O secretário do Tesouro, Scott Bessent, expressou na quinta-feira (31) à CNBC a confiança de que os EUA e a China estão a caminho de um acordo comercial, à medida que o prazo final de uma tarifa importante se aproxima.
🚨Inscreva-se no canal e ative o sininho para receber todo o nosso conteúdo!
Siga o Times Brasil nas redes sociais: @otimesbrasil
📌 ONDE ASSISTIR AO MAIOR CANAL DE NEGÓCIOS DO MUNDO NO BRASIL:
🔷 Canal 562 ClaroTV+ | Canal 562 Sky | Canal 592 Vivo | Canal 187 Oi | Operadoras regionais
🔷 TV SINAL ABERTO: parabólicas canal 562
🔷 ONLINE: www.timesbrasil.com.br | YouTube
🔷 FAST Channels: Samsung TV Plus, TCL Channels, Pluto TV, Soul TV, Zapping | Novos Streamings
#CNBCNoBrasil
#JornalismoDeNegócios
#TimesBrasil
🚨Inscreva-se no canal e ative o sininho para receber todo o nosso conteúdo!
Siga o Times Brasil nas redes sociais: @otimesbrasil
📌 ONDE ASSISTIR AO MAIOR CANAL DE NEGÓCIOS DO MUNDO NO BRASIL:
🔷 Canal 562 ClaroTV+ | Canal 562 Sky | Canal 592 Vivo | Canal 187 Oi | Operadoras regionais
🔷 TV SINAL ABERTO: parabólicas canal 562
🔷 ONLINE: www.timesbrasil.com.br | YouTube
🔷 FAST Channels: Samsung TV Plus, TCL Channels, Pluto TV, Soul TV, Zapping | Novos Streamings
#CNBCNoBrasil
#JornalismoDeNegócios
#TimesBrasil
Categoria
🗞
NotíciasTranscrição
00:00DIGITAL Música
00:02E aí
00:04Obrigado, pessoal.
00:06A CIDADE NO BRASIL
00:08É POR NÓS
00:10PELOSI.
00:12Estamos nos novos no tarifas e trade.
00:14President Trump disse,
00:16Treasury Secretary Scott Besant.
00:18Mr. Secretary,
00:20Always a pleasure to see you
00:22e to have you on the show.
00:24Morning, Joe.
00:26We heard yesterday
00:28O que é isso?
00:30Nós estamos aqui.
00:32E então, antes de tudo, nós estamos aqui.
00:34É isso aí?
00:36Tem outros países que estão vendo o que está acontecendo,
00:38que estão dizendo,
00:40que não queriam ser o último país
00:42para fazer a deal com o presidente Trump?
00:45Bem, olha,
00:46temos o 1º de Augusto,
00:48e, como mencionou antes,
00:50o rates could boomerang
00:52para o 2º de April.
00:54South Korea was a special case
00:56because they had an election,
00:58a new government,
01:00so they were not
01:02in the position to fully negotiate.
01:04They came in yesterday afternoon.
01:06They presented a very good offer.
01:08President Trump moved the offer
01:10up a bit, and we reached a very
01:12good agreement
01:14where they will have 15%
01:16tariffs. They will buy a substantial
01:18amount of U.S. energy.
01:20They will make a substantial
01:22investment into the U.S.,
01:24both from their sovereign resources
01:28and via private companies.
01:30So they really, that sounds like
01:32a template. It sounds very similar
01:34to some of the other recently
01:36announced deals.
01:38What will it do for us in terms of exports
01:40to South Korea?
01:42We pulled down a lot of the
01:44trade barriers, a lot of the non-tariff
01:46trade barriers. So,
01:48you know, obviously we'll be exporting
01:50a lot more energy to them,
01:52and then it will be better for our
01:54farmers, better for all of our
01:58exporters. As the South Koreans
02:00said, we like U.S.
02:02products, and now what we're
02:04seeing with President Trump is
02:06these tariff barriers and the
02:08non-tariff barriers, which are
02:10more difficult to quantify sometimes
02:12are coming down.
02:14Jameson Greer, the USTR
02:16ambassador, has a book that looks
02:18like kind of three of the old New
02:22York City phone books that is a
02:24list of all the non-tariff
02:26barriers by country. They had been
02:28substantial. I believe with
02:30Indonesia, we marked out something
02:32like 11,000 lines of tariffs.
02:36The lot was made of the President's
02:42comments about India. We were trying
02:44to figure it out exactly what, and
02:46it's obviously negotiating and
02:48leverage and everything else, and
02:50we've heard that we're close with
02:52India, and that's one of the
02:54majors, other than China, that are
02:56left. What was the President's
02:58intent yesterday with some of those
03:00comments about India, and do you
03:02expect something to happen before
03:04you? Well, I don't know what's
03:06going to happen. It'll be up to
03:08India. India came to the table
03:10early. They've been slow rolling
03:12things, so I think that the
03:14President, the whole trade team's
03:16a bit frustrated with them, and
03:18also, you know, India's been a
03:20large buyer of sanctioned Russian
03:22oil that they then resell as
03:26refined products. So, you know,
03:28they have not been a great global
03:31actor. How about in China, some of
03:34that wrapped up, and we'd like to
03:36hear it from you exactly what the
03:38tone was, and we understand how
03:41complex a deal with China, and
03:43involving how many different
03:45myriad complex issues are involved,
03:48but where does it stand after the
03:50weekend of the last few days? Yes.
03:53Yes. So, we met for two full days in
03:56Stockholm. The Chinese are tough
03:59negotiators. We're tough, too. It was
04:01led by the Vice Premier, my
04:03counterpart, Hu Li Feng, who I have
04:06great respect for. You know, he is
04:08both a statesman, a tough
04:10negotiator, and a very senior in the
04:14leadership. We pushed back on them
04:19quite a bit and made our positions
04:22known. I believe that we have the
04:25makings of a deal. They announced
04:28that we would have a 90-day role,
04:31which was a bit premature. Ambassador
04:35Greer and myself will be speaking
04:37to President Trump today about
04:39whether we will be doing the role
04:41by the August 12th deadline. There's
04:45still a few technical details to be
04:47worked out on the Chinese side
04:50between us. I'm confident that it
04:52will be done, but it's not 100%
04:55done. Secretary Besson, just in
04:58terms of the China negotiations, we
05:00had Leland Miller on earlier today. He
05:03does the China Beige Book report. He
05:05said that when you had the export
05:07controls that were put into these
05:09negotiations, and China forced that
05:12issue by throttling our exports to us
05:16of the rare earth minerals, that
05:18that changed the leverage and gave
05:21China much more leverage in the
05:23situation. We heard this morning
05:25that China is asking questions now
05:27about NVIDIA's H20 chip and whether
05:30there are concerns, whether you can
05:31track those chips, and they want
05:33reassurances on that front. How much
05:35more complicated is the Chinese
05:37negotiation than it has been with any
05:39other country you've dealt with?
05:41Well, one thing I'll tell you is
05:43that is a gross oversimplification
05:45from your previous guest. I didn't
05:48hear what he said, but I can tell
05:51you, you know, they have used the
05:53rare earth magnets as a negotiating
05:56card, but we've got plenty of our
05:59economy of our own. And we at a point
06:02had 12 countermeasures on against
06:04them. The, you know, all national
06:08security based. We have dropped
06:11those. The magnets are flowing.
06:14And, you know, we'll see. But you've
06:17got the two largest economies in the
06:19world. And Becky, what we've never
06:21seen before in recent history is if you
06:26look back to the negotiate, the
06:28economic negotiations, 70s, 80s,
06:31even the 90s, you know, you look at
06:33the Plaza Accord, the Louvre Accord,
06:35some of the big economic
06:37negotiations, even when the U.S.
06:40came off the gold standard in the
06:4270s, we were negotiating with our
06:44allies. Our allies were our biggest
06:46economic rivals. And then there was
06:48the Soviet Union, who was our big
06:52military rival. They were a small
06:55economy, but a military powerhouse.
06:58Negotiating with China, we are
07:01negotiating both with our largest
07:03economic rival and our largest
07:05military rival. So you're right to
07:08say that this is, in a way,
07:11three-dimensional chess.
07:13Mr. Secretary, one of the things
07:15we're all watching is the Treasury
07:17market. And China, of course, had been
07:20a massive buyer over the years of
07:22our Treasuries. And I'm curious, as
07:24these negotiations continue over
07:27trade, and we start to see some of
07:29the numbers in terms of what they're
07:31buying or not buying or, frankly,
07:33selling, how you think that that
07:35could influence or change anything?
07:38Yes. So, Andrew, really, for most of the
07:44Asian economies, 2017 marked the high
07:49point of their ownership of U.S.
07:51Treasuries. We've seen a gradual
07:54decrease since then. So the Treasury
07:58market really hasn't featured in any of
08:01these negotiations.
08:04Mr. Secretary, I have a real
08:06specific question to ask you about
08:10some of the unintended, maybe,
08:14consequences of tariffs. Ford hasn't
08:16lost money in a quarter since 2023.
08:19They make almost all their cars here.
08:21Now, they're doing it. I think they're
08:23trying the best they can to have U.S.
08:26made vehicles, but they still import some
08:29parts. As a result, $800 million in
08:32tariffs pushed them into a lot of
08:35wiped out the profit entirely.
08:37Are there still carve outs available?
08:41If a company like Ford comes to you
08:43and says, look, this is how this
08:44affected us or comes to the president.
08:46This is a direct consequence of
08:48what's happening. That's not what was
08:50intended with the tariffs, was it?
08:53And it's not what we want, I don't
08:54think, to cause Ford to report a loss,
08:57even though they're trying their best
08:58to make all their cars here.
09:01Yeah, and look, I admire, Joe, I
09:04admire Ford. Ford, I believe, has the
09:07highest U.S. production of any
09:11auto manufacturer. I think that there
09:14were numerous circumstances with
09:17Ford. I believe that the Ford F-150,
09:22250, you know, their big truck series is
09:27made out of aluminum instead of
09:29steel, which is different than other
09:32cars. So I think maybe the aluminum
09:35tariffs have hit them harder. We will
09:38be negotiating with Canada on those.
09:41So, you know, I think with Ford it's
09:43probably been idiosyncratic.
09:47The number we got yesterday for GDP was
09:50above expectations. It's a great
09:51sounding number, 3%. But if you
09:54average it with the first quarter,
09:56many are pointing out it's about 1.2%
10:00average GDP growth, which is slower than
10:04in the last year. Obviously, the
10:08second half will tell the tale and the
10:10of the big beautiful bill. A lot of
10:13those positives, some of the tailwinds
10:15for businesses probably aren't evident
10:17yet. But there is some, it looks like,
10:21maybe some lessening of demand. One of
10:23the key drivers, I think, is final sales
10:26to private domestic purchasers. You
10:28probably are more familiar than I am
10:29with it. Slowest growth since 2022. And
10:33they're tying that to tariffs. I mean,
10:35there's a lot of long-term benefits, I
10:38think, the president and you see in
10:40tariffs. But near term, do you need
10:42some other things to kick in? Maybe
10:44lower interest rates to offset some
10:48of the effects of the tariffs? Well,
10:51Joe, maybe you should call the folks
10:53over on Constitution Avenue and tell
10:56them what you're hearing. That wasn't
11:01what Chair Powell said in the press
11:03conference yesterday. And I think we
11:06have great momentum in the economy. Now
11:10that the tax bill is passed, there is
11:13great certainty. I think that there has
11:15been a big hold back in CapEx until
11:20companies were sure that they were
11:22going to get the 100% immediate
11:24expensing. And then they'll be getting,
11:26and that's permanent, they'll be
11:28getting 100% immediate expensing for
11:31factory structures and ag structures for
11:34the next five years. So, you know, we're
11:37seeing a CapEx boom that started. I
11:40think it's going to really accelerate
11:42third, fourth quarter. Andrew and I
11:46were out in Sun Valley. You know, a
11:48lot of the tech titans out there are
11:53talking about the continued AI
11:56acceleration. And, you know, we're
11:58expecting to see that productivity
12:02kick in in the first or second quarter
12:04of next year. So I would expect that
12:08we are going to see an economic
12:10acceleration from here. And, you know,
12:12again, if I were the Fed, I would try to
12:18think a little about the 1990s
12:21Greenspan model where you saw the
12:24productivity kick in from the
12:28previous decades adoption cycle in
12:33office technology and electronic
12:36technology. I think we could, there's
12:38a good chance we could see a replay of
12:41the 1990s. And it's going to take a
12:43little bit of imagination, same way
12:45Alan Greenspan had. With AI as well.
12:48I mean, one of the best things in the
12:50report yesterday, the PCE, two and a
12:52half percent. That's almost where the
12:54Fed wants it to be versus three and a
12:57half, previous three and a half
12:58percent. So that's down. But you
13:01understand, Mr. Sector, the more that
13:03that the president or the
13:05administration crows about the
13:06strength of the economy, that just
13:08sort of gives, I don't know, it gives
13:11Jay Powell more rationale not to cut
13:13at this point. But when you throw in
13:15the PCE along with maybe the average
13:18of the two quarters at 1.2, I think
13:22it makes it much more compelling. We
13:24had a couple of dissents. We haven't
13:25had that two of them since 1993.
13:28Well, I also think, well, I know
13:31Chair Powell said at the ECB annual
13:36conference in Portugal that the Fed
13:40would have been cutting if it weren't
13:42for tariffs. And Joe, to your point,
13:45we haven't seen any inflation and PCE
13:50is quite nascent. So I'm not sure
13:53what the case is here. But at this
13:56point, you figure, when were we here?
14:00That's a good one. So he makes it till
14:02May, Jay Powell. Let's assume that it's
14:05not unusual to see an appointment
14:07announced, I don't know, well before
14:10then. Do you have any idea on when
14:12we might hear what the president is
14:15thinking in terms of Chair Powell's
14:17replacement? I do. I'm going to be
14:21You do? Can you tell us? I'm going to be
14:24Sure, Joe, if you could just lean
14:27forward, I'll tell you a little.
14:28Oh, that's Connie Chung.
14:30Whisper it in my ear. That's right.
14:33So we are putting together a very
14:38good list of candidates. And remember,
14:40there are going to be two seats opening
14:44up. Governor Kugler will be leaving
14:47in, I can't remember whether it's
14:49January, February, Chair Powell in
14:53May. So there will be two seats
14:55opening up. I'm putting together a
14:57list for president, chief of staff
14:59to review. We'll be interviewing
15:01people. So, you know, I would expect
15:08that we could have an announcement by
15:11the end of the year. Is Powell
15:13definitely leaving? Because even
15:15though his chairmanship is up, his
15:17seat, I think, extends a little
15:18longer. His seat extends for two
15:22years. Two more years. Two years.
15:26It would be highly unusual for a chair
15:29to stay on. And you're helping with
15:34the search, obviously. We shouldn't
15:36read into it any, like, Dick Cheney
15:38type stuff, should we, Mr. Secretary?
15:40Dick Cheney looking for a vice
15:42president, and then, lo and behold.
15:47As I keep saying, I think I have
15:50it. He likes this job better.
15:51He does. He says the food's
15:53better at the Fed, though. He might
15:54be able to keep that job and have
15:56the other job. The food is
15:58better at the Fed. And I can tell
16:00you, the Treasury building, we run
16:02it very well. We keep it in good
16:04shape. We don't do any major
16:05building projects. You know, we do
16:08things as needed. And, you know,
16:13it's a great historical building.
16:15Mr. Secretary, I have one actually
16:17Fed question. Do you think that
16:19the Fed chair, because you do have
16:21to have the whole board kind of
16:23with you? How, I mean, could you
16:26imagine actually putting somebody
16:27in who has views that are
16:29otherwise different than the rest
16:30of the group and is therefore
16:32unable to effectuate the changes
16:34that perhaps the president would
16:36be pursuing? I think, Andrew,
16:40that we want the person who's going
16:44to do what is best for the
16:47American people and for the
16:49economy. And, you know, as Joe
16:53said, we had the first two
16:55dissents for several decades. So,
16:59it looks like there's already a
17:01schism in the board. So, you know,
17:04there would be two more voters. We
17:08would have a majority of the
17:09board. But, of course, then
17:11there are the regional governors
17:13who rotate their voting status.
17:17Did people misunderstand that
17:19some of your comments and
17:21extrapolate it to Social
17:24Security, Mr. Secretary? Or is
17:26that actually something you're
17:28thinking about, the
17:29privatization? No, it was
17:32ridiculous. I was giving an
17:35interview, and I was talking
17:37about the $1,000 baby bonds
17:41that every American citizen,
17:43every newborn is going to get.
17:46The Democrats hate this program
17:48because it brings capitalism and
17:52markets to every American, not
17:55just their constituents at the
17:58upper end. And, you know,
18:01over time, the compounding is going
18:04to be an incredible supplement to
18:07Social Security, not a
18:08replacement. It is a
18:10complement. And, you know, what I
18:14said was Social Security will
18:16continue as it is. It is intact.
18:20Everyone will get their check
18:22every month. But it's very
18:24exciting to me that there could be
18:26a big payout at the end of, you
18:33know, when people turn 59 or 60.
18:35For the first time, Joe, because,
18:37as you know, bottom 50% of
18:39households in America do not have
18:41financial assets. Right. And
18:42President Trump is giving them
18:43financial assets. Right.
18:45You know, I believe that the
18:47reason you all have the mess you
18:49are about to have in New York,
18:51Caracas on the Hudson, is because
18:53people have given up on a
18:56market-based system. And the
18:59Trump administration is going to
19:01make every newborn a shareholder,
19:04and they are going to have a
19:06stake in the system. When you have
19:08a stake in the system, you do not
19:10want to bring down the system. So
19:12the power of compounding could
19:14mean a big payout that would be a
19:16complement, not a substitute for
19:18Social Security. Oh, yeah. That
19:20is horrifying. It is. And it is
19:23horrifying to some. If you're not
19:24beholden to the government, it
19:26sort of undercuts a lot of one
19:28side's programs, doesn't it? If
19:30you're, yeah, that's horrifying.
19:32The secretary? Well, you know,
19:34Joe, the other thing, too, is,
19:36you know, I got to say, some of
19:38the senators who criticize me are
19:40the ones who take the most
19:42advantage of, you know, they don't
19:44have insider trading rules. So
19:46Senator Wyden criticized me. You
19:48know, he has a, you know, he's a
19:52statistical aberration. Somehow he
19:54has made over 120 percent one
19:56year, uh, over 70 percent the
19:59next year. Uh, you know, if he
20:01were a private citizen, the SEC
20:03would be knocking on his door.
20:05Same with the Pelosi family. How
20:07does this happen? Good point.
20:11That's a good point. Uh, the
20:12secretary, we appreciate all the
20:13time again, uh, that you've given
20:15us and hope to see you, uh,
20:17frequently, uh, as we did today.
20:19Thanks. Good. Thank you.
20:21Okay.
Comentários