大宗商品影响欧元区通胀的关键原因是,欧元区高度依赖进口能源,并且即将进入北部地区的高峰供暖季节。

另外一点是,根据国际货币基金组织的估计,欧洲的经济闲置产能微不足道,其他估计显示没有闲置或略有过度需求(图表15)。面对成本激增,这意味着其他公司不太可能利用闲置产能增加产出,以从任何试图提价的公司手中夺取市场份额。

所有这些信息最终将反映在本次会议发布的最新预测中。大宗商品(即能源)价格高位持续的时间更长,意味着通胀预测可能会被上调。

回顾这些预测共享的四种情景——见此处表4——这取决于能源价格冲击的幅度、持续时间和严重程度。他们的每种情景都表明需要收紧货币政策,而且很难辩称欧元区不会走向不利或更糟的情景。

秘鲁中央储备银行可能会在周四将政策利率维持在4.25%不变。自去年9月以来一直维持该水平。油价长期走高促使BCRP保持谨慎立场,因为通胀仍处于高位。8月CPI同比升至4.4%,核心CPI同比上涨4.5%。尽管如此,增长正在放缓,GDP在Q2同比上涨2.6%(Q1为3.6%)。持续的能源价格冲击可能日益挑战政策制定者的倾向,他们认为这些压力是暂时的,但厄尔尼诺风险正在上升。

预计土耳其央行周四将把基准回购利率维持在37%不变,但不要低估这家波动性较大的央行恢复紧缩或发出此类指引的风险。里拉兑美元继续直线下跌。在一个进口依存度较高的国家,这一点很重要。能源价格在更长时间内保持高位也是如此。这加剧了通胀担忧。通胀已从疫情期间超过70%、甚至接近90%的峰值水平回落,但同比增速在32%处陷入停滞。

在7月出人意料地降息25 bp之后,俄罗斯央行预计将在周五维持其一周拍卖利率不变,此前该央行表示“需要更渐进地降低关键利率”。鉴于伊朗冲突导致油价在更长时间内走高,这一次可能转为更为中性偏鹰派的立场。自6月以来,卢布兑美元已下跌五分之一,呈单边下跌走势。再加上油价在更长时间内走高,继续放松政策的理由不足。

加拿大银行——厘清事实

在贸易谈判破裂的情况下,有关加拿大银行部门的错误信息传播成为牺牲品。需要澄清事实。

加拿大不允许美国银行在该国开展业务的说法是不真实的。以下是外部对相关法规的合理总结,以及为什么这些说法是错误的。他们还指出,美国银行曾有机会收购本土业务,但选择了放弃。那些对加拿大银行进行不实指责的人根本不知道自己在说什么。

包括美国银行在内的外国银行获准在加拿大开展业务已有大约半个世纪。此类银行数量众多,你可以在这里搜索343家联邦监管金融机构的名单。它们有时在加拿大市场上因缺乏承诺而声名不佳,因为它们可能会利用利基市场然后又突然撤退。

加拿大银行发现美国市场具有吸引力有多种原因。其中之一是美国银行业长期以来一直存在整合模式,从比较优势的角度来看,美国银行业正逐渐被“加拿大化”。1927年的《麦克法登法案》禁止跨州设立分行,导致银行数量严重过剩,且规模经济和范围经济水平较低。1970年代的地区性银行协定和专营机构的出现开始削弱这一框架,随后1994年的《里格尔-尼尔法案》消除了跨州银行和分行的壁垒。美国银行市场的集中度无法用全国资产集中份额或赫芬达尔指数来衡量,因为其集中度大部分仍停留在地方市场层面。

全球日历较为清淡,重点将放在一些英国宏观报告,以及中国、北欧国家和一些拉美市场的通胀数据上。

本周加拿大没有数据公布。加拿大市场周一因劳动节休市,之后如前述,关税可能重新进入对话。

美国日历上唯一真正的焦点将是上述通胀数据。除此之外,只有周四的8月成屋销售、周五的密歇根大学消费者信心指数,以及周三的ADP民间就业人数和周四的初请失业金人数周度预估。

拉美市场将迎来两项CPI数据。哥伦比亚率先公布8月通胀数据(周一),这是哥伦比亚央行9月30日决议前的最后一次通胀数据。随后智利于周二公布8月数据,数小时后智利央行预计将维持利率不变。墨西哥周三公布CPI数据,这也是墨西哥央行9月24日预计维持利率不变路径上的一个参考指标。

市场普遍预计英国央行将在9月17日维持银行利率在3.75%不变,但市场对11月或12月加息的可能性定价较高。周五公布的7月GDP、工业产出、服务业产出和贸易月度数据不太可能左右决策,但可能反映出6月环比增长0.3%后的部分回调,当时天气、旅游业和足球推动了服务业产出。

中国基本没有消费通胀,周二晚间(美东时间)公布的8月数据不会改变这一状况。CPI同比增幅一直维持在约0.5%,核心通胀低于1%。这应该会给中国人民银行在未能达到3%总体通胀目标后提供一些宽松空间,该目标自2020初以来从未实现,而那次是自全球金融危机后不久以来的首次。即便是此前下调存款准备金率,也尚未推动本币贷款增长令人信服地提速(图16)。一个合理的问题是,中国为何不刺激国内经济以帮助遏制房价下跌,并推出更多消费者支持措施,从而惠及世界经济。随着肮脏管理的人民币钉住美元汇率跌至2022和2023初以来最弱水平,货币不稳定成为制约因素,因为货币宽松可能引发更广泛的金融不稳定。

瑞典(周一)和挪威(周四)的通胀数据值得关注。瑞典央行在8月20日的最新会议上抑制了短期加息定价,这可能排除了9月24日加息的可能性,但仍暗示年底前加息仍有可能。挪威央行下次决议定于9月24日,此前8月13日维持利率不变,本月将公布新的预测和指引。

除此之外,全球日历上的重要数据不多,仅有欧洲贸易和工业产出数据,以及中国8月贸易数据。

本报告由丰业银行经济部编制,作为丰业银行客户的资源。本文中的意见、估计和预测均为我们截至本文日期的观点,如有变更,恕不另行通知。本文中的信息和意见来自据信可靠的来源,但对其他准确性或完整性不作任何明示或暗示的陈述或保证。丰业银行及其任何高管、董事、合伙人、员工或关联方对因使用本报告或其内容而产生的任何直接或后果性损失不承担任何责任。

完整英文原文
  • Canada-US tariff war could escalate…
  • …as Canada builds investment momentum
  • Canada needs a budget!
  • Canadian banks — getting the facts straight
  • US CPI — Make it or break it time
  • FOMC blackout
  • ECB to hike, then what?
  • BCCh — growth over inflation
  • BCRP — hawkish hold?
  • Turkey’s central bank — hold with hike risk
  • Russian central bank — hawkish shift?
  • Global macro — UK data dump, global inflation
  • Canadian, US markets shut on Monday

It’s back to school time after once last Labour Day long weekend hurrah. Kids may groan, but the adults may rejoice—or will they?

For economy-watchers and market participants, the answer all depends upon the outcome of a jam-packed week of relatively high-risk developments. After a nonfarm payrolls print that I frankly do not trust (recap here), what might settle September hike risk at the Federal Reserve could be Friday’s CPI reading and the previous day’s producer prices. Putting major releases on a Friday is apparently the new method of tormenting economists.

There is also the risk that the trade war started by the Trump administration against Canada could flare anew. Either way, the Carney administration is pivoting toward an investment focus that will gather increasing momentum.

Several central banks will weigh in with the most impactful one being the European Central Bank that is expected to hike on Thursday and to deliver fresh forecasts that may inform the future path.

What follows also addresses the line-up of global indicators and sets the facts straight on misperceptions about Canada’s banking system.

On Tuesday, Canada is expected to follow-through on imposing tariffs of 15%, 25% and 50% on about C$28 billion of US imports. Chart 1 shows the shares of US imports into Canada by tariff bracket. Chart 2 shows the breakdown of the tariffs the US imposes on Canada before talks collapsed and since. The US has threatened to retaliate against Canada’s retaliation which was against the US imposing 50% tariffs on about C$28 billion of imports from Canada equal to about 5% of Canada’s exports to the US.

May one side or the other blink? It is difficult to judge possible developments behind the scenes.

A more constructive parallel development lies ahead and we will likely begin to hear more about it this coming week. Even though the Canada Investment Summit takes place in Toronto the following week on September 14th–15th, pre-announcements are expected to build momentum. Think of it as Canada moving on by turning the other cheek, so to speak.

The goal is to attract C$1 trillion in investments over the next five years with a focus upon infrastructure, energy, critical minerals and nation-building projects. An estimated 250 power hitters from investment firms, sovereign wealth funds, pension funds and others representing over two dozen countries will arrive.

That sounds like a big number, so is this goal achievable? Why not. A significant amount has been pledged since September 2025. Canada has already seen foreign direct investment rise by over $1½ trillion over the past five years (chart 3). This has happened as the US has continued to invest more but its share has declined from about two-thirds of all FDI into Canada in the 1990s to under 50% now (chart 4). The rest of the world has already been beating a path to Canada’s door. Further, Canada sees over C$600B of total business investment per year.

Since we’re talking nominal investment, we need to compare this goal to nominal GDP—the value of all goods and services produced by Canada in a given year. That stands at about C$3½ trillion. Grown at about a 4% per year pace, Canada’s nominal GDP could rise to about C$4¼ trillion in five years. Total nominal GDP over the next five years could sum to over C$23 trillion. $1 trillion wouldn’t be bad, but it’s not going to blow the lights out especially since it’s unclear how much of this would have happened in any event.

Against such numbers, the $1 trillion in investments over the next five years could, dare we say, be even more ambitious? Perhaps the Carney administration is abiding by the maxim that it’s better to under-promise and over-deliver.

The government’s aim is to seed this $1 trillion with government inducements totalling $280 billion. It is employing the Productivity Super-Deduction to offer enhanced tax incentives and immediate expensing of cap-ex. This results in a relatively attractive corporate tax regime for such purposes (chart 5). This is being steered through the Major Projects Office that has been announcing several projects in the areas of LNG, nuclear power, critical minerals and transportation infrastructure such as ports totalling $126 billion of potential investments across 15 projects and a half dozen transformative strategies. There are several areas of focus. One is the so-called Defence Industrial Strategy to build out the domestic defence industry.

Why invest in Canada? It’s cheap, for one thing. CAD is probably around a dime undervalued, maybe more in a purchasing power parity sense. Equity valuations are still attractive even as Canada’s stock market has outperformed the US since the US election (chart 6). The TSX’s one-year forward price-earnings ratio stands at about 17¼; it’s 28 times on the Nasdaq and 21 times on the S&P500. Funding is attractive with a base rates curve that remains well below the US. And if you don’t take my word, then how about chart 7 that shows Canada is ranked #2 behind only the US in terms of attractiveness as an investment destination.

Throughout all of these developments, however, we have a job as a street shop serving clients who pay taxes, work in many parts of the economy, borrow and invest, to question developments in balanced fashion. There are caveats and concerns aplenty that I don’t think are getting addressed. For example, $4.7 billion on passenger rail cars at a cost of nearly $7 million per job for the 700 employees is small in a big picture sense, but it’s part of a growing number of such announcements.

Canada needs a budget and needs it soon given the speed with which money is flying out the door under the present state capitalism model that is being employed. We need to see a refreshed funding and debt management plan. We need to see the implications for taxes, other spending programs, deficits, and debt issuance.

Another CPI inflation reading could be impactful to expectations for monetary policy actions just days before the FOMC meets the following week. At present, about 17bps of a quarter point rate hike are priced for the September 16th decision. Notwithstanding recent progress, an upside shock could further tip the balance toward pricing a hike that Chair Warsh’s deference to markets would probably find irresistible, whereas another soft reading may not.

Friday’s total CPI is estimated to rise by 0.4% m/m SA. Core CPI (excluding food and energy) is expected to have risen by 0.3%. If such estimates are on the mark—and I’m a tick higher than consensus on core—then it could reinforce market pricing for a September hike.

Among the ingredients to the estimate are slightly firmer gasoline prices in August over July. Rent and OER are expected to put slightly milder upward pressure on prices than in July and neither primary rent nor owners’ equivalent rent are looking like a source of heat (charts 8, 9). Vehicle prices are not expected to be a material contribution. It’s the same for food prices. There is expected to be further passthrough of cost pressures into core goods prices and moderate growth in core services prices (ex-housing and energy services).

The producer price index for August will be refreshed the day before CPI and some of its components will serve as input into expectations for core PCE inflation along with what we learn from CPI after adjusting for methodological differences.

Still, the trend in core services and core goods inflation remains soft. Pending August’s update and any revisions, the three-month moving averages are 1% and 0% for core services and core goods respectively.

Not much of this is filtering into what used to be the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, core PCE inflation. This measure has been running at a 3% m/m SAAR pace on average over the past three months. Part of the reason could be that PCE updates weights more frequently than CPI and may be capturing more of the AI-related inflation at a quicker pace as the spending weight rises. Further, as chart 10 shows, software and portfolio management services are responsible for about a half percentage point of the overall y/y rise in core PCE and responsible for pushing it over 3%.

Much of this is because of narrowly based price gains. As evidence of this point we have the Dallas Fed’s trimmed mean PCE measure that has been running at a 2.2% m/m SAAR pace on a 3mo moving average basis. Charts 11 and 12 shows trimmed and official measures for CPI and PCE respectively.

The rub lies in the fact that we don’t know how the FOMC views core inflation under Chair Warsh and namely whether that may change as one of the areas under investigation by one of five taskforces he has established. Market patience for an answer to this fundamental question may be tested if it lasts much longer.

This is part of the uncertainty that is keeping upward pressure on the term premium which is reinforcing the recent increases in longer-term TIPS breakevens as a market guide to inflation expectations.

So is the ongoing question marks surrounding US data quality not just on this past Friday’s nonfarm payrolls report, but also toward the record high share of the CPI basket being estimated through proxy methods instead of direct data (chart 13).

CENTRAL BANKS—ONE HIKE, THREE WHIFFS AND A BLACKOUT

The sub header could almost be taken as the outcome of a fight night! Alas, we’re talking about the much more sedate world of central banking.

The FOMC goes into communications blackout on Saturday through to the September 15th–16th meeting and therefore don’t expect officials to react to the inflation report. In any event, it would be against Chair Warsh’s anti-guidance I’ve-got-a-secret mantra to find a clandestine way to put out a message through the media.

Banco Central de Chile is first up and will probably remain on hold at an overnight policy rate of 4½% on Tuesday. It has held at every meeting so far this year. Inflation is running at 4.3% y/y which is above the 3% target, but core CPI is tamer at 2.5% although rising. Another reading is due just hours before the decision. The bias for now may be to support growth that has vapourized as GDP was flat in Q2 after contracting in Q1.

The European central bank is fully priced to hike its deposit rate by 25bps on Thursday. The question then becomes what next in terms of guidance relative to market pricing for a probable skip in October and then another hike in December.

The ECB’s present 2.25% deposit rate is at or close to neutral, unlike some other central banks like the Federal Reserve and Bank of England that we think are still mildly restrictive. This affords less room for error at the ECB in delivering on its price stability mandate.

That’s important alongside other differences. A key one is that second-round effects of the commodity—namely energy—price shocks are more material in Europe than elsewhere. Some of the reason for this is because of how its labour markets operate. The dominance of collective bargaining and wage responses to price changes is a bigger consideration than, say, in Canada where one-third of the workforce is unionized and especially compared to the US where only 10% of workers are unionized. US wages set in real time more so than second-round and subsequent effects in Europe.

Enter the evidence. The ECB’s wage tracker has been creeping up again (chart 14). You don’t get less inflation by paying people more.

Another key reason for leaning against commodity influences on Eurozone inflation is that the Eurozone depends heavily on imported energy and will soon be going into the peak heating season across northern areas.

An additional point is that there is an immaterial amount of economic slack in Europe according to IMF estimates and other estimates show no slack or slight excess demand (chart 15). Faced with a surge in costs, this means that other companies are less likely to be in a position to raise output from a position of slack to take away market share from anyone who tries hiking prices.

All of this information ultimately goes into refreshed forecasts that are due at this meeting. The higher for longer commodity—namely energy—surge means that inflation projections will likely be raised.

Recall that those projections shared four scenarios—shown in Table 4 here—which depended upon the magnitude, length and severity of the energy price shock. Each of their scenarios pointed to the need to tighten monetary policy and it’s hard to argue that the Eurozone isn’t moving into the adverse or worse scenarios.

Banco Central de Reserva del Perú is likely to hold its policy rate at 4.25% on Thursday. It has been there since September of last year. Higher for longer oil prices contribute to a cautious stance by BCRP as inflation remains high. CPI in August rose to 4.4% y/y and core CPI is up 4.5% y/y. Nevertheless, growth is slowing, as GDP was up 2.6% y/y in Q2 (3.6% in Q1). Persistent energy price shocks may increasingly challenge the bias of policymakers who consider these pressures temporary but into El Nino risks.

The Central Bank of Turkey is expected to leave its benchmark repo rate unchanged at 37% on Thursday but don’t discount the risk of renewed tightening or guidance in that direction from this volatile central bank. The lira continues to tumble on what has been a straight-line depreciating path to the dollar. That matters in a country with high import propensities. So do higher-for-longer energy prices. That adds to inflation worries. Inflation is down from the peak rates over 70% and even nearly 90% coming out of the pandemic, but progress has stalled out at 32% y/y.

Following a surprise 25 bp rate cut in July, the Central Bank of Russia is expected to leave its one-week auction rate unchanged on Friday after signalling that “a more gradual reduction in the key rate is required.” That could give way to a more neutral-hawkish approach this time with oil higher for longer on the Iran conflict. The ruble has been a one-way train-wreck ever since June, having lost one-fifth of its value to the dollar. Combined with higher for longer oil prices, the case for continued easing lacks merit.

CANADIAN BANKS—GETTING THE FACTS STRAIGHT

The spreading of false information about Canada’s banking sector is a casualty in trade negotiations gone sour. The record needs to be set straight.

It is untrue that Canada does not allow US banks to operate within the country. This is a decent external summary of the regulations and why such assertions are incorrect. They also note that US banks have had opportunities to acquire domestic franchises but chose not to. Folks who levy mistruths toward Canadian banks simply do not know what they are talking about.

Foreign—including US—banks have been permitted to operate in Canada for about half a century. There are many of them and you can search the list of 343 federally regulated financial institutions here. Often times they have a reputation in the Canadian market for lacking commitment in that they can exploit niches and suddenly retreat.

There are multiple reasons why Canadian banks find the US market to be attractive. Among them is that there has been in a longstanding pattern of consolidation as the US banking market has been slowly getting Canadianized from a comparative advantage standpoint. The McFadden Act of 1927 prohibited interstate branching which resulted in a severe overabundance of banks operating at low economies of scale and scope. Regional banking pacts in the 1970s and the arrival of monolines began to chip away at this framework and then the Riegle-Neal Act of 1994 eliminated interstate banking and branching barriers. The US banking market’s concentration cannot be measured using nationwide asset concentration shares or Herfindahl indices because so much of its concentration remains at the local market level.

A light global calendar will focus upon some UK macro reports, and inflation readings from China, Scandinavian countries and some Latin American markets.

There are no releases due out for Canada this week. Canadian markets will be shut on Monday for Labour Day after which tariffs may re-enter the dialogue as noted.

The only real focus on the US calendar will be the aforementioned inflation data. Otherwise, it’s just about existing home sales during August (Thursday), Friday’s UMich consumer sentiment, and weekly estimates for ADP private payrolls (Wednesday) and jobless claims (Thursday).

Latin American markets face a pair of CPI readings. Colombia goes first with August’s reading (Monday) which is the last inflation reading before BanRep’s decision on September 30th. Then Chile releases August’s print (Tuesday) just hours before what is expected to be a hold decision by BCCh. Mexico refreshes CPI on Wednesday and here too it is a marker on the path to an expected hold by Banxico on September 24th.

The Bank of England’s next move on September 17th is widely expected to be a hold at Bank Rate of 3.75%, but markets are pricing a high probability of a hike in either November or December. Monthly readings for GDP, industrial production, services output and trade during July on Friday are unlikely to swing the decision but will probably reflect some payback for June’s 0.3% m/m gain that was fed by weather, tourism and football that helped propel services output.

China basically has no consumer inflation and August’s updates on Tuesday night (ET) won’t change anything in that regard. CPI has been running at about ½% y/y with core inflation under 1%. That should give the PBOC some room to ease after not hitting its 3% headline inflation target once since early 2020 which in turn was the first time since just after the Global Financial Crisis. Even prior reductions in required reserve ratios have yet to drive a convincing acceleration of domestic currency loan growth (chart 16). It’s not an unreasonable question to ask why China is not stimulating its domestic economy to help arrest falling property prices and unleash more consumer supports to the benefit of the world economy. Currency instability as the dirty-managed yuan peg to the dollar falls to its weakest since 2022 and early 2023 is a constraint in that monetary easing could create more widespread financial instability.

Sweden (Monday) and Norway (Thursday) could be worth watching as they update inflation readings. The Riksbank had tamped down nearer term hike pricing at its latest meeting on August 20th which probably ruled out going on September 24th but continued to guide that a rate hike remained a possibility before year-end. Norges Bank’s next decision is also on September 24th after holding on August 13th and ahead of fresh forecasts and guidance to be shared this month.

Otherwise, the global calendar is pretty lightly populated with European trade and industrial output figures, Chinese trade data for August.

This report has been prepared by Scotiabank Economics as a resource for the clients of Scotiabank. Opinions, estimates and projections contained herein are our own as of the date hereof and are subject to change without notice. The information and opinions contained herein have been compiled or arrived at from sources believed reliable but no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to their accuracy or completeness. Neither Scotiabank nor any of its officers, directors, partners, employees or affiliates accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this report or its contents.

机构免责声明
These reports are provided to you for informational purposes only. This report is not, and is not constructed as, an offer to sell or solicitation of any offer to buy any financial instrument, nor shall this report be construed as an opinion as to whether you should enter into any swap or trading strategy involving a swap or any other transaction. The information contained in this report is not intended to be, and does not constitute, a recommendation of a swap or trading strategy involving a swap within the meaning of U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Regulation 23.434 and Appendix A thereto. This material is not intended to be individually tailored to your needs or characteristics and should not be viewed as a “call to action” or suggestion that you enter into a swap or trading strategy involving a swap or any other transaction. Scotiabank may engage in transactions in a manner inconsistent with the views discussed this report and may have positions, or be in the process of acquiring or disposing of positions, referred to in this report. Scotiabank, its affiliates and any of their respective officers, directors and employees may from time to time take positions in currencies, act as managers, co-managers or underwriters of a public offering or act as principals or agents, deal in, own or act as market makers or advisors, brokers or commercial and/or investment bankers in relation to securities or related derivatives. As a result of these actions, Scotiabank may receive remuneration. All Scotiabank products and services are subject to the terms of applicable agreements and local regulations. Officers, directors and employees of Scotiabank and its affiliates may serve as directors of corporations. Any securities discussed in this report may not be suitable for all investors. Scotiabank recommends that investors independently evaluate any issuer and security discussed in this report, and consult with any advisors they deem necessary prior to making any investment. This report and all information, opinions and conclusions contained in it are protected by copyright. This information may not be reproduced without the prior express written consent of Scotiabank. ™ Trademark of The Bank of Nova Scotia. Used under license, where applicable. Scotiabank, together with “Global Banking and Markets”, is a marketing name for the global corporate and investment banking and capital markets businesses of The Bank of Nova Scotia and certain of its affiliates in the countries where they operate, including; Scotiabank Europe plc; Scotiabank (Ireland) Designated Activity Company; Scotiabank Inverlat S.A., Institución de Banca Múltiple, Grupo Financiero Scotiabank Inverlat, Scotia Inverlat Casa de Bolsa, S.A. de C.V., Grupo Financiero Scotiabank Inverlat, Scotia Inverlat Derivados S.A. de C.V. – all members of the Scotiabank group and authorized users of the Scotiabank mark. The Bank of Nova Scotia is incorporated in Canada with limited liability and is authorised and regulated by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada. The Bank of Nova Scotia is authorized by the UK Prudential Regulation Authority and is subject to regulation by the UK Financial Conduct Authority and limited regulation by the UK Prudential Regulation Authority. Details about the extent of The Bank of Nova Scotia's regulation by the UK Prudential Regulation Authority are available from us on request. Scotiabank Europe plc is authorized by the UK Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority and the UK Prudential Regulation Authority. Scotiabank Inverlat, S.A., Scotia Inverlat Casa de Bolsa, S.A. de C.V, Grupo Financiero Scotiabank Inverlat, and Scotia Inverlat Derivados, S.A. de C.V., are each authorized and regulated by the Mexican financial authorities. Not all products and services are offered in all jurisdictions. Services described are available in jurisdictions where permitted by law.
预览 PDF
1 / 110%

正在载入文档……

AI 分析
由 AI 依据上文研报生成 · 非原文直译、非机构原话 · 重要判断请核对官网原文
关键论点
  • 周五的美国CPI和周二的PPI将是美联储9月16日决策的关键输入,目前市场定价约17个基点的加息概率。
  • 加拿大预计周二对美国280亿加元的进口商品实施报复性关税,可能引发与美国进一步升级。
  • 加拿大目标是在五年内吸引1万亿加元的投资,并由2800亿加元的政府激励措施作为种子。
  • 欧洲央行周四加息25个基点已被完全定价,更新的预测可能因能源成本而显示更高通胀。
  • 加拿大银行长期以来允许美国银行运营,与此相反的误解是错误的。
  • 中国消费通胀接近于零,给予中国人民银行宽松空间,但受货币疲软制约。
  • 土耳其央行预计维持37%不变,但由于里拉疲软和能源价格,加息风险仍存。
  • 俄罗斯央行在7月意外降息后可能转向更鹰派,因卢布大幅贬值。
风险
  • 美国CPI上行意外可能巩固9月美联储加息。
  • 加拿大与美国关税战可能升级,损害双方经济。
  • 如果能源冲击持续,欧洲央行新预测可能指向更多加息。
  • 土耳其央行尽管预期维持,但可能意外加息。
  • 俄罗斯可能比预期更鹰派。
  • 中国缺乏刺激措施对全球增长构成下行风险。
  • 加拿大财政支出可能在没有正式预算的情况下使预算紧张。