The GBPUSD pair is above the EMA200 and EMA50 on the 4-hour timeframe and is moving in its ascending channel. In case of a downward correction, the pair can be sold to narrow it.
Last week ended with an unexpected shock for economists: estimates pointed to a significant trade imbalance in the United States for January, primarily driven by a sharp surge in imports. The data indicated that U.S. businesses had made extensive efforts to ramp up foreign purchases ahead of the imposition of new tariffs. Economic analysts expressed concerns that this trend could negatively impact U.S. GDP growth in the first quarter of 2025, as increased imports are typically subtracted from gross domestic product calculations.
However, Goldman Sachs experts presented a different perspective. They argue that the unexpected surge in imports was mainly due to an influx of gold bars into the U.S.—a trend that reflects the dynamics of the global precious metals market and the price disparity between gold in London and New York.
According to data cited by Goldman Sachs, the U.S. imported approximately $25 billion worth of gold in January, meaning that a substantial portion of the commodity trade deficit was driven by gold transactions. Since gold is generally considered a financial asset, these imports are not factored into GDP calculations.
As a result, the actual economic impact of this growing trade deficit may be significantly lower than initially perceived.
Currently, financial markets anticipate a 77-basis-point rate cut by the Federal Reserve this year. However, this expectation largely hinges on the trajectory of inflation. At the same time, uncertainty surrounding tariff policies remains high.
A new report from the New York Federal Reserve indicates that inflation expectations among businesses have risen. According to the report, projected inflation for the next year has increased from 3% to 3.5% among manufacturing firms and from 3% to 4% among service-based companies. Additionally, many businesses foresee a significant rise in operational costs in 2025.
Meanwhile, market pricing suggests that traders no longer expect the Bank of England to implement two rate cuts this year. Taylor, a member of the central bank, stated that every policy meeting carries great importance. He noted that the output gap—the difference between actual and potential production—may be larger than previous Bank of England estimates. Taylor emphasized that monetary policies should gradually return to normal and that a cautious approach is necessary when dealing with multiple price shocks.
Furthermore, Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England, stressed that the economic outlook remains uncertain, with risks moving in both directions. He stated that while inflation is expected to rise, it will not resemble the severe inflationary periods of recent years. According to Bailey, decisions on rate cuts will depend on inflation trends, which have so far remained within an acceptable range. He also noted that the likelihood of second-round inflationary effects—where slowing economic growth leads to renewed price pressures—has diminished.
Last week ended with an unexpected shock for economists: estimates pointed to a significant trade imbalance in the United States for January, primarily driven by a sharp surge in imports. The data indicated that U.S. businesses had made extensive efforts to ramp up foreign purchases ahead of the imposition of new tariffs. Economic analysts expressed concerns that this trend could negatively impact U.S. GDP growth in the first quarter of 2025, as increased imports are typically subtracted from gross domestic product calculations.
However, Goldman Sachs experts presented a different perspective. They argue that the unexpected surge in imports was mainly due to an influx of gold bars into the U.S.—a trend that reflects the dynamics of the global precious metals market and the price disparity between gold in London and New York.
According to data cited by Goldman Sachs, the U.S. imported approximately $25 billion worth of gold in January, meaning that a substantial portion of the commodity trade deficit was driven by gold transactions. Since gold is generally considered a financial asset, these imports are not factored into GDP calculations.
As a result, the actual economic impact of this growing trade deficit may be significantly lower than initially perceived.
Currently, financial markets anticipate a 77-basis-point rate cut by the Federal Reserve this year. However, this expectation largely hinges on the trajectory of inflation. At the same time, uncertainty surrounding tariff policies remains high.
A new report from the New York Federal Reserve indicates that inflation expectations among businesses have risen. According to the report, projected inflation for the next year has increased from 3% to 3.5% among manufacturing firms and from 3% to 4% among service-based companies. Additionally, many businesses foresee a significant rise in operational costs in 2025.
Meanwhile, market pricing suggests that traders no longer expect the Bank of England to implement two rate cuts this year. Taylor, a member of the central bank, stated that every policy meeting carries great importance. He noted that the output gap—the difference between actual and potential production—may be larger than previous Bank of England estimates. Taylor emphasized that monetary policies should gradually return to normal and that a cautious approach is necessary when dealing with multiple price shocks.
Furthermore, Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England, stressed that the economic outlook remains uncertain, with risks moving in both directions. He stated that while inflation is expected to rise, it will not resemble the severe inflationary periods of recent years. According to Bailey, decisions on rate cuts will depend on inflation trends, which have so far remained within an acceptable range. He also noted that the likelihood of second-round inflationary effects—where slowing economic growth leads to renewed price pressures—has diminished.
Disclaimer
The information and publications are not meant to be, and do not constitute, financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice or recommendations supplied or endorsed by TradingView. Read more in the Terms of Use.
Disclaimer
The information and publications are not meant to be, and do not constitute, financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice or recommendations supplied or endorsed by TradingView. Read more in the Terms of Use.