Daily Commentary

MarketMinder’s View: While the White House and Senate are racing toward a deal to pass at least five of the six spending bills necessary to avoid a partial government shutdown by Friday’s end, it remains on the table for now. Should one occur, there could be some downstream effects worth being aware of. After a hefty dose of politics at the outset of this piece (which leads us to remind you we are politically agnostic, focusing only on policies’ potential economic and market implications, and we leave party, personality and general sociology out of it), this article focuses on one potential effect people may have to deal with: IRS headaches. The agency’s funding is set to run out midnight Friday, meaning employees would be furloughed or have to work without pay (the agency hasn’t released a fresh contingency plan). That could affect taxpayers, as filing season opened earlier this week. “The impact on how quickly refunds would be processed isn’t clear. The agency claims to issue refunds to most taxpayers within 21 days of filing. Pete Sepp, president of the National Taxpayers Union, a nonprofit advocacy group, said he expects the IRS to maintain that standard even with the disruption of a shutdown. But refunds are likely to be issued on the ‘outer edge’ of the 21-day range, Sepp said.” As the article also notes, taxpayers who want to talk to a human at the IRS may be waiting a while given already strained staffing issues—a shutdown probably wouldn’t help on that front. So for those who like to file their taxes early, it may be worth preparing for a possible government closure and set your expectations accordingly.

MarketMinder’s View: Please note MarketMinder doesn’t make individual security recommendations, and the firms mentioned here are coincident to a couple themes we wish to highlight. As this article lays out, Singapore—a shipping hub linking China with the West and an international finance center—would theoretically appear especially vulnerable to major trade disruptions (e.g., tariffs). So it may seem counterintuitive that the city-state’s markets fared so well last year: “The country’s stock market had its best year for a decade in 2025, with a total return of 28.6 per cent, while foreign investors rushed to buy its banks’ bonds, a safety-first asset class favoured primarily by domestic buyers.” The article cites Singapore’s predictable political backdrop and reforms to boost domestic listings as reasons for international investors’ interest in the city’s markets. Those probably play some role, though we think a broader force is at play: The disruptions to global trade last year weren’t as severe as feared, and that positive relief buoyed non-US markets, with Singapore’s status as a free-trade bastion perhaps boosting sentiment there especially. Singapore’s market performance last year also illustrates another underappreciated theme: The global bull market isn’t just about tech. “While much of the momentum across Asia’s equity markets came from a rush to invest in AI-related businesses, Singapore’s biggest risers were steadier businesses such as banks and property companies.” Now, 2025’s returns won’t predict 2026’s, and Singapore’s market is tiny in the global scheme of things. But its resilience is a microcosm of why non-US markets look likely to continue leading this bull market. Moreover, as the conclusion alludes to, despite Singapore’s resilience last year, many worry about a growth slowdown and the possibility of resurgent global inflation—false fears that add bricks to the wall of worry bull markets climb.

MarketMinder’s View: Canada has been on a deal-making run recently, as Prime Minister Mark Carney announced last week Ottawa reached 12 new trade and security pacts—including a “strategic partnership” with China—over the past 6 months. With that backdrop, Canada reached a non-binding memorandum of understanding to deepen industrial cooperation with South Korea, with plans to bring the latter’s auto manufacturing to Canada. Now, that sounds all fine and dandy, but as with any trade agreement (whether for allegedly “freer” commerce or protectionist policy), the details matter. While politicians cheer pledges to “enhance cooperation,” it is notable one of Korea’s largest auto manufacturers currently has no manufacturing plants in Canada—and politicians talking about potential factories doesn’t make them so. Far be it from us to pooh-pooh plans to boost economic ties, but “non-binding” pacts are just that. Don’t presume rhetoric alone will lead to actual results. For more, see last week’s commentary, “Trade War Fears Remain Unsubstantiated.”