分类： business

Escalating geopolitical tensions between the United States and Iran, sparked by the seizure of an Iranian vessel near the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz, sent global oil prices jumping by as much as 8% on Monday — but the move failed to lift Australian equities, which closed barely changed in a choppy session of mixed sector performance.

The benchmark S&P/ASX 200 eked out a marginal 6.4-point gain, or 0.07%, to settle at 8,953.30, while the broader All Ordinaries index added an even smaller 5.4 points, equivalent to 0.06%, to end the day at 9,174.10. The Australian dollar also posted a minor uptick, rising 0.24% to buy 71.51 U.S. cents by market close.

Across the benchmark’s 11 sectors, the day split evenly: six finished in positive territory while five closed lower. The most counterintuitive movement came from the energy sector, which led the declines despite Monday’s dramatic surge in Brent Crude prices. The global oil benchmark climbed as high as 8% intraday before settling at $95.50 U.S. ($133.30 Australian) as investors priced in growing supply risk from the disrupted Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20% of global oil supplies transit daily.

Major Australian energy stocks posted steep losses: Woodside Energy fell 2.93% to $31.77, Santos dropped 1.31% to $7.55, and fuel retailer Ampol slid 3.19% to $31.88. Viva Energy was an even bigger laggard, plummeting 9.09% to $2.30 after resuming trading following a major fire at its Geelong refinery the previous week.

Losses across energy were largely offset by strong gains in consumer-facing stocks and most of the financial sector. Retail giant Wesfarmers, which owns brands including Bunnings and Kmart, led consumer discretionary gains with a 2.44% jump to $74.63. Electronics retailer JB Hi-Fi added 0.55% to $76.49, and furniture chain Harvey Norman gained 0.88% to $4.61.

Among the big four banks, three closed higher: Commonwealth Bank of Australia rose 1.08% to $180.15, Westpac added 0.73% to $40.02, and ANZ nudged up 0.03% to $37.93. The outlier was National Australia Bank, which tumbled 3.60% to $41.02 after the lender disclosed it was boosting provisions for bad debt ahead of its first-half results, citing rising risk from the ongoing Middle East conflict involving the U.S., Israel and Iran. The bank now forecasts total impairment costs of up to $706 million, up from a previous projection of $485 million before the escalation of regional tensions.

Another company caught in the crossfire of Middle East uncertainty was engineering firm Worley, which dropped 5.84% to $11.13 after warning that ongoing conflict would delay operational activities and contract awards, dragging down its full-year 2026 financial outlook.

The only major standout on the day was buy now, pay later provider Zip Co, which extended a Friday rally with a 7.73% gain to $2.51 on Monday. The surge followed a bullish quarterly update released Friday that showed third-quarter cash earnings before interest and tax jumped 41.5% year-over-year, driven primarily by robust revenue growth in the U.S. market. The stock had already rallied 13.66% on Friday.

Market analysts noted that overall trading sentiment remained muted as investors adopt a wait-and-see approach to evolving geopolitical developments. “Markets are in a holding position as they await more news out of the US and Iran conflict,” said Tony Sycamore, market analyst at IG. “Either the data will break or the blockade will break. When you talk about the data breaking, we aren’t at that point although Japan, New Zealand and the UK inflation will give an indication. We also have a ceasefire coming up and I don’t think anyone thinks the ceasefire won’t be extended.”

Additional uncertainty filtered through markets following conflicting reports around planned regional peace talks: U.S. officials confirmed Vice President JD Vance would join a diplomatic delegation traveling to Pakistan for talks, but Iranian state media has already indicated Tehran will not attend the negotiations, dashing early hopes of a near-term de-escalation of tensions.

A landmark ruling from Australia’s Fair Work Commission (FWC) has mandated the nation’s largest retailers, supermarket chains, and other major businesses across manufacturing and mining to adjust road transport payment rates starting Tuesday, forcing big business to absorb soaring fuel costs that have disproportionately hit independent truck drivers and small fleet operators amid ongoing Middle East conflict-driven market volatility.

This binding order marks the first official intervention under the Albanese government’s fuel pricing amendments, which were fast-tracked through federal parliament earlier this year to address sudden global energy market shocks. Australian Workplace Relations Minister Amanda Rishworth framed the decision as a critical step toward advancing workplace fairness, noting that truck drivers should never be forced to absorb the cost of global fuel disruptions that are entirely outside of their control.

“By requiring fuel price changes to be reflected in transport rates, this order helps protect hard working truckies and small businesses from being pushed to the brink,” Rishworth said. She added that the mandate complements the government’s existing National Fuel Security Plan, which aims to mitigate fuel supply disruptions and keep essential goods moving across the country’s domestic supply chains.

The FWC built in targeted flexibility and safeguards to avoid unnecessary market disruption: the compensation requirements will automatically lapse when diesel prices drop below AU$2 per litre, and the commission will conduct a full review after the first month of implementation, with follow-up reviews every three months to confirm the order remains appropriate for current market conditions. The commission also acknowledged that existing industry-specific payment arrangements can be accommodated where they meet the core requirement of passing through fuel price adjustments.

In its published ruling, the FWC detailed the severe financial pressure that skyrocketing diesel costs, amplified by Middle East tensions between the U.S. and Iran despite a soon-to-expire ceasefire, have inflicted on owner-drivers, small fleet operators, and non-employee road transport workers. Historically, fuel costs made up 20% to 30% of total operational costs for road transport businesses; that share has now surged to between 40% and 50%, according to the commission’s findings.

“For those who have been unable to recover the increased cost of fuel (either for a period or at all), the effect has been significantly detrimental to them,” the FWC’s ruling stated. “Generally, it has seriously reduced the incomes and living standards of owner-drivers and road transport employee-like workers, with consequential effects on their families, and has affected the capacity of small fleet operators to generate any returns on their businesses. For many, it has been or will be necessary for them to ‘park their trucks’ and cease operating their businesses since otherwise they will be operating at a loss.”

The commission also warned that widespread business collapse among small road transport operators would trigger broader national supply chain disruption, reducing the industry’s overall capacity to meet the transportation needs of the entire Australian economy.

Notably, the ruling does not explicitly exclude rideshare and on-demand delivery workers for platforms such as Uber, Uber Eats and DoorDash, even though they are not named directly in the published order. The three platforms submitted formal arguments to the FWC requesting that their workers be excluded from the mandate, or that their existing temporary fuel adjustment policies be recognized as compliant. Earlier this month, Uber rolled out a temporary 5% fuel surcharge for customers to offset higher fuel costs for its drivers. The FWC also rejected procedural fairness claims from industry groups including the Australian Industry Group and NatRoad, which argued they had not been given adequate opportunity to contribute to the ruling process.

A coalition of almost 30 leading Australian business industry groups is pushing for sweeping regulatory reform ahead of the federal government’s upcoming budget, warning that crippling red tape currently costs the national economy $160 billion annually and is pushing struggling businesses to the breaking point.

Leading the coalition’s pre-budget submission, Business Council of Australia chief executive Bran Black told reporters that businesses of all sizes, just like household consumers, are grappling with mounting cost pressures amid global economic uncertainty. He laid out the startling example of overburdened licensing requirements that illustrate the scope of the problem: cafes in New South Wales must secure 25 separate permits just to operate and serve a basic cup of coffee, while Victorian food service businesses are forced to obtain 37 distinct licences to open their doors.

“We’re seeing that there are extraordinary costs that businesses are incurring right across the economy, and it doesn’t matter if you’re in farming or in retail or in small business, you’re seeing those challenges,” Black said.

Black is calling on the federal government to adopt an official national target to cut unnecessary red tape by 25% by 2030, a goal aligned with ongoing regulatory reform efforts across European nations that have struggled with their own bureaucratic bloat. He emphasized that the timing for reform is critical, as global economic volatility driven by ongoing conflicts such as the crisis in the Middle East has amplified existing cost pressures for Australian businesses.

Wes Lambert, director of the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBA), echoed Black’s urgency, noting that small operators across the country are “drowning” under overlapping bureaucratic requirements that show no sign of easing despite government claims of progress. Lambert cited research from the Australian Institute of Company Directors, which confirms that overlapping rules and regulations from local, state and federal levels of government combine to create the $160 billion annual drag on Australian business output.

Black added that the upcoming May federal budget represents a make-or-break opportunity to address longstanding complaints about regulatory burden, a demand the business community has raised for years but that has grown more urgent amid global market instability.

In response to the coalition’s proposal, Finance Minister Katy Gallagher confirmed that the current government plans to prioritize targeted regulatory reform in the upcoming budget, but rejected calls for broad, across-the-board cuts. “One of the things about regulatory reform is the government’s keen to do something where it makes sense, where it improves outcomes, where it delivers better regulation,” Gallagher told ABC Radio on Monday. “It’s not just a ‘cut all regulation and see how it goes’, so we’re working with their ideas as well as ideas across the government.”

Global banking giant HSBC has issued a stark warning that Australia may be just weeks away from entering its most damaging economic period since the 1970s, with a rising stagflation threat driven by spillover effects from the ongoing Middle East conflict. The bank’s official projection expects Australia to slip into an outright stagflation environment by the June quarter of this year, when official national economic data is scheduled for public release.

By June, HSBC predicts Australia will see three core stagflation indicators align: a contraction in gross domestic product, sustained acceleration in cost-of-living pressures, and a noticeable uptick in national unemployment rates. Paul Bloxham, HSBC’s chief economist for Australia, noted in a client note that a stagflationary shock has already reached the country’s borders, and that the nation will experience stagflationary conditions in two of the next three quarters.

“Could it be genuine stagflation – like the 1970s? This depends on how persistent it is. And, importantly, on what policymakers do next,” Bloxham wrote.

Stagflation is widely recognized as the worst-case scenario for modern economies, characterized by simultaneous slowdown in economic activity and rising consumer prices that leaves policymakers with few viable policy options. Australia last faced a full stagflation crisis in the mid-1970s, triggered by a global oil price shock that mirrored the current market disruption. While Bloxham stopped short of declaring a full 1970s-style repeat is inevitable, he emphasized that risks are growing rapidly for Australian economic decision-makers.

“Australia faces a stagflationary shock, and we expect that outright stagflation is a rising risk. The aim for policymakers ought to be to keep it brief and optimal policy settings could help to make it so,” Bloxham added.

He explained that Australia entered the current crisis in a vulnerable position, with inflation already running well above the Reserve Bank of Australia’s 2-3% target at 3.7% before the Middle East conflict escalated. Unlike many other advanced economies, Australia’s domestic economy has little to no spare capacity to absorb external shocks, creating a higher risk that fuel-driven inflation will become embedded in long-term consumer and business inflation expectations.

Against this backdrop, Bloxham projects that the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) will raise its official cash rate for the third consecutive month in May, completely undoing the three rate cuts implemented in 2025. If the forecast holds, the cash rate will climb from its current 4.1% to 4.35%.

The current volatility stems from the escalation of conflict between US-allied Israel and Iran that began in late February, which has led to disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz – the critical global chokepoint through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s daily oil supplies pass. Before the conflict erupted six weeks ago, global benchmark oil traded at roughly $US56 per barrel; it has since surged to around $US100 per barrel. For Australian consumers, every $US10 per barrel increase translates to an extra 10 Australian cents per litre of fuel at the pump, directly amplifying cost-of-living pressures.

The threat of stagflation has already been acknowledged as a worst-case outcome by senior RBA officials. During a fireside chat with the Money Marketeers in New York, RBA deputy governor Andrew Hauser described stagflation as a “central banker’s nightmare” that complicates the central bank’s core mandate.

“I don’t think those surveys tell you a lot about what consumption is going to do but, if they are right, we have a big income shock coming our way,” Hauser said. “It is the central bankers nightmare, you know, inflation up, activity down and judging the balance between the two is how we earn our money.”

Hauser added that the Middle East-driven oil price shock has made it far more difficult for the RBA to return inflation to its 2-3% target range. “I wouldn’t say we have high confidence that we’ve set interest rates at the right level because you never do have that high confidence. But we’re going to have to monitor this new shock pretty carefully,” he said. “I think it is easy to see that upside inflation pressure. More important for us now is to think through what the medium-term impact might be.”

A key variable that will determine how long any stagflation period lasts is the Albanese government’s upcoming May federal budget, Bloxham argued. He warned that expansionary fiscal policy, particularly broad-based cost-of-living support measures that are not targeted, would only worsen persistent inflation pressures by boosting aggregate demand at a time of constrained supply.

Earlier this month, the government cut the national fuel excise by roughly 32 Australian cents per litre to ease pressure on motorists. Data from Westpac shows that total national fuel spending has increased by $236.7 million compared to the same period last year, and remains 16.2% higher year-on-year. While Westpac projects fuel spending growth will plateau as prices stabilize and households adjust their spending habits, Bloxham said the broad excise cut is actively worsening stagflation risks.

“Recent cuts to fuel excise do exactly this – they support more spending by all households and lower the price of fuel when fuel is the product in short supply, preventing the price mechanism from working properly,” he explained. “Targeted, timely and temporary fiscal support ought to be deployed. Any more than a targeted approach will mean the RBA could need to set tighter monetary policy than otherwise.”

Treasurer Jim Chalmers has acknowledged the extreme uncertainty created by the Middle East conflict, but says the government will strike an appropriate balance between near-term support for households and long-term fiscal responsibility in the upcoming budget. “We are putting together the budget in very uncertain, very unpredictable and very volatile global conditions,” Chalmers told reporters last Friday. “It will strike the right balance between the pressures on people in the here and now and our intergenerational responsibilities. I’m confident that we’ll get those balances right, but I’m not complacent about it because we are hostage to developments in the Middle East.”