Will the US Federal Reserve speed up its interest rate hikes this year? The Fed will have to consider US economic growth, the inflation outlook and the COVID-19 situation, but as the risk posed by the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 appears controllable and employment data last month showed a still-tight labor market, a rate hike cycle might start as early as March, when the US Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is to discuss measures to curb inflation. The Fed has maintained its target interest rate at zero to 0.25 percent since March 15, 2020.
The employment numbers released on Friday were a shot in the arm for the US economy and Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. The unemployment rate dropped to 3.9 percent from 4.2 percent in November, and average wages continued to rise, up 0.6 percent from the previous month.
Meanwhile, nonfarm payroll employment increased by 199,000 last month on a seasonally adjusted basis, following upward revisions in the previous two months, the US Department of Labor reported. While public health concerns remain, the employment data continued to boost the economy, and, based on data compiled by Reuters and Bloomberg, the probability that the FOMC will lift the interest rate in March is above 70 percent.
The committee said last month that it would wind down the Fed’s bond-buying program faster than first announced at its November meeting, aiming to end the program in March. However, the minutes of its meeting last month, which were released on Wednesday, revealed not only FOMC policymakers’ thoughts of a faster timeline to raise the rate and scale back asset purchases, but also that they discussed reducing the Fed’s balance sheet, which has ballooned to US$8.8 trillion following years of purchases of Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities.
The minutes showed the Fed’s hawkish position on monetary policy, but at the same time confused the public with regard to its intentions. On the one hand, a quick interest rate increase would mean that the Fed has confidence in the US economy and that inflation can be brought under control. Rate hikes would increase people’s income from savings, boost consumption and further stimulate the economy.
On the other hand, the markets were upset by the FOMC’s discussions about reducing the balance sheet, with investors on Thursday worrying that the central bank’s moves might reduce global market liquidity.
The Fed’s policies have over the past two years pumped liquidity into global markets, helping them weather the COVID-19 pandemic. Losing this boost is a legitimate worry for investors, who can only speculate how and when the Fed might start working toward shrinking its balance sheet.
The anticipated rate hike and balance sheet reduction would lead to rising US Treasury yields and a stronger US dollar, which could in turn lead to greater volatility and affect fund flows into emerging markets, and their currencies and equities, including Taiwan’s.
Fortunately, Taiwan has a strategic advantage — its semiconductor industry — and its external debt burden is light, so Taiwan’s economy would not be hit hard by the Fed’s policy changes, although the stock market in Taipei might experience a mild pullback due to capital outflows.
As several central banks — including in South Korea, Singapore, New Zealand, the UK and Russia — have tightened their monetary policy, it is only a matter of time until the central bank in Taipei raises its rates. This move would warrant investors’ closer attention to leverage in financial markets and investment plans, as well as measures for vulnerable groups and pandemic-hit businesses.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS