WEBVTT - Fed Board Shakeup, Trump-Xi Call Set for Friday

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

0:00:10.240 --> 0:00:13.400
<v Speaker 2>Welcome to the Daybreak Asia podcast. I'm Deuk Krisner. So

0:00:13.520 --> 0:00:16.920
<v Speaker 2>officials from the US and China have reached a framework

0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:19.919
<v Speaker 2>on keeping TikTok running in the US. This will set

0:00:19.960 --> 0:00:23.360
<v Speaker 2>the stage for a phone call on Friday between President

0:00:23.400 --> 0:00:27.120
<v Speaker 2>Trump and Chinese President Chi Jinping. The framework was reached

0:00:27.200 --> 0:00:31.720
<v Speaker 2>in Madrid Treasury Secretary Besson confirming a plan for US

0:00:31.880 --> 0:00:37.080
<v Speaker 2>ownership of TikTok. Tom Orlick is chief economist for Bloomberg Economics.

0:00:37.360 --> 0:00:40.919
<v Speaker 3>If we think about this from Beijing's perspective, they've got

0:00:40.960 --> 0:00:45.080
<v Speaker 3>conflicting objectives. On the one hand, they would dearly love

0:00:45.159 --> 0:00:49.120
<v Speaker 3>to have unlimited access to leading edge chips from Nvidia

0:00:49.200 --> 0:00:54.440
<v Speaker 3>to accelerate their artificial intelligence progress. On the other hand,

0:00:55.200 --> 0:00:58.560
<v Speaker 3>they recognize that the US is using access to chips

0:00:58.960 --> 0:01:04.360
<v Speaker 3>as an instrument control and negotiating leverage. They don't like that.

0:01:04.360 --> 0:01:07.520
<v Speaker 2>That is Bloomberg's tom Orlick. Now, we'll get some perspective

0:01:07.680 --> 0:01:11.000
<v Speaker 2>from the Asia Pacific momentarily, but we begin here in

0:01:11.040 --> 0:01:14.200
<v Speaker 2>the States, where the fed's two day meeting gets underway

0:01:14.200 --> 0:01:17.280
<v Speaker 2>in a matter of hours. Joining me now is Katie Kaminski,

0:01:17.680 --> 0:01:22.759
<v Speaker 2>Chief for Search strategist, also portfolio manager at Alpha Simplex. Katie,

0:01:22.800 --> 0:01:24.520
<v Speaker 2>good to see you. Thank you so much for spending

0:01:24.560 --> 0:01:26.679
<v Speaker 2>time with me. So a rate cut, I think we

0:01:26.720 --> 0:01:30.240
<v Speaker 2>can agree, seems like it's a sure thing. The question

0:01:30.400 --> 0:01:33.000
<v Speaker 2>is whether the FED begins to signal a series of

0:01:33.040 --> 0:01:35.920
<v Speaker 2>reductions extending into next year. Is that a fair statement?

0:01:36.680 --> 0:01:37.760
<v Speaker 4>I definitely agree.

0:01:37.800 --> 0:01:41.080
<v Speaker 5>I feel like the market has already priced in and

0:01:41.160 --> 0:01:44.280
<v Speaker 5>has really sort of foregone the conclusion that we'll have

0:01:44.360 --> 0:01:48.160
<v Speaker 5>rate cuts this week. But what I'm really interested in

0:01:48.280 --> 0:01:51.800
<v Speaker 5>is how many and what till do they make so

0:01:51.840 --> 0:01:55.400
<v Speaker 5>that we kind of understand the trajectory of the FED

0:01:55.440 --> 0:01:57.400
<v Speaker 5>as opposed to just this week.

0:01:57.760 --> 0:02:01.440
<v Speaker 2>What is your sense the probability of a fifty basis

0:02:01.440 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 2>point rate cut this week? Is that too too aggressive?

0:02:04.360 --> 0:02:04.800
<v Speaker 2>Do you think?

0:02:06.080 --> 0:02:10.040
<v Speaker 5>Well? I think based on most indications, there's a low

0:02:10.120 --> 0:02:13.760
<v Speaker 5>probability of that, but there still is a small probability.

0:02:14.440 --> 0:02:18.600
<v Speaker 5>There are a few officials that also probably will dissent

0:02:18.880 --> 0:02:22.040
<v Speaker 5>in favor of a fifty point cut, and I think

0:02:22.520 --> 0:02:25.880
<v Speaker 5>that sort of indicates the amount of descents that we've had,

0:02:25.919 --> 0:02:27.680
<v Speaker 5>and we haven't had a lot of descents in the

0:02:27.720 --> 0:02:30.640
<v Speaker 5>FED until recently, so I think that is something to

0:02:30.720 --> 0:02:31.600
<v Speaker 5>watch and think about.

0:02:31.919 --> 0:02:35.240
<v Speaker 2>One of the things that we know is that President

0:02:35.240 --> 0:02:38.400
<v Speaker 2>Trump has been pressuring the FED to cut interest rates.

0:02:38.440 --> 0:02:41.520
<v Speaker 2>David Kelly over at JP Morgan Asset Management was saying

0:02:42.280 --> 0:02:45.880
<v Speaker 2>a rate cut will increase risk for stock spawns and

0:02:45.919 --> 0:02:50.919
<v Speaker 2>the dollar if it's perceived to be driven by political pressure,

0:02:51.160 --> 0:02:53.800
<v Speaker 2>if it's perceived to be driven by political pressure and

0:02:53.880 --> 0:02:58.040
<v Speaker 2>doesn't align with the Fed's forecast for the economy. Fair statement.

0:02:59.280 --> 0:03:00.400
<v Speaker 4>I definitely so.

0:03:00.639 --> 0:03:02.600
<v Speaker 5>And the reason for this is if you look at

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:05.919
<v Speaker 5>the dual mandate, I mean, inflation numbers have actually been

0:03:06.000 --> 0:03:09.120
<v Speaker 5>going up some so you know, you're really sitting in

0:03:09.160 --> 0:03:12.600
<v Speaker 5>a situation where if it's perceived that this is not

0:03:14.280 --> 0:03:17.679
<v Speaker 5>given by a sort of economic analysism based on the

0:03:18.440 --> 0:03:22.880
<v Speaker 5>fed's view, then real view, that could definitely cause people

0:03:22.919 --> 0:03:25.720
<v Speaker 5>to wonder if it could go too far. And I

0:03:25.760 --> 0:03:27.760
<v Speaker 5>think there's definitely people out there thinking about that.

0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:29.600
<v Speaker 2>So we had records today for the S and P

0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:31.800
<v Speaker 2>and the NASDAK. What does it say to you that the

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:34.440
<v Speaker 2>market is trading at record highs at a time when

0:03:34.440 --> 0:03:36.560
<v Speaker 2>the FED is going to be easy. Does that make

0:03:36.600 --> 0:03:40.720
<v Speaker 2>you constructive on equities or are maybe a little cautious.

0:03:40.400 --> 0:03:44.720
<v Speaker 5>Right now, I'd say it's still constructive in terms of

0:03:44.760 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 5>the signals because it's all about the magnitude. So how

0:03:48.200 --> 0:03:52.280
<v Speaker 5>severe is the job situation versus the benefits of lower

0:03:52.360 --> 0:03:55.600
<v Speaker 5>rates potentially stimulating the economy, And so I.

0:03:55.560 --> 0:03:57.440
<v Speaker 4>Think that's where the market is right now.

0:03:57.480 --> 0:04:01.280
<v Speaker 5>It's leaning towards having lower rates could be positive, and

0:04:01.320 --> 0:04:07.320
<v Speaker 5>it's not more positive than a worsening job situation. So

0:04:07.400 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 5>I think we have to wait and see the next

0:04:09.880 --> 0:04:13.520
<v Speaker 5>trajectory because the severity of multiple cuts could actually have

0:04:13.560 --> 0:04:16.799
<v Speaker 5>a much more stimulative or a larger effect.

0:04:16.839 --> 0:04:18.880
<v Speaker 4>So it's just the beginning now, I would say.

0:04:19.000 --> 0:04:21.119
<v Speaker 2>So a moment ago, I mentioned the US in China

0:04:21.160 --> 0:04:24.360
<v Speaker 2>reaching the framework on keeping TikTok running in the US

0:04:24.400 --> 0:04:30.320
<v Speaker 2>maybe step one in trade negotiations between Washington and Beijing. Tariffs,

0:04:30.680 --> 0:04:33.919
<v Speaker 2>as we know, are still in effect. How are you

0:04:34.000 --> 0:04:37.200
<v Speaker 2>reading the tariff story right now as it relates to inflation.

0:04:38.560 --> 0:04:42.200
<v Speaker 5>Well, the challenge with this particular situation, if you look

0:04:42.240 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 5>at this conversation with China is it just shows how

0:04:45.520 --> 0:04:49.000
<v Speaker 5>complex it is that this could really take a long

0:04:49.080 --> 0:04:51.919
<v Speaker 5>time to actually come to fruition that there is a

0:04:52.000 --> 0:04:55.400
<v Speaker 5>deal which means that these tariffs stay in place, and there.

0:04:55.320 --> 0:04:57.359
<v Speaker 4>Will be ramifications of those tariffs.

0:04:57.400 --> 0:05:01.840
<v Speaker 5>So I think what we've noticed, though, is that headlines

0:05:01.839 --> 0:05:04.919
<v Speaker 5>are not moving the markets as much as they were before.

0:05:05.480 --> 0:05:09.320
<v Speaker 5>So you're really not seeing as much reaction to such information.

0:05:09.400 --> 0:05:11.520
<v Speaker 5>And I think it's going to take a long time

0:05:11.640 --> 0:05:13.719
<v Speaker 5>and it's going to be quite complex to understand the

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:14.880
<v Speaker 5>US China situation.

0:05:15.120 --> 0:05:18.240
<v Speaker 2>So we had yields down just a bit today. There's

0:05:18.279 --> 0:05:20.920
<v Speaker 2>been a lot of movement in the bond market recently

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:25.279
<v Speaker 2>as players in that space have been discounting an aggressive FED.

0:05:25.920 --> 0:05:28.520
<v Speaker 2>How much more room to run is there in the

0:05:28.560 --> 0:05:32.080
<v Speaker 2>bond market right now? How far can yields decline further?

0:05:33.440 --> 0:05:35.680
<v Speaker 5>Well, this is a very good question because a lot

0:05:35.720 --> 0:05:38.440
<v Speaker 5>of times the market gets ahead.

0:05:38.080 --> 0:05:41.000
<v Speaker 4>Of the FED. So I think a surprising.

0:05:40.400 --> 0:05:43.760
<v Speaker 5>Thing would be that we might actually be underwhelmed and

0:05:43.800 --> 0:05:48.159
<v Speaker 5>the market correct. This is because a lot of traders

0:05:48.400 --> 0:05:50.880
<v Speaker 5>and investors have been getting in sort of ahead of

0:05:50.880 --> 0:05:53.039
<v Speaker 5>the FED, and if the FED sort of slows down

0:05:53.160 --> 0:05:56.400
<v Speaker 5>or pumps the brakes, you might actually see a tick

0:05:56.520 --> 0:05:59.760
<v Speaker 5>up and yields, which is kind of counterintuitive for some investors.

0:06:00.240 --> 0:06:03.479
<v Speaker 5>So my view is that it's going to be touch

0:06:03.560 --> 0:06:05.320
<v Speaker 5>and go, and we're going to have to watch and

0:06:05.400 --> 0:06:09.440
<v Speaker 5>see how the markets move, but moving abruptly more. I

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:12.039
<v Speaker 5>don't see that at this point, so I think we'll

0:06:12.040 --> 0:06:13.920
<v Speaker 5>have to wait until later this week and see how

0:06:13.920 --> 0:06:14.520
<v Speaker 5>that reactions.

0:06:14.640 --> 0:06:17.719
<v Speaker 2>So worst case scenario, though we're just above four percent

0:06:17.800 --> 0:06:20.240
<v Speaker 2>now in the tenure in yield terms, could we get

0:06:20.279 --> 0:06:22.040
<v Speaker 2>back up to a round four and a half?

0:06:23.520 --> 0:06:27.640
<v Speaker 5>I mean it's possible, but I think that would require

0:06:27.720 --> 0:06:30.680
<v Speaker 5>us to have signaling that the FED is still being

0:06:30.839 --> 0:06:33.560
<v Speaker 5>very steady, and that has not really been the direction

0:06:34.520 --> 0:06:36.760
<v Speaker 5>momentum that you've seen with the FED. There's been just

0:06:36.760 --> 0:06:41.480
<v Speaker 5>sort of a slow pivot towards easing, and that, in

0:06:41.520 --> 0:06:42.840
<v Speaker 5>some sense, I would.

0:06:42.640 --> 0:06:44.640
<v Speaker 4>Suggest, is a little bit less likely.

0:06:45.600 --> 0:06:48.159
<v Speaker 5>You could see yields tick up a little bit if

0:06:48.520 --> 0:06:52.039
<v Speaker 5>people where markets are underwhelmed by cuts not coming as

0:06:52.080 --> 0:06:55.920
<v Speaker 5>fast as they think, or people pricing in aggressive cuts

0:06:55.960 --> 0:06:57.000
<v Speaker 5>that don't.

0:06:56.800 --> 0:06:57.520
<v Speaker 4>Come to fruition.

0:06:57.839 --> 0:07:00.960
<v Speaker 2>I'm just wondering about a negative prints on inflation.

0:07:01.320 --> 0:07:01.480
<v Speaker 5>Right.

0:07:01.560 --> 0:07:04.240
<v Speaker 2>We talk a little bit about the risk of stagflation

0:07:04.360 --> 0:07:07.040
<v Speaker 2>in the current environment, and I'm wondering whether that could

0:07:07.040 --> 0:07:10.040
<v Speaker 2>precipitate a move up and yield at the long end.

0:07:11.120 --> 0:07:14.440
<v Speaker 5>Oh, definitely, And we started to see some indications in

0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:16.239
<v Speaker 5>the technical signals this summer.

0:07:16.600 --> 0:07:18.520
<v Speaker 4>We saw steepening trades.

0:07:18.160 --> 0:07:22.640
<v Speaker 5>Going on for sure, and that could definitely be back

0:07:22.680 --> 0:07:26.000
<v Speaker 5>in focus again. If we start to see an acceleration

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:29.640
<v Speaker 5>in inflation and we're cutting rates at the same time,

0:07:30.080 --> 0:07:33.920
<v Speaker 5>that always gets everyone concerned about low growth, lots more

0:07:33.960 --> 0:07:38.560
<v Speaker 5>inflation aka stagflation. I think that's the corner case that

0:07:39.000 --> 0:07:42.119
<v Speaker 5>many investors are concerned about with cutting rates too fast.

0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:45.440
<v Speaker 2>So we had some dollar weakness today that shouldn't surprise you.

0:07:45.840 --> 0:07:48.760
<v Speaker 2>It seems like the dollar has been in this process

0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:50.840
<v Speaker 2>right now of giving back a lot of the gains

0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:54.440
<v Speaker 2>that we saw a short while ago. Are we firmly

0:07:54.520 --> 0:07:57.080
<v Speaker 2>now in a new paradigm where the dollar is concerned

0:07:57.120 --> 0:07:57.960
<v Speaker 2>against the majors?

0:07:59.240 --> 0:08:01.760
<v Speaker 5>Well this that's a good question because we have seen

0:08:01.760 --> 0:08:06.160
<v Speaker 5>a persistent, persistent weakness in the US dollar most of

0:08:06.160 --> 0:08:09.120
<v Speaker 5>the year, and there's several factors that are against the

0:08:09.160 --> 0:08:12.120
<v Speaker 5>dollar right now. So cutting rates tends to in general

0:08:12.200 --> 0:08:19.400
<v Speaker 5>be negative for the dollar. Positive sentiment cash flows regarding

0:08:19.440 --> 0:08:22.240
<v Speaker 5>positive sentiment can also be negative for the dollar.

0:08:22.320 --> 0:08:23.760
<v Speaker 4>So there's just a few.

0:08:23.840 --> 0:08:26.840
<v Speaker 5>Factors at play right now that don't make the dollar

0:08:26.880 --> 0:08:31.040
<v Speaker 5>look as desirable. So I think that could continue to

0:08:31.040 --> 0:08:33.800
<v Speaker 5>be the case, especially if we continue to see ray

0:08:33.840 --> 0:08:35.880
<v Speaker 5>cuts over the next couple of months. So I think

0:08:35.920 --> 0:08:38.600
<v Speaker 5>people are positioning in anticipation of that.

0:08:38.920 --> 0:08:41.440
<v Speaker 2>One of the things the market is prepared for is

0:08:41.559 --> 0:08:45.360
<v Speaker 2>a Dubvish tilt as the fed's Board of Governors kind

0:08:45.400 --> 0:08:48.240
<v Speaker 2>of gets reconfigured here, and I know there's been some

0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:52.440
<v Speaker 2>question at the margin about FED independence. We spoke a

0:08:52.520 --> 0:08:55.240
<v Speaker 2>moment ago about the influence that the president may be

0:08:55.400 --> 0:08:58.840
<v Speaker 2>having on policy right now. Is that something that you're

0:08:58.880 --> 0:09:00.760
<v Speaker 2>concerned about a great extent.

0:09:02.120 --> 0:09:05.839
<v Speaker 5>I mean, I think the market is definitely concerned about

0:09:05.840 --> 0:09:08.840
<v Speaker 5>that and has moved some on those type of reactions,

0:09:08.960 --> 0:09:10.160
<v Speaker 5>especially earlier on.

0:09:11.400 --> 0:09:14.320
<v Speaker 4>I think the fact that you have several.

0:09:14.120 --> 0:09:17.520
<v Speaker 5>More descents and disagreement in the FED is something that

0:09:17.559 --> 0:09:20.440
<v Speaker 5>we're not used to seeing for quite some time. So

0:09:20.520 --> 0:09:24.520
<v Speaker 5>I think as things start to shift even further, this

0:09:24.679 --> 0:09:27.319
<v Speaker 5>question will continue to be at the top of minds,

0:09:27.679 --> 0:09:30.160
<v Speaker 5>and if it becomes more apparent, you could see a

0:09:30.240 --> 0:09:35.360
<v Speaker 5>market reaction where investors get nervous thinking sort of is

0:09:35.400 --> 0:09:38.760
<v Speaker 5>this really the right decision given the current inflation scenario

0:09:39.040 --> 0:09:45.560
<v Speaker 5>and unemployment or the current economic situation in the US.

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:48.040
<v Speaker 2>Katie, before I let you go I have to ask

0:09:48.080 --> 0:09:50.600
<v Speaker 2>you about the story in China. We had the monthly

0:09:50.679 --> 0:09:55.400
<v Speaker 2>activity data in the prior session, both retail sales industrial

0:09:55.440 --> 0:09:58.320
<v Speaker 2>production coming in on the weak side. How do you

0:09:58.440 --> 0:10:01.560
<v Speaker 2>see the global economy right now outside the US, how

0:10:01.559 --> 0:10:03.960
<v Speaker 2>do you see it performing well?

0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:08.640
<v Speaker 5>The interesting thing is in certain areas like Japan merging markets,

0:10:08.679 --> 0:10:12.199
<v Speaker 5>they have been very strong. China, on the other hand,

0:10:12.280 --> 0:10:17.040
<v Speaker 5>has lagged, for example em in general. But you're also

0:10:17.200 --> 0:10:22.840
<v Speaker 5>seeing positive and mixed signals in other portions of the

0:10:23.080 --> 0:10:26.520
<v Speaker 5>Europe and also even in the US across different sectors.

0:10:26.559 --> 0:10:27.880
<v Speaker 4>So I'd say.

0:10:27.720 --> 0:10:30.400
<v Speaker 5>That China is definitely one of the laggards when many

0:10:30.559 --> 0:10:33.040
<v Speaker 5>of the markets have been up substantially this month, and

0:10:33.120 --> 0:10:36.440
<v Speaker 5>that may be due to that fundamental data that's just

0:10:36.480 --> 0:10:38.840
<v Speaker 5>suggesting there's not as much growth.

0:10:38.480 --> 0:10:39.280
<v Speaker 4>There right now.

0:10:39.480 --> 0:10:41.280
<v Speaker 2>Katie, we'll leave it there, Thank you so very much.

0:10:41.360 --> 0:10:45.360
<v Speaker 2>Kati Kaminski is chief for Search Strategist, also portfolio manager

0:10:45.840 --> 0:10:49.439
<v Speaker 2>at Alpha Simplex. Joining us here on the Daybreak Asia podcast.

0:10:57.720 --> 0:11:01.480
<v Speaker 2>Welcome back to the Daybreak Asia podcast Time Doug Krisner. So,

0:11:01.760 --> 0:11:04.160
<v Speaker 2>as I mentioned a moment ago, officials from the US

0:11:04.200 --> 0:11:07.719
<v Speaker 2>and China reached a framework on keeping TikTok running in

0:11:07.760 --> 0:11:11.080
<v Speaker 2>the US. President Trump spoke earlier to reporters in the

0:11:11.080 --> 0:11:12.000
<v Speaker 2>Oval Office.

0:11:12.160 --> 0:11:16.920
<v Speaker 1>It's important and it can maybe even bring us closer

0:11:16.960 --> 0:11:17.360
<v Speaker 1>to Jenna.

0:11:17.400 --> 0:11:18.840
<v Speaker 6>We had a very good meeting with John.

0:11:18.840 --> 0:11:19.440
<v Speaker 7>I was surprised.

0:11:19.480 --> 0:11:21.959
<v Speaker 4>I didn't expect it to that extent.

0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:25.840
<v Speaker 7>And I'm going to speak again with President she on.

0:11:25.080 --> 0:11:28.160
<v Speaker 6>Friday, and you know, I think that'll confirm.

0:11:27.800 --> 0:11:31.880
<v Speaker 2>Things up now. China's Commerce ministry called the deal a consensus.

0:11:31.920 --> 0:11:36.280
<v Speaker 2>Although some technical hurdles do remain. This breakthrough, nonetheless could

0:11:36.320 --> 0:11:40.559
<v Speaker 2>unlock a long awaited Trump She's summit at APEC next month.

0:11:41.000 --> 0:11:43.480
<v Speaker 2>For a closer look, we heard from Wendy Cutler, vice

0:11:43.520 --> 0:11:47.800
<v Speaker 2>president at the Asia Society Policy Institute. She formerly served

0:11:47.880 --> 0:11:52.640
<v Speaker 2>as acting Deputy US Trade Representative. Cutler spoke with Bloomberg

0:11:52.640 --> 0:11:56.600
<v Speaker 2>TV host Sherry On and Annabelle Droolers on the Asia.

0:11:56.280 --> 0:11:59.080
<v Speaker 1>Trade Wendy, always great to have you with us. What

0:11:59.160 --> 0:12:02.680
<v Speaker 1>do you make of the Madrid talks because we saw

0:12:02.840 --> 0:12:05.800
<v Speaker 1>some progress on TikTok, but at the same time, China

0:12:06.160 --> 0:12:08.920
<v Speaker 1>in the backdrop continues to apply pressure to the US

0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:09.600
<v Speaker 1>chip settor.

0:12:10.679 --> 0:12:14.840
<v Speaker 6>Look, the TikTok framework deal is a welcome development. This

0:12:14.960 --> 0:12:18.480
<v Speaker 6>has been a long term irritant in our relations with China.

0:12:18.920 --> 0:12:21.200
<v Speaker 6>So it's good that it's on the path to solution.

0:12:22.080 --> 0:12:26.599
<v Speaker 6>But there's so many other issues that are challenging this relationship.

0:12:27.000 --> 0:12:29.760
<v Speaker 6>And if it took two days of talks to basically

0:12:29.840 --> 0:12:33.280
<v Speaker 6>deal with TikTok, it's hard to see these other issues

0:12:33.320 --> 0:12:36.880
<v Speaker 6>being resolved over the coming months. I think it's just

0:12:36.920 --> 0:12:37.960
<v Speaker 6>going to take longer.

0:12:38.880 --> 0:12:41.600
<v Speaker 1>Could something of a breakthrough be achieved in the President

0:12:41.679 --> 0:12:44.160
<v Speaker 1>cGMP and Trump and Leader summit.

0:12:44.760 --> 0:12:46.960
<v Speaker 6>Well, first, they're going to have a call on Friday.

0:12:47.080 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 6>I think that call is important in that they can

0:12:49.840 --> 0:12:53.520
<v Speaker 6>confirm the TikTok deal and hopefully they can set a

0:12:53.720 --> 0:12:59.920
<v Speaker 6>direction forward for their staffs to work together in tech

0:13:00.679 --> 0:13:05.080
<v Speaker 6>leading up to the APEC meeting. But again there's you know,

0:13:05.160 --> 0:13:10.200
<v Speaker 6>between fetanyl and export controls and soybeans, there's just so

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:15.960
<v Speaker 6>many issues that these two countries need to work on intensively.

0:13:16.840 --> 0:13:19.240
<v Speaker 1>How big of a priority was TikTok in the grand

0:13:19.240 --> 0:13:21.640
<v Speaker 1>scheme of things when it comes to those low hanging

0:13:21.679 --> 0:13:24.360
<v Speaker 1>fruits that the two countries can target at the moment

0:13:24.720 --> 0:13:26.319
<v Speaker 1>and what could be next?

0:13:27.000 --> 0:13:30.800
<v Speaker 6>So I do TikTok is as of medium importance? What

0:13:30.960 --> 0:13:35.199
<v Speaker 6>made it rise to the top was the Wednesday deadline

0:13:35.640 --> 0:13:38.720
<v Speaker 6>to reach a decision or else to kick TikTok out

0:13:38.720 --> 0:13:41.960
<v Speaker 6>of the United States, And so that deadline I think

0:13:42.160 --> 0:13:46.720
<v Speaker 6>served to reach a resolution, you know, in this area.

0:13:47.320 --> 0:13:53.839
<v Speaker 6>But again there are issues including semiconductors and soybean purchases

0:13:54.000 --> 0:13:57.920
<v Speaker 6>and excess capacity. All of these issues need to be

0:13:58.080 --> 0:14:02.640
<v Speaker 6>looked at between the two countries to help stabilize the relationship.

0:14:03.000 --> 0:14:06.199
<v Speaker 6>I'm not talking about strengthening or improving it. I'm talking

0:14:06.280 --> 0:14:09.520
<v Speaker 6>about stabilizing it. And that is going to take more

0:14:09.559 --> 0:14:13.080
<v Speaker 6>work from both sides, particularly if the tariffs are going

0:14:13.120 --> 0:14:16.080
<v Speaker 6>to be rolled over. The tariff cuts are going to

0:14:16.080 --> 0:14:19.200
<v Speaker 6>be rolled over again on November tenth when their ninety

0:14:19.280 --> 0:14:20.720
<v Speaker 6>day clock expires.

0:14:21.960 --> 0:14:24.200
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, you mentioned semiconductors. I mean, how much do we

0:14:24.240 --> 0:14:26.360
<v Speaker 7>really need to read into the TikTok deal when you

0:14:26.400 --> 0:14:29.960
<v Speaker 7>had as well China targeting and video for instance, over

0:14:29.960 --> 0:14:33.520
<v Speaker 7>and I going back to a twenty twenty deal exactly.

0:14:33.680 --> 0:14:36.600
<v Speaker 6>And I have to say, as a trade negotiator, I

0:14:36.640 --> 0:14:40.520
<v Speaker 6>have never seen a trading partner overnight in the middle

0:14:40.560 --> 0:14:45.160
<v Speaker 6>of trade negotiations to hit the other country with such

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:48.960
<v Speaker 6>a strong measure like finding one of its key tech

0:14:49.040 --> 0:14:55.440
<v Speaker 6>companies in violation of its anti monopoly law. So you know,

0:14:55.840 --> 0:14:59.200
<v Speaker 6>I don't think that helped contribute to a good atmosphere

0:14:59.240 --> 0:15:02.400
<v Speaker 6>in the talks, but I give kudos to both sides

0:15:02.400 --> 0:15:05.360
<v Speaker 6>for finding a way forward at least on one issue

0:15:05.360 --> 0:15:06.840
<v Speaker 6>of concern TikTok.

0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:10.680
<v Speaker 7>Do you think then enough has been done right now

0:15:10.760 --> 0:15:13.800
<v Speaker 7>to sort of set the stage for any travel of

0:15:14.240 --> 0:15:17.440
<v Speaker 7>President Trump to Beijing later this year or does that

0:15:17.480 --> 0:15:19.360
<v Speaker 7>sort of look unlikely still for now?

0:15:20.960 --> 0:15:24.360
<v Speaker 6>I think we're there's a good start, and Secretary Besson

0:15:24.560 --> 0:15:26.840
<v Speaker 6>mentioned that the two sides will get together at his

0:15:27.040 --> 0:15:30.240
<v Speaker 6>level within a month, so you could see other issues

0:15:30.280 --> 0:15:33.360
<v Speaker 6>being worked at at the working level and then you know,

0:15:33.480 --> 0:15:37.200
<v Speaker 6>being put forward to Vice Premier Hoa and Secretary Besson.

0:15:37.640 --> 0:15:40.080
<v Speaker 6>So I think there still is a good chance of

0:15:40.200 --> 0:15:43.160
<v Speaker 6>at least a meeting in Korea. I'm not sure if

0:15:43.200 --> 0:15:47.600
<v Speaker 6>circumstances are right for a President Trump visit to China.

0:15:47.360 --> 0:15:50.760
<v Speaker 1>Yet, Wendy, I find it really funny that you mentioned

0:15:51.120 --> 0:15:54.440
<v Speaker 1>imagining being a trade negotiator now and how Nvidia became

0:15:54.520 --> 0:15:58.600
<v Speaker 1>targeted while the China used conversations went ongoing. But that

0:15:58.680 --> 0:16:01.400
<v Speaker 1>seems to be the case these days, isn't it. Even

0:16:01.440 --> 0:16:03.640
<v Speaker 1>in the US. I mean, could you have imagined an

0:16:03.640 --> 0:16:07.600
<v Speaker 1>immigration rate in that Georgia plant by South Korea after

0:16:07.720 --> 0:16:10.560
<v Speaker 1>that trade agreement was announced? I mean, how big of

0:16:10.600 --> 0:16:13.840
<v Speaker 1>an issue is this for Soul Because that issue seems

0:16:13.840 --> 0:16:16.120
<v Speaker 1>to be dealt with, But what's happening to all of

0:16:16.120 --> 0:16:18.240
<v Speaker 1>those investments going into the US.

0:16:18.800 --> 0:16:21.920
<v Speaker 6>Well, I couldn't agree more. And I've just returned from Korea,

0:16:22.120 --> 0:16:25.600
<v Speaker 6>and believe me, I've heard a lot of concerns and

0:16:25.680 --> 0:16:30.200
<v Speaker 6>a lot of caution about of investing more in the

0:16:30.320 --> 0:16:35.240
<v Speaker 6>United States. And at the same time that we're detaining

0:16:35.440 --> 0:16:39.600
<v Speaker 6>we were detaining Korean workers in Georgia, we're pressing the

0:16:39.680 --> 0:16:43.000
<v Speaker 6>Korean government to set up an investment fund of three

0:16:43.080 --> 0:16:47.240
<v Speaker 6>hundred and fifty billion dollars in the US, where basically

0:16:47.320 --> 0:16:51.440
<v Speaker 6>Donald Trump would decide which investments made sense and which

0:16:51.440 --> 0:16:54.840
<v Speaker 6>one should go forward. So it's it's kind of a

0:16:54.920 --> 0:16:59.080
<v Speaker 6>tense time in Seul, and I think that I was

0:16:59.120 --> 0:17:03.240
<v Speaker 6>heartened by the depth the Secretary of State apologizing for

0:17:03.320 --> 0:17:06.919
<v Speaker 6>the visa raids and emphasizing the need to find a

0:17:06.960 --> 0:17:10.160
<v Speaker 6>way forward on visas, because that's going to be critical

0:17:10.560 --> 0:17:13.399
<v Speaker 6>if Korean companies are going to have the confidence to

0:17:13.480 --> 0:17:17.440
<v Speaker 6>keep investing at those same levels in the United States.

0:17:18.680 --> 0:17:21.560
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, it certainly was a mere culpa of sorts yesterday.

0:17:21.600 --> 0:17:24.880
<v Speaker 7>I mean, it's really hard to not sort of reinforce

0:17:25.000 --> 0:17:27.240
<v Speaker 7>just that maybe the level of damage that's been done

0:17:27.320 --> 0:17:29.400
<v Speaker 7>from this, and not just the signal that it sends

0:17:29.440 --> 0:17:31.560
<v Speaker 7>to Korea, but also the signal it sends to other

0:17:31.600 --> 0:17:35.560
<v Speaker 7>places like Taiwan where you're asking businesses to shift investment

0:17:35.600 --> 0:17:38.120
<v Speaker 7>to the US. But how much of this is a setback?

0:17:38.160 --> 0:17:40.080
<v Speaker 7>Then just go back to what you learn in Soul

0:17:40.160 --> 0:17:42.840
<v Speaker 7>and what did you learn more on the ground there

0:17:42.880 --> 0:17:46.240
<v Speaker 7>about sort of the inclination or to strike a deal.

0:17:47.320 --> 0:17:51.240
<v Speaker 6>Well, again, I think the Koreans are concerned about going

0:17:51.280 --> 0:17:55.960
<v Speaker 6>forward with this huge investment fund, and after they read

0:17:56.080 --> 0:18:00.040
<v Speaker 6>the MoU between the US and Japan, which made it

0:18:00.119 --> 0:18:04.000
<v Speaker 6>clear that while there's a committee where the Japanese can

0:18:04.400 --> 0:18:08.560
<v Speaker 6>input into recommended projects, at the end of the day,

0:18:08.600 --> 0:18:13.000
<v Speaker 6>it's a US decision. Japan focused on just getting those

0:18:13.080 --> 0:18:16.760
<v Speaker 6>auto tariffs down was willing to make that concession. It's

0:18:16.960 --> 0:18:22.520
<v Speaker 6>unclear whether Korea is in a similar position, but still

0:18:22.880 --> 0:18:26.639
<v Speaker 6>it places top priority on reaching an agreement with a

0:18:26.680 --> 0:18:30.359
<v Speaker 6>close ally and getting the tariff's down, particularly in the

0:18:30.359 --> 0:18:32.840
<v Speaker 6>automotive sector and.

0:18:32.840 --> 0:18:37.480
<v Speaker 1>Talk about allies getting blindsided by the Trump administration. India

0:18:37.640 --> 0:18:41.000
<v Speaker 1>US officials now they're trying to negotiate a trade agreement.

0:18:41.520 --> 0:18:44.360
<v Speaker 1>What are your expectations when we have, of course seen

0:18:44.400 --> 0:18:47.359
<v Speaker 1>the threats of fifty percent tariffs on all Indian goods.

0:18:48.520 --> 0:18:51.359
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, actually, I'm kind of optimistic on the India front.

0:18:51.480 --> 0:18:53.960
<v Speaker 6>I think we got very close to a trade deal

0:18:54.080 --> 0:18:57.560
<v Speaker 6>with them, and the signals coming out of both Washington

0:18:57.640 --> 0:19:01.080
<v Speaker 6>and Delhi suggest that both sides do want to finalize

0:19:01.160 --> 0:19:05.440
<v Speaker 6>an agreement. That's positive, but again, we need to keep

0:19:05.520 --> 0:19:09.080
<v Speaker 6>in mind that trust has been broken and that it's

0:19:09.119 --> 0:19:11.440
<v Speaker 6>going to be hard to get back to where we were.

0:19:11.560 --> 0:19:15.359
<v Speaker 6>It's going to take time and effort, and hopefully a

0:19:15.400 --> 0:19:18.760
<v Speaker 6>trade agreement concluded between the US and India and a

0:19:18.800 --> 0:19:23.200
<v Speaker 6>reduction in those high tariffs would be a positive first

0:19:23.240 --> 0:19:26.240
<v Speaker 6>step to kind of repairing this relationship.

0:19:26.920 --> 0:19:29.000
<v Speaker 7>Wendy, thanks so much for joining us this morning. That's

0:19:29.000 --> 0:19:33.760
<v Speaker 7>Wendy Kutla, their vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute.

0:19:34.800 --> 0:19:38.160
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for listening to today's episode of the Bloomberg Daybreak

0:19:38.320 --> 0:19:41.680
<v Speaker 2>Asia Edition podcast. Each weekday, we look at the story

0:19:41.760 --> 0:19:46.119
<v Speaker 2>shaping markets, finance, and geopolitics in the Asia Pacific. You

0:19:46.160 --> 0:19:50.240
<v Speaker 2>can find us on Apple, Spotify, the Bloomberg Podcast YouTube channel,

0:19:50.359 --> 0:19:53.399
<v Speaker 2>or anywhere else you listen. Join us again tomorrow for

0:19:53.520 --> 0:19:57.000
<v Speaker 2>insight on the market moves from Hong Kong to Singapore

0:19:57.400 --> 0:20:01.119
<v Speaker 2>and Australia. I'm Doug Chrisner and this is Bloomberg.

0:20:04.720 --> 0:20:08.720
<v Speaker 4>Hmm