“The Last Jedi Has Fallen”: Wall Street Reacts To Cohn’s Departure

“The Last Jedi Has Fallen”: Wall Street Reacts To Cohn’s Departure

by Tyler Durden

As we highlighted first thing this morning, there has been no shortage of opinions about what Gary Cohn’s departure from the White House (after just one very lucrative year, which allowed Gary to cash out tax free on over $280 million in Goldman deferred comp) will mean for both markets and Trump policy going forward. And while many differ on the margins, the collective agreement is that “political moderate” Gary Cohn’s resignation confirms the ascendancy of the “protectionists”, “populists” and “anti-globalists” in Trump’s circle of influence (first noted here 2 weeks ago), such as Peter Navarro and Wilbur Ross.

Courtesy of Bloomberg, here is a rundown of some of the most vocal views this morning from Wall Street analysts, investors and traders.

‘The last Jedi’, from Citi’s Fraser King

“While heavily-trailed in the press, the market is still mourning the sudden departure of Gary Cohn, the White House’s ‘lonely democrat’ – seen by some as the final bastion of tariff-free international trade. Alas, now the last Jedi has fallen, Trade Wars and a galaxy far, far away now all seems an awful lot closer than before.”

‘Voice of Reason’, from Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS Wealth Management:

“The departure signals the defeat of anti-protectionism, or reduces the influence of anti-protectionism.”

“Any tax on trade, in any country, means consumers are going to be purchasing goods they would not chose to buy, at prices that are higher than they should have to pay, to subsidize less efficient companies.”

‘Most Meaningful’, from Michael O’Rourke, chief market strategist at JonesTrading Institutional Services:

“Of all the Trump administration resignations, this will be the one most meaningful for markets.”

“Cohn was the administration official financial markets had the most confidence in. This opens the environment up to whole new wave of uncertainty. The likelihood of a trade war just jumped dramatically.”

‘Treasury Tremors’, from Rabobank strategists led by Richard McGuire:

“We would challenge the oft-cited view that protectionism is bearish for USTs as it promises higher import costs (and, thus, inflation) while also portending a possible divesture of U.S. debt by China in retaliation.”

“We would instead argue that higher import costs, in representing a negative supply shock will ultimately weigh on demand. Tit-for-tat trade measures, meanwhile, point to lower world trade volumes which, in turn, promises lower global growth.”

Retaliation Risk. from Ben Emons, chief economist at Intellectus Partners LLC:

“Not only countries may retaliate, reciprocal trade is not a 1 for 1 trade, especially when tariffs are placed on high quality/low cost foreign goods that are a benefit to the domestic consumer.”

“The favorable global synchronization theme from 2017 is morphing into a de-synchronizing theme that can impact markets negatively.”

Faith in Earnings, from James Soutter, a fund manager at K2 Asset Management Ltd. in Melbourne:

“Markets will see this as another negative in the Trump presidency and will move lower on the news in the short term, but this doesn’t have an impact on the broader earnings growth story that equities are experiencing.”

‘More Chaos’, from Alan Patricof, a venture capitalist and managing director of Greycroft LLC who had backed Hillary Clinton against Trump:

“We need a grown up in the White House, that’s the problem, and it gets worse every day,” with the latest news indicating “more chaos.”

“The market doesn’t like uncertainty, the market doesn’t like surprises. All we’ve gotten for the last 15 months is surprises, and yet the market went up. At some point the market has got to be spooked by the fact that they just don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow.”

“I feel it so many times — I Tweet it myself — this is it we’ve hit the inflection point. But “the market defies me, then we get another crazy move.” But this time, “Gary Cohn has been a grown up in the White House, and now he’s gone.”

‘Bark vs Bite‘, from Terry Haines, a managing director at Evercore ISI:

The narrative will be that protectionists “will be in the ascendant” and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, “the lone remaining ‘free trader,’ will be in eclipse.” Even so, “there is more bark than bite in the Trump protectionist story line of the last few days.”

“Investors should understand the Cohn departure as the end of his influence in a difficult White House, but not to overreact to it.”

‘Rates Impact?’, from Michael McCarthy, Sydney-based chief strategist at CMC Markets Asia Pacific.

“It’s clear at the moment the markets are likely to price the worst-case scenario on tariffs. “Markets are very concerned about the impact on global growth,” given the “potential for tit-for-tat” protectionist moves in the wake of Europe’s retaliation threat following the move on U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs.

“Higher interest rates could be off the table if this does escalate.”

‘Brutal’ Worries, from Johan Jooste, chief investment officer at Bank of Singapore Ltd.:

The really important next thing is how do other countries react to this. If the response is fairly brutal, if it’s really strong, without Cohn there you’d imagine the White House reacts in kind. Then we get into the kind of thing the market is probably now starting to discount as a greater probability, which is not a good outcome for stocks.”

‘Grandstanding Behavior’, from Nader Naeimi, head of dynamic markets at AMP Capital Investors Ltd.:

“I view this as grandstanding behavior by Mr. Trump, with the aim to have more negotiating cards in his deck.”

“In markets, we are closer to a durable low than we were after the first leg down in markets in early February.”


TLB published this financial article from ZeroHedge with our thanks for the coverage.

 Follow TLB on Twitter @thetlbproject


1 Comment on “The Last Jedi Has Fallen”: Wall Street Reacts To Cohn’s Departure

  1. If “anti-globalism” is used to define those opposing the global opportunity to buy and sell products in one country, that were made in another, there there are no anti-globalists. If “anti-globalism” is a defined as those opposed to taxes and regulations enriching an elite global corporate/political 1% collusion, then there are billions.

    Which definition represents profitable propaganda and who gets the resulting the loot, are the questions to which the answers will clarify the issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.