两票反对又能怎?美联储依旧不降息

比推Pubblicato 2025-07-30Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-07-30

北京时间周四凌晨02:00,美联储第五次维持利率不变,将基准利率目标区间维持在4.25%-4.50%,符合市场预期。美联储这一决定是在白宫对主席鲍威尔施加强大政治压力、要求其降息的背景下做出的。

美联储将其基准政策利率维持在4.25%至4.5%区间,同时权衡进口商、零售商和消费者将如何分摊更高关税带来的成本。围绕谁将承担关税负担的激烈争论的结果,或将决定今年晚些时候通胀和就业的走向,并可能决定央行在未来几个月是否以及何时恢复降息。

美联储在政策声明中几乎没有做出改动,显示其目前无意发出任何即将降息的信号。

维持利率不变的决定遭到两名官员罕见的反对,美联储理事沃勒和鲍曼要求立即降息25个基点。 这是自2020年以来首次有超过一位美联储官员在会议中对鲍威尔的决定投反对票,也是自1993年以来首次有两名理事会成员持不同意见。

美联储理事沃勒两周前曾表示支持降息,这与他明年春天可能接任鲍威尔的美联储主席职位的潜在提名相吻合。本月早些时候,他表示担心维持过高的利率对一个缺乏推高通胀动力的经济来说太过高——这一观点也得到了部分经济学家和前美联储官员的支持。

美联储理事鲍曼此前一直是鹰派立场坚定的代表,曾反对去年9月开始的首次降息,她此次的转变颇为引人注目。

鲍威尔及其同僚正在研究关税如何在通胀数据中体现出来,市场普遍担忧商品价格上涨可能使通胀连续第五年高于美联储2%的目标。虽然通胀自2021至2023年高点明显回落,且没有出现许多经济学家预测的衰退,但美联储官员仍对过早降息、重新点燃价格压力保持高度警惕。

许多企业在关税生效前囤积库存,由于担心失去被通胀压垮的消费者,一直不愿提高价格。但一些经济学家警告称,随着利润率较低的企业耗尽关税前的库存并面临更高成本,它们可能越来越倾向于将这些成本转嫁给消费者。

曾任鲍威尔副手、由特朗普任命的理查德·克拉里达(Richard Clarida)表示:

鲍威尔眼下要兼顾的事情太多了,但有一件事他确实说过,而且他的批评者没有充分认识到,那就是关税确实已经反映在部分物价指数中。通胀压力之所以没有失控,是因为服务价格一直保持稳定。

周三早些时候公布的经济数据发出了好坏参半的信号,解释了美联储的谨慎态度。 尽管第二季度GDP增长达到3.0%,超出预期,但私人企业和消费者需求的衡量指标则从上一季度的1.9%放缓至1.2%,远低于去年底的2.9%。

经济学家将这一下滑归因于劳动力增长放缓及关税的影响。其他近期数据则显示,消费者支出可能在进口成本上升反映到零售价格之前已经企稳。

不过,特朗普政府则认为,从长期来看,关税将通过推动高薪制造业就业使美国更加富裕。

在理解特朗普政府经济政策方面,美联储陷入了“两步进、一步退”的循环。美国近期与日本和欧盟达成的贸易协议设定的关税水平为15%,虽低于特朗普今年4月的威胁性言论,但仍高于年初的市场预期。特朗普的不可预测性也让未来加征关税的可能性仍存,同时还存在司法挑战可能推翻这些关税的风险。

在财政方面,特朗普本月签署了一项重大减税法案。一些共和党议员正在讨论向消费者返利,这可能会对美联储认为已接近充分就业的经济构成新的刺激。如果劳动力市场因此持续保持稳定, 美联储官员可能会后悔过早降息。

投资者目前预计,美联储在9月会议上降息的概率约为三分之二,但这取决于关税对通胀的影响是否仍受控,以及劳动力市场是否出现更多疲软迹象。

未来几个月,美联储内部的分歧可能集中在以下问题上:关税对经济造成破坏的速度是否会超过其推高通胀的速度,以及在尚未明朗前就贸然行动,是否会导致政策误判。

一派观点认为,当前利率水平已高于适应经济实际状况的区间,而通胀基本面压力不足,若就业增长停滞,美联储将印证白宫等方面“落后于形势”的批评。

但另一派则担忧,在夏季关税推高价格的压力加剧之际降息,或在财政刺激与金融市场活跃的双重推动下为经济带来超预期的热度,此时降息可能为时过早。

如果数据在9月前出现明确走向,决策也许就会相对容易:如果通胀顽固且经济增长强劲,则可以推迟降息;若经济明显走弱,则有理由下调利率。但若目前这种模糊状态持续下去,鲍威尔将不得不面对更加艰难的抉择。

曾任鲍威尔副手、由特朗普任命的理查德·克拉里达(Richard Clarida)表示:

如果数据继续沿着目前的节奏演进,那就会变得非常棘手——既不足以让人毫无疑问地降息,也不够好到可以宣布胜利。因此,比一些人想象的更可能的情形是,鲍威尔干脆按兵不动,在他任期剩下的六次政策会议中均维持利率不变。

(以上内容来自“美联储传声筒”Nick Timiraos)


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

比推 TG 交流群:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

比推 TG 订阅: https://t.me/bitpush

说明: 比推所有文章只代表作者观点,不构成投资建议

Letture associate

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News16 min fa

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News16 min fa

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit27 min fa

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit27 min fa

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

Anthropic has published an article titled "When AI builds itself," discussing the emerging concept of "recursive self-improvement," where AI begins to actively participate in designing, training, testing, and optimizing its own subsequent versions. The company presents internal data showing that by May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its codebase was written by Claude, its AI model. Claude's capabilities have expanded to handling complex, open-ended engineering tasks, achieving a 76% success rate in such areas, and even contributing to research processes, such as optimizing code performance and conducting AI safety experiments. Anthropic outlines an evolution from human-driven development to AI-assisted workflows, culminating in the current stage where AI agents can autonomously write, run, and delegate code. The company cautions that the path toward a "closed loop," where AI continuously improves itself, is becoming visible. It calls for coordinated global mechanisms to potentially slow or pause frontier AI development to allow safety research and societal structures to catch up. However, the timing of this warning coincides with Anthropic's preparations for an IPO, framing the narrative not just as a safety concern but also as a demonstration of Claude's advanced capabilities and its integral role in accelerating Anthropic's own R&D—creating a potential "flywheel" effect for competitive advantage. This contrasts with OpenAI's recent, more policy-oriented discussion of the same risks, highlighting the competitive dynamics in the AI industry as companies position themselves in both the technological and regulatory landscape.

marsbit1 h fa

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片