ReportWire

Tag: Economic policy

  • Americans are spending big with credit cards. Here’s what that means for the possibility of a recession

    Americans are spending big with credit cards. Here’s what that means for the possibility of a recession

    [ad_1]

    Economists have been forecasting a recession for months, and that looming downturn is one of the most anticipated in U.S. history. But it’s not yet materialized, in part due to strong consumer spending.

    “Consumer spending represents more than half of the economy,” said Curt Long, chief economist at the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions. “So if consumer spending is strong, that alone is, generally speaking, enough to keep the economy from slipping into a recession.”

    In the first quarter of 2023, gross domestic product grew at a 1.1% rate compared to the previous quarter. This modest level of growth is an improvement from mid-2022 GDP figures, which initially brought recession fears to light.

    More from Personal Finance:
    What debt ceiling standoff means for money market funds
    Why missing one $2 expense could derail a national park trip
    MIT economist helps decide when recessions begin and end

    A key reason for the fear: Inflation stayed stickier than economists anticipated. In May, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported headline annual inflation of 4.9%.

    To combat inflation, the Federal Reserve has hiked its overnight bank lending rate 10 times over the past year or so. At the Fed’s May meeting, policymakers hinted that they may pause further interest rate increases, barring unexpected developments.

    The end of this tightening cycle may be coming into focus as consumers reach their breaking point. As the pandemic fades, historic levels of personal saving have taken a nosedive. Deposits at banks have crested as consumers keep spending amid continually rising prices.

    This is happening as the least well off are increasingly relying on credit in their day-to-day lives. Roughly 29% of households earning less than $50,000 a year were using credit cards to finance their spending, according Bank of America Institute economists. Credit-use rates have risen steadily in recent years despite being below higher pre-pandemic levels.

    Moderate-income Americans also are facing the significant headwind of less tax-refund money. The average refund this year is $2,777 through April 28, down 8% from the same period last year, according to IRS data.

    “Because this is the same household that rely more on the tax refund to finance their spending, a lower refund really has some negative impact on their spending,” said Anna Zhou, an economist at the Bank of America Institute.

    Analysts at the New York Federal Reserve report record levels of credit card debt in 2023. This underscores the economic split in the country, with some consumers flush with savings following a thrifty pandemic while others are finding it increasingly difficult to spend wisely amid rising prices, mounting layoffs and the potential of recession.

    Still economists see the chance for a soft landing. “We don’t think … the slowdown process will be as dramatic as some people have feared,” said Zhou. “And it will be a gradual process.”

    Watch the video above to learn how U.S. consumer spending has so far fended off a recession.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Americans are saving far less than normal in 2023. Here’s why

    Americans are saving far less than normal in 2023. Here’s why

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. personal savings rate remains below its historical average, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

    The seasonally adjusted annual rate of personal saving was 4.6% in February. That’s well below the average annual rate of more than 8%, according to the data, which traces back to 1959. In June 2022, the rate had dipped to 2.7%, a 15-year low.

    This was a large fall from periods of the pandemic when households across the country were saving as much as 30% of their monthly income.

    “Something like $2 [trillion] to $2.5 trillion above what we would have otherwise expected were saved by American households,” said Curt Long, chief economist at the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions.

    Collectively, Americans have trillions in excess savings compared with expectations leading up to the pandemic, according to Federal Reserve economists.

    “That really has helped to buoy the economy,” said Shelley Stewart, a senior partner at McKinsey & Company, “particularly in a place like the U.S., where consumption is such a big part of GDP.”

    Federal Reserve economists note that the lion’s share of excess savings is concentrated in the top half of households by income.

    But the lower half built up savings in this time, too, according to the central bank’s October note. They noted at the time that the lower half of earners had roughly $5,500 in excess savings per household. Experts believe these stockpiles of cash will begin to dwindle in 2023.

    In the months since, headline inflation stayed stubbornly high, at an annual rate of 5% in March. This weighs on consumer spending, while devaluing savings held in low return positions such as cash.

    Watch the video above to learn about how the personal savings rate affects you and the wider economy.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Retail spending fell in March as consumers pull back | CNN Business

    Retail spending fell in March as consumers pull back | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington, DC
    CNN
     — 

    Spending at US retailers fell in March as consumers pulled back after the banking crisis fueled recession fears.

    Retail sales, which are adjusted for seasonality but not for inflation, fell by 1% in March from the prior month, the Commerce Department reported on Friday. That was steeper than an expected 0.4% decline, according to Refinitiv, and above the revised 0.2% decline in the prior month.

    Investors chalk up some of the weakness to a lack of tax returns and concerns about a slowing labor market. The IRS issued $84 billion in tax refunds this March, about $25 billion less than they issued in March of 2022, according to BofA analysts.

    That led consumers to pull back in spending at department stores and on durable goods, such as appliances and furniture. Spending at general merchandise stores fell 3% in March from the prior month and spending at gas stations declined 5.5% during the same period. Excluding gas station sales, retail spending retreated 0.6% in March from February.

    However, retail spending rose 2.9% year-over-year.

    Smaller tax returns likely played a role in last month’s decline in retail sales, along with the expiration of enhanced food assistance benefits, economists say.

    “March is a really important month for refunds. Some folks might have been expecting something similar to last year,” Aditya Bhave, senior US economist at BofA Global Research, told CNN.

    Credit and debit card spending per household tracked by Bank of America researchers moderated in March to its slowest pace in more than two years, which was likely the result of smaller returns and expired benefits, coupled with slowing wage growth.

    Enhanced pandemic-era benefits provided through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program expired in February, which might have also held back spending in March, according to a Bank of America Institute report.

    Average hourly earnings grew 4.2% in March from a year earlier, down from the prior month’s annualized 4.6% increase and the smallest annual rise since June 2021, according to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Employment Cost Index, a more comprehensive measure of wages, has also shown that worker pay gains have moderated this past year. ECI data for the first quarter of this year will be released later this month.

    Still, the US labor market remains solid, even though it has lost momentum recently. That could hold up consumer spending in the coming months, said Michelle Meyer, North America chief economist at Mastercard Economics Institute.

    “The big picture is still favorable for the consumer when you think about their income growth, their balance sheet and the health of the labor market,” Meyer said.

    Employers added 236,000 jobs in March, a robust gain by historical standards but smaller than the average monthly pace of job growth in the prior six months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The latest monthly Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS report, showed that the number of available jobs remained elevated in February — but was down more than 17% from its peak of 12 million in March 2022, and revised data showed that weekly claims for US unemployment benefits were higher than previously reported.

    The job market could cool further in the coming months. Economists at the Federal Reserve expect the US economy to head into a recession later in the year as the lagged effects of higher interest rates take a deeper hold. Fed economists had forecast subdued growth, with risks of a recession, prior to the collapses of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

    For consumers, the effects of last month’s turbulence in the banking industry have been limited so far. Consumer sentiment tracked by the University of Michigan worsened slightly in March during the bank failures, but it had already shown signs of deteriorating before then.

    The latest consumer sentiment reading, released Friday morning, showed that sentiment held steady in April despite the banking crisis, but that higher gas prices helped push up year-ahead inflation expectations by a full percentage point, rising from 3.6% in March to 4.6% in April.

    “On net, consumers did not perceive material changes in the economic environment in April,” Joanne Hsu, director of the surveys of consumers at the University of Michigan, said in a news release.

    “Consumers are expecting a downturn, they’re not feeling as dismal as they were last summer, but they’re waiting for the other shoe to drop,” Hsu told Bloomberg TV in an interview Friday morning.

    This story has been updated with context and more details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What markets are watching after digesting the US jobs data | CNN Business

    What markets are watching after digesting the US jobs data | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    In an unusual coincidence, the US jobs report was released on a holiday Friday — meaning stock markets were closed when the closely-watched economic data came out.

    It was the first monthly payroll report since Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank collapsed. It also marked a full year of jobs data since the Federal Reserve began hiking interest rates in March 2022.

    While inflation has come down and other economic data point to a cooling economy, the labor market has remained remarkably resilient.

    Investors have had a long weekend to chew over the details of the report and will likely skip the typical gut-reaction to headline numbers.

    What happened: The US economy added 236,000 jobs in March, showing that hiring remained robust though the pace was slower than in previous months. The unemployment rate currently stands at 3.5%.

    Wages increased by 0.3% on the month and 4.2% from a year ago. The three-month wage growth average has dropped to 3.8%. That’s moving closer to what Fed policymakers “believe to be in line with stable wage and inflation expectations,” wrote Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM in a note.

    “That wage data tends to suggest that the risk of a wage price spiral is easing and that will create space in the near term for the Federal Reserve to engage in a strategic pause in its efforts to restore price stability,” he added.

    The March jobs report was the last before the Fed’s next policy meeting and announcement in early May. The labor market is cooling but not rapidly or significantly, and further rate hikes can’t be ruled out.

    At the same time Wall Street is beginning to see bad news as bad news. A slowing economy could mean a recession is forthcoming.

    Markets are still largely expecting the Fed to raise rates by another quarter point. So how will they react to Friday’s report?

    Before the Bell spoke with Michael Arone, State Street Global Advisors chief investment strategist, to find out.

    This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

    Before the Bell: How do you expect markets to react to this report on Monday?

    Michael Arone: I think that this has been a nice counterbalance to the weaker labor data earlier last week and all the recession fears. This data suggests that the economy is still in pretty good shape, 10-year Treasury yields increased on Friday indicating there’s less fear about an imminent recession.

    There’s this delicate balance between slower job growth and a weaker labor market without economic devastation. I think this report helps that.

    As it relates to the stock market, I would expect the cyclical sectors to do well — your industrials, your materials, your energy companies. If interest rates are rising, that’s going to weigh on growth stocks — technology and communication services sectors, for example. Less recession fears will mean investors won’t be as defensively positioned in classic staples like healthcare and utilities.

    Could this lead to a reverse in the current trend where tech companies are bolstering markets?

    Yes, exactly. It’s difficult to make too much out of any singular data point, but I think this report will hopefully lead to broader participation in the stock market. If those recession fears begin to abate somewhat, and investors recognize that recession isn’t imminent, there will be more investment.

    What else are investors looking at in this report?

    We’ve seen weakness in the interest rate sensitive parts of the market — areas that are typically the first to weaken as the economy slows down. So things like manufacturing, things like construction. That’s where the weakness in this jobs report is. And the services areas continue to remain strong. That’s where the shortage of qualified skilled workers remains. I think that you’re seeing continued job strength in those areas.

    What does this mean for this week’s inflation reports? It seems like the jobs report just pushed the tension forward.

    it did. I expect that inflation figures will continue to decelerate — or grow at a slower rate. But I do think that the sticky part of inflation continues to be on the wage front. And so I think, if anything, this helps alleviate some of those inflation pressures, but we’ll see how it flows through into the CPI report next week. And also the PPI report.

    Is the Federal Reserve addressing real structural changes to the labor market?

    The Fed was confused in February 2020 when we were in full employment and there was no inflation. They’re equally confused today, after raising rates from zero to 5%, that we haven’t had more job losses.

    I’m not sure why, but from my perspective, the Fed hasn’t taken into consideration the structural changes in the labor force, and they’re still confused by it. I think the risk here is that they’ll continue to focus on raising rates to stabilize prices, perhaps underestimating the kind of structural changes in the labor economy that haven’t resulted in the type of weakness that they’ve been anticipating. I think that’s a risk for the economy and markets.

    A few weeks ago, Before the Bell wrote about big problems brewing in the $20 trillion commercial real estate industry.

    After decades of thriving growth bolstered by low interest rates and easy credit, commercial real estate has hit a wall. Office and retail property valuations have been falling since the pandemic brought about lower occupancy rates and changes in where people work and how they shop. The Fed’s efforts to fight inflation by raising interest rates have also hurt the credit-dependent industry.

    Recent banking stress will likely add to those woes. Lending to commercial real estate developers and managers largely comes from small and mid-sized banks, where the pressure on liquidity has been most severe. About 80% of all bank loans for commercial properties come from regional banks, according to Goldman Sachs economists.

    Since then, things have gotten worse, CNN’s Julia Horowitz reports.

    In a worst-case scenario, anxiety about bank lending to commercial real estate could spiral, prompting customers to yank their deposits. A bank run is what toppled Silicon Valley Bank last month, roiling financial markets and raising fears of a recession.

    “We’re watching it pretty closely,” said Michael Reynolds, vice president of investment strategy at Glenmede, a wealth manager. While he doesn’t expect office loans to become a problem for all banks, “one or two” institutions could find themselves “caught offside.”

    Signs of strain are increasing. The proportion of commercial office mortgages where borrowers are behind with payments is rising, according to Trepp, which provides data on commercial real estate.

    High-profile defaults are making headlines. Earlier this year, a landlord owned by asset manager PIMCO defaulted on nearly $2 billion in debt for seven office buildings in San Francisco, New York City, Boston and Jersey City.

    Dig into Julia’s story here.

    Tech stocks led market losses in 2022, but seemed to rebound quickly at the start of this year. So as we enter earnings season, what should we expect from Big Tech?

    Daniel Ives, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, says that he has high hopes.

    “Tech stocks have held up very well so far in 2023 and comfortably outpaced the overall market as we believe the tech sector has become the new ‘safety trade’ in this overall uncertain market,” he wrote in a note on Sunday evening.

    Even the recent spate of layoffs in Big Tech has upside, he wrote.

    “Significant cost cutting underway in the Valley led by Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, Google and others, conservative guidance already given in the January earnings season ‘rip the band- aid off moment’, and tech fundamentals that are holding up in a shaky macro [environment] are setting up for a green light for tech stocks.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Wall Street says bad news is no longer good news. Here’s why | CNN Business

    Wall Street says bad news is no longer good news. Here’s why | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    There’s been a seismic shift in investor perspective: Bad news is no longer good news.

    For the past year, Wall Street has hoped for cool monthly economic data that would encourage the Federal Reserve to halt its aggressive pace of interest rate hikes to tame inflation.

    But at its March meeting — just days after a series of bank failures raised concerns about the economy’s stability — the central bank signaled that it plans to pause raising rates sometime this year. With an end to interest rate hikes in sight, investors have stopped attempting to guess the Fed’s next move and have turned instead to the health of the economy.

    This means that, whereas softening economic data used to signal good news — that the Fed could potentially stop raising rates — now, cooling economic prints simply suggest the economy is weakening. That makes investors worried that the slowing economy could fall into a recession.

    What happened last week? Markets teetered after a slew of economic reports signaled that the red-hot labor market is finally cooling (more on that later), flashing warning signals across Wall Street.

    Investors accordingly shed high-growth, large-cap stocks that have surged recently to rush into defensive stocks in industries like health care and consumer staples.

    While tech stocks recovered somewhat by the end of the short trading week — markets were closed in observance of Good Friday — the Nasdaq Composite still slid 1.1%. The broad-based S&P 500 fell 0.1% and the blue-chip Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.6%.

    What does this mean for markets? Now that Wall Street is in “bad news is bad news and good news is good news” mode, it will be looking for signs that the economy remains resilient.

    What hasn’t changed is that investors still want to see cooling inflation data. While the central bank has signaled that it will pause hiking rates this year, its actions so far have only somewhat stabilized prices. The Personal Consumption Expenditures price index, the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, rose 5% for the 12 months ended in February — far above its 2% inflation target.

    Moreover, Wall Street might be overly optimistic about how the Fed will act going forward: Some investors expect the central bank to cut rates several times this year, even though the central bank indicated last month that it does not intend to lower rates in 2023.

    It’s unclear how markets will react if the Fed doesn’t cut rates this year. But there likely won’t be a notable rally unless the central bank pivots or at least indicates that it plans to soon, said George Cipolloni, portfolio manager at Penn Mutual Asset Management.

    Commentary that’s hawkish or reveals inflation worries could hurt markets, he adds. “It keeps that boiling point and that temperature a little high.”

    What comes next? The Fed holds its next meeting in early May. Before then, it will have to parse through several economic reports to get a sense of how the economy is doing, and what it will be able to handle. Markets currently expect the Fed to raise interest rates by a quarter point, according to the CME FedWatch tool.

    The labor market appears to be cooling somewhat, at least according to the slew of data released last week. But it’s still far too early to assume that the job market has lost its strength.

    President Joe Biden said in a statement Friday that the March data is “a good jobs report for hard-working Americans.”

    The March jobs report revealed that US employers added a lower-than-expected 236,000 jobs last month. Economists expected a net gain of 239,000 jobs for the month, according to Refinitiv.

    The unemployment rate dropped to 3.5%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s below expectations of holding steady at 3.6%.

    The jobs report was also the first one in 12 months that came in below expectations.

    But that doesn’t mean that the job market isn’t strong anymore.

    “The labor market is showing signs of cooling off, but it remains very tight,” Bank of America researchers wrote in a note Friday.

    Still, other data released last week help make the case that cracks are finally starting to form in the labor market. The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey for February revealed last week that the number of available jobs in the United States tumbled to its lowest level since May 2021. ADP’s private-sector payroll report fell far short of expectations.

    What this means for the Fed is that the cooldown in the latest jobs report likely won’t be enough for the central bank to pause rates at its next meeting.

    “The Fed will more than likely raise rates in May as the labor market continues to defy the cumulative effects of the rate hikes that began over a year ago,” said Quincy Krosby, chief global strategist at LPL Financial.

    Monday: Wholesale inventories.

    Tuesday: NFIB Small Business Optimism Index. Earnings from CarMax (KMX), Albertsons (ACI) and First Republic Bank (FRC).

    Wednesday: Consumer Price Index and FOMC meeting minutes.

    Thursday: OPEC monthly report and Producer Price Index. Earnings from Delta Air Lines (DAL).

    Friday: Retail sales and University of Michigan consumer sentiment survey. Earnings from JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Wells Fargo (WFC), BlackRock (BLK), Citigroup (C) and PNC Financial Services (PNC).

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China has not provided extensive assistance to Russia as part of its war against Ukraine even as the two countries forge closer ties, senior Treasury officials say | CNN Business

    China has not provided extensive assistance to Russia as part of its war against Ukraine even as the two countries forge closer ties, senior Treasury officials say | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    While China and Russia have strengthened ties since the Kremlin’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, the US has not seen evidence that China has provided systemic material support to the Kremlin as Russian President Vladimir Putin and his government look for avenues to evade Western sanctions and backfill its military, according to senior US Treasury officials.

    One senior Treasury official said that China is, as of now, unwilling to provide material support to Russia at scale and in a significant way, pointing instead to Russian efforts to source material from North Korea and Iran. The comments come almost one month after revelations of US intelligence that China has been open to providing Russian with requested military and financial assistance, and US national security adviser Jake Sullivan warned top Chinese diplomat Yang Jiechi about American concerns over such a move.

    With relations between Washington and Beijing at historic lows, the senior officials attributed the decision by China to hold off so far on more systemic help to efforts across the sanctions coalition – from public US comments to active and direct messages that the Europeans have given to China.

    With Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine into its second year, the Biden administration has continued to take steps to plug the gaps of the Western allies’ sanctions regime as they broaden intelligence sharing with US allies and jurisdictions where Russia has looked to sidestep sanctions and export controls.

    The US and its allies have also taken more direct action, sanctioning a Chinese satellite company providing intelligence to Russian forces in January and putting some Chinese companies on the US export control list.

    As part of that effort and as leaders of the global financial system descend on Washington D.C. next week for the Spring Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, top US Treasury and intelligence officials will share information with relevant partners to help countries and businesses understand how the Kremlin continues to use its intelligence services to try and evade the unprecedented sanctions regime instituted by the US and its allies, these senior officials also said.

    The meetings next week with countries the US is concerned about are part of a broader push by the Treasury over the next month as senior officials continue to fan out across the world to strategize with US allies and partners to deepen cooperation and ramp up the pressure on countries key to Russia’s sanctions evasion and backfilling efforts.

    Two of Treasury’s top sanctions officials – Brian Nelson and Liz Rosenberg – will continue the US government’s ramped up efforts internationally to speak to specific countries and their businesses about the risks of providing support to Russia and share detailed information on sanctions evasion. Nelson will travel to Switzerland, Italy, Austria and Germany to compare notes with their counterparts and continue to share intelligence on the ways in which Russia is attempting to evade sanctions; and, Rosenberg will travel to Kazakhstan in Central Asia, a region with a long history of ties to Russia, and through which officials have raised concerns that Russia is sourcing materials.

    Despite the impact sanctions have had on the Russian economy, some observers have pointed to concerns over Moscow’s ability to evade sanctions and re-orient trade routes to continue to acquire some of the technologies and financing needed to fund its war machine through countries it borders and more permissive jurisdictions, such as the United Arab Emirates and Turkey.

    But in recent months officials have also begun to see some results from their public and private efforts. Turkish officials told the US last month that their government has been taking further action to block the transit of sanctioned goods directly to Russia, according to a source familiar with the discussion.

    Since Russia launched its bloody war against Ukraine, the US has imposed thousands of sanctions against Russian politicians, oligarchs and companies, cut off the Russian central bank from its dollar-denominated reserves as well as the global financial messaging system, undermined Russia’s defense-industrial base and imposed a price cap on Russian oil and petroleum products.

    One of the most successful efforts, the price cap, has already been having a demonstrable effect with the Russian Finance Ministry announcing Friday a $29 billion dollar deficit in the budget for the first quarter of 2023, according to Reuters.

    In a speech earlier this year on the anniversary of Russia’s invasion, US Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo publicly warned Russian intelligence services that the US is monitoring their efforts and is cracking down.

    “We know Russia is actively seeking ways to circumvent these sanctions… In fact, one of the ways we know our sanctions are working is that Russia has tasked its intelligence services – the FSB and GRU – to find ways to get around them,” Adeyemo said in his February speech.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Fed could easily drive Black unemployment much higher than the overall jobless rate | CNN Business

    The Fed could easily drive Black unemployment much higher than the overall jobless rate | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Millions of jobs could be on the chopping block this year, as the Federal Reserve continues its rate-hiking campaign to tame inflation. But the effects of that action likely won’t reverberate evenly across the economy.

    The Fed has seen some success: Inflation has cooled for eighth consecutive months, according to the February Consumer Price Index. The Producer Price Index shows a dramatic drop in wholesale prices in February. And the Fed’s favored inflation gauge, the Personal Consumption Expenditures price index, has also started to moderate.

    But the job market has proved to be a formidable force, humming steadily in the face of climbing rates meant to slow its growth. After adding more than half a million jobs in January, the US economy then added 311,000 jobs in February, with an unemployment rate of 3.6% — just above a half-century low — according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    However, the jobless rate isn’t expected to be that low for long.

    At its most recent policy-making meeting, the Fed released projections for the year ahead that showed unemployment could jump to 4.5%, representing another 1.5 million job losses, by the end of the year.

    While that’s a small improvement from the central bank’s previous 4.6% jobless rate estimate, economists say it’s possible the unemployment rate could rise above the Fed’s expectations. Moreover, they say that historically disadvantaged groups could be disproportionately affected by the central bank’s stringent monetary policy.

    While some groups often sidelined in the job market have seen benefits from this hot job market — women have seen a faster pace of job gains than men in recent months, for example — others, including Black women and Latino men, have seen slower recoveries in jobless rates since the onset of the Covid pandemic.

    Recession fears gained traction last month when the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank sent markets wobbling, raising concerns about the economy’s ability to handle more stress. Goldman Sachs revised its estimate of the United States entering a recession over the next 12 months to a 35% chance, up from its estimate of a 25% chance before the banking sector turmoil.

    That’s of particular concern to certain demographic groups: Jobless rates for Black and Hispanic Americans often increase by more than those of their White counterparts during recessions, said Rakesh Kochhar, a senior researcher focusing on demographics and social trends at the Pew Research Center.

    History makes that discrepancy clear.

    A Pew Research Center report comparing two recessions in recent decades shows how Black and Hispanic Americans experience disproportionate effects on their jobless rates during periods of economic downturn. From the second quarter of 2007 to the second quarter of 2009, during the Great Recession, the unemployment rate rose 6.5 percentage points for Black Americans. The Hispanic unemployment rate climbed 6.3 percentage points. For White workers, it increased 4 percentage points.

    And from the first quarter of 1990 to the first quarter of 1991, the unemployment rate climbed 1.4 percentage points for Black Americans and 2.1 percentage points for Hispanic Americans. The White unemployment rate rose 1.3 percentage points.

    Economists say it’s hard to guess the trajectory of the unemployment rate this year, noting it could very well exceed the Fed’s estimate.

    “There’s just tons of momentum, and once you slow the economy enough to get the unemployment rate moving up, it’s very hard to sort of turn that cruise ship back around,” said Josh Bivens, research director and chief economist at the Economic Policy Institute.

    As such, the Fed’s tightening efforts could easily drive the Black unemployment rate much higher than the overall jobless rate, said William Spriggs, an economics professor at Howard University and chief economist to the AFL-CIO.

    “If the Fed continues to use unemployment as its measure of labor force slack, and thinks they want a 4.5% unemployment rate — to make that happen, the Fed would have to induce net job loss in the labor market,” Spriggs told CNN in an email. “If we go through two months of negative job growth, all bets are off. The Black unemployment rate will easily get to 9% in that scenario.”

    One other likely consequence of growing unemployment is slowing wage growth, Bivens said.

    Like rising unemployment, stunted wage growth tends to hit marginalized groups harder. A 2021 Economic Policy Institute report shows that a 1 percentage point increase in overall unemployment correlates with about 0.5% slower wage growth for White median hourly wages. Wage growth falls by roughly 0.8% for Black median hourly wages.

    “A lot of people have this idea that in a recession, if unemployment rises by a couple of percentage points, as long as you’re not one of those unlucky people to lose the job, you’ve dodged the bullet,” Bivens said. “And that’s not true at all.”

    Still, a robust labor market isn’t a permanent solution to bridging employment disparities, even if the Fed does keep rates lower, says Wendy Edelberg, director of the Hamilton Project and a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution.

    The job market’s recent strength is unsustainable, she said. The US economy needs about 75,000 net job gains a month to keep stable and is currently adding about 350,000 net job gains a month on average, according to Edelberg.

    “[The Fed is] right to be confident that one of the things that’s going to have to happen to get inflation back down to a normal, stable level is to get job growth to a normal, sustainable level,” Edelberg said. “But if the Fed’s actions resulted in a slower labor market, then inflation stayed high — that would be a disaster.”

    The March jobs report from the Department of Labor, due to be released Friday at 8:30 a.m., is expected to show the US economy gained 240,000 positions last month. ADP’s private-sector payroll report, generally seen by investors as a proxy for the trajectory of Friday’s number, fell short of expectations, with just 145,000 jobs added. Economists had expected private hiring would rise by 200,000 positions last month.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Amazon, Microsoft could face UK antitrust probe over cloud services | CNN Business

    Amazon, Microsoft could face UK antitrust probe over cloud services | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    Britain’s media and communications regulator Ofcom says it has “significant concerns” that Amazon and Microsoft could be harming competition in the market for cloud services.

    In a statement Wednesday, Ofcom said it was “proposing to refer” the cloud services market to the Competition and Markets Authority, the UK antitrust regulator, for further investigation.

    Ofcom’s own probe, which it launched in October, had so far uncovered some “concerning practices, including by some of the biggest tech firms in the world,” said Fergal Farragher, the Ofcom director leading the investigation.

    “High barriers to switching are already harming competition in what is a fast-growing market. We think more in-depth scrutiny is needed, to make sure it’s working well for people and businesses who rely on these services,” Farragher added.

    The Competition and Markets Authority said it received Ofcom’s provisional findings Wednesday and was reviewing them. “We stand ready to carry out a market investigation into this area, should Ofcom determine it is required,” a spokesperson said.

    The Ofcom announcement comes days after Google Cloud accused Microsoft

    (MSFT)
    of anti-competitive cloud computing practices. In an interview with Reuters, Google Cloud Vice President Amit Zavery said the company had raised the issue with antitrust agencies and urged EU antitrust regulators to take a closer look.

    Cloud services are delivered to businesses and consumers over the internet and include applications such as Gmail and Dropbox.

    Europe’s Digital Markets Act, which will apply from May, aims to enhance competition in online services. Britain’s own Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Bill is expected to come before lawmakers this year.

    According to Ofcom, Amazon

    (AMZN)
    Web Services and Microsoft’s Azure have a combined UK market share of 60%-70% in cloud services. Google

    (GOOGL)
    is their closest competitor with 5%-10%.

    Ofcom said the three companies charged high “egress fees” for transferring data out of a cloud, which discourages customers from switching providers or using multiple providers to best serve their needs.

    It also flagged technical restrictions imposed by the leading providers that prevent some of the services of one provider working effectively with cloud services from other firms, and said that fee discounts were structured to incentivize customers to use a single provider for all or most of their cloud needs.

    There were indications that these market features were already causing harm, “with evidence of cloud customers facing significant price increases when they come to renew their contracts,” Ofcom said.

    A Microsoft spokesperson said the company would continue to engage with Ofcom on its investigation. “We remain committed to ensuring the UK cloud industry stays highly competitive,” the spokesperson added. CNN has also contacted Amazon and Google.

    Ofcom has invited feedback on its interim findings and will publish a final decision by October 5 on whether to refer the cloud services market to the Competition and Markets Authority.

    “Making a market investigation reference would be a significant step for Ofcom to take. Our proposal reflects the importance of cloud computing to UK consumers and businesses,” it said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UK reaches its biggest trade deal since Brexit, joining trans-Pacific partnership | CNN Business

    UK reaches its biggest trade deal since Brexit, joining trans-Pacific partnership | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Atlanta/Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Britain has reached an agreement to join a major trans-Pacific partnership, calling it its biggest trade deal since Brexit.

    The country will become the first new member, and the first in Europe, to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) since it came into force in 2018.

    British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced the move early Friday, hailing it as a historic move that could help lift economic growth in the country by £1.8 billion ($2.2 billion) in the long run.

    “The bloc is home to more 500 million people and will be worth 15% of global GDP once the UK joins,” Sunak’s office said.

    The CPTPP is a free trade agreement with 11 members: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam. It succeeded the Trans-Pacific Partnership after the United States withdrew under former President Donald Trump in 2017.

    The UK agreement comes almost two years after it began talks to join the pact.

    As a member, more than 99% of UK exports to those 11 countries will now be eligible for tariff-free trade. That includes major exports, such as cheese, cars, chocolate, machinery, gin and whisky.

    In the year through September 2022, the United Kingdom exported £60.5 billion ($75 billion) worth of goods to CPTPP countries, Sunak’s office said in a statement.

    Dairy farmers, for example, sent £23.9 million ($29.6 million) worth of products such as cheese and butter to Canada, Chile, Japan and Mexico last year, and were set to “benefit from lower tariffs,” it added.

    The deal also aims to lift red tape for British businesses, which will no longer be required to set up local offices or be residents of the pact’s member countries to provide services there.

    Services made up a huge chunk — 43% — of overall UK trade with CPTPP members last year, according to Sunak’s office.

    “We are at our heart an open and free-trading nation,” the prime minister said in the statement, seeking to cast the deal as an example of the “economic benefits of our post-Brexit freedoms.”

    “As part of CPTPP, the UK is now in a prime position in the global economy to seize opportunities for new jobs, growth and innovation,” Sunak added.

    Several businesses expressed their support for the deal in the government statement, including global bank Standard Chartered

    (SCBFF)
    and spirits maker Pernod Ricard

    (PDRDF)
    .

    Joining the pact “is a big opportunity for our Scotch whisky business,” said Anishka Jelicich, Pernod Ricard’s UK director of public affairs.

    “Five of our top 20 export markets are CPTPP members. We expect tariff cuts and smoother access to some of the world’s fastest growing economies to increase exports and secure jobs and investment in the UK, with sales doubling in some markets.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China e-commerce giant Alibaba outlines future strategy

    China e-commerce giant Alibaba outlines future strategy

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG — Top executives of Chinese e-commerce and financial giant Alibaba said Thursday that the company is moving toward giving up control of some of its business units in a transition toward becoming a capital operator to optimize the value of its sprawling businesses.

    Alibaba CEO Daniel Zhang outlined details of a plan announced earlier this week to split Alibaba into six main groups as a prelude toward stock listings of some of its companies. The restructuring marks a new stage in Alibaba’s growth after a series of setbacks as regulators cracked down on it and other tech companies.

    Alibaba, whose headquarters is in the eastern city of Hangzhou, will be “in the nature of a holding company that is the controlling shareholder of the business group companies,” Zhang said in a conference call.

    Alibaba’s CFO, Toby Xu, said the company would continue to evaluate the strategic importance of group companies after they go public and decide whether or not to retain control. He declined to say when they might go public.

    “We believe the market is the best litmus test, so each business group company can pursue independent fundraising and IPOs as and when they are ready,” Xu said.

    Alibaba’s stock prices in Hong Kong and New York have rallied nearly 15% since the restructuring was announced Tuesday. The firm’s Hong Kong-listed stock was up 0.9% by midday Thursday.

    The plan, and the recent return of Alibaba founder Jack Ma to China after months abroad appear to mark a turnaround after several hard years. Chinese regulators singled out Alibaba for scrutiny in a crackdown on technology and internet companies, putting the brakes on a planned initial public offering in 2020 of Alibaba’s financial affiliate Ant Group.

    Ma had kept a low profile with few public appearances since Nov. 2020, when he had publicly criticized China’s regulators and financial systems during a speech in Shanghai.

    Ant had been set to raise $34.5 billion in what would have been the world’s largest share offering at the time. Alibaba was later investigated and fined $2.8 billion for breaching antitrust rules as Chinese authorities cracked down on the once-freewheeling technology industry.

    “The looser connections between the business units is in line with the regulatory stance of encouraging competition,” said an analyst’s note from Moody’s Investor Service.

    Alibaba is to split into its Cloud Intelligence Group, Taobao Tmall Business Group, Local Services Group, Global Digital Business Group, Cainiao Smart Logistics and Digital Media and Entertainment Group. Each group apart from Taobao Tmall could potentially seek an initial public offering. Taobao Tmall will remain wholly-owned by Alibaba Group.

    Among other things, the restructuring plan might allay past antitrust concerns, since as Zhang explained, each Alibaba business unit would be empowered to make its own decisions and raise capital independently. He said that having business units operate independently should also foster innovation and growth after years of harsh COVID-19 restrictions that battered China’s economy.

    Alibaba’s restructure — the first of its kind in the Chinese technology industry — also could serve as an example for similar companies such as online games company Tencent to follow suit. Tencent’s shares rallied after Alibaba’s announcement on Monday.

    “We think that Alibaba’s new organizational structure could be used by Chinese regulators as a template for other Chinese Big Tech firms,” said a report by CreditSights.

    Francis Lun, CEO of Geo Securities in Hong Kong, said that in the short term Alibaba’s move will likely allow the group to raise more capital. But it might be more difficult for the company to stay competitive in mergers and acquisitions.

    “When you split into six business units, you’d just be a lightweight competing against the heavyweights such as Apple, Amazon and Alphabet,” Lun said.

    He pointed out that only Alibaba’s e-commerce and cloud units were profitable and that in the long-term, the other units may not succeed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China e-commerce giant Alibaba outlines future strategy

    China e-commerce giant Alibaba outlines future strategy

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG — Top executives of Chinese e-commerce and financial giant Alibaba said Thursday that the company is moving toward giving up control of some of its business units in a transition toward becoming a capital operator to optimize the value of its sprawling businesses.

    Alibaba CEO Daniel Zhang outlined details of a plan announced earlier this week to split Alibaba into six main groups as a prelude toward stock listings of some of its companies. The restructuring marks a new stage in Alibaba’s growth after a series of setbacks as regulators cracked down on it and other tech companies.

    Alibaba, whose headquarters is in the eastern city of Hangzhou, will be “in the nature of a holding company that is the controlling shareholder of the business group companies,” Zhang said in a conference call.

    Alibaba’s CFO, Toby Xu, said the company would continue to evaluate the strategic importance of group companies after they go public and decide whether or not to retain control. He declined to say when they might go public.

    “We believe the market is the best litmus test, so each business group company can pursue independent fundraising and IPOs as and when they are ready,” Xu said.

    Alibaba’s stock prices in Hong Kong and New York have rallied nearly 15% since the restructuring was announced Tuesday. The firm’s Hong Kong-listed stock was up 0.9% by midday Thursday.

    The plan, and the recent return of Alibaba founder Jack Ma to China after months abroad appear to mark a turnaround after several hard years. Chinese regulators singled out Alibaba for scrutiny in a crackdown on technology and internet companies, putting the brakes on a planned initial public offering in 2020 of Alibaba’s financial affiliate Ant Group.

    Ma had kept a low profile with few public appearances since Nov. 2020, when he had publicly criticized China’s regulators and financial systems during a speech in Shanghai.

    Ant had been set to raise $34.5 billion in what would have been the world’s largest share offering at the time. Alibaba was later investigated and fined $2.8 billion for breaching antitrust rules as Chinese authorities cracked down on the once-freewheeling technology industry.

    “The looser connections between the business units is in line with the regulatory stance of encouraging competition,” said an analyst’s note from Moody’s Investor Service.

    Alibaba is to split into its Cloud Intelligence Group, Taobao Tmall Business Group, Local Services Group, Global Digital Business Group, Cainiao Smart Logistics and Digital Media and Entertainment Group. Each group apart from Taobao Tmall could potentially seek an initial public offering. Taobao Tmall will remain wholly-owned by Alibaba Group.

    Among other things, the restructuring plan might allay past antitrust concerns, since as Zhang explained, each Alibaba business unit would be empowered to make its own decisions and raise capital independently. He said that having business units operate independently should also foster innovation and growth after years of harsh COVID-19 restrictions that battered China’s economy.

    Alibaba’s restructure — the first of its kind in the Chinese technology industry — also could serve as an example for similar companies such as online games company Tencent to follow suit. Tencent’s shares rallied after Alibaba’s announcement on Monday.

    “We think that Alibaba’s new organizational structure could be used by Chinese regulators as a template for other Chinese Big Tech firms,” said a report by CreditSights.

    Francis Lun, CEO of Geo Securities in Hong Kong, said that in the short term Alibaba’s move will likely allow the group to raise more capital. But it might be more difficult for the company to stay competitive in mergers and acquisitions.

    “When you split into six business units, you’d just be a lightweight competing against the heavyweights such as Apple, Amazon and Alphabet,” Lun said.

    He pointed out that only Alibaba’s e-commerce and cloud units were profitable and that in the long-term, the other units may not succeed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Alibaba’s restructuring and Jack Ma’s homecoming are all part of China’s plan | CNN Business

    Alibaba’s restructuring and Jack Ma’s homecoming are all part of China’s plan | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Alibaba’s landmark restructuring has sent its shares soaring in New York and Hong Kong, as investors bet on the return of regulatory support for China’s tech industry and private businesses after more than two years of a brutal crackdown.

    But the nature of the overhaul, in which the internet conglomerate will split its business into six separate units, is a sign that Beijing’s campaign against Big Tech hasn’t fundamentally changed. Regulators still intend to reduce the monopolistic nature of tech giants and limit their power, even as they urge private companies to do their part to create jobs and boost a flagging economy.

    The news of the restructuring came shortly after the return of co-founder Jack Ma to mainland China. Ma had been spending time overseas and otherwise keeping a low profile since the Chinese government began a fierce crackdown on the tech sector in late 2020.

    “It appears that Alibaba’s break-up has been orchestrated by Beijing,” said Brock Silvers, chief investment officer for Kaiyuan Capital.

    “This idea is reinforced by Jack Ma’s sudden reappearance, which now seems like a planned media event intended to boost market sentiment at a critical moment.”

    It worked. Shares in Alibaba

    (BABA)
    , which has a market capitalization of $260 billion, soared 13% in Hong Kong on Wednesday, following a 14% surge on Wall Street overnight, leading the tech sector’s gains in the Asia Pacific.

    Ma is seen as a symbol of China’s tech industry and a barometer of the Chinese government’s support for private business. His presence is perceived as evidence of a more supportive approach to the private sector, at a time when China’s economy badly needs growth.

    In October 2020, the once high-profile entrepreneur criticized the country’s financial regulatory system for being too rigid and unfriendly to small business. As a result, the authorities shelved Ant Group’s planned $35 billion IPO at the last minute.

    A sweeping regulatory crackdown on Big Tech followed, which later engulfed China’s most powerful private companies, wiping huge sums off their market value. Alibaba’s stock is still down 70% from its peak just days before regulators abruptly pulled the Ant Group IPO.

    But almost three years on, the dynamics have changed.

    The Chinese government is now facing significant economic challenges. It’s eager to shore up growth and reinvigorate confidence in the tech sector following its emergence from three years of strict Covid-19 controls.

    Alibaba’s restructuring is “part of [Beijing’s] strategy to shore up confidence in the private sector,” said Hong Hao, chief economist for Grow Investment Group.

    In a policy shift, Chinese leader Xi Jinping recently urged the government to support private businesses, while calling on entrepreneurs to play a role in boosting growth and tech innovation, so that China can better counter what he called “containment” and “suppression” from the West led by the United States.

    Premier Li Qiang, a trusted ally of Xi who was confirmed as the country’s No 2 official this month, followed up by rolling out a series of measures intended to repair ties between the government and the private sector.

    “For a period of time last year, there were some incorrect discussions and comments in the society, which made some private entrepreneurs feel worried,” Premier Li said at his first news conference earlier this month.

    China may need Alibaba now, but it’s not nearly as powerful as it was, according to analysts.

    The breakup appears to “curb the influence of tech titans,” Silvers said. “It would serve as a stark reminder of Beijing’s uncomfortable relationship with the private sector, despite recent reassurances.”

    Beijing’s major concern is that private tech firms have become too big and powerful. During its years-long clampdowns, the government sought to reduce the monopolistic nature of many prominent tech companies, slapping them with big fines, banning apps from stores and demanding that some firms completely overhaul their businesses.

    “[Alibaba’s restructuring plan] offers a way to limit monopoly power and platform sway,” Hong said.

    It could serve as a model for other Chinese tech giants going forward.

    “Tencent is the obvious [one] next,” Hong said, adding that the social media and gaming giant has already started reducing its stake in portfolio companies, including food delivery company Meituan.

    Investors and analysts have cheered Alibaba’s restructuring.

    The move marks the most significant overhaul in the company’s 24-year history and will “unlock the value” of its various businesses, it said on Tuesday.

    Alibaba’s business will be split into six units: domestic e-commerce, international e-commerce, cloud computing, local services, logistics, and media and entertainment.

    The domestic e-commerce group, which includes Taobao and contributes to a majority of the company’s revenues, will remain a wholly-owned unit. The other five, meanwhile, will have their own CEOs and can pursue separate public listings.

    “The market is the best litmus test, and each business group and company can pursue independent fundraising and IPOs when they are ready,” Alibaba CEO Daniel Zhang said in an email to employees.

    Some analysts welcomed the move, believing it will lead investors to reassess the valuation of Alibaba.

    Citi analysts said Tuesday their target price for Alibaba’s US-listed stock was $156 per share, which is nearly 60% higher than Tuesday’s closing level.

    -— CNN’s Riley Zhang contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Most Asian shares reverse early losses after US Fed raises rates by a quarter point | CNN Business

    Most Asian shares reverse early losses after US Fed raises rates by a quarter point | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Most Asia Pacific shares pared early losses on Thursday, after the US Federal Reserve reaffirmed its dedication to bring down inflation.

    In Hong Kong, the benchmark Hang Seng

    (HSI)
    index traded 1.5% higher, leading gainers in the region. One of the top gainers was internet giant Tencent, which was more than 7% higher after posting a strong rise in its online advertising business in the December quarter on Wednesday.

    In Japan, the Nikkei 225

    (N225)
    was flat after opening lower. The broader Topix index was 0.3% lower, reversing some of its early morning losses.

    South Korea’s Kospi was 0.2% higher, while Australia’s S&P ASX 200 advanced by half a percentage point.

    Asian shares had opened broadly lower, tracking losses on Wall Street. In the US, the Dow closed 1.6% lower, while the S&P 500

    (DVS)
    slipped about 1.7%. The Nasdaq Composite declined 1.6%.

    “Looking ahead, while we see fundamental value in Asia-ex Japan stocks … we remain concerned about a possible pullback in US stocks assuming US data deteriorates in the months ahead,” Nomura analysts wrote in a Thursday research note.

    US markets had been fickle on Wednesday before settling in the red as investors digested the Federal Reserve’s quarter-point rate hike and looked for clues about the state of the banking sector meltdown.

    The Fed raised rates by a quarter point at the conclusion of its two-day meeting, even though its historic rate hiking campaign was a contributing factor in the banking crisis.

    Investors were heartened by the central bank’s strong hints that its aggressive pace of interest rate hikes would come to an end soon. Still, the central bank also warned that rate cuts aren’t coming this year.

    – CNN’s Krystal Hur and Laura He contributed reporting

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China may prefer TikTok to be banned than fall into US hands | CNN Business

    China may prefer TikTok to be banned than fall into US hands | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Nearly three years after the Trump administration threatened to ban TikTok if its Chinese owner didn’t sell the company to American investors, the video app is once again facing an existential threat.

    TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew will appear later Thursday before US lawmakers, many of whom want the app banned in the United States because of the risk they say it presents to national security. The clamor for a sale is growing louder again.

    But an outright divestment isn’t in the cards, according to analysts and legal experts, not least because the Chinese government views TikTok’s technology as sensitive and has taken steps since 2020 to ensure it can veto any sale by its Beijing-based owner, ByteDance.

    At issue is who owns the keys to TikTok’s algorithms and the vast troves of data collected from the 150 million people in the United States who use the app each month.

    The Chinese government considers some advanced technology, including content recommendation algorithms, to be critical to its national interest. In December, Chinese officials proposed tightening the rules that govern the sale of that technology to foreign buyers.

    “Beijing will have no say in the US decision to mandate the sale of TikTok, but it will retain the ultimate approval authority over such a sale,” said Brock Silvers, chief investment officer for Kaiyuan Capital.

    “It also seems extremely unlikely that Beijing will accept any deal that removes TikTok’s algorithm[s] from its direct control and regulatory authority,” he said.

    TikTok’s algorithms, which keep users glued to the app, are believed to be key to its success. The algorithms give recommendations based on users’ behavior, thus pushing videos they actually like and want to watch.

    Chinese regulators first added algorithms to the restricted list of technologies in August 2020, when the Trump administration threatened to ban TikTok unless it was sold.

    Back then, Chinese state media published a commentary by a professor of trade at the University of International Business and Economics who said the updated rules meant ByteDance would need a license from Beijing to sell its technology.

    “Some cutting-edge technologies might impact national security and public welfare, and need to be included in [export control] management,” Cui Fan told Xinhua.

    The intended sale of TikTok in 2020 to Oracle and Walmart hit a snag after Beijing added algorithms to its export control list. The Biden administration eventually rescinded the Trump-era executive order targeting TikTok, but replaced it with a broader directive focused on investigating technology linked to foreign adversaries, including China.

    Now, the company is once again caught up in a geopolitical struggle between Washington and Beijing.

    “The TikTok hearings in the United States mark the beginnings of a regulatory meat-grinder facing all [Chinese] tech companies,” said Alex Capri, a research fellow at the Hinrich Foundation.

    A senior official from the Chinese regulator of digital and traditional media visited Bytedance’s offices last week. He urged the company to improve the use of “recommendation algorithms” to spread “positive energy” and strengthen the review of online content, according to a statement from the regulator posted on its website.

    The visit highlights Beijing’s resolve to keep its most powerful internet companies on a tight leash. It also has more direct levers to pull.

    In April 2021, a Chinese government entity acquired a “golden share” of 1% in a Beijing subsidiary of ByteDance, according to business data platform Qichacha. The subsidiary controls operating licenses for Douyin, TikTok’s sister app in China, and Toutiao, a news aggregation app.

    “TikTok’s algorithms make it truly unique in terms of data harvesting and strategic analytics, therefore, I don’t see Beijing allowing it to fall into the hands of US interests,” said Capri.

    “Unless they can somehow still access TikTok’s data through other means and methods, including ongoing cyber intrusion and other forms of back-door access.”

    Chinese regulators have been gradually tightening their control over algorithm technology more generally.

    Starting in March 2022, an unprecedented regulation came into effect requiring internet companies to register recommendation algorithms with the Cyberspace Administration, the powerful internet regulator that reports to President Xi Jinping.

    At the beginning of 2023, rules governing “deep synthesis algorithms” also took effect. They will restrict the use of AI-powered image, audio and text-generation software. Such technologies underpin popular apps such as ChatGPT.

    These regulatory developments suggest that TikTok’s recommendation algorithms will be subject to China’s export controls, said Winston Ma, an adjunct professor at New York University School of Law.

    TikTok has been erecting technical and organizational barriers that it says will keep user data safe from unauthorized access.

    Under the plans, known as Project Texas, the US government and third-party companies such as Oracle would also have some degree of oversight of TikTok’s data practices. TikTok is working on a similar plan for the European Union known as Project Clover.

    But that hasn’t reassured US officials, likely because no matter what TikTok does internally, China would still theoretically have leverage over TikTok’s Chinese owners. (Similar measures taken by Huawei didn’t prevent it from being kicked out of Western 5G markets.)

    And the concerns would remain even if TikTok is sold to an American buyer, Capri said.

    “A change of TikTok’s ownership solves nothing,” he said. “The real issue is general data security and who ultimately has access to that data, by whatever means, regardless of legal ownership.”

    The true test, he said, is whether user data can be effectively ring-fenced and privacy and security can be achieved through data segregation, encryption and other means.

    As for a solution, Silvers expects both sides to try to “finesse a compromise” where US concerns are addressed, but Beijing still retains control over TikTok.

    But, he believes Beijing would ultimately prefer for TikTok leave the US market rather than surrender its algorithm.

    “If any Chinese company is to have any chance of surviving increased scrutiny from Western governments, they will have to entrust their data to third party security firms and endure rigorous third party audits and government intrusion, in addition to transferring ownership,” Capri said.

    “This is really an existential crisis for Chinese firms operating in the West.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden White House closely watching Federal Reserve following bank failures | CNN Politics

    Biden White House closely watching Federal Reserve following bank failures | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    All eyes are trained on the Federal Reserve as it prepares to announce another potential interest rate hike Wednesday afternoon – exactly 10 days after the Biden administration stepped in with dramatic emergency actions to contain the fallout from two bank failures.

    Biden White House officials will be closely watching the highly anticipated rate decision – and monitoring every word of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell’s public comments – for any telling clues on how the central bank is processing what has emerged one of the most urgent economic crises of Joe Biden’s presidency.

    The moment creates a complex, if carefully observed, dynamic for the administration’s top economic officials who have spent much of the last two weeks engaged in regular discussions and consultations with Powell and Fed officials as they’ve navigated rapid and acute risks to the banking system.

    The Fed’s central role in not only supervising US banks and the stability of the financial system, but also in serving as a liquidity backstop in moments of systemic risk, has once again thrust the central bank back to center stage in the government’s effort to stabilize rattled markets.

    But Biden has made the central bank’s independence on monetary policy an unequivocal commitment – and has repeatedly underscored that he has confidence in the Fed’s central role in navigating inflation that has weighed on the US economy for more than a year and remained stubbornly persistent.

    Even as some congressional Democrats have directed fire at Powell for the rapid increase in interest rates and the risks the effort poses to a robust post-pandemic economic recovery, White House officials have taken pains not to shed light on their views publicly.

    Officials stress nothing in the last week has changed that mandate from Biden – and note that the widespread uncertainty about what action the Fed will take on rates only serves to underscore that reality.

    It’s a reality that comes at a uniquely inopportune time for a banking system that has shown clear signs of stabilizing in the last several days, but is still facing a level of anxiety among market participants and depositors about the durability of that shift.

    “I do believe we have a very strong and resilient banking system and all of us need to shore up the confidence of depositors that that’s the case,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said during remarks Tuesday in Washington.

    Yellen said a new emergency lending facility launched by the Fed, along with its existing discount window, are “working as intended to provide liquidity to the banking system.”

    But prior to the closures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, analysts had widely predicted that the Fed would unveil a half-point rate hike. But after the sudden collapse of the two banks that sent shockwaves across the global economy, there has been a growing belief among Wall Street analysts that the central bank will pull back, and only raise rates by a quarter-point – in part to try to alleviate concerns that the Fed’s historically aggressive rate hikes over the past year were precisely to blame for this month’s financial turmoil.

    But there are also concerns that a dramatic pullback, like choosing to forgo any rate increases altogether until a later meeting, would bring its own risks of signaling to the market that there are deeper systemic problems.

    It’s a conundrum top Fed officials started grappling with in the first of their two-day Federal Open Market Committee meeting on Tuesday. How they choose to navigate the path ahead will remain behind closed doors until their policy statement is released Wednesday afternoon.

    Powell is scheduled to speak to reporters shortly after.

    For officials inside the Biden White House, Wednesday is poised to offer critical insight into how the central bank is grappling with its urgent priority of bringing down inflation, while at the same time, minimizing the risk of additional dominoes falling in the US banking sector.

    Those two imperatives – bringing prices down and maintaining stability across the US financial sector – are urgent priorities for the Biden White House, particularly as the president moves closer to a widely expected reelection announcement and the health of the economy remains the top issue for voters.

    Yet the Fed’s decision will come at a moment of accelerating political pressure on the Fed itself – and Powell specifically.

    Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a member of the Senate Banking Committee, slammed Powell, saying he has failed at two of his main jobs, citing raising interest rates and his support of bank deregulation.

    “I opposed Chair Powell for his initial nomination, but his re-nomination. I opposed him because of his views on regulation and what he was doing to weaken regulation, but I think he’s failing in both jobs, both as oversight manager of these big banks which is his job and also what he’s doing with inflation,” Warren said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

    White House officials have made clear – with no hesitation – that Biden’s long-stated confidence in Powell is unchanged. Powell, who was confirmed for his second four-year term as Fed chair last year, announced last week that the Fed would launch a review into the failure of Silicon Valley Bank.

    Treasury and Fed officials, along with counterparts at other federal regulators and their international counterparts, have continued regular discussions this week as they’ve monitored the system in the wake of the weekend collapse, and eventual sale, of European banking giant Credit Suisse.

    US officials viewed the Credit Suisse collapse as unrelated to the crisis that took down the US banks a weekend prior, although they acknowledged it posed broader risks tied to confidence, or the potential lack thereof, in the system.

    In recent days, White House officials have begun to cautiously suggest that they see signs of the US economy stabilizing, following the turbulent aftermath of the closures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank. Biden, for his part, has credited the sweeping steps his administration announced – namely, the backstopping of all depositors’ funds held at the two institutions and the creation of an emergency lending program by the Federal Reserve – as having prevented a broader financial meltdown.

    He has also called on US regulators and lawmakers to strengthen financial regulations, though it is not yet clear what specific actions the president may ultimately throw his weight behind.

    Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined to comment Tuesday afternoon at the White House press briefing on how she and other officials were watching the Fed’s upcoming decision.

    “The Fed is indeed independent. We want to give them the space to make those monetary decisions and I don’t want to get ahead of that,” Jean-Pierre said. “I don’t even want to give any thoughts to what Jerome Powell might say tomorrow.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Asia Pacific stocks rise as investor worries about global banking turmoil ease | CNN Business

    Asia Pacific stocks rise as investor worries about global banking turmoil ease | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Stocks in the Asia Pacific region rose Tuesday as concerns about the global banking sector eased in response to a whirlwind of intervention by policymakers and industry players.

    The S&P/ASX 200 in Australia jumped 1.3%, boosted by its AXFJ index, a measure of banking stocks, which surged 1.7%.

    In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng Index

    (HSI)
    opened up 0.8%. China’s Shanghai Composite was 0.3% higher at the start of its trading session.

    South Korea’s Kospi ticked up 0.8%. Japanese markets were closed for a public holiday. Singapore’s Straits Times Index gained 1.1%.

    US stock futures were flat in Asian trade Tuesday, with Dow futures, S&P 500 futures and Nasdaq futures little changed.

    That followed a sunnier day on Wall Street, as investors became more confident in the outlook for the general banking sector, sending shares up.

    On Monday, central banks across Asia Pacific moved to quell concerns about the finance industry, with authorities in Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore and the Philippines assuring the public that their money was safe following the emergency bailout of Credit Suisse over the weekend.

    That did little to stop stocks from slumping initially, though analysts had predicted global markets could see calm later on Monday as investor nerves settled and relief set in. The landmark rescue of Credit Suisse

    (CS)
    by bigger Swiss rival UBS

    (UBS)
    on Sunday was followed by a coordinated move by major central banks to boost the flow of US dollars through financial markets.

    Shares of UBS rose about 3.3% in an intraday reversal on Monday, following a drop of as much as 15% earlier in the session.

    Still, recession fears continue to dog investors ahead of the US Federal Reserve’s meeting, which is set to conclude Wednesday. Traders see about a 73% probability of the central bank raising interest rates by 25 basis points.

    US regional banks also aren’t out of the woods yet. Shares of First Republic

    (FRC)
    , the struggling California bank bailed out by a consortium of banks last week, fell to an intraday record low Monday before ending the session down about 47% in another day of steep losses for the company.

    The Dow

    (INDU)
    closed 1.2% higher, while the S&P 500

    (SPX)
    gained about 0.9%. The Nasdaq Composite

    (COMP)
    climbed 0.4%.

    — CNN’s Krystal Hur contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: The SVB collapse doesn’t have to be the first in a chain of many | CNN

    Opinion: The SVB collapse doesn’t have to be the first in a chain of many | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Lanhee J. Chen is a regular contributor to CNN Opinion and the David and Diane Steffy fellow in American Public Policy Studies at the Hoover Institution. He was a candidate for California state controller in 2022. He has played senior roles in both Republican and Democratic presidential administrations and has been an adviser to four presidential campaigns, including as policy director of 2012 Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan campaign. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion on CNN.



    CNN
     — 

    When Silicon Valley Bank collapsed this month, analysts and policymakers quickly began considering how to prevent similar failures from happening in the future. While there are changes that lawmakers should consider, when it comes to financial regulation, history shows us that politicians are usually reacting to the last crisis and one step behind the next one.

    The savings and loan crisis of the 1980s led to passage of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, which closed insolvent financial institutions, created new regulatory agencies and implemented restrictions on how savings and loan (or thrift) institutions could invest deposited funds.

    The 2007-2008 financial crisis led to passage of the sweeping Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, which revamped federal regulation of the financial services sector and placed restrictions on how banks do business. Amid criticism that Dodd-Frank had gone too far in regulating banks, a bipartisan coalition in Congress passed, and then-President Donald Trump signed into law in 2018, some rollbacks of Dodd-Frank’s requirements pertaining to small and midsize financial institutions.

    Democrats have largely blamed this rollback of regulations for SVB’s demise. Many Republicans, for their part, have focused their aim on whether the bank’s leadership spent too much time pursuing “woke” policies on diversity and sustainability rather than ensuring depositors were protected.

    The fact that there is so little overlap between Republican and Democrat critiques in the wake of SVB’s collapse illuminates the challenging road ahead for bipartisan policy solutions to avert a future similar failure. If the two sides can’t even agree on the principal cause of the bank’s failure, it’s unlikely there will be consensus on the policies needed to shore up the financial system for the future.

    But they should. While Democrats generally favor more aggressive oversight of the financial system and Republicans largely argue that the current regulatory scheme is sufficient, the right answer looking ahead is somewhere in between.

    In the wake of SVB’s failure, some regulatory interventions have come into focus and could form the basis of policy discussions in the coming weeks and months as Congress considers how to respond to the current banking crisis.

    First, SVB’s demise came when a lack of liquidity (or a shortfall of cash on hand) left it unable to pay out depositors when they came looking for their money. The bank had invested a disproportionate amount of assets in long-term debt that was purchased at a time when interest rates were much lower than they are today. When the bank attempted to liquidate this debt over the last few weeks, it was forced to do so at a significant loss. SVB failed to hedge against risk by diversifying its investments.

    When depositors tried to withdraw $42 billion in cash from the bank on a single day, SVB’s cash shortfall generated a panic among those who had deposits at the bank and raised concerns about the health of the US banking system more broadly.

    Just as individual investors are often advised to diversify their investment strategies to minimize risk, so too might politicians look to requirements that banks ensure that they have proper diversification in how they are investing their assets.

    Further, some Republicans and many Democrats are also calling for expanded deposit insurance so that bank deposits over the current federal cap of $250,000 are also insured. Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a vocal supporter of increased financial sector regulation, has called for increased deposit insurance that would be paid for by banks. Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California is expected soon to introduce legislation that raises or removes the insurance cap entirely, such that deposits of all amounts will be protected.

    Some Republicans have joined them in addressing the insurance cap. Republican Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, for example, has argued that lifting the cap (for example, by ensuring the cap keeps up with inflation) would equalize the playing field between large banks and smaller local and regional ones. Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah has suggested that larger depositors might be insured up to the entire amount of their deposits in exchange for a small fee.

    If Congress moves toward increasing or eliminating the deposit insurance cap entirely, it should do so carefully. Depending on how the policy is constructed, such changes could disproportionately benefit wealthier institutional depositors or encourage bad behavior by banks if they know an open-ended bailout is waiting on the other end of risky investment decisions.

    Finally, some changes will undoubtedly come through the Federal Reserve, rather than Congress. This is probably a good thing, as these policymakers have some insulation from the political forces that directly affect lawmakers.

    The Federal Reserve, for example, will likely examine the extent of both capital and liquidity requirements at banks based on their total assets. A bank’s capital is the difference between its assets and liabilities or, put another way, the resources a bank has to ultimately absorb losses. Liquidity, by comparison, is a measure of the cash and assets a bank has immediately on hand to pay obligations (such as money that depositors might ask for).

    America’s central bank may also look at the content of “stress tests” created by the Dodd-Frank Act and designed to regularly assess the health of large financial institutions across the country. For nearly a decade, tests have been benchmarked to a low-interest rate environment, which is not reflective of recent conditions.

    But ultimately, the Federal Reserve is not blameless in the collapse of SVB as it created a fertile environment for the bank’s failure by keeping interest rates as low as they were for as long as they were. Lawmakers should do their part to make sure people understand that monetary policy has far-reaching impacts.

    While the best way to prevent the next SVB is likely to be viewed by policymakers through partisan-tinted glasses, there are avenues for Democrats and Republicans to work together. But the window to do so is narrow and closing. This time next year, we’ll be in the throes of presidential primary elections, and neither party will be particularly interested in compromise — even if that’s what our financial system needs.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Dutch to restrict semiconductor tech exports to China, joining US effort | CNN Business

    Dutch to restrict semiconductor tech exports to China, joining US effort | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Amsterdam/Washington
    Reuters
     — 

    The Netherlands’ government on Wednesday said it plans new restrictions on exports of semiconductor technology to protect national security, joining the US effort to curb chip exports to China.

    The announcement marked the first concrete move by the Dutch, who oversee essential chipmaking technology, toward adopting rules urged by Washington to hobble China’s chipmaking industry and slow its military advances.

    The US in October imposed sweeping export restrictions on shipments of American chipmaking tools to China, but for the restrictions to be effective it needs other key suppliers in the Netherlands and Japan, who produce key chipmaking technology, to agree. The allied countries have been in talks on the matter for months.

    Dutch Trade Minister Liesje Schreinemacher announced the decision in a letter to parliament, saying the restrictions will be introduced before the summer.

    Her letter did not name China, a key Dutch trading partner, nor did it name ASML Holding

    (ASML)
    , Europe’s largest tech firm and a major supplier to semiconductor manufacturers, but both will be affected. It specified one technology that will be impacted is “DUV” lithography systems, the second-most advanced machines that ASML sells to computer chip manufacturers.

    “Because the Netherlands considers it necessary on national security grounds to get this technology into oversight with the greatest of speed, the Cabinet will introduce a national control list,” the letter said.

    A White House representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    ASML said in a response it expects to have to apply for licenses to export the most advanced segment among its DUV machines, but that would not impact its 2023 financial guidance.

    ASML dominates the market for lithography systems, multimillion dollar machines that use powerful lasers to create the minute circuitry of computer chips.

    The company expects sales in China to remain about flat at 2.2 billion euros in 2023, implying relative shrinkage as the company expects overall sales to grow by 25%. Major ASML customers such as TSMC and Intel

    (INTC)
    are engaged in capacity expansions.

    ASML has never sold its most advanced “EUV” machines to customers in China, and the bulk of its “DUV” sales in China go to relatively less advanced chipmakers. Its biggest South Korean customers, Samsung

    (SSNLF)
    and SK Hynix both have significant manufacturing capacity in China.

    The Dutch announcement leaves major questions unanswered, including whether ASML will be able to service the more than 8 billion euros worth of DUV machines it has sold to customers in China since 2014.

    Schreinemacher said the Dutch government had decided on measures “as carefully and precisely as possible … to avoid unnecessary disruption of value chains.”

    “It is for companies of importance to know what they are facing and to have time to adjust to new rules,” she wrote.

    Japan is expected to issue an update on its chip equipment export policies as soon as this week.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • From Wile E. Coyote to edibles: Recession forecasts are getting weird | CNN Business

    From Wile E. Coyote to edibles: Recession forecasts are getting weird | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Understanding the economy is a complicated task, and even the experts are struggling to answer seemingly simple questions like “Are we on the brink of a recession?” or “Why isn’t inflation falling faster?”

    Many have resorted to the use of metaphor to convey the current complexity of the economy.

    It’s a communications tactic that some Federal Reserve officials have long favored. In the early 1980s, Nancy Teeters, the first woman appointed to the Federal Reserve Board, came up with an apt metaphor to explain why she disagreed with steep rate hikes implemented by then-Fed Chairman Paul Volcker.

    Her colleagues were “pulling the financial fabric of this country so tight that it’s going to rip,” she said. “Once you tear a piece of fabric, it’s very difficult, almost impossible, to put it back together again,” she added, before remarking that “none of these guys has ever sewn anything in his life.”

    These days, economists and analysts are turning to increasingly outlandish metaphors to help translate their thoughts.

    Here are some of the most interesting descriptors used recently and what they mean:

    Wile E. Coyote

    If you think back to Saturday morning cartoons, you may remember the never-ending, and mostly futile, chase between Wile E. Coyote and his nemesis, Road Runner. That pursuit often ended with Wile E. running off a cliff and into mid-air.

    The toons were fun sources of entertainment in our salad years, but former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers says they now double as a case study for the Fed and the economy.

    “The [Federal Reserve’s] process of bringing down inflation will bring on a recession at some stage, as it almost always has in the past,” Summers told CNN last week.

    And for the US economy, it could likely mean a “Wile E. Coyote moment,” Summers said — if we run off the cliff, gravity will eventually win out.

    “The economy could hit an air pocket in a few months,” he said.

    Antibiotics

    When describing the state of the economy, Summers doesn’t just rely on Looney Tunes. He also borrows from the medical community.

    While describing why the Fed can’t end its rate hike regimen when inflation shows signs of showing, Summers has compared higher interest rates to medicine for a country sick with high inflation. The entire dose must be taken for the treatment to fully work, he says.

    “We’ve all had the experience of taking a course of drugs and giving up, stopping the drugs, before the course was exhausted, simply because we felt better. And then, whatever infection we had came back and it was harder to fight the second time,” Summers told Boston’s NPR news station WBUR in February.

    For what it’s worth, Before the Bell is also guilty of using this one.

    Fog report

    We may be driving in the fog, landing a plane in the fog or even just walking in it.

    What’s important in this oft-used scenario is that it’s hard to see and we’re doing something that typically requires clear visibility.

    Clients “facing the fog of uncertainty in financial markets, economic growth and geopolitics,” should “avoid unnecessary lane changes,” and “allow extra time to reach your destination,” advised Goldman Sachs analysts earlier this year.

    It’s essentially a fancy way of saying that no one really knows what’s going on in this economy. Instead of attempting to find a way out of the chaos, investors should slow down, stay the course and wait for recovery.

    Edibles

    Late last year, investment analyst Peter Boockvar used a semi-illicit metaphor to explain why he thought the Fed might be over-tightening the economy into recession. He compared the Fed to an inexperienced consumer of weed gummies, which can take a long time to kick in.

    During that waiting period, an eager consumer may think the drugs aren’t working and eat more before the effects of the first dose even set in. They then inevitably find themselves way too stoned and feeling not-so-great.

    Boockvar was careful to note that he himself does not indulge in this practice, by the way.

    Storm chasing

    JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon should receive an honorary degree in meteorology for his recessionary weather predictions.

    The Big Bank exec has repeatedly referred to economic recession as a storm gathering on the horizon — occasionally he’ll update the public on how far away and how bad that storm is.

    Last summer Dimon spooked markets when he compared a possible upcoming recession to a “hurricane.” In November, he downgraded it to a “storm.”

    By January, his forecast was simply “storm clouds,” adding that he probably should never have used the term “hurricane.”

    Polyurethane

    Rick Rieder, BlackRock’s Chief Investment Officer of Global Fixed Income, has likened the economy to a bendable piece of plastic. Much like the economy, he wrote, polyurethane, “displays flexibility and adaptability, but also durability and strength.”

    He added that “the material’s ability to be stretched, bent, stressed and flexed without breaking, while in fact returning to its original condition, is what makes it so chemically unique. In recent years the US economy has displayed a remarkable resilience to stresses and an extraordinary ability to adapt to changing conditions.”

    Last week Senator Elizabeth Warren grilled Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell about American job losses being potential casualties of the central bank’s battle against high inflation.

    Warren, a frequent critic of the Fed’s leader, noted that an additional 2 million people would have to lose their jobs if the unemployment rate rises from its current 3.6% rate to reach the Fed’s projections of 4.6% by the end of the year.

    “If you could speak directly to the two million hardworking people who have decent jobs today, who you’re planning to get fired over the next year, what would you say to them?” Warren asked.

    Powell argued that all Americans, not just two million, are suffering under high inflation.

    “Will working people be better off if we just walk away from our jobs and inflation remains 5% or 6%?” Powell replied.

    Warren cautioned Powell that he was “gambling with people’s lives.”

    The discussion was part of a larger cost-benefit conversation that keeps popping up around the jobs market: Which is worse — widespread job loss or elevated inflation?

    CNN spoke with two top economic analysts with different perspectives to gain a deeper understanding of the debate.

    Below is our interview with Johns Hopkins economist Laurence Ball.

    Yesterday we published our interview with Roosevelt Institute director Michael Konczal, you can read that here.

    This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

    Before the Bell: Is it necessary to increase the unemployment rate to successfully fight inflation?

    Laurence Ball: There’s a trade off between inflation and unemployment. When the economy is very strong and unemployment is pushed down, inflation tends to be higher. Right now there are almost two job openings per unemployed worker, the supply of workers looking for jobs and the demand for firms to hire is out of whack. That’s leading to faster wage increases, which sounds good except that gets passed through to faster price increases and more inflation. So somehow the labor market has to be brought back towards a normal balance of workers and jobs and that means slowing down the economy, and that probably means raising unemployment.

    Can you explain the cost-benefit analysis of two million jobs lost to get down to 2% inflation?

    If we assume we have to get inflation down to 2%, then it’s just an unhappy fact of life that that’s going to require higher unemployment. But a lot of people, including me, think that if the Fed gets it down to 4% or 3%, that’s the time to declare victory or say, ‘close enough for government work.’

    It gets more and more expensive in terms of how much unemployment it costs to go from 3% to 2% inflation. Those last few points will have disproportionately large costs, and it’s very dubious if that’s really worth it.

    Now, the Fed has the political problem that they’ve been insisting on a 2% target rate for years. If they say right at this moment that 3% or 4% is okay that would be seen as surrendering or moving the goalposts. I think a likely outcome is that inflation gets down to 3% or 4% and the Fed continues to say their target is a 2% inflation rate but never does what has to be done to get it there.

    If you examine Fed history you see that 5% appears to be a magic number. When inflation is above 5% it becomes this big political issue. When it goes below 5% it disappears from the headlines.

    What do you think is important for our readers to know about this back-and-forth between Powell and Warren?

    Behind all of this, in a market economy there’s sort of a basic glitch. We have this thing called unemployment, we sort of chronically have not enough jobs for everybody and that’s a big problem. The problem can be reduced somewhat in the short run if you get the economy going very fast. But then that leads to inflation. Accepting that unemployment has to go back up is just recognizing that there’s this glitch in the market economy or capitalism. It’s not clear how we can get around that.

    CNN Business’ David Goldman reports

    In an extraordinary action to restore confidence in America’s banking system, the Biden administration on Sunday guaranteed that customers of the failed Silicon Valley Bank will have access to all their money starting Monday.

    In a related action, the government shut down Signature Bank, a regional bank that was teetering on the brink of collapse in recent days. Signature’s customers will receive a similar deal, ensuring that even uninsured deposits will be returned to them Monday.

    SVB collapse: live updates

    In a joint statement Sunday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg said the FDIC will make SVB and Signature’s customers whole. By guaranteeing all deposits — even the uninsured money that customers kept with the failed banks — the government aimed to prevent more bank runs and to help companies that deposited large sums with the banks to continue to make payroll and fund their operations.

    The Fed will also make additional funding available for eligible financial institutions to prevent runs on similar banks in the future.

    Wall Street investors were relieved that the government intervened as stock futures rebounded on Sunday evening, although the rally is fading Monday morning. Markets had tumbled more than 3% Thursday and Friday as investors feared more bank failures and systemic risk for the tech sector.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Treasury secretary rules out bailout for Silicon Valley Bank | CNN Politics

    Treasury secretary rules out bailout for Silicon Valley Bank | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Sunday ruled out a federal bailout for Silicon Valley Bank following its spectacular collapse last week.

    “Let me be clear that during the financial crisis, there were investors and owners of systemic large banks that were bailed out, and we’re certainly not looking,” Yellen told CBS News when asked if there will be a bailout. “And the reforms that have been put in place means that we’re not going to do that again.”

    Also Sunday, Shalanda Young, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, stressed in an interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on “State of the Union” that the US banking system at large was “more resilient” now.

    “It has a better foundation than before the [2008] financial crisis. That’s largely due to the reforms put in place,” Young said on “State of the Union.”

    Yellen said she’s been hearing from depositors all weekend, many of whom are “small businesses” and employ thousands of people. “I’ve been working all weekend with our banking regulators to design appropriate policies to address this situation,” the Treasury secretary said, declining to provide further details.

    SVB collapsed Friday morning after a stunning 48 hours in which a bank run and a capital crisis led to the second-largest failure of a financial institution in US history.

    California regulators closed down the tech lender and put it under the control of the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The FDIC is acting as a receiver, which typically means it will liquidate the bank’s assets to pay back its customers, including depositors and creditors.

    Despite initial panic on Wall Street over the run on SVB, which caused its shares to crater, analysts said the bank’s collapse is unlikely to set off the kind of domino effect that gripped the banking industry during the financial crisis.

    But the collapse has prompted a bailout debate in Washington as lawmakers assess the fallout.

    Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina told Collins in a separate interview on “State of the Union” that she doesn’t support a bailout “at this time” but cautioned, “It’s still very early.”

    “We cannot keep bailing out private companies because there’s no consequences to their actions. People, when they make mistakes or break the law, have to be held accountable in this country,” she said.

    While relatively unknown outside Silicon Valley, SVB was among the top 20 American commercial banks, with $209 billion in total assets at the end of last year, according to the FDIC. It’s the largest lender to fail since Washington Mutual collapsed in 2008.

    [ad_2]

    Source link