????上周四，瑞士央行決定取消瑞士法郎與歐元之間的貨幣掛鉤政策，全球市場為之震蕩不斷。此項決定完全出乎人們的意料，因為就在之前兩天，該行官員還確認將保持匯率政策不變。

????此舉讓貨幣交易商損失慘重，至少有兩家大型外匯經(jīng)紀商——總部設在新西蘭的Excel Markets和Global Brokers在一夜間關門大吉。瑞士法郎兌歐元和美元的匯率也因此而直線上升，如下圖所示：

????這項決定令人匪夷所思，因為瑞士央行并無實施匯率脫鉤政策的迫切壓力。瑞士的通脹水平仍非常低。瑞士政府上周公布，去年12月份瑞士的物價同比下跌0.3%，創(chuàng)2013年10月份以來新低。雖然歐洲執(zhí)行量化寬松政策可能迫使瑞士央行加大對本國貨幣的保護力度，但由于瑞士央行可以增發(fā)瑞士法郎，所以它實際上能夠無限制地通過購買外幣來維持貨幣掛鉤政策。

????更令人詫異的是，就在這項措施出臺幾天前，一位瑞士央行官員還表示該行將繼續(xù)執(zhí)行貨幣掛鉤政策。瑞士央行本來有以下三條路可走，哪一種都會比現(xiàn)在更好一些。

????1. 給予一些前瞻性指引。二三十年前，中央銀行暗地里采取行動并非什么新鮮事。舉例來說，美聯(lián)儲有段時間甚至都不公布目標利率。它只管買賣債券，至于美聯(lián)儲意欲何為，則要由分析師來揣測。但最近這十幾年中，經(jīng)濟學家開始意識到市場溝通以及提前釋放動向信號所蘊含的力量。央行官員把這樣的信息稱為 “前瞻性指引”，借此他們可以左右市場預期并順利實現(xiàn)政策過渡。而向市場做出保證短短幾天后就出爾反爾，這用任何道理都說不通。

????2. 從微調(diào)著手。如果擔心歐洲的量化寬松會讓交易商集體轉(zhuǎn)投瑞士資產(chǎn)，瑞士央行完全可以像從前那樣把利率從-0.25%下調(diào)到-0.75%，以便市場對此做出反應，然后再采取更為極端的措施。

????3. 按兵不動。在各國長期通脹率和經(jīng)濟增長普遍放慢以及全球經(jīng)濟預計將減速的情況下，采取貨幣緊縮政策的理由并不充分。

????看來，瑞士央行最擔心的似乎是政治。長期以來，瑞士一直都遵循著硬性貨幣政策和自由市場原則。就算在非常時期，瑞士也反對采用貨幣掛鉤等干預政策。此外，瑞士央行有一部分屬于私人所有，許多個人所有者都擔心該行的外匯儲備可能蒙受損失。如果瑞士央行真的繼續(xù)實施貨幣掛鉤政策，那么它就必須大量買進歐元。而一旦歐洲央行啟動量化寬松式的債券購買計劃，歐元的價值將應聲下跌。瑞士民眾非常擔心出現(xiàn)這種情況，為此，瑞士央行行長托馬斯?約爾丹在制定貨幣掛鉤政策時不得不發(fā)表聲明，以解釋為什么央行的資產(chǎn)不必非得超過負債的原因。

????換句話說，瑞士央行此舉更多地是受到了政治因素的影響，而非經(jīng)濟因素。它對瑞士經(jīng)濟的長期影響也許不會那么糟糕，原因是長期以來瑞士出口商一直都在應付強勢貨幣帶來的負擔，而且與歐洲其他國家相比，瑞士的經(jīng)濟相對強勁。但在這種環(huán)境下，收緊貨幣政策的意愿在事實面前是站不住腳的，而且，像瑞士央行上周四那樣在市場面前虛晃一槍的舉動幾乎沒有任何道理可言。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：Charlie

????審稿: 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.