瑞士央行本来还有三条路可走，但它偏偏选了最糟的那一条

    上周四，瑞士央行决定取消瑞士法郎与欧元之间的货币挂钩政策，全球市场为之震荡不断。此项决定完全出乎人们的意料，因为就在之前两天，该行官员还确认将保持汇率政策不变。

    此举让货币交易商损失惨重，至少有两家大型外汇经纪商——总部设在新西兰的Excel Markets和Global Brokers在一夜间关门大吉。瑞士法郎兑欧元和美元的汇率也因此而直线上升，如下图所示：

    这项决定令人匪夷所思，因为瑞士央行并无实施汇率脱钩政策的迫切压力。瑞士的通胀水平仍非常低。瑞士政府上周公布，去年12月份瑞士的物价同比下跌0.3%，创2013年10月份以来新低。虽然欧洲执行量化宽松政策可能迫使瑞士央行加大对本国货币的保护力度，但由于瑞士央行可以增发瑞士法郎，所以它实际上能够无限制地通过购买外币来维持货币挂钩政策。

    更令人诧异的是，就在这项措施出台几天前，一位瑞士央行官员还表示该行将继续执行货币挂钩政策。瑞士央行本来有以下三条路可走，哪一种都会比现在更好一些。

    1. 给予一些前瞻性指引。二三十年前，中央银行暗地里采取行动并非什么新鲜事。举例来说，美联储有段时间甚至都不公布目标利率。它只管买卖债券，至于美联储意欲何为，则要由分析师来揣测。但最近这十几年中，经济学家开始意识到市场沟通以及提前释放动向信号所蕴含的力量。央行官员把这样的信息称为 “前瞻性指引”，借此他们可以左右市场预期并顺利实现政策过渡。而向市场做出保证短短几天后就出尔反尔，这用任何道理都说不通。

    2. 从微调着手。如果担心欧洲的量化宽松会让交易商集体转投瑞士资产，瑞士央行完全可以像从前那样把利率从-0.25%下调到-0.75%，以便市场对此做出反应，然后再采取更为极端的措施。

    3. 按兵不动。在各国长期通胀率和经济增长普遍放慢以及全球经济预计将减速的情况下，采取货币紧缩政策的理由并不充分。

    看来，瑞士央行最担心的似乎是政治。长期以来，瑞士一直都遵循着硬性货币政策和自由市场原则。就算在非常时期，瑞士也反对采用货币挂钩等干预政策。此外，瑞士央行有一部分属于私人所有，许多个人所有者都担心该行的外汇储备可能蒙受损失。如果瑞士央行真的继续实施货币挂钩政策，那么它就必须大量买进欧元。而一旦欧洲央行启动量化宽松式的债券购买计划，欧元的价值将应声下跌。瑞士民众非常担心出现这种情况，为此，瑞士央行行长托马斯•约尔丹在制定货币挂钩政策时不得不发表声明，以解释为什么央行的资产不必非得超过负债的原因。

    换句话说，瑞士央行此举更多地是受到了政治因素的影响，而非经济因素。它对瑞士经济的长期影响也许不会那么糟糕，原因是长期以来瑞士出口商一直都在应付强势货币带来的负担，而且与欧洲其他国家相比，瑞士的经济相对强劲。但在这种环境下，收紧货币政策的意愿在事实面前是站不住脚的，而且，像瑞士央行上周四那样在市场面前虚晃一枪的举动几乎没有任何道理可言。（财富中文网）

    译者：Charlie

    审稿: 李翔

    The Swiss National Bank’s decision to remove its currency peg against the Euro on Thursday continues to send shock waves through the market. The decision was a complete surprise, as a bank official reaffirmed its commitment to the policy just two days before the peg was removed.

    The decision has been costly for currency traders, with at least two big retail foreign exchange brokerages, New Zealand-based Excel Markets and Global Brokers, going bust overnight. It has also sent the value of the Swiss Franc soaring against both the euro and the dollar, as you can see below:

    The decision is a curious one, as the Swiss Central Bank was coming under no real pressure to remove the peg. Inflation remains remarkably low in the country—last week, the Swiss government announced that prices fell by an annual rate of 0.3% in December, the lowest inflation reading since October 2013. While impending quantitative easing in Europe may force the Swiss Bank to step up its efforts to defend the currency, there is effectively no end to the Bank’s ability to buy foreign currencies to defend the peg, as the Swiss bank can just print more francs.

    But even stranger was the bank’s decision to make this move just days after an official from the bank affirmed its commitment to the policy. Here are three ways the bank could have done better.

    1. Give some forward guidance. Twenty or 30 years ago, it was par for the course for central banks to act in the shadows. Once upon a time, the Federal Reserve, for instance, didn’t even announce interest rate targets. It simply bought and sold bonds, and it was up to analysts to figure out what the bank was up to. But in recent decades, economists have begun to learn the power of communicating with markets and signaling moves beforehand. By giving what central bankers call forward guidance, they can shape the market’s expectations and smooth policy transitions. There’s simply no good rationale for dumping this decision on the markets just days after reassuring participants it would act otherwise.

    2. Start small. If the bank was afraid that quantitative easing in Europe would send traders flocking to Swiss assets, it could have just lowered interest rates from -0.25% to -0.75%, as it did, and let the market react to that decision before taking more extreme measures.

    3. Do nothing. With inflation and economic growth chronically slow across the world, and forecasts for global growth falling, the rationale for making any moves to tighten monetary policy is thin.

    What the Swiss National Bank appears to be most concerned about, then, is politics. The Swiss have a long history of adhering to hard money policies and free market principles. Even in extraordinary times, the Swiss bristle against interventions like currency pegs. Furthermore, the Swiss bank is owned in part by private individuals, many of whom are worried about the possibility of the bank losing money on its foreign currency reserves. If the bank did continue to defend its currency peg, it would have had to buy a bunch of Euros, which would presumably drop in value if the European Central Bank began a QE-style bond buying program. The Swiss public was so afraid of this happening that Swiss National Bank President Thomas Jordan was forced to issue a statement back when the peg was instituted explaining why central banks don’t need to keep positive equity on its balance sheet at all times.

    In other words, the Swiss National Bank’s move was influenced by politics more than economics. The long-term effects on the Swiss economy might not be all that harsh, as Swiss exporters have long dealt with the burden of a strong currency and the Swiss economy is relatively strong compared to its European peers. But the desire to tighten monetary policy in this environment isn’t justified by the facts on the ground, and the decision to head-fake the markets as the Swiss Bank did on Thursday makes very little sense at all.