La tentative désespérée de Trump de jouer avec les marchés est vouée à l'échec

President Donald Trump’s Treasury Department has launched another aggressive effort to influence financial markets, aiming to curb rising bond yields and ease borrowing costs ahead of the upcoming midterm elections. According to official reports, the Treasury announced plans to significantly boost its purchase of longer-term government bonds, increasing the quarterly buyback amount by at least double. Analysts estimate that this adjustment would raise the total purchases to approximately $32 billion per quarter. The decision comes amid a surge in 30-year Treasury yield, which reached levels not seen since 2007, prompting concerns over the impact on government, business, and consumer borrowing costs. The move is framed by the Treasury as part of a broader liquidity support initiative, a program originally designed to enhance market efficiency and government cash management. However, critics argue that the current application of these measures is misaligned with their intended purpose. The previous administration had clearly defined such programs as not meant to address acute market stress, yet this is precisely the situation the market is facing. Despite the Treasury's reassurances, the immediate effect of the announcement appears to have been a modest decline in 30-year Treasury yields, dropping by as much as 0.10 percentage points. Yet, the question remains whether this temporary relief will prove meaningful in the face of larger economic pressures. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, a former hedge fund manager, has been at the center of several controversial initiatives aimed at stabilizing financial markets. His tenure has included adjustments to bank capital requirements to encourage greater holdings of government bonds, backing of the GENIUS Act, which outlines a regulatory framework for stablecoin investments in U.S. government securities, and authorization of U.S. support for yen intervention. These actions were perceived as attempts to deter major foreign holders of Treasury bonds from selling their holdings to bolster their domestic currencies. However, the effectiveness of these strategies has been limited, with some efforts, such as the yen intervention, showing signs of diminishing returns shortly after implementation. The broader context reveals a growing disconnect between the administration’s policy goals and the realities of the global financial landscape. Public debt in the United States has exceeded $40 trillion for the first time, marking a sharp rise of nearly a third within five years. Mortgage rates have climbed to around 7 percent, disappointing voters who had anticipated more favorable lending conditions. Meanwhile, the administration continues to resist calls for addressing historic fiscal imbalances, further exacerbating concerns over long-term economic stability. Global factors are compounding the challenges faced by the U.S. financial system. Inflation is resurging in Japan, ending a quarter-century of subdued price growth. Japanese 10-year government bond yields, which directly compete with U.S. Treasuries for international investor attention, have reached levels not seen in three decades. As the Bank of Japan prepares to begin raising its benchmark interest rates by October, the upward trend in yields could intensify, creating ripple effects across global bond markets. These developments suggest that the U.S. alone may struggle to exert control over long-term Treasury yields, despite the increased buyback activity. Additionally, the rapid expansion of corporate borrowing for artificial intelligence infrastructure is adding pressure to long-term interest rates. Major companies such as Alphabet recently issued $25 billion in bonds with maturities extending up to 40 years, while Amazon and SpaceX have similarly engaged in large-scale debt offerings. Such trends indicate that the demand for long-term funding is not waning, and the forces shaping global interest rates remain powerful and largely beyond the reach of individual national policies. As the Treasury moves forward with its latest strategy, the outcome remains uncertain. While the immediate market response suggests some degree of responsiveness to the buyback plan, the scale of the challenge, both domestically and internationally, casts doubt on its long-term efficacy. The administration’s continued reliance on market interventions, rather than structural reforms, underscores the complexity of managing a global economy increasingly shaped by interdependent financial systems and evolving macroeconomic dynamics. Whether this latest maneuver will succeed or merely add to the list of ineffective attempts to manipulate market outcomes remains to be seen.