新华丝路网是一带一路综合信息服务平台,丝绸之路经济带和21世纪海上丝绸之路的权威网站

一带一路国家级信息服务平台

新华丝路4.0版,更懂你

新华丝路首页 > 智库报告 > 免费报告

英镑投资者应保持冷静,继续前进

2017-01-17 08:48 加图研究所

摘要:英国经济并未像专家预测的那样在公投后变得黯淡——服务业、制造业和建筑业都强劲增长,富时100股指触及纪录高位。鉴于此,汇市投机者的悲观情绪似乎有些为时过早。他们抛售英镑说明他们认为英国退欧会很痛苦。但硬退欧不太可能发生。从长远看,即使是硬退欧也不一定给英国带来灾难性后果。投资者应牢记古训:保持冷静,继续前进。

E0C914583B9C5CDF571BD560888E3EAD

原文标题:Dear Pound Sterling Investors, Keep Calm and Carry On

中文摘要:加图研究所专家Tom Clougherty在《英镑投资者应保持冷静,继续前进》一文中说,1月9日,英镑兑美元跌至30年低点,此前英国首相特蕾莎·梅表示在英国退欧后无意保持“一丁点儿欧盟成员身份”。此番言论被普遍解读为:作为英国退欧谈判的一部分,英国将退出欧洲单一市场。英镑暴跌则说明,投资者把此视为一个经济错误。不过,虽然2016年6月英国选民投票支持退欧,但其实目前什么都未改变。更重要的是,英国经济并未像专家预测的那样在公投后变得黯淡——服务业、制造业和建筑业都强劲增长,富时100股指触及纪录高位。鉴于此,汇市投机者的悲观情绪似乎有些为时过早。抛售英镑说明他们认为英国退欧会很痛苦。但硬退欧不太可能发生。从长远看,即使是硬退欧也不一定给英国带来灾难性后果。投资者应牢记古训:保持冷静,继续前进。(编译:刘小云)

原文:

The pound fell to a 30-year low against the dollar on Monday, after British Prime Minister Theresa May said she had no intention of keeping “bits of membership of the EU” after Brexit.

The comment was widely interpreted as meaning that Britain would leave the European Single Market as part of Brexit negotiations, and the pound’s sharp fall suggests investors see this as an economic blunder.

However, while the British electorate voted for Brexit in June 2016, nothing has actually changed yet. What’s more, the British economy has consistently defied expert predictions of post-referendum gloom — services, manufacturing, and construction sectors are all growing strongly, and the benchmark FTSE-100 share index is hitting record highs.

In light of this, currency speculators’ pessimism seems somewhat premature. The unhappy Brexit their sterling sell-off implies is certainly a possibility, but it’s not the most likely one. So let’s step back and look at how things might play out over the months and years ahead.

The British government is awaiting a Supreme Court decision on whether it can unilaterally trigger Article 50 — the legislative clause formally signaling Britain’s intention to leave the EU, which would begin the two-year period of UK-EU negotiation — or whether parliament must have a vote. The Court is expected to rule in favor of a parliamentary vote sometime in January.

At that point, the British government will quickly bring forward Brexit legislation, aiming to trigger Article 50 before the end of March. That legislation ought to pass the House of Commons without too much trouble — not least because Theresa May could use any legislative intransigence to engineer an early general election that her party would win handsomely.

The unelected House of Lords could be a different matter, however. While the upper chamber cannot realistically block Brexit, they may seek to delay it, or else use their influence to reshape the government’s negotiating principles.

What of those principles? The government has yet to fully articulate its Brexit strategy, but the broad outline of its approach is easy enough to discern. First, the government is determined to restore national control of immigration and to end the supremacy of European Court of Justice rulings over British law.

That rules out continued membership of the Single Market, which requires free movement of people and imposes a unified regulatory regime across the European Economic Area.

Second, the government wants the freedom to negotiate new trade deals with non-EU countries. That rules out continued membership of the EU customs union, which puts a common tariff on all imports from outside the bloc.

Third, the government wants UK-EU trade in goods and services to be as free as possible after Brexit. Taken together with the preceding points, that suggests Britain will pursue an extensive bilateral trade agreement with the EU.

There’s no reason why such an agreement should not be reached. Britain and the EU both have a strong interest in continued trade. Moreover, they are starting from a position in which free trade already exists to a very large degree.

There are no significant regulatory differences to iron out and no subsidy-hungry special interest groups to placate. In other words, few of the policy issues that bedevil most trade agreements apply.

Politics may be the biggest challenge. For one thing, any bilateral agreement could require the assent of numerous national (and even regional) electorates across Europe — approval that cannot be taken for granted.

EU negotiators may also attempt to discourage other EU member states from following in Britain’s footsteps. This suggests Britain may have to suffer some form of punishment for leaving the EU, with London’s lucrative financial services sector the most likely target for continental ire.

For its part, the British government will face significant pressure from its own MPs — as well the media and the general public — not to back down easily; many would prefer that Britain walk away with no deal, rather than settle for a humiliating one.

That raises the specter of a truly “hard” Brexit — a clean break after which Britain would trade with the EU like any other country, in accordance with World Trade Organization rules.

That scenario is still unlikely to come to pass. In the short term, it would be extremely disruptive (not to mention economically damaging) for both sides; negotiators will surely work hard to avoid it.

In the long run, though, even a hard Brexit need not be disastrous for Britain — any losses it generated could be balanced out by a genuine commitment to radical policy reform at home, coupled with a concerted effort to liberalize trade overseas.

It remains to be seen whether the British government has what it takes to make necessity the mother of invention. In the meantime, however, investors would be wise to remember the old adage about keeping calm and carrying on.

责任编辑:刘小云

相关阅读 英镑投资 英国退欧

精彩视频

新华丝路数据库

推荐阅读
热点文章