News location:

Saturday, October 17, 2026 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

Economists less confident of RBA rate cut than market

Reserve Bank Building, London Circuit, Canberra
Out of 32 economists surveyed by AAP, 25 expect the RBA to drop its cash rate target by 25bps.

By Jacob Shteyman in Canberra

A clear majority of economists believe the Reserve Bank of Australia will cut rates at its next board meeting, but they are less convinced than market pricing suggests.

Out of 32 Australian economists surveyed by AAP, 25 expected the RBA to drop its cash rate target by 25 basis points on Tuesday, bringing an end to 15 months with no change to monetary policy.

Expectations for a cut have ratcheted up in recent weeks, following a softer-than-expected December quarter CPI print that brought annual underlying inflation close to the RBA’s target band.

That was enough to convince Andrew Barker, head of research at non-profit think tank CEDA.

“The RBA is forward-looking in its interest rate decisions, as it takes a year or more for the full effects of lower interest rates to boost economic activity and thus prices,” he told AAP.

“This means above-target underlying inflation is not enough reason to avoid cutting rates.”

Traders are pricing in a 90 per cent chance of a cut, but many economists believe it will be a much closer-run thing than the market expects, with 22 per cent of economists surveyed expecting no change.

Morgans chief economist Michael Knox, Deloitte Access Economics partner Stephen Smith, Oxford Economics Australia’s Sean Langcake, HIA chief economist Tim Reardon, KPMG’s Brendan Rynne, University of Sydney professor Stella Huangfu and Judo Bank’s Warren Hogan predicted the RBA to hold for a 10th straight meeting.

“Even though the CPI quarterly trimmed mean has fallen to 3.2 per cent, we think that unemployment at four per cent is too low for a decline in inflation down to a sustained level of the RBA target of 2.5 per cent,” Mr Knox said.

Some economists such as UNSW professor Richard Holden, former RBA board member Warwick McKibbin and Steven Hamilton of George Washington University are predicting a cut, but believe it would be a bad idea.

“Market pricing has strongly favoured a cut for a while and RBA officials have had opportunities to lean against it but have not. Not cutting given market pricing would then be a big shock,” Professor Hamilton said.

“But, I think if they do cut, it will be all or nearly all the relief provided this year because the fundamentals (particularly the labour market and global outlook) simply do not offer much additional capacity for them to do so.

“As such, I would personally not cut, and would prefer to wait and see if core inflation continues to fall before doing so.”

Prof Hamilton is not alone in thinking it will be a “hawkish hold”.

Nomura senior economist Andrew Ticehurst was confident the central bank would not deliver a back-to-back cut in April, given price growth and global uncertainty remain high.

“I expect its messaging to be cautious, noting that any further policy easing is highly reliant on future (quarterly, not monthly) inflation developments, which are of course as yet unknown,” he said.

Following the RBA rates decision and Statement on Monetary Policy update on Tuesday, the Australian Bureau of Statistics is due to release wage price index data on Wednesday and labour force statistics on Thursday.

RBA governor Michele Bullock will face a parliamentary grilling over her rates decision in Canberra on Friday, rounding out a monumental week on the economic front.

The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index on Friday finished up 28.6 points, or 0.34 per cent, to 8,568.6, while the broader All Ordinaries climbed 20.9 points, or 0.24 per cent, to 8,825.1.

The benchmark S&P 500 edged down 0.01 per cent to end the session at 6,114.63 points.

Of the 11 S&P 500 sector indexes, seven declined, led lower by consumer staples, down 1.16 per cent, followed by a 1.11 per cent loss in healthcare.

US markets will be closed on Monday for the Presidents Day holiday.

AAP ECONOMIST SURVEY

* Gareth Aird, CBA: Cut

* Andrew Barker, CEDA: Cut

* David Bassanese, Betashares: Cut

* Adam Boyton, ANZ: Cut

* Katrina Ell, Moody’s Analytics: Cut

* Luci Ellis, Westpac: Cut

* Saul Eslake, Corinna Advisory: Cut

* Grant Feng, Vanguard: Cut

* Nicholas Gruen, Lateral Economics: Cut

* Steven Hamilton, George Washington University: Cut

* Warren Hogan, Judo Bank: Hold

* Richard Holden, UNSW: Cut

* Stella Huangfu, University of Sydney: Hold

* Ben Jarman, JP Morgan: Cut

* Greg Jericho, Australia Institute: Cut

* Jonathan Kearns, Challenger: Cut

* Michael Knox, Morgans Financial: Hold

* Stephen Koukoulas, Market Economics: Cut

* Sean Langcake, Oxford Economics Australia: Hold

* Warwick McKibbin, ANU: Cut

* Peter Munckton, Band of Queensland: Cut

* Shane Oliver, AMP: Cut

* Alan Oster, NAB: Cut

* Benjamin Picton, Rabobank: Cut

* Nicola Powell, Domain: Cut

* Tim Reardon, Housing Industry Association: Hold

* David Robertson, Bendigo Bank: Cut

* Brendan Rynne, KPMG: Hold

* Stephen Smith, Deloitte Access Economics: Hold

* George Tharenou, UBS: Cut

* Andrew Ticehurst, Nomura: Cut

* Peter Tulip, Centre for Independent Studies: Cut

News all day, every day at CityNews.com.au.

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Australian Associated Press

Australian Associated Press

Share this

2 Responses to Economists less confident of RBA rate cut than market

David says: 16 February 2025 at 8:36 am

The challenge with a rates cut is it will put upward pressure on inflation, houses prices and rent. If inflation was on a clear downward trend then you could imagine the cut would flatten it out. It’s not and any downward trend is being supported but short term government spending to make things look better than they are. We really need a rule that bans rates decisions around elections so there is no attempt to game the system only for a nasty correction once the election is over. You don’t have to look far to find property investors rubbing their hands at the thought of a rate cut. Given the so called market is well a truly tipped towards investors over owner occupiers this means investors can out bid/build owners, keeping the would be owners in the rental market, with rents going up to cover the rise in house prices. Investors have been hurting an any excuse to raise rents will not be missed.

The system needs a big correction and investors need to take their money elsewhere. Do we really want to entice more would be owner occupiers into the market with huge debts with something as shallow as a rate cut or do we want to starting fixing the crisis ?

Reply
David says: 17 February 2025 at 8:28 am

You can tell if someone is truly left or right by their approach to rent. Rent keeps the poor poor and makes the rich richer. It’s a clear social divide especially when the renter is someone who aspires to be a property owner but is kept out of the market by investors. What make’s it worse is that for property investors it’s a choice, they can invest their money elsewhere but choose to make money out of the basic needs of the poor. You also needs to bear in mind poor now includes many average income families. Ask someone who claims to be left wing what their opinion of renting is and you’ll learn a lot about them and probably what the Labor party really stands for.

Here’s an idea for you, we need to break the cycle of would be owner occupiers being stuck in long term rental and ending up with nothing. Owning your own home at the end of your working life is part of your Super. So, why don’t have a super contribution tied to renting. Part of every rental payments include a contribution to a housing super which the landlord also needs to make a separate matching contribution. Separate to deter landlords for just adding it to the rent and if that’s still problematic make it no tax deductible for the landlords. That way people forced into long term rent will have something at the end of their working life to go towards the living expenses of their increasing longer retirement years.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

*

Related Posts

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews