The board held the cash rate at 4.35% in August for a second meeting, after three hikes earlier in 2026. Bullock has now told a business lunch and lawmakers that risks from energy prices, excess demand, the AI and data-centre boom, and the Middle East war may be showing up in the numbers.
Do not say the RBA has already hiked on 29 September if you are reading this before that decision. The meeting is the event. The vote is not public until the bank publishes it.
TL;DR: The RBA meets 29 September with the cash rate at 4.35%. Bullock says upside inflation risks may be materialising, but she is not trying to pre-signal the vote. July CPI was 3.5% annual after a fuel spike; trimmed mean was 3.6%. The IMF said the bank should stand ready to hike; markets had high odds of a move to 4.60%.
Status note: Checked 27 September 2026. This article was written before the 29 September decision. Treat any "RBA hiked today" claim as false until the bank publishes the outcome. Inflation prints and market odds can shift before the vote.
Where the cash rate sits
The cash rate is Australia's overnight policy rate, the RBA's main lever for cooling or supporting the economy. It was held at 4.35% in August for a second straight meeting. Earlier in 2026 the board had delivered three hikes. So the pause is recent, not a long soft patch.
Holding twice does not lock in a hold forever. It means the board wanted more evidence before moving again. Bullock's latest comments suggest that evidence may be tilting toward inflation risk, not relief.
For mortgage holders, the cash rate is the headline number that feeds into bank pricing over time. A hold keeps the current setting. A hike to 4.60%, if it came, would be another quarter-point turn of the screw. Neither outcome should be assumed until the statement lands.
What Bullock actually said
On 22 September at a business lunch, and earlier on 18 September to lawmakers, Bullock listed upside risks: energy prices, excess demand, an AI and data-centre boom, and the Middle East war. She said those risks may be materialising.
Upside inflation risk means prices could rise faster than hoped, not that a recession is the base case in her remarks. Energy and war costs can push fuel and freight. Strong demand can let firms raise prices. A boom in AI and data centres can add to investment demand for power, equipment and construction.
She also said she was not trying to pre-signal the 29 September vote. That is central-bank speak for: listen to the risk list, but do not treat lunch remarks as a locked hike. Markets will still price probabilities. The board still votes in the room.
The inflation backdrop
July CPI, the consumer price index, ran at 3.5% annual after a fuel spike, according to prior AMU coverage of that print. The trimmed mean, a common underlying measure that cuts extreme price moves, was 3.6%. Those are the hard numbers in the brief. They sit above the comfort zone many households associate with "inflation under control."
Energy and war-linked costs are exactly the kind of shocks that can keep those readings sticky. That is why Bullock's risk list matters even before the decision statement drops. A fuel spike can lift the headline. Underlying measures help show whether pressure is broader.
None of that invents a September CPI print that is not in the brief. It places the July figures next to the governor's September risk warning.
What outsiders are pricing
On 17 September the IMF said the RBA should stand ready to hike as needed. Reuters reported that markets had high odds of a 25 basis-point move to 4.60%. High odds are not a decision. They are a bet that can be wrong.
The IMF line matters as an outside pressure check. It is not a vote on the RBA board. Bullock's own caveat matters more for readers who want the Australian signal: risks may be materialising, and she is not trying to tip the ballot in advance.
For anyone with a home loan or a small business facility, the practical question is simple. Does 4.35% hold, or does the board push toward 4.60%? Wait for the RBA release on 29 September. Until then, treat "already hiked" headlines as wrong, and treat Bullock's risk warning as the clearest official signal we have.
Sources: Reuters, 22 September 2026; Reuters IMF, 17 September 2026.