Monetary Policy

The key global economic risks to watch in the second half of 2026

The second half of the year rests on a delicate chain of dominoes, according to a new briefing from Oxford Economics, and whether the US-Iran peace agreement holds is the factor that determines how the rest fall.


ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

“Its durability will determine whether the global economy gets an energy-driven disinflation tailwind or absorbs a second oil shock,” stated chief global economist Ryan Sweet in the report, calling the deal “the key domino that will determine whether other risks are amplified or dampened”.

The consultancy expects the global economy to accelerate, forecasting annualised growth of 3.1% in the second half against an estimated 1.6% in the first, powered chiefly by cheaper oil feeding through to household incomes, although Sweet puts the odds of reaching a durable deal at “a coin flip”.

If the truce holds, Oxford Economics sees Brent crude averaging in the low $70s per barrel, easing inflation and financial conditions across emerging markets and tech valuations.

If it breaks, the consequences would not stay contained to the oil market.

Early on Wednesday, the US military attacked Iran after it said Tehran struck three ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran retaliated with strikes targeting Bahrain and Kuwait. The regional crossfire raised the risk that the interim agreement to halt fighting in the war could break down. However, the exchange of fire followed a pattern of similar attacks during the deal’s shaky ceasefire, and neither country immediately signalled it would step away from the negotiating table.

Oil prices reacted to the attacks by increasing more than 3% by Wednesday morning, with international benchmark Brent trading above $76 a barrel.

“A peace deal breakdown won’t just raise oil prices, it would also increase pressure on AI supply chains in Asia, force central banks to be hawkish, tighten financial conditions, and could shift the outcome of the US midterms and Israeli elections […] the cascade runs fast,” Sweet stated.

A coinflip with a $20 spread

Not everyone shares Oxford Economics’ outlook for oil prices.

Morgan Stanley’s mid-year outlook, published in May, forecast crude climbing back to roughly $90 a barrel by the end of the year, a gap of some $20 compared with Oxford Economics’ forecast that amounts to two different bets on the same peace process.

The World Bank is also more cautious, forecasting Brent crude to average about $94 a barrel this year while warning that global GDP growth will slow to 2.5% in 2026.

Reflecting on how the recent exchange of attacks is testing the fragile truce, Sweet said, “Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is a good bellwether. The deal committed to fully restoring traffic through the chokepoint within 30 days, making mid-July the first hard deadline,” he explained.

“A sustained return to 75% or more of pre-war traffic by mid-July would increase the odds that the agreement is holding and vice versa,” Sweet concluded.

The other indicator, he says, is whether Iran formally invokes the accord’s Lebanon clause over Israeli strikes, and whether its response comes in military or rhetorical form.

Tariffs, trade and AI

Trade is another risk that could reshape the outlook.

US Section 122 tariffs are due to expire on 24 July, but Washington has already lined up replacement levies under Section 301. Oxford Economics expects the changes to push effective tariff rates higher from late July as the US seeks to maintain monthly tariff revenues of between $25 billion (€21.8bn) and $30 billion (€26.2bn).

Europe is also taking a tougher stance. The European Commission has more than 50 trade-defence investigations open against China, up from 17 a year ago, and plans to unveil a broader economic security strategy by September.

These trade tensions also feed into the AI boom that has powered financial markets this year.

Oxford Economics notes the US AI industry depends heavily on semiconductors and other hardware shipped from Northeast and Southeast Asia, the regions with the most to lose from any further disruption to commodities passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the umbrella body for central banks, warned that the AI boom increasingly rests on opaque “circular financing” between chipmakers, cloud giants and artificial intelligence labs, as well as lightly regulated private credit, where lending to the sector has quadrupled in five years.

The BIS’s Asia-Pacific chief, Zhang Tao, cautioned that the sector’s reliance on non-bank funding means an AI downturn could trigger a sharper and faster correction than a traditional banking crisis.

Sweet modelled what such a reversal could look like.

“We have created a so-called tech bust scenario where US technology stocks fall by 25% over the course of a year,” he told Euronews.

According to Sweet, such a shock would cause the US economy to “grind to a halt”, spilling over to technology exporters and investor sentiment worldwide, leaving global growth 1.1 percentage points below Oxford Economics’ baseline next year.

Central banks, ballots and the calendar

The final dominoes are policy and politics.

Oxford Economics expects the major central banks to prove more dovish than financial markets currently anticipate, though they could pivot quickly if traffic through the Strait of Hormuz falters or AI-input prices signal supply stress.

The nearest test is the Federal Reserve’s rate decision under chair Kevin Warsh later this month, coming on the heels of June’s soft jobs report.

Beyond that lie November’s US midterms and Israel’s general election, due by late October, both of which could influence the Middle East peace process. In September, German state elections could also test the coalition behind Germany’s fiscal policy, a key driver of the eurozone economy.

Oxford Economics also flags genuine upside, from stronger AI-driven productivity to an EU economy that weathered the second quarter surprisingly well.

Whether the resilience in Europe is real will show up first in Germany and in credit data, Sweet argues.

“If corporates were absorbing margin compression from the jump in energy prices without cutting investment and drawing down credit lines, that would strengthen the case that underlying momentum in the economy is better than we expected,” he told Euronews, adding that a contraction in eurozone bank lending would push the other way.

It is important to highlight that the typical Oxford Economics forecast miss is nearly a full percentage point, and the range around this assessment in particular is wider than usual.

Source link

Japanese yen sinks to 40-year low against the US dollar as intervention looms

Published on

The Japanese yen fell to around 162.4 per dollar in Asian trading on Tuesday morning, its lowest level since 1986.


ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

The drop extends a punishing run for the yen, which has kept weakening despite the Bank of Japan’s efforts to support it, and now revives the prospect that the authorities will step into the market directly.

Japan’s finance minister, Satsuki Katayama, has already responded to the situation by stating that the government was ready to take “appropriate” and even “decisive” action against excessive currency moves, adding that she had confirmed with Washington that such a step remained an option.

Traders are now watching closely for any sign that Tokyo is selling US dollars to prop up the yen, as it did in the spring.

At the heart of the weakness is the current wide gap between Japanese and American interest rates.

Even after the Bank of Japan raised its benchmark to 1% in mid-June, its highest since 1995, Japanese yields remain far below those in the US, where ten-year government bonds have recently paid around 4.5%, compared with roughly 2.6% in Japan.

That gap sustains the so-called carry trade, in which investors borrow cheaply in yen to buy higher-yielding assets elsewhere, continually pushing the currency down.

A robust dollar has compounded the pressure.

The greenback has drawn safe-haven demand from tensions around the conflict involving Iran, while expectations that the US Federal Reserve could raise rates later this year, even as the Bank of Japan moves cautiously, have widened the divide further.

Japan’s heavy reliance on imported energy, which is costlier amid elevated oil prices, has also added to demand for US dollars.

A test for Tokyo

The renewed slide is a headache for policymakers who have already thrown considerable firepower at the problem.

Between April and May, Japan spent a record ¥11.7 trillion (€63.3bn) intervening in currency markets, the largest such effort on record, yet the Japanese yen has continued to weaken.

Domestic politics has not helped, with the big-spending, growth-focused agenda of Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi raising doubts about Japan’s fiscal discipline.

Analysts say the immediate risk of intervention is high, given that speculative bets against the Japanese yen have climbed to multi-year peaks and a fresh four-decade low tends to sharpen political anxiety in Tokyo.

However, many doubt that buying the currency would reverse its course for long, since the underlying rate gap remains firmly against it.

The Bank of Japan’s next policy decision, due on 31 July, is now in sharp focus, with further rate rises seen as the more durable route to stemming the decline.

For now, the Japanese yen remains at the mercy of forces its central bank has struggled to control.

Source link

Assessing the Legacy of the Fed’s ‘Maestro’

As the financial world remembers the former Fed chair, economists weigh his massive macroeconomic legacy.

Alan Greenspan, the second-longest serving chairman of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, has died just months after his 100th birthday.

Known as “The Maestro,” Greenspan helmed the Fed under five U.S. presidents, from August 1987 until January 2006. He managed the central bank through two market crashes, two recessions, and various financial crises. Through it all, the U.S. economy experienced significant macroeconomic expansion, rising asset prices, and a dramatic shift in corporate finance.

The Greenspan Put

Early in his tenure, Greenspan intervened to mitigate the impact of the 1987 stock market crash, a move known as the “Greenspan put.” The monetary policy lowered interest rates and injected liquidity, stabilizing the economy, restoring investor confidence, and mitigating financial shocks. However, Fed intervention also incentivized investors to take excessive risks, fueled speculative bubbles such as the 1990s dot-com bubble, and led to market expectations of future interventions.

The Greenspan put is a bit of an illusion, Kenneth Rogoff, professor of Economics at Harvard University and former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, wrote in an email exchange.

“When markets collapse, the interest rate required to maintain stable inflation will typically also temporarily collapse,” Rogoff wrote. “His biggest mistakes were in regulatory policy, where he had too much faith in financial market innovation and too hands-off an attitude towards regulation. We are now, in the second year of the [second] Trump administration, repeating that mistake.”

A Man Remembered

“He was a great central banker who helped lead his country through two decades of prosperity,” said Ben Bernanke, a Distinguished Fellow in Residence at Brookings Institution and Greenspan’s successor at the Fed, in a statement. “I always found him generous with his time and insights. We are still learning from him, even if he is no longer with us.”

Don Kohn, a senior fellow at Brookings and former Fed governor and vice chair, remembered Greenspan encouraging Fed staff and fellow policy makers to voice new ideas and analytical insights while asking them to find the weak points in the hypotheses he put forward.

“But those ideas, insights, and challenges need to be backed by evidence and solid reasoning,” he wrote in a post on Brookings’ website. “Once when he asked me what I thought we should be doing on policy, I started my response with, ‘My gut tells me…’ He quickly cut me off: ‘That’s not your gut, Don, that’s your experience and knowledge.’”

Greenspan’s willingness to experiment to lower the unemployment rate, which peaked at 7.4% in 1992, drew many admirers.

“He pushed it lower than the conventional wisdom had ever thought possible, and discovered that it was possible to have more Americans in work without sparking inflation,” Justin Wolfers, professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan, wrote in an email exchange. “Hundreds of thousands more people found work, and their families could afford a better life because he showed that there’s nothing natural about what many economists had called the natural rate of unemployment.”

Although Wolfers did not agree with all of Greenspan’s decisions, he noted that “his intellectual courage and devotion to the public good were never in doubt. He lived a big life and made a difference.”

Contact the author at rdaly@gfmag.com

Source link