\n<\/p>\n
Finansini\u0173 naujien\u0173 portalo \u201eEconostream Media\u201c interviu su Gediminu \u0160imkumi, Lietuvos banko valdybos pirmininku. Interviu paskelbtas 2025 m. baland\u017eio 7 d.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
Q: Governor, \u201cLiberation Day\u201d came and went. What are the implications of the tariff announcement?<\/strong><\/p>\n A. Huge global trade uncertainty was already a drag on economic activity before \u2018Liberation Day\u2019, and stockprices in the US clearly showed concerns about the potential for this to weigh on business confidence, capitalspending, consumer confidence and so on. To some extent, the April 2 announcement makes the pictureclearer, but it was also a tangible escalation of trade tensions and much stronger than expected. So here aswell, the markets\u2019 reaction is indicative of the thinking of those who bet their own money based on where theythink the economy is going. Of course, much will depend on retaliation. But even though we cannot rule out apartial reversal of the April 2 measures, it’s hard to see a huge change in the near term from what was announced, given that all countries in the world were hit by tariffs. From a monetary policy perspective, it’s crucial to distinguish between the short term and the medium to long term. In the short term, the tariffs could lead to some upward price pressures in the euro area. But our more medium-term focus should remain on the\u00a0underlying dynamics, not on the – hopefully – transitory supply shock. And the longer-term effects of the tariffs are weaker demand, lower growth, reduced business confidence, reduced capital spending, weaker consumer confidence – all disinflationary. This warrants a more accommodative policy stance to ensure that inflation converges to our medium-term target.<\/p>\n Q: \u2018More accommodative\u2019 than what? Monetary policy was already likely to be eased further.<\/strong><\/p>\n A: I\u2019m comparing not to any hypothetical alternative, but simply to where we are now, and thinking about what we need to do in April and, depending on developments, June.<\/p>\n Q: So, has your view of the proper pace changed?<\/strong><\/p>\n A: Not really. My thinking is that with the DFR now at 2.5%, policy is currently still more restrictive rather than neutral. Even before April 2, we had a weakened economic situation and increased uncertainty. Euro area growth was sluggish; we repeatedly lowered growth projections for this year. At the same time, we saw inflation returning to target. And now, we have a worsening of the trade tensions that can be deflationary in the medium term. So, my view is that we should proceed with cuts at the next opportunity. A risk management approach requires that we get to a less restrictive stance.<\/p>\n Vis\u0105 interviu skaitykite \u010dia<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n