Euro-zone inflation slows below 2%, backing more ECB cuts
Euro-area inflation eased more than expected, dipping below the
European Central Bank's
2 per cent target and supporting the case for interest rates to be lowered further.
Consumer prices rose 1.9 per cent from a year ago in May, down from 2.2 per cent in April and below the 2 per cent median estimate in a Bloomberg survey of economists, data Tuesday showed. A core gauge excluding volatile items like food and energy moderated to 2.3 per cent, while pressures in the closely watched services sector cooled markedly.
It's the first time in eight months and only the second since mid-2021 that headline inflation hasn't exceeded the target. Following Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent energy crisis, it reached a record 10.6 per cent in October 2022.
The numbers arrive on the eve of the ECB's two-day rate meeting. With inflation in check and trade tensions between President Donald Trump and Europe clouding the economic outlook, another quarter-point cut in the deposit rate, to 2 per cent, is almost fully priced.
READ MORE
'Despite the favourable optics, much of the decline might simply reflect a reversal of temporary pressures April, when the timing of Easter drove up tourism-related costs,' Bloomberg economist Simona Delle Chiaie said. 'Still, several factors – including the lingering effects of US tariffs – suggest further price moderation lies ahead. We expect the ECB to cut rates this week, with a follow-up move likely in September.'
That could be the last easy decision for the Governing Council, however, as policymakers dispute where prices will head next – not just due to tariffs, but also the upcoming jump in European defence and infrastructure outlays. Investors reckon there'll be one more cut this year beyond June.
In the short term, much hinges on trade. Most goods from the European Union are currently subject to a 10 per cent US levy, but that could jump to 50 per cent next month. Brussels has warned it may speed up retaliatory measures if Trump follows through on his tariff threats – the latest of which includes a 50 per cent levy on steel and aluminium imports.
The topic will certainly be on the agenda when German Chancellor Friedrich Merz meets Trump in Washington on Thursday. Due to the uncertainty over how the trade situation will evolve, the ECB will provide scenarios alongside its quarterly projections that day.
In March, it saw inflation slowing to 1.9 per cent in 2026 and 2 per cent and 2027, from 2.3 per cent this year. The euro's surprise advance and softer energy costs have since reinforced the retreat.
Some policymakers have suggested there'll be a downward revision to the projection – feeding a debate over the risk of undershooting 2 per cent. Lithuania's Gediminas Simkus said last week that there's a growing danger of inflation falling short of that goal.
Recent data on workers' pay have added to such concerns. The ECB's wage tracker signals a sharp slowdown in 2025 to levels below what's deemed compatible with 2 per cent inflation. That's despite unemployment holding at a record-low 6.2 per cent in April.
At the same time, consumers' expectations for price growth over the next year have ticked up to 3.1 per cent – the highest since February 2024. – Bloomberg
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Israel-Iran war stretches into a second week without diplomatic breakthrough
Hours of talks aimed at de-escalating fighting between Israel and Iran failed to produce a diplomatic breakthrough as the war entered its second week with a fresh round of strikes between the two adversaries. European ministers and Iran's top diplomat met for four hours on Friday in Geneva, as President Donald Trump continued to weigh US military involvement and worries rose over potential strikes on nuclear reactors. European officials expressed hope for future negotiations, and Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said he was open to further dialogue while emphasising that Tehran had no interest in negotiating with the US while Israel continued attacking. 'Iran is ready to consider diplomacy if aggression ceases and the aggressor is held accountable for its committed crimes,' he told reporters. Benjamin Netanyahu visits the site of the Weizmann Institute of Science, which was hit by missiles fired from Iran (Jack Guez/Pool Photo via AP) No date was set for the next round of talks. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel's military operation in Iran would continue 'for as long as it takes' to eliminate what he called the existential threat of Iran's nuclear programme and arsenal of ballistic missiles. Israel's top general echoed the warning, saying the Israeli military was ready 'for a prolonged campaign'. But Mr Netanyahu's goal could be out of reach without US help. Iran's underground Fordo uranium enrichment facility is considered to be out of reach to all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. Mr Trump said he would put off deciding whether to join Israel's air campaign against Iran for up to two weeks. The war between Israel and Iran erupted on June 13, with Israeli airstrikes targeting nuclear and military sites, top generals and nuclear scientists. At least 657 people, including 263 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 2,000 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group. Iran has retaliated by firing 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, according to Israeli army estimates. Most have been shot down by Israel's multi-tiered air defences, but at least 24 people in Israel have been killed and hundreds wounded. Israel's defence minister said on Saturday it killed a commander in Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard who financed and armed Hamas in preparation for the October 7 2023 attack on Israel that sparked the 20-month long war in Gaza. Israel said Saeed Izadi was commander of the Palestine Corps for the Iranian Quds Force, an elite arm of the Guard that conducts military and intelligence operations outside Iran, and that he was killed in an apartment in the city of Qom.
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
Paschal Donohoe's refusal to tackle banker bonus ban is hitting those who bought State's shares
Paschal Donohoe's sale of the State's remaining shareholding in AIB this week will pave the way for a crisis-era agreement that governed the Minister for Finance's engagements with the bailed-out bank to be torn up within weeks. The relationship framework – tweaked in 2017 as Donohoe proceeded with AIB's initial public offering (IPO) just days into the job and his first stint in the role – gave the Minister the right to be given sight of business plans before these were adopted, consulted on any deal or investment worth more than €100 million and get prior notice of a senior executive appointment before it was announced. On remuneration, the document said that 'any incentive arrangements for directors and senior executives are closely related to their performance, measured by the achievement of relevant targets, such targets having regard to the achievement of the business plan'. It was a moot clause, of course. Bank bonuses above €20,000 have been in effect banned across rescued banks by way of a prohibitive 89 per cent supertax for the past decade-and-a-half. (Indeed, Donohoe only allowed for variable pay up to that level to be introduced in late 2022, after Bank of Ireland returned to full private ownership.) READ MORE Bank executive pay remains as politically thorny today as at any stage the financial crash – even if the State has now recovered, in nominal terms at least, just over the €29.4 billion pumped into AIB, Bank of Ireland and PTSB during the crisis. It continues to hold a 57 per cent stake in PTSB, which at present has a market value of €620 million, and stock warrants in AIB, estimated to be worth about €300 million. Donohoe confirmed to reporters on Tuesday, after selling the Government's last 2 per cent stake in AIB to stock-market investors, that he is lifting the €500,000 basic salary cap at AIB and PTSB. He argued that it was not appropriate for the Government to have a role in setting the pay at AIB and Bank of Ireland 'when we no longer own a single share in those companies'. Lifting the cap at PTSB is to prevent it being put at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to hiring and retaining executives. He's right. But the logic fell apart when he said that he had 'no plans' to remove the 89 per cent super tax on bonuses, knowing it is enshrined in law (the Finance Bill 2011) and requires legislation being passed through the Oireachtas. There are no votes in that. [ How AIB, once worth less than its art collection, came back from the brink Opens in new window ] To be clear, the long campaign by bankers to reintroduce bonuses was largely ham-fisted. It started off with a pitch by AIB's then chairman David Hodgkinson to the Department of Finance in early 2014 when the bank had barely returned to profit after the crisis, let alone start to repay its rescue bill. Arguing for a return of variable pay when the sector spent much of the next decade knee-deep in the tracker mortgage scandal was also tone deaf. But lines have been drawn under those. To see where AIB is now headed on the executive pay front, you only have to look at its main rival. Following the lifting of pay caps in Bank of Ireland in late 2022, its board came up within months with a plan to award its chief executive, Myles O'Grady , the equivalent of 25 per cent of his basic salary from 2024 by way of shares in the group, rising to 50 per cent this year. O'Grady was hired two-and-a-half years ago on a fixed salary of €950,000. With the stock awards set to soar to 100 per cent of salary next year, his total remuneration will top €2 million, when pension entitlements are also included. The fixed share bonanza, which have trickled down to other senior Bank of Ireland executives, means that top employees have skin in the game alongside other investors. The board, in fairness, has also decided that executives must now hold on to stock for five years after they are received, up from three years previously. And it argues the CEO's total package will remain about 60 per cent below the median maximum remuneration opportunity that heads of mid-tier UK banks and other top-10 Iseq companies enjoy. But the no-strings nature of the stock awards – to get around the fact that performance-related pay above €20,000 remains outlawed – is not ideal for investors who now hold the shares that the Government sold in the banks. It treats success, mediocrity and even underperformance as one and the same. It also flies in the face of carefully thought-out EU rules brought in after the financial crisis. These limit variable pay to 100 per cent of salary – or 200 per cent if explicitly approved by at least two-thirds of shareholders. These also include provisions for bonuses to be docked or clawed back when staff engage in risk-taking that causes losses later. The Irish solution to an Irish problem is even more incongruous when you consider that senior finance executives are now subject to one of the strictest individual accountability regimes in Europe – by virtue of rules that came into force almost 12 months ago.
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
If Netanyahu wants regime change in Iran, it is unlikely to end well
It is not yet certain whether Donald Trump will approve US involvement in Israel 's assault on Iran which began last week. While Israel has inflicted severe losses on Iran and appears to have disabled its air defences, there is a broad consensus that, without US intervention, the goal of disabling Iran's nuclear programme will be unachievable. To this end, a great deal of attention has been paid to the Fordow nuclear facility , close to the city of Qom, which is at the heart of the programme of uranium enrichment and much of which is located 80-90m underground. In 2009, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that the facility held about 3,000 centrifuges which are central to the enrichment process. Under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the deal which Iran signed in 2015, uranium enrichment ceased at Fordow. But, when the US pulled out of that agreement under the first Trump administration, production restarted. Now the assumption is that only the so-called 'bunker buster' bombs possessed by the US are capable of destroying the facility at Fordow. However, the US president's announcement of a two-week deadline to decide if his country will join Israel's attack speaks to uncertainty regarding its likely success and divisions within his support base. Either way, the one-sided nature of the conflict so far – which has seen Israel inflict far more significant losses on Iran, both in terms of military leadership and civilian casualties, than it has sustained – raises the question of whether regime-change in Tehran is on the agenda. From the outset, Israeli leaders have expressly stated that this is not a key objective. However, they have made it equally clear that they would welcome the fall of the Islamic Republic should it happen. Indeed, Binyamin Netanyahu has called on Iranians to 'stand up for their freedom'. As for Trump, his rhetoric has shifted dramatically over the course of the past several weeks, from an initial position which saw him urge restraint on Netanyahu, and talk up the prospect of success in negotiations with Iran on its nuclear programme, to his more recent darker utterances regarding the prospect of direct US involvement to put an end to Iran's nuclear ambitions. All of this, in turn, suggests Trump has been bounced into supporting Israel's assault on Iran through Netanyahu's pre-emptive actions last Thursday. READ MORE Israel needs Trump's 'bunker buster' but will US enter the war? Listen | 31:22 Since Israel launched air strikes on Iran last Friday, the two states have traded missiles with mounting casualties on both military leaders have been killed as have some of its nuclear scientists but the country's citizens have borne the brunt of the air has said its rationale for the middle-of-the-night attack that sparked the war was its need to ensure, for its own protection, that Iran's nuclear programme is close Iran is to actually having a nuclear bomb is unclear but for Israel to obliterate entirely the nuclear threat it needs the US to join the war, to send its 'bunker buster' mega bomb to destroy the Fordo uranium enrichment facility buried deep in the by Bernice Harrison. Produced by Declan Conlon. While the likely course of US action on Iran remains unpredictable, it is clear that neither Israel nor the United States has a plan for – or indeed any coherent understanding of – what might follow from the fall of the regime in Tehran, beyond wilfully optimistic assumptions regarding its positive impact on the country and the region. However, history teaches us that such optimistic assumptions are rarely well placed. The reality is that when we have seen external involvement in the affairs of Iran and the Middle East more generally, the results have never been straightforward and rarely positive. [ Could Israel's attacks on Iran create a nuclear contamination risk? Opens in new window ] In Iran in 1953, the country's democratically elected prime minister, Mohammed Mossadeq, was overthrown in a coup orchestrated by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Mossadeq's government nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (which was a forerunner to BP), a move that was widely popular in the country but alarming to the UK and the US. As events unfolded, the Shah of Iran, fearing the worst, left the country. However, Mossadeq was removed from power in August 1953 and the Shah returned to preside over an increasingly repressive regime, until his removal during the revolution of 1979. As is so often the case with external interventions of this nature, Mossadeq's removal had unintended consequences. The events of 1953 dealt a severe blow to liberal and democratic politics in Iran while the Shah was seen as little more than an American puppet – factors contributing to the revolution which ended his rule in 1979 and inaugurated the Islamic Republic of Iran. More recently, the ill-conceived US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 brought years of violent conflict to the country, led to the sectarianisation of its politics and helped pave the way for the emergence of the so-called Islamic State , while strengthening the position of the Iranian regime in the region, along the way. Likewise, western intervention in Libya in 2011 did nothing to contribute to peace and stability in that country. This is not to say that Iranians cannot mobilise in the face of a repressive regime; Iran has a long history of such mobilisation. As far back as the early 20th century, the 'constitutional revolution' of the period from 1906 to 1911 saw mass demonstrations that forced the Shah to agree to a written constitution and the establishment of an elected parliament. That mobilisation was motivated by a number of grievances, including disillusionment with the ruling elite, as well as resentment at foreign influence and interference in the affairs of the country. While many of the gains of this period were subsequently reversed, the constitution remained in place until the revolution of 1979. Decades later, mass mobilisation led to the end of the Pahlavi dynasty, which had ruled Iran since 1925 with significant western support. However, the post-1979 period has also witnessed expressions of dissent from the governing orthodoxy in the country. In 2009, mass protests broke out when the hardline Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed victory in the presidential election of June 12th that year, despite widespread electoral irregularities and claims by opposition candidates that the vote was rigged. After the announcement of the results, supporters of opposition candidates took to the streets in protest. By June 15th, as many as two million people were on the streets of Tehran. The protests were ultimately suppressed with the deaths of dozens of protesters and the arrests of thousands. Thirteen years later, unrest and protests broke out again on a mass scale following the death in police custody of Mahsa Amini, whose 'crime' was the violation of Iran's mandatory hijab law by wearing hers 'improperly'. The protest movement that followed adopted the slogan 'Women, Life, Freedom' but subsequently grew into open calls for the removal of the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. Once more the protests were violently suppressed, and 500 people lost their lives. Popular mobilisation in Iran for more than 100 years has been driven by domestic actors in pursuit of domestic agendas and never by external forces. It is unlikely that Netanyahu's call on the Iranian people to rise up and overthrow their government will alter that record. Dr Vincent Durac lectures in Middle East politics in the UCD school of politics and international relations
