WEBVTT - Markets React to Moody's US Credit Downgrade

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

0:00:10.160 --> 0:00:13.400
<v Speaker 2>Welcome to the Daybreak Asia podcast. I'm Doug Chrisner. This

0:00:13.560 --> 0:00:16.239
<v Speaker 2>is going to be the first opportunity for markets in

0:00:16.360 --> 0:00:18.960
<v Speaker 2>Asia to react to a downgrade of the US credit

0:00:19.040 --> 0:00:22.320
<v Speaker 2>rating by Moody's. It was last Friday, after the New

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:25.400
<v Speaker 2>York close that moody stripped the US government of its

0:00:25.440 --> 0:00:29.120
<v Speaker 2>top credit rating, cutting it to double A one from

0:00:29.200 --> 0:00:32.879
<v Speaker 2>triple A. Bloomberg's Michael McKee says this may not mean

0:00:33.000 --> 0:00:35.120
<v Speaker 2>a lot for US markets.

0:00:34.760 --> 0:00:39.400
<v Speaker 3>But there could be some portfolio rebalancing based on this.

0:00:40.040 --> 0:00:44.560
<v Speaker 3>But most contracts say usment reference US government debt rather

0:00:44.680 --> 0:00:50.000
<v Speaker 3>than specific ratings for it, so that could prevent forest selling. However,

0:00:50.040 --> 0:00:53.599
<v Speaker 3>it does mean likely higher interest rates. We'll have to

0:00:53.800 --> 0:00:56.640
<v Speaker 3>keep an eye on the yield curve, and that raises

0:00:57.000 --> 0:00:58.880
<v Speaker 3>the costs that the US government is going to have

0:00:58.960 --> 0:01:00.040
<v Speaker 3>to pay to service.

0:00:59.760 --> 0:01:03.440
<v Speaker 2>Its Yes, that is Bloomberg's Michael McKee. Now Moody cited

0:01:03.480 --> 0:01:08.120
<v Speaker 2>the failure of successive administrations to deal with rising US

0:01:08.160 --> 0:01:12.800
<v Speaker 2>debt and deficits. The firm also cited interest payment ratios

0:01:12.920 --> 0:01:17.720
<v Speaker 2>at significantly higher levels than similarly rated sovereigns. I guess

0:01:17.760 --> 0:01:20.560
<v Speaker 2>you could say the move was hardly surprising since both

0:01:20.760 --> 0:01:25.039
<v Speaker 2>S and P Global and Fitch have already taken similar steps.

0:01:25.319 --> 0:01:27.200
<v Speaker 2>Joining me now for a closer look at this and

0:01:27.319 --> 0:01:30.399
<v Speaker 2>other stories in the marketplace is Larry Tantarelli. He is

0:01:30.440 --> 0:01:35.199
<v Speaker 2>the chief technical strategist at blue Chip Daily Trend Report. Larry,

0:01:35.200 --> 0:01:37.240
<v Speaker 2>thank you for making time to chat with me about this.

0:01:37.800 --> 0:01:40.280
<v Speaker 2>Give me your reaction to the Moody's downgrade.

0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:43.119
<v Speaker 4>Doug, thank you for having me on. So I believe

0:01:43.200 --> 0:01:45.720
<v Speaker 4>the Moody's downgrade is going to turn out to be

0:01:45.959 --> 0:01:49.640
<v Speaker 4>a non event. As you said, two other rating agencies

0:01:49.680 --> 0:01:52.920
<v Speaker 4>have already downgraded the US over the years. And as

0:01:52.920 --> 0:01:55.200
<v Speaker 4>we look at the market reaction right now, the S

0:01:55.240 --> 0:01:58.080
<v Speaker 4>and P futures are down about six tens of percent.

0:01:58.600 --> 0:02:01.160
<v Speaker 4>Ten year treasure heels with me moved up about five

0:02:01.320 --> 0:02:04.960
<v Speaker 4>basis points. So we may see some short term volatility,

0:02:05.240 --> 0:02:07.040
<v Speaker 4>but I don't think that this is going to be

0:02:07.120 --> 0:02:08.560
<v Speaker 4>a major event whatsoever.

0:02:08.720 --> 0:02:12.880
<v Speaker 2>But the timing comes as Congress debates even more unfunded

0:02:12.919 --> 0:02:16.919
<v Speaker 2>tax cuts. Do you think this in any way influences

0:02:16.960 --> 0:02:18.440
<v Speaker 2>the conversation in Washington?

0:02:19.480 --> 0:02:22.400
<v Speaker 4>It might to a degree, because I do think it

0:02:22.440 --> 0:02:27.519
<v Speaker 4>puts upward pressure on bond yields, So to a degree,

0:02:27.800 --> 0:02:31.120
<v Speaker 4>it might because it is still a major news event,

0:02:31.560 --> 0:02:33.200
<v Speaker 4>so to a degree, yes.

0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:36.560
<v Speaker 2>Well, you mentioned the upward pressure on bond yields, which

0:02:36.720 --> 0:02:40.040
<v Speaker 2>reminds me of the situation a while back with Silicon

0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:43.160
<v Speaker 2>Valley Bank. Do we have to be concerned if we

0:02:43.200 --> 0:02:47.200
<v Speaker 2>get a backup in yields to a meaningful degree about

0:02:47.560 --> 0:02:49.639
<v Speaker 2>the way in which some of the regional banks or

0:02:49.680 --> 0:02:52.760
<v Speaker 2>other financial institutions are exposed to US treasuries.

0:02:53.320 --> 0:02:56.200
<v Speaker 4>We need to see tang year yields break out over

0:02:56.360 --> 0:02:59.600
<v Speaker 4>four point eight zero. Right now, they're trading at about

0:02:59.639 --> 0:03:02.880
<v Speaker 4>four point four eight, and I don't know that this

0:03:03.080 --> 0:03:06.080
<v Speaker 4>is enough of an event to push yields to that

0:03:06.200 --> 0:03:09.959
<v Speaker 4>breakout level. So it's always a possibility, but I would

0:03:10.000 --> 0:03:12.760
<v Speaker 4>say it's a very remote possibility that we get a

0:03:12.840 --> 0:03:15.160
<v Speaker 4>major breakout in yields from this.

0:03:15.560 --> 0:03:17.800
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk a little bit about what's been going on

0:03:17.840 --> 0:03:21.160
<v Speaker 2>with the global economy as the Trump administration works to

0:03:21.280 --> 0:03:25.560
<v Speaker 2>rearrange or re engineer global trade. How do you understand

0:03:25.600 --> 0:03:28.280
<v Speaker 2>the tariff story at the moment? Are we closer to

0:03:28.360 --> 0:03:31.200
<v Speaker 2>a resolution? Do you suspect or does this have the

0:03:31.240 --> 0:03:34.600
<v Speaker 2>potential to drag on for a while and do a

0:03:34.639 --> 0:03:37.040
<v Speaker 2>substantial amount of harm to the global economy.

0:03:37.800 --> 0:03:42.000
<v Speaker 4>My expectation is somewhere in the middle. So my expectation

0:03:42.240 --> 0:03:45.560
<v Speaker 4>is that this will not be a quick fix. It

0:03:45.640 --> 0:03:48.920
<v Speaker 4>could drag on as far as the process for a

0:03:49.080 --> 0:03:53.360
<v Speaker 4>few months or longer. Scott Bessnt recently said that he

0:03:53.400 --> 0:03:55.680
<v Speaker 4>thought it would take two to three years to get

0:03:55.680 --> 0:03:59.920
<v Speaker 4>a full China trade deal, so the process could take

0:04:00.120 --> 0:04:03.320
<v Speaker 4>a little more time. But I think what the markets

0:04:03.360 --> 0:04:07.040
<v Speaker 4>are really focused on right now is the news cycle,

0:04:07.560 --> 0:04:10.400
<v Speaker 4>and about six weeks ago, the markets had really priced

0:04:10.440 --> 0:04:15.960
<v Speaker 4>in worst case scenario and a global economic slowdown. Over

0:04:16.000 --> 0:04:19.560
<v Speaker 4>the past few weeks because of positive news headlines that

0:04:19.600 --> 0:04:22.400
<v Speaker 4>have come out, I think a lot of pressure has

0:04:22.440 --> 0:04:26.480
<v Speaker 4>been taken off global economic expectations, and I think the

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:29.799
<v Speaker 4>markets are adjusting right now to the expected tariffs.

0:04:30.200 --> 0:04:33.800
<v Speaker 2>We talked about the possibility that this Moody's downgrade will

0:04:33.839 --> 0:04:36.880
<v Speaker 2>negatively impact US equities. You cited the S and P

0:04:37.640 --> 0:04:40.200
<v Speaker 2>E many futures contract a moment ago, But if you

0:04:40.240 --> 0:04:43.680
<v Speaker 2>look at what happened Friday, equities capped there as second

0:04:43.720 --> 0:04:46.960
<v Speaker 2>best week of the year. Fair amount of optimism maybe

0:04:46.960 --> 0:04:49.479
<v Speaker 2>about the trade deal, and I was struck by the

0:04:49.520 --> 0:04:52.520
<v Speaker 2>fact that the markets seem to overlook not only the

0:04:52.560 --> 0:04:57.960
<v Speaker 2>slump in consumer sentiment, but a real spike in inflation expectations.

0:04:57.960 --> 0:05:00.039
<v Speaker 2>I think we're at the highest level right now in

0:05:00.080 --> 0:05:03.000
<v Speaker 2>about forty years. What is the risk do you think

0:05:03.040 --> 0:05:05.200
<v Speaker 2>for the US equity market in the next three to

0:05:05.279 --> 0:05:05.880
<v Speaker 2>six months.

0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:10.240
<v Speaker 4>The two biggest risks that we face. Number one would

0:05:10.279 --> 0:05:14.800
<v Speaker 4>be if there was any major walk back in the

0:05:14.839 --> 0:05:18.159
<v Speaker 4>progress that we've made with China and the trade negotiations.

0:05:18.240 --> 0:05:21.720
<v Speaker 4>That would be number one. The second biggest risk if

0:05:21.760 --> 0:05:26.159
<v Speaker 4>for some reason the economy started to slow down drastically,

0:05:26.400 --> 0:05:29.640
<v Speaker 4>if the jobs market started to weaken, which it has not.

0:05:30.320 --> 0:05:33.080
<v Speaker 4>The labor market's held up very well. I think the

0:05:33.120 --> 0:05:39.160
<v Speaker 4>disconnect with inflation is inflation expectations are based on consumer sentiment,

0:05:39.480 --> 0:05:41.880
<v Speaker 4>but if we look at the actual data that's coming in,

0:05:42.000 --> 0:05:45.560
<v Speaker 4>CPI has come in below forecast for the past three months.

0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:51.400
<v Speaker 4>PPI came in negative last week, So the consumer expectations

0:05:51.520 --> 0:05:55.400
<v Speaker 4>may be bearish, but the actual data that's coming in

0:05:55.480 --> 0:05:56.839
<v Speaker 4>has been trending lower.

0:05:56.960 --> 0:05:59.120
<v Speaker 2>But you could make the case that we have yet

0:05:59.160 --> 0:06:03.560
<v Speaker 2>to see the tariffs really bite. I think Walmart last

0:06:03.600 --> 0:06:05.960
<v Speaker 2>week said it was going to raise prices the President

0:06:06.040 --> 0:06:09.120
<v Speaker 2>kind of pushed back against that notion. Is there the

0:06:09.279 --> 0:06:13.800
<v Speaker 2>risk that these tariffs will in fact produce higher inflation

0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.040
<v Speaker 2>that the market is right now maybe underestimating a little bit.

0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:21.840
<v Speaker 4>Yes, there definitely is. The tariff effect is going to

0:06:21.880 --> 0:06:26.400
<v Speaker 4>have a lagging process as far as when the tariff

0:06:26.640 --> 0:06:29.359
<v Speaker 4>kicks it, when the tariffs kick in. So although we

0:06:29.480 --> 0:06:33.159
<v Speaker 4>haven't really seen higher inflation yet, this is going to

0:06:33.200 --> 0:06:36.880
<v Speaker 4>be a process, not an event. So we do have

0:06:37.000 --> 0:06:40.240
<v Speaker 4>to stay cautious over the next few weeks or over

0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:43.280
<v Speaker 4>the next few months that inflation doesn't break out higher.

0:06:43.520 --> 0:06:45.840
<v Speaker 2>So when it comes to the Fed, what is your thinking.

0:06:45.880 --> 0:06:49.160
<v Speaker 2>Do they take a very very cautious stance here? And

0:06:49.200 --> 0:06:51.840
<v Speaker 2>if the market right now is expecting maybe two to

0:06:51.920 --> 0:06:55.480
<v Speaker 2>twenty five bases point rate cuts, that's about right. Maybe

0:06:55.520 --> 0:06:57.440
<v Speaker 2>the risk is that we get fewer than that.

0:06:58.680 --> 0:07:02.360
<v Speaker 4>Yes, I believe that the Fed is on hold at

0:07:02.440 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 4>least until September. The Fed Fund's futures market is pricing

0:07:06.480 --> 0:07:09.440
<v Speaker 4>in the first rate cut in September. But I believe

0:07:09.480 --> 0:07:12.440
<v Speaker 4>the Fed can be very patient right here. They don't

0:07:12.480 --> 0:07:15.440
<v Speaker 4>have to be in a hurry to cut rates whatsoever.

0:07:15.520 --> 0:07:18.640
<v Speaker 4>The economy is holding up well, the labor market is

0:07:18.760 --> 0:07:23.320
<v Speaker 4>very strong, and inflation is still above the long term forecast,

0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:25.800
<v Speaker 4>so I believe that the FED is going to be

0:07:26.040 --> 0:07:28.840
<v Speaker 4>very patient. I believe they're going to want to see

0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:32.800
<v Speaker 4>no negative effects from the tariffs, so I believe they're

0:07:32.800 --> 0:07:34.040
<v Speaker 4>on hold for the time being.

0:07:34.240 --> 0:07:38.280
<v Speaker 2>I'm curious as to how you're viewing opportunities offshore right now.

0:07:38.720 --> 0:07:40.520
<v Speaker 2>Are there places to put money to work?

0:07:41.440 --> 0:07:41.960
<v Speaker 4>Definitely?

0:07:42.200 --> 0:07:42.240
<v Speaker 1>So.

0:07:42.920 --> 0:07:47.800
<v Speaker 4>China has turned up recently. Taiwan. The Taiwan market is

0:07:47.840 --> 0:07:50.320
<v Speaker 4>back over the two hundred day moving average, and they're

0:07:50.440 --> 0:07:54.960
<v Speaker 4>heavily tied to semiconductors. Semiconductors had a very strong week

0:07:55.040 --> 0:07:59.320
<v Speaker 4>last week. Taiwan semi was very strong. India has turned

0:07:59.400 --> 0:08:02.600
<v Speaker 4>up recently over the past few weeks, that's back over

0:08:02.680 --> 0:08:05.880
<v Speaker 4>the forty week moving average, and Korea has been acting

0:08:06.000 --> 0:08:10.360
<v Speaker 4>very well. So I'm seeing opportunities in China, India, Korea,

0:08:10.400 --> 0:08:11.040
<v Speaker 4>and Taiwan.

0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:14.960
<v Speaker 2>I'm curious, Larry about the measures of conviction that you

0:08:15.080 --> 0:08:16.480
<v Speaker 2>use in your work. What are they?

0:08:17.440 --> 0:08:21.440
<v Speaker 4>What I look at is price trends and weekly price moves.

0:08:21.600 --> 0:08:23.760
<v Speaker 4>So what I'm seeing in the S and P five

0:08:23.880 --> 0:08:28.920
<v Speaker 4>hundred and the Nasdaq one hundred very very strong conviction

0:08:29.080 --> 0:08:31.880
<v Speaker 4>moves what we saw last week is the S and

0:08:31.920 --> 0:08:35.160
<v Speaker 4>P five hundred and Nasdaq one hundred both closed over

0:08:35.200 --> 0:08:38.280
<v Speaker 4>the forty week moving average for the first time in

0:08:38.400 --> 0:08:41.080
<v Speaker 4>quite a few weeks. They did it with a very

0:08:41.120 --> 0:08:44.559
<v Speaker 4>strong move. Both indices were up by over five percent.

0:08:45.200 --> 0:08:48.440
<v Speaker 4>The forty week moving average is rising, the ten week

0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:51.440
<v Speaker 4>moving average is rising. So when I look at these

0:08:51.520 --> 0:08:55.360
<v Speaker 4>weekly chart trends, these are very strong moves that we're seeing.

0:08:55.880 --> 0:08:58.120
<v Speaker 2>Larry, we'll leave it there. Thank you so much for

0:08:58.240 --> 0:09:01.439
<v Speaker 2>joining us. Great insights from Tantarelli. He is the chief

0:09:01.440 --> 0:09:05.320
<v Speaker 2>technical strategist at blue Chip Daily Trend Report. Joining us

0:09:05.360 --> 0:09:15.680
<v Speaker 2>here on the Daybreak Asia podcast. Welcome back to the

0:09:15.720 --> 0:09:19.680
<v Speaker 2>Daybreak Asia Podcast. I'm Doug Krisner. We're seeing currency market

0:09:19.720 --> 0:09:23.240
<v Speaker 2>reaction to the downgrade of the US credit rating by Moody's.

0:09:23.440 --> 0:09:26.439
<v Speaker 2>Both the Japanese yenn and the Swiss frank have strengthened.

0:09:26.440 --> 0:09:30.000
<v Speaker 2>The dollar mean time is weaker earlier. Treasury Secretary Scott

0:09:30.000 --> 0:09:33.920
<v Speaker 2>Besson downplayed concerns over the US government's debt and the

0:09:33.960 --> 0:09:37.160
<v Speaker 2>inflationary impact of the tariffs on Sunday. He said the

0:09:37.200 --> 0:09:41.160
<v Speaker 2>Trump administration is determined to lower federal spending and grow

0:09:41.240 --> 0:09:44.360
<v Speaker 2>the American economy now. Besson's remarks come ahead of the

0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:48.160
<v Speaker 2>G seven finance ministers meeting this week in Canada. That's

0:09:48.200 --> 0:09:51.840
<v Speaker 2>where US Japan trade talks are expected. For more, we

0:09:51.920 --> 0:09:55.000
<v Speaker 2>heard from Tobias Harris. He is the founder and principal

0:09:55.240 --> 0:09:59.199
<v Speaker 2>at Japan Foresight. He spoke earlier with Bloomberg sivon men

0:09:59.320 --> 0:10:00.400
<v Speaker 2>and April Home.

0:10:01.160 --> 0:10:03.680
<v Speaker 5>We talked about what's at stake here, but it seems

0:10:03.720 --> 0:10:06.560
<v Speaker 5>like the narrative has shifted on how Japan can approach

0:10:06.840 --> 0:10:10.319
<v Speaker 5>these talks in this third round. What is your expectations

0:10:10.440 --> 0:10:12.920
<v Speaker 5>on whether Japan can actually secure a long term trade

0:10:12.920 --> 0:10:14.040
<v Speaker 5>deal with the US.

0:10:14.400 --> 0:10:17.360
<v Speaker 1>You really have this fundamental question of what is the

0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:19.040
<v Speaker 1>US willing to put on the table, because I think

0:10:19.080 --> 0:10:20.880
<v Speaker 1>Japan has been very clear that it doesn't want a

0:10:20.920 --> 0:10:24.800
<v Speaker 1>one sided deal. It wants automobile tariffs, wh wants steel tariffs,

0:10:24.800 --> 0:10:27.160
<v Speaker 1>WO wants aluminum tariffs to be on the table up

0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:30.280
<v Speaker 1>for consideration, and I think the messaging from the Prime

0:10:30.320 --> 0:10:32.160
<v Speaker 1>Minister and other members of his government has been is

0:10:32.200 --> 0:10:34.680
<v Speaker 1>that this is pretty much a non negotiable position. And

0:10:34.720 --> 0:10:38.079
<v Speaker 1>so frankly, until we see movement from the US on

0:10:39.320 --> 0:10:41.520
<v Speaker 1>those tariffs, it's going to be really hard to get

0:10:41.559 --> 0:10:43.120
<v Speaker 1>a deal done because I think is of Us put

0:10:43.200 --> 0:10:45.360
<v Speaker 1>himself in a position where you can't really climb back

0:10:45.760 --> 0:10:46.120
<v Speaker 1>on that.

0:10:47.040 --> 0:10:48.920
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, you mentioned about the auto tariffs. I mean that

0:10:48.920 --> 0:10:52.160
<v Speaker 5>twenty five percent tariff on japan auto imports is still there.

0:10:53.160 --> 0:10:54.920
<v Speaker 5>What do you think Isshab was thinking? Do you think

0:10:54.960 --> 0:10:59.360
<v Speaker 5>his administration is willing to sacrifice the domestic agricultural industry

0:11:00.200 --> 0:11:02.600
<v Speaker 5>to win back those terror reductions when it comes to autos?

0:11:04.320 --> 0:11:06.400
<v Speaker 6>You know, I think it just depends on the overall

0:11:07.160 --> 0:11:08.400
<v Speaker 6>deal that's on the table.

0:11:08.520 --> 0:11:10.520
<v Speaker 1>And in fact, I think, you know, we've now seen

0:11:10.679 --> 0:11:13.960
<v Speaker 1>some reporting hinting that the Issuba government might be open

0:11:14.080 --> 0:11:17.679
<v Speaker 1>to lower auto tariffs, but not completely removing the new

0:11:17.679 --> 0:11:19.400
<v Speaker 1>tariffs that we're introduced.

0:11:19.440 --> 0:11:21.000
<v Speaker 6>But the overall package.

0:11:21.000 --> 0:11:23.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean, for now, we have not really heard what

0:11:24.160 --> 0:11:26.040
<v Speaker 1>the Trump renstration is really willing to put.

0:11:25.920 --> 0:11:26.440
<v Speaker 6>On the table.

0:11:26.840 --> 0:11:29.840
<v Speaker 1>And frankly, I don't know if we if we've heard

0:11:29.960 --> 0:11:31.960
<v Speaker 1>that the Trump renstration is even happy with some of

0:11:32.000 --> 0:11:36.160
<v Speaker 1>the potential agricultural concessions that we've that have been discussed

0:11:36.520 --> 0:11:37.839
<v Speaker 1>as possible.

0:11:37.360 --> 0:11:40.080
<v Speaker 6>From the Japanese government. I mean, the overall picture.

0:11:39.800 --> 0:11:42.640
<v Speaker 1>The idea, you know, what exactly are they looking to

0:11:42.640 --> 0:11:44.679
<v Speaker 1>get out of Japan in this, you know, is the goal,

0:11:44.960 --> 0:11:45.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, getting rid.

0:11:45.720 --> 0:11:47.520
<v Speaker 6>Of Japan's biolateral.

0:11:47.000 --> 0:11:49.480
<v Speaker 1>Trade surplus with the United States or is it market

0:11:49.520 --> 0:11:52.160
<v Speaker 1>access for US goods, whether or not that results in

0:11:53.120 --> 0:11:55.640
<v Speaker 1>eliminating that trade and balance with Japan.

0:11:55.920 --> 0:11:57.880
<v Speaker 6>And until we get to that point, I think it's.

0:11:57.760 --> 0:12:00.680
<v Speaker 1>Really hard to say what exactly does it an agreement

0:12:00.679 --> 0:12:01.840
<v Speaker 1>between these countries look.

0:12:01.760 --> 0:12:08.040
<v Speaker 7>Like Tomorrow's what about? Sort of like the domestic audience

0:12:08.800 --> 0:12:11.480
<v Speaker 7>at this point, because there is also an Upper House

0:12:11.480 --> 0:12:14.400
<v Speaker 7>election coming up. Does that in a way play into

0:12:14.720 --> 0:12:15.400
<v Speaker 7>trade talks?

0:12:16.320 --> 0:12:18.160
<v Speaker 1>I think it absolutely does, and I think it you know,

0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:22.520
<v Speaker 1>it certainly has affected Issuba's sense of timing that, you know,

0:12:22.600 --> 0:12:26.400
<v Speaker 1>not wanting to have a certainly he doesn't want a

0:12:26.400 --> 0:12:28.320
<v Speaker 1>bad deal at all, but a bad deal right before

0:12:28.360 --> 0:12:29.440
<v Speaker 1>the election I think is going.

0:12:29.360 --> 0:12:30.880
<v Speaker 6>To be bad news.

0:12:31.080 --> 0:12:35.679
<v Speaker 1>I think, you know, a deal that saves Japan's automakers,

0:12:35.920 --> 0:12:40.120
<v Speaker 1>that limits the impact on agricultural producers, I think, you know,

0:12:40.160 --> 0:12:41.920
<v Speaker 1>that would be a great deal for him to announce

0:12:41.960 --> 0:12:43.840
<v Speaker 1>right before the Upper House campaign. And I think you know,

0:12:43.880 --> 0:12:46.640
<v Speaker 1>he's looking, you know, to have some achievement that he

0:12:46.679 --> 0:12:49.800
<v Speaker 1>can take to voters. But if that deal does not

0:12:49.880 --> 0:12:53.120
<v Speaker 1>look like it's materializing. You know, it's much more likely frankly,

0:12:53.160 --> 0:12:55.360
<v Speaker 1>that talks will drag on past the Upper House elections

0:12:55.360 --> 0:12:57.800
<v Speaker 1>that you know, Japan is better off waiting to get

0:12:57.800 --> 0:13:00.320
<v Speaker 1>a better deal than to have something inadequate to put

0:13:00.360 --> 0:13:02.400
<v Speaker 1>before the voters in July.

0:13:02.600 --> 0:13:03.840
<v Speaker 6>So, you know, it really.

0:13:03.720 --> 0:13:06.800
<v Speaker 1>Depends on what ultimately is on the table. But clearly,

0:13:07.080 --> 0:13:08.680
<v Speaker 1>you know the fact that issue doesn't want to be

0:13:08.800 --> 0:13:12.960
<v Speaker 1>going to the electorate having to face accusations that he's

0:13:13.000 --> 0:13:16.160
<v Speaker 1>thrown Japanese agricultural producers under the bus. That's not something

0:13:16.160 --> 0:13:18.280
<v Speaker 1>the LDP wants to have to run on in the

0:13:18.360 --> 0:13:20.520
<v Speaker 1>Upper House election. So you know, it really depends on

0:13:20.559 --> 0:13:23.520
<v Speaker 1>the substance. You know, it's not there's not a one

0:13:23.520 --> 0:13:25.480
<v Speaker 1>size fits all agreements here as far as the LDP

0:13:25.640 --> 0:13:26.160
<v Speaker 1>is concerned.

0:13:27.040 --> 0:13:29.960
<v Speaker 7>What about the best currency? I mean, how is that

0:13:30.000 --> 0:13:31.280
<v Speaker 7>figuring it to negotiations?

0:13:31.280 --> 0:13:35.040
<v Speaker 1>You think, I'm skeptical that currency has that much of

0:13:35.040 --> 0:13:37.360
<v Speaker 1>a role to play. It's been coming up, it's been

0:13:37.400 --> 0:13:41.640
<v Speaker 1>floating around, It's been mentioned as you know, possible.

0:13:42.120 --> 0:13:44.120
<v Speaker 6>I don't think, you know, at the end of the day,

0:13:44.120 --> 0:13:44.880
<v Speaker 6>I don't think a deal.

0:13:45.120 --> 0:13:47.280
<v Speaker 1>I don't even know what a currency deal really looks

0:13:47.320 --> 0:13:50.520
<v Speaker 1>like considering that Japan has not been has not been

0:13:50.520 --> 0:13:53.360
<v Speaker 1>devaluing its currency. If anything, when they've intervened, it's been

0:13:53.360 --> 0:13:56.200
<v Speaker 1>to strengthened its currency. I don't think the Japanese government

0:13:56.240 --> 0:13:59.280
<v Speaker 1>is really in a position to put monetary policy on

0:13:59.320 --> 0:13:59.640
<v Speaker 1>the table.

0:13:59.679 --> 0:14:00.800
<v Speaker 6>I think going to resist that.

0:14:01.320 --> 0:14:03.520
<v Speaker 1>And you know, when it comes down to it, they're

0:14:03.520 --> 0:14:05.680
<v Speaker 1>also not going to agree to some sort of specific

0:14:05.760 --> 0:14:09.000
<v Speaker 1>numerical target for dollar again either. So ultimately, I don't

0:14:09.040 --> 0:14:11.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't know what exactly a currency deal looks like.

0:14:11.640 --> 0:14:13.960
<v Speaker 1>I don't know what Japan is willing to bargain in

0:14:14.000 --> 0:14:16.520
<v Speaker 1>favor of a currency deal, and so ultimately, I mean,

0:14:16.559 --> 0:14:18.640
<v Speaker 1>I think, you know, they'll have these discussions, but when

0:14:18.640 --> 0:14:20.760
<v Speaker 1>it comes down to getting some sort of trade deal done,

0:14:20.800 --> 0:14:22.800
<v Speaker 1>I don't think currency is really going to be an

0:14:22.800 --> 0:14:23.680
<v Speaker 1>important plank of that.

0:14:24.640 --> 0:14:27.200
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, Tobias, you talk about the relationship between the US

0:14:27.240 --> 0:14:29.080
<v Speaker 5>and Japan. You know, Japan is very dependent on the

0:14:29.160 --> 0:14:31.080
<v Speaker 5>US when it comes to security. There's a sixty three

0:14:31.120 --> 0:14:34.160
<v Speaker 5>billion dollar trade surplus with the US. I got to wonder, though,

0:14:34.200 --> 0:14:37.640
<v Speaker 5>how much leverage then, does Japan have going into these talks.

0:14:38.560 --> 0:14:41.400
<v Speaker 1>I think we're seeing that, you know, it's trying to

0:14:41.440 --> 0:14:45.320
<v Speaker 1>find sources of leverage. But ultimately, you know, and some

0:14:45.400 --> 0:14:48.360
<v Speaker 1>of it is the structure of bilateral trade. I mean,

0:14:48.400 --> 0:14:50.640
<v Speaker 1>it's not that there's an easy fix, you know, to

0:14:50.720 --> 0:14:54.880
<v Speaker 1>make you know, either Japanese buy more American stuff or

0:14:55.240 --> 0:14:57.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, to get Americans to buy less, other than

0:14:57.320 --> 0:14:58.880
<v Speaker 1>leaving the tariffs in place, right, I mean, if the

0:14:58.960 --> 0:15:02.920
<v Speaker 1>US is really serious about reducing or eliminating the trade

0:15:02.960 --> 0:15:05.440
<v Speaker 1>deficit with Japan, I mean, ultimately the best thing is

0:15:05.440 --> 0:15:07.320
<v Speaker 1>going to be leaving the tariffs in place and encouraging

0:15:07.320 --> 0:15:10.040
<v Speaker 1>Americans to buy fewer things from Japan.

0:15:10.320 --> 0:15:13.440
<v Speaker 6>That's a little uncomfortable for Japan in general, though.

0:15:13.480 --> 0:15:15.320
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I think, you know, what has been interesting

0:15:15.360 --> 0:15:18.360
<v Speaker 1>over the last several months watching the Japanese public's response

0:15:19.160 --> 0:15:21.480
<v Speaker 1>to you know, the Liberation Day tariffs and the auto

0:15:21.520 --> 0:15:24.560
<v Speaker 1>tariffs and so on. I think there's a feeling of

0:15:25.240 --> 0:15:28.560
<v Speaker 1>frustration and betrayal, and I think it's in some way

0:15:28.600 --> 0:15:30.680
<v Speaker 1>stiff in the Japanese government's fine. I think there's a

0:15:30.720 --> 0:15:34.280
<v Speaker 1>feeling that, you know, in the past, perhaps the expectation was,

0:15:34.360 --> 0:15:37.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, the government has to do whatever it takes

0:15:37.400 --> 0:15:39.440
<v Speaker 1>to make the US happy, to keep the US engaged

0:15:39.480 --> 0:15:42.520
<v Speaker 1>and committed to Japan. But I think there's a feeling that,

0:15:42.800 --> 0:15:44.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, there were certain promises made during the first

0:15:45.160 --> 0:15:47.880
<v Speaker 1>US Japan FTA talks with Trump in twenty nineteen, and

0:15:47.880 --> 0:15:50.240
<v Speaker 1>there's a feeling that those promises were broken. There's a

0:15:50.280 --> 0:15:52.920
<v Speaker 1>feeling that without really having a clear sense of what

0:15:53.240 --> 0:15:55.840
<v Speaker 1>the US actually wants, there's a sense of, you know,

0:15:55.880 --> 0:15:58.880
<v Speaker 1>the US being unfair and being arbitrary, and so therefore,

0:15:58.920 --> 0:16:01.320
<v Speaker 1>I think there's an expectation that, you know, if you

0:16:01.360 --> 0:16:03.680
<v Speaker 1>should just you know, play caated, you know, do whatever

0:16:03.760 --> 0:16:06.120
<v Speaker 1>trip to playk Trump, that that actually could backfi your

0:16:06.160 --> 0:16:08.200
<v Speaker 1>domestically in a way that I think would not necessarily

0:16:08.240 --> 0:16:09.360
<v Speaker 1>have been the case in the past.

0:16:09.680 --> 0:16:12.400
<v Speaker 6>And so this is something of you uncharted waters.

0:16:12.400 --> 0:16:16.000
<v Speaker 1>You know, we don't really the way that domestic politics

0:16:16.120 --> 0:16:17.440
<v Speaker 1>are playing out in this situation.

0:16:17.480 --> 0:16:19.080
<v Speaker 6>It's a little different than what we've seen with you

0:16:19.160 --> 0:16:19.880
<v Speaker 6>as in the past.

0:16:20.560 --> 0:16:23.760
<v Speaker 7>Tobias, thanks so much, great to get your analysis. Tobias Harris,

0:16:23.920 --> 0:16:27.240
<v Speaker 7>founder and principal at Japan Foresight.

0:16:29.600 --> 0:16:32.960
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for listening to today's episode of the Bloomberg Daybreak

0:16:33.120 --> 0:16:36.480
<v Speaker 2>Asia Edition podcast. Each weekday, we look at the story

0:16:36.560 --> 0:16:40.920
<v Speaker 2>shaping markets, finance, and geopolitics in the Asia Pacific. You

0:16:40.960 --> 0:16:45.040
<v Speaker 2>can find us on Apple, Spotify, the Bloomberg Podcast YouTube channel,

0:16:45.160 --> 0:16:48.200
<v Speaker 2>or anywhere else you listen. Join us again tomorrow for

0:16:48.320 --> 0:16:51.800
<v Speaker 2>insight on the market moves from Hong Kong to Singapore

0:16:52.200 --> 0:16:55.960
<v Speaker 2>and Australia. I'm Doug Prisoner and this is Bloomberg