We permit the publication of our auditors’ report, provided the report is published in full only and is accompanied by the full financial statements to which our auditors’ report relates, and is only published on an access-controlled page on your website, to enable users to verify that an auditors’ report by independent accountants has been commissioned by the directors and issued. Such permission to publish is given by us without accepting or assuming any responsibility or liability to any third party users save where we have agreed terms with them in writing.

Our consent is given on condition that before any third party accesses our auditors’ report via the webpage they first document their agreement to the following terms of access to our report via a click-through webpage with an 'I accept' button. The terms to be included on your website are as follows:

I accept and agree for and on behalf of myself and the Trust I represent (each a "recipient") that:

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) accepts no liability (including liability for negligence) to each recipient in relation to PwC’s report. The report is provided to each recipient for information purposes only. If a recipient relies on PwC’s report, it does so entirely at its own risk;
  2. No recipient will bring a claim against PwC which relates to the access to the report by a recipient;
  3. Neither PwC’s report, nor information obtained from it, may be made available to anyone else without PwC’s prior written consent, except where required by law or regulation; and
  4. PwC’s report was prepared with Hermes Property Unit Trust's interests in mind. It was not prepared with any recipient's interests in mind or for its use. PwC’s report is not a substitute for any enquiries that a recipient should make. The financial statements are as at 25 March 2017, and thus PwC’s auditors’ report is based on historical information. Any projection of such information or PwC’s opinion thereon to future periods is subject to the risk that changes may occur after the reports are issued and the description of controls may no longer accurately portray the system of internal control. For these reasons, such projection of information to future periods would be inappropriate.
  5. PwC will be entitled to the benefit of and to enforce these terms.
I accept

1. Select your country

  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Luxembourg
  • Netherlands
  • Norway
  • Singapore
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • USA
  • Other

2. Select your investor type

  • Financial Advisor
  • Discretionary Investment Manager
  • Wealth Manager
  • Family Office
  • Institutional Investor
  • Investment Consultant
  • Charity, Foundation & Endowment Investor
  • Retail Investor
  • Press
  • None of the above

3. Accept our terms and conditions

By clicking Proceed I confirm I have read the important information and agree to the terms of use.


The Hermes Investment Management website uses cookies to remember your preferences and help us improve the site.
By proceeding, you agree to cookies being placed on your computer.
Read our privacy and cookie policy.

More – not less – QE means this is not tightening

Home / Press Centre / More – not less – QE means this is not tightening

Neil Williams, Senior Economic Adviser
08 December 2016
Macro Economics

Some today will be disappointed that Mr Draghi is planning to taper the ECB’s QE from next April. But Neil Williams, Group Chief Economist at Hermes Investment Management, believes they shouldn’t be.

First, tapering means more, not less, QE, and even though he’s closing the tap a notch in April, the ECB’s liquidity sink is still filling up. By tapering its monthly asset purchases from €80bn down to €60bn, he is still looking to inject an extra €540bn in QE. To put this into perspective, this easily surpasses in equivalent terms, the combined GDPs of Greece and Portugal for example.

Second, the nuance here is his growing support for fiscal support.

A lesson from Japan is that QE provides cash to lend, but cannot force consumers and firms to borrow. The euro-zone looks to be halfway down the Japan route. It too may be running QE and negative rates, but has yet to loosen the fiscal reins.

Yet, austerity has pulled down its budget deficit from 6¼% of GDP in 2009 to 2% - below the 3% Maastricht test for EMU. We suspect this makes it easier presentationally for fiscally-prudent Germany and the ECB to ‘turn a blind eye’ to profligacy by the higher-debt members needing to maximise growth. With Greece losing a fifth of its real GDP since austerity and Italy/Spain running 36%/43% male-youth unemployment rates, reform fatigue - and populist parties - are building.

‘Helicopter money’ is considered a next step, via targeted fiscal give-aways. This would go some way to aligning the euro-zone and Japan with the faster-growing US and UK, whose net fiscal positions have loosened the most in the long run. Together with on-going monetary stimuli, this would raise the chance of keeping the euro down to avoid deflation. A hitch is the absence of a region-wide fiscal agency. This precludes a unified giveaway akin to the US’s tax-rebate cheques ‘helicopter dropped’ to consumers in 2001 and 2008.

But, this could still be done nationally, perhaps in a coordinated way, supported (by actions if not words) by the ECB’s bond buying. Given the ECB’s concern expressed last the spring about “political risk” (reform-reluctant populist parties) potentially contributing “to contagion and re-fragmentation” of the zone, it should at this lower deficit ratio, be seen as the lesser of ‘two evils’. Reform pledges could even become back-end loaded to allow growth to breathe and avoid credit downgrades.

Either way, despite an improving periphery, it will take years before the converging countries can reclaim their GDP lost - with Italy and Greece’s real GDP, on a net basis, still yet to rise with the euro.

Meantime, with 2017 such a highly-charged political year in Europe, any contagion, unlike 2008-09, is increasingly likely to be political rather than financial.

Share this post:
Neil Williams Senior Economic Adviser Neil joined Hermes in August 2009 and is responsible for Hermes’ economic research. He has a forward-looking approach to generate investment strategy ideas. Neil adopts top-down methods – macro and market analysis to identify interest rate and credit value, and sovereign default risk. Neil began his career in 1987 at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), becoming its youngest ever Head of Economic Policy. He went on to hold a number of senior positions in investment banks - including Director of Bond Research at UBS, Head of Research at Sumitomo International, Global Head of Emerging Markets Research at PaineWebber International, and, before coming to Hermes, Head of Sovereign Research and Strategy at Mizuho International. Neil has 30 years’ industry experience and earned an MA in Economics in 1986 from Manchester University, having the previous year completed his BSc (Hons), also in Economics, from University College Swansea.
Read all articles by Neil Williams

Find posts by author

  • Alex Knox, ACA
  • Andrew Parry
  • Claire Gavini
  • Dr Michael Viehs
  • Emeric Chenebaux
  • Eoin Murray
  • Geoffrey Wan, CFA
  • Harriet Steel
  • Louise Dudley
  • Mark Sherlock, CFA
  • Martin Todd
  • Michael Russell, CFA
  • Michael Vaughan
  • Neil Williams
  • Nick Spooner
  • Nina Röhrbein
  • Philip Nell
  • Saker Nusseibeh
  • Silvia Dall’Angelo
  • Tatiana Bosteels
  • Tim Crockford
  • Tommaso Mancuso

Find posts by category

  • macro economics

Press contacts