Live Comments

Australia’s labor market softened noticeably in July, with employment falling -15.8K after a revised 80.2K increase in June, missing expectations for an 11.4K gain. Unemployment rate rose from 4.4% to 4.5%, above 4.4% forecast. Weakness extended beyond headline: participation rate slipped from 67.0% to 66.9%, while employment-to-population ratio fell from 64.0% to 63.9%.

Hours worked reinforced cooling signal, dropping -0.6% m/m, or 12 million hours, from 2.010bn to 1.998bn. Employment losses were concentrated among males, down -11K, while female employment fell -5K. Female full-time employment actually rose 17K, but this was outweighed by a 22K decline in part-time positions. Underemployment rate held at 6.4%, suggesting labor-market deterioration is still measured rather than broad-based.

For RBA, report provides fresh evidence that tighter financial conditions are slowing employment after Deputy Governor Andrew Hauser said Wednesday Bank had already seen “a bit of a slowdown in consumption and employment growth, but needs to see more still.” July delivers more of that evidence, with employment, participation and hours worked all weakening together. It does not eliminate tightening risk while inflation and energy costs remain elevated, but it reduces urgency for another near-term hike and raises importance of upcoming inflation data in determining whether RBA’s hawkish bias survives.

Data Summary

Key Takeaways

• Australian employment fell 15.8K in July after a revised 80.2K increase in June, well below expectations for an 11.4K gain.
• Unemployment rate rose from 4.4% to 4.5%, exceeding consensus for no change.
• Weakness extended beyond headline employment, with participation rate falling from 67.0% to 66.9% and employment-to-population ratio slipping from 64.0% to 63.9%.
• Hours worked fell 12 million, or 0.6% m/m, providing another sign of softer labor utilization.
• Underemployment held at 6.4%, suggesting cooling has not yet turned into a broad deterioration.
• Male employment fell 11K, while female employment declined 5K despite a 17K increase in female full-time jobs.
• For RBA, July delivers more evidence of slowdown in employment that Deputy Governor Andrew Hauser said policymakers still needed to see.
• Report reduces urgency for another near-term hike, although inflation and oil-related upside risks mean RBA’s tightening option remains open.

Full Australia employment release here.

Japan’s exports accelerated to 23.2% y/y in July, beating 19.9% consensus and marking fastest growth since October 2022, as semiconductor-related demand continued to power overseas shipments. Electrical machinery exports rose 29.4%, while semiconductor-related shipments jumped 49.1% in value. Machinery exports increased 18.4%, including 40.9% growth in semiconductor manufacturing equipment, while motor vehicle exports climbed 19.5%. Geographic demand was also broad, with exports to China rising 25.8% and shipments to US up 22.0%.

But headline considerably overstates underlying growth in real export demand. Overall export volumes rose only 5.2%, indicating that weak Yen and higher selling prices accounted for much of 23.2% increase in nominal value. Autos illustrate that split particularly clearly: passenger-car export value jumped 20.8%, while unit shipments increased just 1.2%. Semiconductor machinery showed firmer underlying demand, with shipment quantities rising 36.4%, suggesting AI-related capital spending remains one of more genuine sources of export strength.

Imports delivered another distortion in opposite direction. Import growth accelerated to 27.8% y/y, above 26.5% expected and strongest since November 2022, outpacing exports and widening trade deficit from JPY 156.3bn a year earlier to JPY 634.5bn. Iran conflict and resulting oil-price surge played a major role, with petroleum imports jumping 87.8% in value. For an economy heavily dependent on imported energy, stronger oil prices quickly translate into a larger import bill even when overseas demand for Japanese goods is performing well.

July report therefore gives a more nuanced picture than export headline alone suggests. External sector remains an important support for growth, following its strong contribution to Q2 GDP, while AI-related demand is providing a clear lift to Japan’s industrial exporters. Yet only a fraction of nominal export surge came from higher volumes, and much stronger energy imports overwhelmed export gains at trade-balance level. Japan is benefiting from weak Yen and global technology demand on one side, while paying increasingly expensive bill for imported energy on other.

Data Summary

Trade balance in July 2025: JPY -156.3bn.

Key Takeaways

• Japan’s exports surged 23.2% y/y in July, beating 19.9% expected and recording fastest growth since October 2022.
• Semiconductor-related demand remained a major driver. Semiconductor exports jumped 49.1%, while semiconductor manufacturing equipment rose 40.9%.
• Export strength was broad geographically, with shipments to China up 25.8% and exports to US up 22.0%.
• But export volumes increased only 5.2%, showing weak Yen and higher selling prices accounted for much of 23.2% nominal increase.
• Autos highlighted that divergence: passenger-car export values rose 20.8%, while unit shipments increased only 1.2%.
• Imports accelerated even faster, rising 27.8% y/y versus 26.5% expected, strongest growth since November 2022.
• Petroleum import values surged 87.8% as Iran conflict pushed oil prices higher, exposing Japan’s vulnerability to expensive imported energy.
• Trade deficit consequently widened sharply to JPY 634.5bn, from JPY 156.3bn a year earlier.
• Overall picture is two-sided: AI and semiconductor demand are supporting Japanese manufacturing, but weak Yen and oil shock are inflating both export values and import costs, limiting benefit to net trade.

Full Japan trade balance release here.

Minutes of Federal Reserve’s July 28–29 meeting showed a more hawkish policy debate than 9–3 decision to hold rates at 3.50–3.75% might suggest. While three members formally voted for a 25bp hike, minutes said “several participants favored an increase of 25 basis points”, while “many participants assessed that policy tightening would likely be necessary if inflation did not decline.” Some also questioned whether financial conditions were sufficiently restrictive to return inflation to 2%. Taken together, discussion suggests concern about persistent inflation extended well beyond simple tally of three dissenting votes, even if minutes do not establish that additional members would have voted for an immediate hike.

Inflation debate centered increasingly on risk that repeated shocks keep delaying disinflation. Most participants still expected inflation to step down over rest of year as tariff and earlier energy effects faded, but officials judged risks were “skewed to the upside.” Several warned that “successive supply shocks have repeatedly delayed the expected return of inflation to 2 percent,” while renewed Middle East conflict was seen as capable of extending supply-chain problems and lifting prices again. AI was emerging as another complication: some officials saw investment boom already boosting aggregate demand and prices, even as eventual productivity gains could increase supply and lower costs later.

Stable labor market gave hawks room to emphasize price stability. Participants judged labor demand and supply to be broadly balanced, unemployment close to longer-run estimates and economic activity still expanding at a solid pace. A few officials favoring a July hike argued that acting then could “help forestall the need for a steeper and potentially more costly sequence of tightening moves at a later stage.” That effectively captures insurance-hike argument: tighten modestly before inflation becomes entrenched rather than risk a larger adjustment later.

But minutes describe Fed’s assessment at end of July, making their hawkish message less straightforward for markets today. Subsequent softer employment, inflation, retail-sales and producer-price readings have altered information set substantially. July record is therefore more useful as a guide to Fed’s reaction function than as a direct September signal: failure of inflation to fall would revive tightening pressure, while clearer weakening in labor demand and consumption gives hold camp more reason to wait. Minutes reveal how easily tightening debate could return, but whether July hawks still command same urgency depends on data that arrived after meeting.

Key Takeaways

• July FOMC minutes showed broader hawkish concern than 9–3 vote alone suggested. Three members formally dissented for a 25bp hike, while “several participants” favored raising rates and “many” saw further tightening as likely if inflation failed to decline.
• Some officials questioned whether financial conditions were restrictive enough to bring inflation sustainably back to 2%.
• Hawkish argument included an “insurance hike” logic: acting sooner could reduce risk of needing a steeper and more costly tightening sequence later.
• Fed remained concerned that successive supply shocks were repeatedly delaying return of inflation to target, with Middle East tensions adding fresh upside risk.
• AI investment was becoming part of inflation debate, with some officials seeing stronger aggregate demand and price pressure before longer-term productivity gains arrive.
• Labor market was still viewed as broadly stable in July, giving hawks more room to prioritize inflation.
• But minutes are already partly stale. Softer jobs, CPI, retail-sales and PPI data released since meeting have weakened immediate case for tightening.
• Best interpretation is hawkish reaction function, outdated economic snapshot: minutes show what could revive hike debate, not necessarily what Fed would do today.

Full FOMC minutes here.