米トランプ政権による相互関税の発表は、新興国の経済や世界中の企業にどのような影響を与えるのでしょうか?今回のポッドキャスト「Emerging markets and US tariffs: opening gambit or torpedo?」では、エマージング・マーケットの投資責任者であるZhikai Chenが、チーフ・マーケット・ストラテジストであるDaniel Morrisと対談を行っております。その中で、相互関税によるアジア諸国および新興国市場の経済と企業への影響について解説いたします。
Zhikaiはポッドキャストの中で、輸出主導の新興国経済にとって、公表された税率が予想を超える水準であったことを指摘しています。この関税が実施されれば、新興国の輸出による経済成長の道が阻害され、国内投資に方向転換せざるを得なくなることが予想されます。楽観的なシナリオとしては、関税の発表は交渉の始まりに過ぎず、最終的にはより低い税率で落ち着くというものでしょう。
“Talking heads”はBNPパリバ・アセットマネジメントが提供するポッドキャストにおける投資情報のプログラムです。今後も投資家の皆様にとって、重要なトピックに関する詳細なインサイトに加え、サステナビリティの観点から世界の市場分析を行い、投資プロフェッショナルとのより有意義な対話を展開します。
*当プログラムは英語のみとなります。英語スクリプトは、以下よりご覧いただけます。
Read the transcript
This is an edited audio transcript of the Talking Heads episode with Zhikai Chen
Daniel Morris: Hello and welcome to the BNP Paribas Asset Management Talking Heads Podcast. Every week, Talking Heads will bring you in-depth insights and analysis on the topics that really matter to investors. In this episode, we’ll be discussing the recent tariff announcements from the Trump administration and the implications for emerging markets. I’m Daniel Morris, Chief Market Strategist, and I’m joined today by Zhikai Chen, Head of Global Emerging Markets. Welcome, Zhikai, and thanks for joining me.
Zhikai Chen: Thanks for having me, Daniel.
DM: The topic of today, and the topic that’s going be on investors’ minds for a while yet, is assessing the ramifications of the most recent announcements. What does it mean for profits, particularly for emerging market countries? What’s your initial assessment of the impact? And what that will mean for Asian economies or for emerging market economies [and] emerging market equities?
ZC: For Asia, which are predominantly export oriented economies, [it is] worse than expectations, so that’s not good. Is this the upper end and will there be initial bargaining levels? Each of the economies would negotiate with the US administration to see if there’s a way to reduce the ultimate tariff. This will need to kick off very quickly. We know Vietnam’s Prime Minister will be in Washington to meet with this administration this weekend to see if there’s a possibility of reaching an agreement. No surprises Vietnam having been chosen as one of the economies where multinationals have been establishing production bases post the China/US trade war during the first Trump administration. So, I think this is still the first round, and we are trying to figure out whether this is the worst-case scenario or a likely scenario for the next six to 12 months.
DM: All the headlines we see now are taking a negative interpretation of what’s occurred. That said, if you read the justifications for the measures, two things were mentioned. One: on average, US tariffs prior to all these announcements were lower than for most US trading partners. So, this is to some degree creating a level playing field. Then there were specific examples where tariff levels are exceedingly high vis-a-vis the US. One of the most notable ones was a 700% tariff on US rice imports into Japan. The point that countries might have to say, okay, we reduce this tariff and the Trump administration responds in kind. That’s probably the fig leaf that we’re holding onto.
ZC: That’s definitely a possibility. But this is also a longstanding function of the fact that the US consumer has always been the consumer of last resort of the world. We see a very large trade deficit that the US is running versus the rest of the world because of the US consumer. Certainly if room can be made to negotiate through some of the areas, then the ultimate tariff might be lower than what is publicised, but I also suspect that the US is probably looking at a minimum of 10% tariffs globally.
DM: Ideally, investors would like to see an outcome that’s more moderate over time. One aspect that hasn’t been brought up too much, this is going to raise a significant amount of revenue for the US government. Given the size of the budget deficit levels in the US, this is a good thing if you believe that the US needs to pursue fiscal consolidation to deal with the debt situation. That means that we should see lower interest rates, which should offset some of the negative impact from the price increases, though I imagine that’s cold comfort for equity investors.
So, the inevitable question becomes, how do other countries, how do companies react? The concern is that this leads to retaliation and then retaliation to the retaliation. Governments up to now acknowledge the need to avoid exactly that scenario. If we think about stimulus measures, say, from the Chinese government looking for other export markets, what can governments or companies do to try to offset the impact of the tariffs?
ZC: It does depend on which economies you’re talking about. For most emerging economies, policymakers are used to dealing with shocks and they’ll adapt to the new reality. They will try their best to see if there’s a way to resolve some of those tariffs and hopefully reach an agreement where the tariff is as low as possible, perhaps with a 10% base level. But there is a possibility that for some of the smaller EM economies where the consumption power is really not there, there’s very little they can do. This would create a situation where they struggle to offset some of the fixed asset investment which they have benefited from and to try to diversify their export base.
The largest EM economy, China, would have ample fiscal ammunition to shield the economy from the potential impact of the tariffs. They have the fiscal will to put in a significant expansion of their budget deficit to support the economy and support consumption.
DM: That makes a good point: the distinction between small open economies and large economies. If you’re Europe or China, you can rely on domestic demand to make up for what you’re going to lose on the export market. But if you’re a small open economy, there’s not really that channel. We turn then to globalisation. It seems to be the US retreating from the principle of global free trade. Does this raise the prospect of two worlds where you have the US more or less trading with itself, and EM and China trading with themselves? Does that change how you think about the companies you want to be investing in?
ZC: The world that we have operated and invested in has been used to relying on the US consumer for many decades. It’s going to be challenging for us to quickly find another source of a potential demand for all the goods and services the world produces that could replace that particular demand. That’s the fear that we have for a lot of emerging economies. If the tariffs are going ahead, it will mean a sharp reduction in terms of net exports. Depending on the economy involved, it could be a sharp contraction of their overall GDP as well.
In terms of trading blocks, there’s certainly interest from other trading partners. In recent weeks, we have seen traditional competitors and geopolitical rivals – South Korea, Japan, and China – talking about enhancing the overall trading cooperation as well as opening their markets to each other. How this will evolve over the next couple of months or quarters will be something that we watch quite carefully. If you look at some of the smaller Asian economies. their intraregional trade and their trade with China in particular is now bigger than their trade with the US overall. That will probably be used as some offset, but I will still say that there’s probably going to be a challenging and negative environment for most of the export oriented economies in the immediate term. We just have to take a pause here and wait and see right now.
DM: From a corporate profitability point of view, an emerging market company that was producing in its home country for export to the US, with the tariffs, it sets up a factory in the US, produces in the US and sells there. So, from a revenue point of view and profits, the impact doesn’t necessarily have to be significant, but from the country’s point of view, employment is taking place in the US instead of at home, that’s where the bigger impact is going to be felt.
ZC: That’s a great point. One driving factors of the emerging market developing model has been that they export their way into high income growth and hopefully make a transition from an emerging market into developed markets where the domestic consumption can start to take over. So, potentially, this route is now closed to them. Policymakers will need to revisit their domestic policy and reorientate domestic investment. It’s going be quite challenging, but I don’t think they have a choice.
DM: Well, thank you very much. This is very much a quick reaction to all the news. That’s it for this week’s episode of Talking Heads. If you would like more information, please reach out to your BNP Paribas Asset Management contact or check out Viewpoint, our website for investment insights@viewpoint.bnpparibas-am.com. Just before we go, I’d like to mention that the Talking Heads podcast is available on Spotify and on YouTube. You’ve been listening to the BNP Paribas Asset Management Talking Heads podcast with me, Daniel Morris, and Zhikai Chen, Global Head of Emerging Market Equities. Thank you. And until next week, take care.
当ポッドキャストはBNPパリバ・アセットマネジメントグループが作成したもので、特定の金融商品の取得勧誘を目的としたものではありません。また、金融商品取引法に基づく開示情報ではありません。当ポッドキャストにおける統計等は、信頼できると思われる外部情報等に基づいて作成しておりますが、その正確性や完全性を保証するものではありません。また、当ポッドキャストに含まれる内容は作成日時点のスピーカーの見解であり、予告なく変更される場合があります。個々のポートフォリオ運用チームは、異なる見解を持ち、顧客の特性によって異なる投資決定を行う場合があります。過去の実績に関する数値、図表、見解や予測などを含むいかなる内容も将来の運用成績を示唆または保証するものではありません。
当社は、言及された情報の正確性及び完全性について、明示的であるか黙示的であるかを問わず、なんらの表明又は保証を行うものではなく、また、一切の責任を負いません。なお、事前の承諾なく当ポッドキャストの見解、予想、資料等を複製、転用等することはお断りいたします。
当ポッドキャストで使用している文言等に係る著作権等の知的財産権、その他一切の権利は、当該文言等の開発元または公表元に帰属します。また、当ポッドキャストで使用している商標等に係る著作権等の知的財産権、その他一切の権利は、当該商標等の権利者に帰属します。
当ポッドキャストで言及されている銘柄は当ポッドキャストでご紹介する運用戦略のご説明のための参考情報であり、当社が特定の有価証券等の取得勧誘を行うものではありません。
投資した資産の価値や分配金は変動する可能性があり、投資家は投資元本を回収できない可能性があります。新興国市場、または専門的なセクター、制限されたセクターへの投資は、入手可能な情報が少なく流動性が低いため、また市場の状況(社会的、政治的、経済的状況)の変化により敏感に反応しやすいため、より不安定性があり、大きな変動を受ける可能性があります。
環境・社会・ガバナンス(ESG)投資に関するリスク:ESGと持続可能性を統合する際、EU基準で共通または統一された定義やラベルがないため、ESG目標を設定する際に資産運用会社によって異なるアプローチが取られる場合があります。これはESGと持続可能性の基準を統合した投資戦略を比較することが困難であることを意味しており、同じ名称が用いられていても異なる測定方法に基づいている場合があるということです。保有銘柄のESGや持続可能性に関する評価において、資産運用会社は、外部のESG調査会社から提供されたデータソースを活用する場合があります。ESG投資は発展途上の分野であるため、こうしたデータソースは不完全、不正確、または利用できない場合があります。投資プロセスにおいて責任ある企業行動指針を適用することで、特定の発行体やセクターが除外される場合があります。その結果、当該指針を適用しない類似の投資戦略のパフォーマンスよりも良くなったり、悪くなったりする場合があります。