ReportWire

Tag: finance and investments

  • CEO pay cuts could be just the start | CNN Business

    CEO pay cuts could be just the start | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Corporate boards are slashing the pay of some leading CEOs in a new trend that could just be getting started.

    The pay cuts are hitting some of America’s best-known and highest-paid bosses, including Apple CEO Tim Cook, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman and Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon.

    The moves follow a dreadful year in the stock market – 2022 was the S&P 500’s worst year since 2008 – and come as a growing number of corporations lay off rank-and-file workers to brace for a potential recession.

    For example, Goldman Sachs laid off 3,200 employees earlier this month amid a downturn in Wall Street dealmaking. The bank then disclosed on Friday that Solomon’s 2022 pay is being cut by nearly 30%. Goldman Sachs’ profit dropped 49% last year as the slowdown in dealmaking curbed advisory fees.

    “This is a show of solidarity. CEOs need to share the pain,” said Nell Minow, vice chair of ValueEdge Advisors, which advises institutional investors on corporate governance matters.

    A similar pay cut could be coming for Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google parent Alphabet

    (GOOGL)
    .

    After Alphabet announced 12,000 job cuts this month, Pichai told employees that top executives would take a “very significant” pay cut, Business Insider reported. Google did not respond to a request for comment.

    But don’t feel too badly for these top execs. They’re still raking in serious cash and stock awards, just not quite as much as in the past.

    Apple, for example, said it is cutting the target pay package of Cook by 40%. But that still leaves him with a massive $49 million in total compensation.

    “They are still overpaid. Let me super clear about that,” said Minow.

    Among the 500 largest public companies by revenue, the median CEO made $14.2 million in fiscal 2021, up 18.9% from the year before, according to the latest research from Equilar.

    Tech bosses have received the biggest pay hikes, with the median CEO pay surging by 42.1% in 2021 to $19.1 million, Equilar said.

    Earlier this month, Morgan Stanley announced Gorman made $31.5 million in total compensation for 2022, down 10% from the year before. The Wall Street bank said its compensation committee took into consideration the fact that “in a challenging economic and market environment firm performance for 2022 was not as strong as the prior year” when it enjoyed record results.

    Minow is relieved that some boards are imposing pain on CEOs.

    “That’s exactly the way pay is supposed to work,” Minow said. “The problem with pay traditionally is it’s been all upside and no downside. CEOs would often get all the credit and money for good times and then blame El Nino or some extraneous force for the downside. Now they are being forced to accept more responsibility.”

    Of course, some of that responsibility is coming because the rules have changed.

    After the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, regulators have required public companies to give shareholders a voice on compensation issues. So-called “Say on Pay” votes are advisory, meaning companies can still go forward even if 100% of shareholders vote no. Still, having shareholders reject pay packages is an embarrassment companies try to avoid.

    Last year, JPMorgan Chase suffered a blow when its shareholders voted down a massive $52.6 million retention bonus that was planned for CEO Jamie Dimon.

    This month, JPMorgan announced Dimon’s pay will be unchanged at $34.5 million – even though wages are rising for average workers. The bank also said it decided not to give Dimon a special award for the year.

    That means Dimon’s pay isn’t budging even as wages go up for many employees.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s why you should always wait for the earnings call | CNN Business

    Here’s why you should always wait for the earnings call | 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
     — 

    Investors are pretty bad at living in the moment. We’re currently in the thick of fourth quarter earnings reports, but traders don’t seem to care about how companies fared during the final months of 2022. They’re more focused on what’s going to happen in the future.

    Case-in-point: Earnings calls, where top execs pontificate about their economic outlook, have been moving markets more than earnings-per-share and revenue reports.

    What’s happening: The mantra on Wall Street has become, as Ritholtz Wealth Management CEO Josh Brown puts it, “ignore the numbers, wait for the call.”

    Microsoft reported great fourth quarter earnings last Tuesday that beat Wall Street’s expectations, but the stock dropped 4% the next day. That’s because CEO Satya Nadella got on an earnings call with investors and warned of a slowdown in the company’s cloud business and software sales. His negative outlook came just as the company announced it was letting go of 10,000 employees, further spooking investors. 

    Other tech companies are following suit — while things are fine for the time being, they’re reporting that the future is foggy.

    IBM stock sank 4.5% last Thursday even as the tech titan beat Wall Street’s Q4 expectations. The reason for the drop might be because Jim Kavanaugh, IBM’s finance chief, warned on the conference call that it would be wise to expect the company’s total 2023 revenue growth to be on the low end. IBM also announced layoffs – the company said it plans to cut around 3,900 jobs or 1.5% of its total workforce. 

    The economic environment is rapidly changing. CEOs on earnings calls are talking more about recession than inflation now, according to an analysis by Purpose Investments.

    Wall Street is also beginning to fear an economic downturn more than painful rate hikes and as a result investors are putting more weight on CEO and CFO forecasts.

    And they’re looking bleak. As of Friday, 19 companies in the S&P 500 had issued forward earnings-per-share guidance for the first quarter of 2023, according to FactSet data. Of these 19 companies, 17, or 89%, issued negative guidance. That’s well above the 5-year average of 59%.

    “My best guess is that cautious tones on conference calls will be the norm, not the exception,” wrote Brown in a recent post. These slowdowns have been partially factored into stock prices, he said, “but not necessarily in full.”

    The upside: Market reaction appears to go both ways. American Express missed on earnings last week but said that credit card spending was hitting new records and that the future looks bright. The stock shot up more than 10%. 

    Prices at the pump typically fall during the coldest months as wintry weather keeps Americans off the roads. But something unusual is happening this year, reports my colleague Matt Egan. Gas prices are rocketing higher.

    The national average for regular gas jumped to $3.51 a gallon on Friday and remained there through the weekend, according to AAA. Although that’s a far cry from the record of $5.02 a gallon last June, gas prices have increased by 12 cents in the past week and 41 cents in the past month.

    All told, the national average has climbed by more than 9% since the end of last year – the biggest increase to start a year since 2009, according to Bespoke Investment Group.

    Why are gas prices jumping? It’s not because of demand, which remains weak, even for this time of the year. Instead, the problem is supply.

    The extreme weather in much of the United States near the end of last year caused a series of outages at the refineries that produce the gasoline, jet fuel and diesel that keep the economy humming. US refineries are operating at just 86% of capacity, down from the mid-90% range at the start of December, according to Bespoke.

    Beyond the refinery problems, oil prices have crept higher, helping to drive prices at the pump northward. US oil prices have jumped about 16% since December partially due to expectations of higher worldwide demand as China relaxes its Covid-19 policies and also because oil markets are no longer receiving massive injections of emergency barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

    What’s next: Expect more pain at the pump. Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, worries the typical springtime jump in prices will be pulled forward.

    “Instead of $4 a gallon happening in May, it could happen as early as March,” De Haan told CNN. “There is more upside risk than downside risk.”

    A return of $4 gas would be painful to drivers and could dent consumer confidence. Moreover, pain at the pump would complicate the inflation picture as the Federal Reserve debates whether to slow its interest rate hiking campaign.

    Goldman Sachs had a rough time in 2022, and the investment bank’s CEO, David Solomon, is being punished for it. Well, kind of. 

    The investment banking giant said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Friday that Solomon received $25 million in annual compensation last year. While that is still a very large amount of money, it’s down nearly 30% from the $35 million that Solomon raked in during 2021, reports my colleague Paul R. La Monica

    Solomon’s $2 million annual salary is unchanged. But the company said that his “annual variable compensation,” paid in a mix of performance-based restricted stock units and cash, was well below 2021 levels.

    Goldman Sachs (GS) shares fell more than 10% in 2022. The company also  reported a 16% drop in revenue in the fourth quarter and profit plunge of 66% earlier this month, mainly due to the lack of merger activity and initial public offerings.

    Maybe Solomon can make that extra $10 million with payouts from his burgeoning DJ career

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jobs report to give further clues about where economy is headed | CNN Business

    Jobs report to give further clues about where economy is headed | 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.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The Federal Reserve is going to raise interest rates again on Wednesday. But will it be another half-point hike or just a quarter-point increase? And what about the rest of the year?

    The Fed’s actions beyond this week’s meeting will depend primarily on whether inflation is truly slowing. Investors will get another clue when the January jobs report is released on Friday.

    Economists predict that 185,000 jobs were added last month, a slowdown from the gain of 223,000 jobs in December and 263,000 in November. A further deceleration in the labor market would likely please the Fed, as it would show that last year’s rate hikes are successfully taking some air out of the economy.

    The Fed knows it’s in a tough situation. Inflation pressures are partly fueled by wage gains for workers. In an environment where the unemployment rate is at a half-century low of 3.5%, employees have been able to command big increases in pay to keep up with rising prices of consumer goods and services.

    Along those lines, average hourly earnings, a measure of wages that is also part of the monthly jobs report, are expected to increase 4.3% year-over year. That’s down from 4.6% in December and 5.1% in November.

    As wage growth cools, so do price increases. The Fed’s favorite measure of inflation – the Personal Consumption Price Index or PCE – rose “just” 5% over the past 12 months through last December, compared to a 5.5% annual increase in November.

    That is still uncomfortably high, but the trend is moving in the right direction.

    The problem for the Fed, though, is that it may need to keep raising interest rates until there is further evidence that the labor market is cooling off enough to push the rate of inflation even lower.

    Several other job market indicators continue to show that the US economy is in no serious danger of a recession just yet. The number of people filing for weekly jobless claims dipped last week to 186,000, a nine-month low. Investors will get the latest weekly initial claims numbers on Thursday.

    The market will also be closely watching reports about private-sector job growth from payroll processor ADP and the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) from the Department of Labor this week. The last JOLTS report showed that more jobs were available than expected in November.

    Still, some expect that wage growth should continue to fall, which should take pressure off the Fed somewhat.

    “Wage growth has been on a slowing trajectory, and we suspect that softer wage growth will be a trend in 2023 as jobs available contract,” said Tony Welch, chief investment officer at SignatureFD, a wealth management firm, in a report.

    Not everyone agrees with that assessment. Organized labor has been winning bigger pay increases lately in the transportation industry. And more workers at tech and retail giants have been unionizing as of late.

    “Workers will be loath to relinquish the bargaining power they perceive to have gained over the past year,” said Jason Vaillancourt, global macro strategist at Putnam, in a report.

    Vaillancourt also pointed out that many consumers are still flush with cash that they saved up during the early stages of the pandemic. That could mean that inflation isn’t going away anytime soon.

    And even though the pace of jobs gains may be slowing, it’s not as if economists are starting to predict monthly job losses like the US has had in previous recessions.

    “Combine a strong labor market with a still substantial reserve of excess savings, and you have all the components in place to keep the Fed up at night,” Vaillancourt said.

    So as long as hopes for an economic “soft landing” persist, the Fed will have to keep worrying that inflation is too high. That increases the chances the Fed could go too far with rate hikes and ultimately lead to a recession.

    Wall Street is clearly buying into the “soft landing” argument. Just look at how well tech stocks have done so far this year, despite a series of high-profile layoff announcements from top Silicon Valley companies in the past few months.

    The Nasdaq is up 11% so far in January, putting it on track for its best monthly performance since July.

    Some argue that more tech layoffs won’t be a problem. Investors seem to be (somewhat perversely) taking the view that companies cutting costs is a good thing for profits and that revenue likely won’t be impacted in a negative way because consumers are still spending.

    “A theme that can’t go unnoticed this month is how traders are rewarding firms for cutting jobs. With corporate layoffs making headlines each evening, you might think the consumer is strained. Maybe not so much. It turns out that demand is decent,” said Frank Newman, portfolio manager at Ally Invest, in a report.

    But a continuation of the Nasdaq’s surge may depend a lot on how well a quartet of tech leaders do when they report fourth quarter earnings next week: Facebook and Instagram owner Meta Platforms, Apple

    (AAPL)
    , Google owner Alphabet

    (GOOGL)
    and Amazon

    (AMZN)
    .

    “A set of much weaker-than-expected reports from these firms could dent the market’s strong start to 2023,” said Daniel Berkowitz, senior investment officer for investment manager Prudent Management Associates, in a report.

    So far, tech earnings season is not off to an inspiring start, with Microsoft

    (MSFT)
    , Intel

    (INTC)
    and IBM

    (IBM)
    all reporting weak results. But it’s important to note that that trio is part of the “old tech” guard while Apple, Amazon, Alphabet and Meta all have more rapidly growing businesses.

    Tesla

    (TSLA)
    reported strong results last week, which could be a sign of good things to come from other more dynamic tech companies.

    Monday: IMF releases world outlook; earnings from Philips

    (PHG)
    , GE Healthcare, Franklin Resources

    (BEN)
    , SoFi, Ryanair

    (RYAAY)
    , Whirlpool

    (WHR)
    and Principal Financial

    (PFG)

    Tuesday: China official PMI; Europe GDP; US employment cost index; US consumer confidence; earnings from Exxon Mobil

    (XOM)
    , Samsung

    (SSNLF)
    , GM

    (GM)
    , Phillips 66

    (PSX)
    , Marathon Petroleum

    (MPC)
    , UPS

    (UPS)
    , Pfizer

    (PFE)
    , Sysco

    (SYY)
    , Caterpillar

    (CAT)
    , UBS

    (UBS)
    , McDonald’s

    (MCD)
    , Spotify

    (SPOT)
    , Mondelez

    (MDLZ)
    , Amgen

    (AMGN)
    , AMD

    (AMD)
    , Electronic Arts

    (EA)
    , Snap

    (SNAP)
    and Match

    (MTCH)

    Wednesday: Fed meeting; US ADP private sector jobs; US JOLTS; China Caixin PMI; Europe inflation; earnings from AmerisourceBergen

    (ABC)
    , Humana

    (HUM)
    , T-Mobile

    (TMUS)
    , Novartis

    (NVS)
    , Altria

    (MO)
    , Peloton

    (PTON)
    , Meta Platforms, McKesson

    (MCK)
    , MetLife

    (MET)
    and AllState

    (ALL)

    Thursday: US weekly jobless claims; US productivity; BOE meeting; ECB meting; Germany trade data; earnings from Cardinal Health

    (CAH)
    , ConocoPhillips

    (COP)
    , Merck

    (MRK)
    , Bristol-Myers

    (BMY)
    , Honeywell

    (HON)
    , Eli Lilly

    (LLY)
    , Stanley Black & Decker

    (SWK)
    , Hershey

    (HSY)
    , Sirius XM

    (SIRI)
    , Penn Entertainment

    (PENN)
    , Ferrari

    (RACE)
    , Harley-Davidso

    (HOG)
    n, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Ford

    (F)
    , Qualcomm

    (QCOM)
    , Starbucks

    (SBUX)
    , Gilead Sciences

    (GILD)
    , Hartford Financial

    (HIG)
    , Clorox

    (CLX)
    and WWE

    (WWE)

    Friday: US jobs report; US ISM non-manufacturing (services) index; earnings from Cigna

    (CI)
    , Sanofi

    (SNY)
    , LyondellBasell

    (LYB)
    and Regeneron

    (REGN)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Biden makes false and misleading claims in economic speech | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Biden makes false and misleading claims in economic speech | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden delivered a Thursday speech to hail economic progress during his administration and to attack congressional Republicans for their proposals on the economy and the social safety net.

    Some of Biden’s claims in the speech were false, misleading or lacking critical context, though others were correct. Here’s a breakdown of the 14 claims CNN fact-checked.

    Touting the bipartisan infrastructure law he signed in 2021, Biden said, “Last year, we funded 700,000 major construction projects – 700,000 all across America. From highways to airports to bridges to tunnels to broadband.”

    Facts First: Biden’s “700,000” figure is wildly inaccurate; it adds an extra two zeros to the correct figure Biden used in a speech last week and the White House has also used before: 7,000 projects. The White House acknowledged his misstatement later on Thursday by correcting the official transcript to say 7,000 rather than 700,000.

    Biden said, “Well, here’s the deal: I put a – we put a cap, and it’s now in effect – now in effect, as of January 1 – of $2,000 a year on prescription drug costs for seniors.”

    Facts First: Biden’s claims that this cap is now in effect and that it came into effect on January 1 are false. The $2,000 annual cap contained in the Inflation Reduction Act that Biden signed last year – on Medicare Part D enrollees’ out-of-pocket spending on covered prescription drugs – takes effect in 2025. The maximum may be higher than $2,000 in subsequent years, since it is tied to Medicare Part D’s per capita costs.

    Asked for comment, a White House official noted that other Inflation Reduction Act health care provisions that will save Americans money did indeed come into effect on January 1, 2023.

    – CNN’s Tami Luhby contributed to this item.

    Criticizing former President Donald Trump over his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic, Biden said, “Back then, only 3.5 million people had been – even had their first vaccination, because the other guy and the other team didn’t think it mattered a whole lot.”

    Facts First: Biden is free to criticize Trump’s vaccine rollout, but his “only 3.5 million” figure is misleading at best. As of the day Trump left office in January 2021, about 19 million people had received a first shot of a Covid-19 vaccine, according to figures published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The “3.5 million” figure Biden cited is, in reality, the number of people at the time who had received two shots to complete their primary vaccination series.

    Someone could perhaps try to argue that completing a primary series is what Biden meant by “had their first vaccination” – but he used a different term, “fully vaccinated,” to refer to the roughly 230 million people in that very same group today. His contrasting language made it sound like there are 230 million people with at least two shots today versus 3.5 million people with just one shot when he took office. That isn’t true.

    Biden said Republicans want to cut taxes for billionaires, “who pay virtually only 3% of their income now – 3%, they pay.”

    Facts First: Biden’s “3%” claim is incorrect. For the second time in less than a week, Biden inaccurately described a 2021 finding from economists in his administration that the wealthiest 400 billionaire families paid an average of 8.2% of their income in federal individual income taxes between 2010 and 2018; after CNN inquired about Biden’s “3%” claim on Thursday, the White House published a corrected official transcript that uses “8%” instead. Also, it’s important to note that even that 8% number is contested, since it is an alternative calculation that includes unrealized capital gains that are not treated as taxable income under federal law.

    “Biden’s numbers are way too low,” said Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute think tank, though Gleckman also said we don’t know precisely what tax rates billionaires do pay. Gleckman wrote in an email: “In 2019, Berkeley economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabe Zucman estimated the top 400 households paid an average effective tax rate of about 23 percent in 2018. They got a lot of attention at the time because that rate was lower than the average rate of 24 percent for the bottom half of the income distribution. But it still was way more than 2 or 3, or even 8 percent.”

    Biden has cited the 8% statistic in various other speeches, but unlike the administration economists who came up with it, he tends not to explain that it doesn’t describe tax rates in a conventional way. And regardless, he said “3%” in this speech and “2%” in a speech last week.

    Biden cited a 2021 report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy think tank that found that 55 of the country’s largest corporations had made $40 billion in profit in their previous fiscal year but not paid any federal corporate income taxes. Before touting the 15% alternative corporate minimum tax he signed into law in last year’s Inflation Reduction Act, Biden said, “The days are over when corporations are paying zero in federal taxes.”

    Facts First: Biden exaggerated. The new minimum tax will reduce the number of companies that don’t pay any federal taxes, but it’s not true that the days of companies paying zero are “over.” That’s because the minimum tax, on the “book income” companies report to investors, only applies to companies with at least $1 billion in average annual income. According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, only 14 of the companies on its 2021 list of 55 non-payers reported having US pre-tax income of at least $1 billion.

    In other words, there will clearly still be some large and profitable corporations paying no federal income tax even after the minimum tax takes effect this year. The exact number is not yet known.

    Matthew Gardner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, told CNN in the fall that the new tax is “an important step forward from the status quo” and that it will raise substantial revenue, but he also said: “I wouldn’t want to assert that the minimum tax will end the phenomenon of zero-tax profitable corporations. A more accurate phrasing would be to say that the minimum tax will *help* ensure that *the most profitable* corporations pay at least some federal income tax.”

    There are lots of nuances to the tax; you can read more specifics here. Asked for comment on Thursday, a White House official told CNN: “The Inflation Reduction Act ensures the wealthiest corporations pay a 15% minimum tax, precisely the corporations the President focused on during the campaign and in office. The President’s full Made in America tax plan would ensure all corporations pay a 15% minimum tax, and the President has called on Congress to pass that plan.”

    Noting the big increase in the federal debt under Trump, Biden said that his administration has taken a “different path” and boasted: “As a result, the last two years – my administration – we cut the deficit by $1.7 trillion, the largest reduction in debt in American history.”

    Facts First: Biden’s boast leaves out important context. It is true that the federal deficit fell by a total of $1.7 trillion under Biden in the 2021 and 2022 fiscal years, including a record $1.4 trillion drop in 2022 – but it is highly questionable how much credit Biden deserves for this reduction. Biden did not mention that the primary reason the deficit fell so substantially was that it had skyrocketed to a record high under Trump in 2020 because of bipartisan emergency pandemic relief spending, then fell as expected as the spending expired as planned. Independent analysts say Biden’s own actions, including his laws and executive orders, have had the overall effect of adding to current and projected future deficits, not reducing those deficits.

    Dan White, senior director of economic research at Moody’s Analytics – an economics firm whose assessments Biden has repeatedly cited during his presidency – told CNN’s Matt Egan in October: “On net, the policies of the administration have increased the deficit, not reduced it.” The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, an advocacy group, wrote in September that Biden’s actions will add more than $4.8 trillion to deficits from 2021 through 2031, or $2.5 trillion if you don’t count the American Rescue Plan pandemic relief bill of 2021.

    National Economic Council director Brian Deese wrote on the White House website last week that the American Rescue Plan pandemic relief bill “facilitated a strong economic recovery and enabled the responsible wind-down of emergency spending programs,” thereby reducing the deficit; David Kelly, chief global strategist at J.P. Morgan Funds, told Egan in October that the Biden administration does deserve credit for the recovery that has pushed the deficit downward. And Deese correctly noted that Biden’s signature legislation, last year’s Inflation Reduction Act, is expected to bring down deficits by more than $200 billion over the next decade.

    Still, the deficit-reducing impact of that one bill is expected to be swamped by the deficit-increasing impact of various additional bills and policies Biden has approved.

    Biden said, “Wages are up, and they’re growing faster than inflation. Over the past six months, inflation has gone down every month and, God willing, will continue to do that.”

    Facts First: Biden’s claim that wages are up and growing faster than inflation is true if you start the calculation seven months ago; “real” wages, which take inflation into account, started rising in mid-2022 as inflation slowed. (Biden is right that inflation has declined, on an annual basis, every month for the last six months.) However, real wages are lower today than they were both a full year ago and at the beginning of Biden’s presidency in January 2021. That’s because inflation was so high in 2021 and the beginning of 2022.

    There are various ways to measure real wages. Real average hourly earnings declined 1.7% between December 2021 and December 2022, while real average weekly earnings (which factors in the number of hours people worked) declined 3.1% over that period.

    Biden said he was disappointed that the first bill passed by the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives “added $114 billion to the deficit.”

    Facts First: Biden is correct about how the bill would affect the deficit if it became law. He accurately cited an estimate from the government’s nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

    The bill would eliminate more than $71 billion of the $80 billion in additional funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that Biden signed into law in the Inflation Reduction Act. The Congressional Budget Office found that taking away this funding – some of which the Biden administration said will go toward increased audits of high-income individuals and large corporations – would result in a loss of nearly $186 billion in government revenue between 2023 and 2032, for a net increase to the deficit of about $114 billion.

    The Republican bill has no chance of becoming law under Biden, who has vowed to veto it in the highly unlikely event it got through the Democratic-controlled Senate.

    Biden said that “MAGA Republicans” in the House “want to impose a 30 percent national sales tax on everything from food, clothing, school supplies, housing, cars – a whole deal.” He said they want to do that because “they want to eliminate the income tax system.”

    Facts First: This is a fair description of the Republicans’ “FairTax” bill. The bill would eliminate federal income taxes, plus the payroll tax, capital gains tax and estate tax, and replace it with a national sales tax. The bill describes a rate of 23% on the “gross payments” on a product or service, but when the tax rate is described in the way consumers are used to sales taxes being described, it’s actually right around 30%, as a pro-FairTax website acknowledges.

    It is not clear how much support the bill currently has among the House Republican caucus. Notably, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy told CNN’s Manu Raju this week that he opposes the bill – though, while seeking right-wing votes for his bid for speaker in early January, he promised its supporters that it would be considered in committee. Biden wryly said in his speech, “The Republican speaker says he’s not so sure he’s for it.”

    Biden claimed the unemployment rate “is the lowest it’s been in 50 years.”

    Facts First: This is true. The unemployment rate was just below 3.5% in December, the lowest figure since 1969.

    The headline monthly rate, which is rounded to a single decimal place, was reported as 3.5% in December and also reported as 3.5% in three months of President Donald Trump’s tenure, in late 2019 and in early 2020. But if you look at more precise figures, December was indeed the lowest since 1969 – 3.47% – just below the figures for February 2020, January 2020 and September 2019.

    Biden said that the unemployment rates for Black and Hispanic Americans are “near record lows” and that the unemployment rate for people with disabilities is “the lowest ever recorded” and the “lowest ever in history.”

    Facts First: Biden’s claims are accurate, though it’s worth noting that the unemployment rate for people with disabilities has only been released by the government since 2008.

    The Black or African American unemployment rate was 5.7% in December, not far from the record low of 5.3% that was set in August 2019. (This data series goes back to 1972.) The rate was 9.2% in January 2021, the month Biden became president. The Hispanic or Latino unemployment rate was 4.1% in December, just above the record low of 4.0% that was set in September 2019. (This data series goes back to 1973.) The rate was 8.5% in January 2021.

    The unemployment rate for people with disabilities was 5.0% in December, the lowest since the beginning of the data series in 2008. The rate was 12.0% in January 2021.

    Biden said that fewer families are facing foreclosure than before the pandemic.

    Facts First: Biden is correct. According to a report published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, about 28,500 people had new foreclosure notations on their credit reports in the third quarter of 2022, the most recent quarter for which data is available; that was down from about 71,420 people with new foreclosure notations in the fourth quarter of 2019 and 74,860 people in the first quarter of 2020.

    Foreclosures plummeted in the second quarter of 2020 because of government moratoriums put in place because of the Covid-19 pandemic. Foreclosures spiked in 2022, relative to 2020-2021 levels, after the expiry of these moratoriums, but they remained very low by historical standards.

    Biden said, “More American families have health insurance today than any time in American history.”

    Facts First: Biden’s claim is accurate. An analysis provided to CNN by the Kaiser Family Foundation, which studies US health care, found that about 295 million US residents had health insurance in 2021, the highest on record – and Jennifer Tolbert, the foundation’s director for state health reform, told CNN this week that “I expect the number of people with insurance continued to increase in 2022.”

    Tolbert noted that the number of insured residents generally rises over time because of population growth, but she added that “it is not a given” that there will be an increase in the number of insured residents every year – the number declined slightly under Trump from 2018 to 2019, for example – and that “policy changes as well as economic factors also affect these numbers.”

    As CNN’s Tami Luhby has reported, sign-ups on the federal insurance exchange created by the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, have spiked nearly 50% under Biden. Biden’s 2021 American Rescue Plan pandemic relief law and then the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act temporarily boosted federal premium subsidies for exchange enrollees, and the Biden administration has also taken various other steps to get people to sign up on the exchanges. In addition, enrollment in Medicaid health insurance has increased significantly during the Covid-19 pandemic, in part because of a bipartisan 2020 law that temporarily prevented people from being disenrolled from the program.

    The percentage of residents without health insurance fell to an all-time low of 8.0% in the first quarter of 2022, according to an analysis published last summer by the federal government’s Department of Health and Human Services. That meant there were 26.4 million people without health insurance, down from 48.3 million in 2010, the year Obamacare was signed into law.

    Biden said, “And over the last two years, more than 10 million people have applied to start a small business. That’s more than any two years in all of recorded American history.”

    Facts First: This is true. There were about 5.4 million business applications in 2021, the highest since 2005 (the first year for which the federal government released this data for a full year), and about 5.1 million business applications in 2022. Not every application turns into a real business, but the number of “high-propensity” business applications – those deemed to have a high likelihood of turning into a business with a payroll – also hit a record in 2021 and saw its second-highest total in 2022.

    Trump’s last full year in office, 2020, also set a then-record for total and high-propensity applications. There are various reasons for the pandemic-era boom in entrepreneurship, which began after millions of Americans lost their jobs in early 2020. Among them: some newly unemployed workers seized the moment to start their own enterprises; Americans had extra money from stimulus bills signed by Trump and Biden; interest rates were particularly low until a series of rate hikes that began in the spring of 2022.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why urgent care centers are popping up everywhere | CNN Business

    Why urgent care centers are popping up everywhere | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    If you drive down a busy suburban strip mall or walk down a street in a major city, chances are you won’t go long without spotting a Concentra, MedExpress, CityMD or another urgent care center.

    Demand at urgent care sites surged during the Covid-19 pandemic as people searched for tests and treatments. Patient volume has jumped 60% since 2019, according to the Urgent Care Association, an industry trade group.

    That has fueled growth for new urgent care centers. A record 11,150 urgent care centers have popped up around the United States and they are growing at 7% a year, the trade group says. (This does not include clinics inside retail stores like CVS’ MinuteClinic or freestanding emergency departments.)

    Urgent care centers are designed to treat non-emergency conditions like a common cold, a sprained ankle, an ear infection, or a rash. They are recommended if patients can’t get an immediate appointment with their primary care doctor or if patients don’t have one. Primary care practices should always be the first call in these situations because they have access to patients’ records and all of their health care history, while urgent care sites are meant to provide episodic care.

    Urgent care sites are often staffed by physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Many also have doctors on site. (One urgent care industry magazine says, in 2009, 70% of its providers were physicians, but that the percentage had fallen to 16% by last year.) Urgent cares usually offer medical treatment outside of regular doctor’s office hours and a visit costs much less than a trip to the emergency room.

    Urgent care has grown rapidly because of convenience, gaps in primary care, high costs of emergency room visits, and increased investment by health systems and private-equity groups. The urgent care market will reach around $48 billion in revenue this year, a 21% increase from 2019, estimates IBISWorld.

    The growth highlights the crisis in the US primary care system. A shortage of up to 55,000 primary care physicians is expected in the next decade, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

    But many doctors, health care advocates and researchers raise concerns at the proliferation of urgent care sites and say there can be downsides.

    Frequent visits to urgent care sites may weaken established relationships with primary care doctors. They can also lead to more fragmented care and increase overall health care spending, research shows.

    And there are questions about the quality of care at urgent care centers and whether they adequately serve low-income communities. A 2018 study by Pew Charitable Trusts and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that antibiotics are overprescribed at urgent care centers, especially for common colds, the flu and bronchitis.

    “It’s a reasonable solution for people with minor conditions that can’t wait for primary care providers,” said Vivian Ho, a health economist at Rice University. “When you need constant management of a chronic illness, you should not go there.”

    Urgent care centers have been around in the United States since the 1970s, but they were long derided as “docs in a box” and grew slowly during their early years.

    They have become more popular over the past two decades in part due to pressures on the primary care system. People’s expectations of wait times have changed and it can be difficult, and sometimes almost impossible, to book an immediate visit with a primary care provider.

    Urgent care sites are typically open for longer hours during the weekday and on weekends, making it easier to get an appointment or a walk-in visit. Around 80% of the US population is within a 10-minute drive of an urgent care center, according to the industry trade group.

    “There’s a need to keep up with society’s demand for quick turnaround, on-demand services that can’t be supported by underfunded primary care,” said Susan Kressly, a retired pediatrician and fellow at the American Academy of Pediatrics.

    Health insurers and hospitals have also become more focused on keeping people out of the emergency room. Emergency room visits are around ten times more expensive than visits to an urgent care center. During the early 2000s, hospital systems and health insurers started opening their own urgent care sites, and they have introduced strategies to deter emergency room visits.

    Additionally, passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 spurred an increase in urgent care providers as millions of newly insured Americans sought out health care. Private-equity and venture capital funds also poured billions into deals for urgent care centers, according to data from PitchBook.

    Urgent care centers can be attractive to investors. Unlike ERs, which are legally obligated to treat everyone, urgent care sites can essentially choose their patients and the conditions they treat. Many urgent care centers don’t accept Medicaid and can turn away uninsured patient,s unless they pay a fee.

    Like other health care options, urgent care centers make money by billing insurance companies for the cost of the visit, additional services, or the patient pays out of pocket. In 2016, the median charge for a 30-minute new insured patient visit was $242 at an urgent care center, compared with $294 in a primary care office and $109 in a retail clinic, according to a study by FAIR Health, a nonprofit that collects health insurance data.

    “If they can make it a more convenient option, there’s a lot of revenue here,” said Ateev Mehrotra, a professor of health care policy and medicine at Harvard Medical School who has researched urgent care clinics. “It’s not where the big bucks are in health care, but there’s a substantial number of patients.”

    Mehrotra research has found that between 2008 and 2015, urgent care visits increased 119%. They became the dominant venue for people seeking treatment for low-acuity conditions like acute respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, rashes, and muscle strains.

    Some doctors and researchers worry that patients with primary care doctors – and those without – are substituting urgent care visits in place of a primary care provider.

    “What you don’t want to see is people seeking a lot care outside their pediatrician and decreasing their visits to their primary care provider,” said Rebecca Burns, the urgent care medical director at the Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

    Burns’ research has found that high urgent care reliance fills a need for children with acute issues but has the potential to disrupt primary care relationships.

    The National Health Law Program, a health care advocacy group for low-income families and communities, has called for state regulations to require coordination among urgent care sites, retail clinics, primary services, and hospitals to ensure continuity of patients’ care.

    And while the presence of urgent care centers does prevent people from costly emergency department visits for low-acuity issues, Mehrotra from Harvard has found that, paradoxically, they increase health care spending on net.

    Each $1,646 visit to the ER for a low-acuity condition prevented was offset by a $6,327 increase in urgent care center costs, his research has found. This is in part because people may be going to urgent care for minor illnesses they would have previously treated with chicken soup.

    There are also concerns about the oversaturation of urgent care centers in higher-income areas that have more consumers with private health care and limited access in medically underserved areas.

    Urgent care centers selectively tend not to serve rural areas, areas with a high concentration of low-income patients, and areas with a low concentration of privately-insured patients, researchers at the University of California at San Francisco found in a 2016 study. They said this “uneven distribution may potentially exacerbate health disparities.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prices rose at a slower pace last month, the Fed’s favored inflation gauge shows | CNN Business

    Prices rose at a slower pace last month, the Fed’s favored inflation gauge shows | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Minneapolis
    CNN
     — 

    The Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge showed prices rose at a slower pace last month, indicating further progress in the central bank’s battle with higher prices.

    The Personal Consumption Expenditures price index, or PCE, rose by 5% in December, compared to a year earlier, the Commerce Department reported Thursday.

    In December alone, prices rose 0.1% from November.

    On a month-to-month basis, prices for goods decreased 0.7% and prices for services increased 0.5%, according to the PCE price index for December. Within those categories, food prices increased 0.2% and energy prices decreased 5.1%.

    Core PCE, which doesn’t include the more volatile food and energy categories, increased by 4.4% annually, down from November’s annual rate of 4.7%. On a monthly basis, it was up 0.3%.

    Core PCE, which is now at its lowest level since October 2021, is the Fed’s favored inflation gauge as it provides a more complete picture of consumer costs and spending.

    “It’s clear, continued progress on the inflation front — which is something we expected, but good to see,” Joe Davis, Vanguard’s global chief economist, told CNN. “I think you’re seeing continued softening across the entire report.”

    The data showed that consumers pulled back in December, with spending falling by 0.2% from the month before. Personal income rose 0.2% last month, the smallest increase since April.

    Through much of 2022, consumer spending remained robust in spite of high inflation, rising interest rates, and simmering recession fears. However, as the months dragged on, economic data suggested that consumers were running out of dry powder: Reliance on credit grew and delinquencies started to tick up, while savings levels declined.

    Retail sales fell 1.1% in December, the Commerce Department reported earlier this month.

    In Friday’s report, the personal saving rate as a percentage of disposable income increased to 3.4% from 2.9% in November. The savings rate is now up 1 percentage point from its September low.

    The increase is “a sign that consumers are growing cautious after rapidly drawing down their savings last year,” Lydia Boussour, senior economist for EY Parthenon, said in a statement.

    Separately on Friday, a closely watched measurement of consumer attitudes toward the economy showed increased confidence in January for the second consecutive month. The University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment index landed at 64.9 for January, up nearly 9% from December.

    Despite the uptick, the director of the school’s Surveys of Consumers cautioned that there are “considerable downside risks” to sentiment and that two-thirds of consumers surveyed said they expect an economic downturn to occur in the next year.

    Massud Ghaussy, senior analyst of Nasdaq IR Intelligence, said consumer sentiment hinges heavily on the labor market.

    “The big question this year so far is, ‘is the jobs market the next shoe to fall?’” he told CNN. “The economic picture is still quite murky, and the reason why we’re seeing consumer confidence still relatively strong is because of a strong job market.”

    Friday’s PCE report is the last key inflation data before the Federal Reserve meets next week for its first policymaking meeting of 2023.

    Economists and investors are expecting the Fed to raise its benchmark rate by just quarter of a point, signaling another downshift following a spree of blockbuster rate hikes last year.

    The Fed is not expected to pivot simply because inflation is cooling, Davis said, noting that PCE isn’t yet at the Fed’s 2% target.

    The labor market, which has remained strong and tight despite inflation and interest rate hikes, remains a crucial area of focus in the Fed’s inflation fight. The latest data on employment turnover as well as job growth will be released next week.

    “The labor market is clearly Exhibit A in this debate between a soft landing or a mild recession,” Davis said. “The bigger wild card is, do the modest layoffs that we’re seeing in the technology sector in particular spread to other parts of the economy?”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China still wants to control Big Tech. It’s just pulling different strings | CNN Business

    China still wants to control Big Tech. It’s just pulling different strings | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Investors have raced back into Chinese tech stocks this year, encouraged by an apparent truce in a two-year battle between some of the country’s most powerful regulators and its biggest internet companies.

    But the enthusiasm may prove to be premature; Beijing is tightening its grip on household names such as Alibaba

    (BABA)
    by acquiring so-called “golden shares” that allow government officials to be directly involved in their businesses, including having a say in the content they provide to hundreds of millions of people.

    Earlier this month, a fund controlled by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) took a 1% stake in Alibaba’s digital media subsidiary in Guangzhou, according to business data platform Qichacha. The subsidiary — Guangzhou Lujiao Information Technology — has a portfolio of businesses under its wing, including mobile browser UCWeb and streaming video site Youku Tudou.

    According to Qichacha, a new board member, who has the same name as a mid-level official at the CAC, was appointed to the subsidiary at the same time. Alibaba didn’t respond to CNN request for comments. Calls to the CAC went unanswered.

    According to a person familiar with the matter, the Chinese government is also discussing taking a similar stake in a mainland Chinese subsidiary of Tencent

    (TCEHY)
    , the group that includes WeChat and a vast gaming business. The terms have not been finalized yet, the person said. Tencent

    (TCEHY)
    declined to comment.

    The moves come as Beijing has signaled that its two-year onslaught on the internet industry is coming to an end. As the economy falters, the ruling Communist Party needs the private sector to boost jobs and growth.

    But that doesn’t mean China is changing its attitude towards companies it believes have become too powerful.

    “It wasn’t a change of heart that caused Beijing to pull back its regulatory push on tech companies, it was a concession to economic reality,” said Brock Silvers, chief investment officer for Kaiyuan Capital in Hong Kong.

    “The goal of furthering state control over sprawling tech empires, however, wasn’t abandoned.”

    Instead, Beijing is returning to the “golden shares” approach, by which the state can still assert control over these firms, while moderating its impact on markets, Silvers added.

    “Golden shares” give their owners, usually governments, some level of control over companies, often those that were previously state-owned.

    In China, such shares are called “special management shares” and give the government decisive voting rights or veto power over certain business decisions or — in the case of internet companies — content.

    The policy could present a “nightmare” scenario for foreign investors, said Alex Capri, a research fellow at the Hinrich Foundation.

    That’s because the Biden administration has issued a series of executive orders limiting securities investments in Chinese entities that the US suspects of aiding China’s military.

    “This represents a murky grey zone for investors, as the CCP’s presence spills over into all areas, both military and civil,” Capri said. “American and other foreign investors will struggle to perform due diligence in an opaque Chinese system.”

    The Chinese government first introduced “golden shares” in 2013 with the aim of strengthening its control over state-backed media firms, which were later opened up to private investors. But as the mobile internet took off, it took such shares in a number of private tech firms operating news and video apps to maintain its grip over information on the internet.

    Between 2018 and 2022, several government entities took 1% stakes in popular news and content platforms, including US-listed Sina Weibo

    (SINA)
    , 36kr

    (KRKR)
    , and Qutoutiao

    (QTT)
    , and Hong Kong-listed Kuaishou, according to company filings or public registration records.

    “Beijing’s Golden Share initiative is about embedding the Chinese Communist Party within the nerve-centers of China’s most important internet-content companies,” said Capri. “It’s about achieving pervasive surveillance, censorship and policing capabilities from the inside out,” he added.

    In April 2021, a government entity acquired a 1% stake in a Beijing subsidiary of TikTok’s parent company Bytedance, according to Qichacha.

    The subsidiary controls some Chinese operating licenses for Douyin and Toutiao. Douyin is the country’s most popular short-video app with more than 600 million active users. Toutiao is a news aggregation app.

    Later that year, an executive at TikTok said at a US congressional hearing that TikTok had “no affiliation” with the Bytedance subsidiary.

    Beijing has tried to arrest a rapid slowdown in the country’s economy by hitting pause on the heavy-handed tech crackdown. Chinese Vice Premier Liu He said at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week that China will support the growth of the private sector, while opening its door further to foreign investment.

    But investors may not be so easily enticed to return to China, analysts said.

    The Communist Party may be easing off on fines and penalties, but the “golden shares” approach seeks the same end, which is “control and tight oversight,” said Capri.

    Silver pointed out that not only will government control of listed entities likely raise risks with an increasingly wary US administration, but Western institutional investors may be reluctant to invest alongside Beijing.

    “The risk is that shareholder interests will remain subservient to state interests,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • We finally know whom FTX owes money to: Wall Street elite, Big Tech, airlines, and many more | CNN Business

    We finally know whom FTX owes money to: Wall Street elite, Big Tech, airlines, and many more | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Newly unsealed bankruptcy documents revealed thousands of creditors to whom FTX owes money after the once-mighty crypto exchange collapsed in November.

    Wall Street heavyweights including Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan were named in the creditor list, which includes businesses, charities, individuals and other entities in a 116-page document filed late Wednesday. FTX is now at the center of a massive fraud investigation.

    Also included in the creditors list are media companies, such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, commercial airliners, including American, United, Southwest and Spirit, as well as several Big Tech players, including Netflix, Apple and Meta.

    On Thursday, lawyers for FTX filed an additional document advising the court that the list — known as a creditor matrix — is “intended to be very broad” and “includes parties who may appear in the Debtors books and records for any number of reasons.” Being on the list does not “necessarily indicate that the party is a creditor” of FTX or its affiliates, they wrote.

    Goldman Sachs, for one, is named in the creditor matrix but doesn’t appear to be a creditor. In a statement to CNN on Wednesday, the bank said it had not filed a claim against FTX.

    “This type of creditor matrix is prepared by the debtors for the purpose of providing notice to interested parties in a bankruptcy proceeding and is not necessarily evidence of a creditor relationship,” a spokesperson said.

    The document doesn’t disclose the amount or nature of the debt, and names of individual creditors — mostly customers who deposited funds on FTX — remain redacted at FTX’s request. Inclusion on the creditor list doesn’t necessarily mean the parties had an FTX account.

    FTX is believed to have more than a million creditors, the top 50 of whom are collectively owed more than $3 billion.

    The crypto platform was once of the most popular crypto exchanges on the planet, fueled by celebrity endorsements and high-profile partnerships with sports teams. It marketed itself as a beginner-friendly crypto platform, allowing customers to deposit fiat currency and trade it for digital assets. But FTX came unraveled in November as speculation about its balance sheet sparked investor panic. In the midst of a liquidity crisis, the company filed for bankruptcy, leaving customers in limbo.

    Federal prosecutors investigating FTX say that its founder and former CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried, orchestrated a massive fraud by stealing customer funds to cover losses at his hedge fund, Alameda Research. They also accuse him of using stolen money to buy luxury real estate and contribute to US poltical campaigns.

    Bankman-Fried, who was indicted in December and remains under house arrest at his parents’ California home, pleaded not guilty to eight criminal counts earlier this month. He has repeatedly denied committing fraud, and is scheduled to go to trial in October.

    Two of his former business partners have pleaded guilty to fraud and conspiracy charges and are cooperating with prosecutors from the Southern District of New York. Both associates have implicated Bankman-Fried in the alleged crimes.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Chevron earnings soar to a record | CNN Business

    Chevron earnings soar to a record | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Chevron reported a record full-year profit of $36.5 billion, buoyed by high oil prices.

    Adjusted earnings for the year more than doubled from the $15.6 billion Chevron earned in 2021 and up 36% from its previous record profit set in 2011.

    The oil company’s fourth-quarter earnings came in at $7.9 billion, up 61% from a year earlier but less than the record quarterly income of $11.4 billion it reported for the second quarter.

    The fourth quarter earnings per share of $4.09 fell short of the forecast of $4.38 a share from analysts surveyed by Refinitiv. But revenue in the quarter of $56.5 billion topped forecasts by nearly $2 billion and was up 17% from a year earlier.

    Full-year revenue of $246.3 billion was up 52% from 2021.

    Shares of Chevron

    (CVX)
    were down slightly more than 1% in premarket trading.

    Ahead of Friday’s report Chevron, the nation’s second largest oil company, behind only ExxonMobil, had announced it was hiking its dividend by 6% along with a massive $75 billion share repurchase plan. The decision brought criticism from those who said oil companies should be investing their money in producing more oil and gasoline to increase supply and drive down prices for inflation-weary drivers.

    “For a company that claimed not too long ago that it was ‘working hard’ to increase oil production, handing out $75 billion to executives and wealthy shareholders sure is an odd way to show it,” said Abdullah Hasan, assistant press secretary at the White House, in a tweet Wednesday evening after the share repurchase was announced.

    Chevron said Friday its investments in operations increased by more than 75% from 2021, and annual US production increased to the equivalent of 1.2 million barrels of oil a day.

    The amount it spent on capital spending and exploration in 2022 was $12.3 billion, up 43% compared with $8.6 billion spent in 2021, but only slightly more than the $11 billion it spent on dividends or the $11.3 billion on share repurchases during the year.

    The record profit came primarily from the soaring oil prices during the year, not its increased production.

    Chevron and other major oil companies all benefited from the spike in oil and gasoline prices during 2022, in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. While Russia, one of the world’s leading oil exporters, sent relatively little oil to the United States, sanctions placed on Russia following the invasion roiled global commodity prices which set the price of oil.

    Futures for a barrel of Brent crude oil, the global benchmark, hit a record of $123.58 close in early June, up more than 50% from six months earlier ahead of the war, and the average price of a gallon of regular gas in the United States broke the $5 mark a week later to reach a record $5.03.

    But oil and gas prices have fallen substantially since then. Brent closed Thursday at $87.47, slightly below the year-earlier level, while the average price of a gallon of regular gas stands at $3.51 a gallon, only slightly higher from the $3.35 average of a year ago.

    But prices have started to rise once again, partly because Covid lockdown rules in China have been lifted. Traders believe that’s a bullish sign for global demand for oil and gasoline. Refinery problems caused by winter weather are also pushing prices higher.

    The average US price of a gallon of regular gasoline is up nearly 12 cents in just the last week and up 41 cents, or 13%, in the last month. Brent oil is up 12% in the last three weeks.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • One news publication had an AI tool write articles. It didn’t go well | CNN Business

    One news publication had an AI tool write articles. It didn’t go well | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    News outlet CNET said Wednesday it has issued corrections on a number of articles, including some that it described as “substantial,” after using an artificial intelligence-powered tool to help write dozens of stories.

    The outlet has since hit pause on using the AI tool to generate stories, CNET’s editor-in-chief Connie Guglielmo said in an editorial on Wednesday.

    The disclosure comes after CNET was previously called out publicly for quietly using AI to write articles and later for errors. While using AI to automate news stories is not new – the Associated Press began doing so nearly a decade ago – the issue has gained new attention amid the rise of ChatGPT, a viral new AI chatbot tool that can quickly generate essays, stories and song lyrics in response to user prompts.

    Guglielmo said CNET used an “internally designed AI engine,” not ChatGPT, to help write 77 published stories since November. She said this amounted to about 1% of the total content published on CNET during the same period, and was done as part of a “test” project for the CNET Money team “to help editors create a set of basic explainers around financial services topics.”

    Some headlines from stories written using the AI tool include, “Does a Home Equity Loan Affect Private Mortgage Insurance?” and “How to Close A Bank Account.”

    “Editors generated the outlines for the stories first, then expanded, added to and edited the AI drafts before publishing,” Guglielmo wrote. “After one of the AI-assisted stories was cited, rightly, for factual errors, the CNET Money editorial team did a full audit.”

    The result of the audit, she said, was that CNET identified additional stories that required correction, “with a small number requiring substantial correction.” CNET also identified several other stories with “minor issues such as incomplete company names, transposed numbers, or language that our senior editors viewed as vague.”

    One correction, which was added to the end of an article titled “What Is Compound Interest?” states that the story initially gave some wildly inaccurate personal finance advice. “An earlier version of this article suggested a saver would earn $10,300 after a year by depositing $10,000 into a savings account that earns 3% interest compounding annually. The article has been corrected to clarify that the saver would earn $300 on top of their $10,000 principal amount,” the correction states.

    Another correction suggests the AI tool plagiarized. “We’ve replaced phrases that were not entirely original,” according to the correction added to an article on how to close a bank account.

    Guglielmo did not state how many of the 77 published stories required corrections, nor did she break down how many required “substantial” fixes versus more “minor issues.” Guglielmo said the stories that have been corrected include an editors’ note explaining what was changed.

    CNET did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment.

    Despite the issues, Guglielmo left the door open to resuming use of the AI tool. “We’ve paused and will restart using the AI tool when we feel confident the tool and our editorial processes will prevent both human and AI errors,” she said.

    Guglielmo also said that CNET has more clearly disclosed to readers which stories were compiled using the AI engine. The outlet took some heat from critics on social media for not making overtly clear to its audience that “By CNET Money Staff” meant it was written using AI tools. The new byline is just: “By CNET Money.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Europe could dodge a recession. But the UK is in a mess | CNN Business

    Europe could dodge a recession. But the UK is in a mess | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    Business activity across the 20 countries that use the euro expanded in January for the first time in six months, according to data published Tuesday, providing fresh evidence that Europe’s economy could confound expectations and dodge a recession this year.

    An initial reading of the eurozone’s Purchasing Managers’ Index, which tracks activity in the manufacturing and service sectors, rose to 50.2 in January from 49.3 in December, indicating the first expansion since June. A reading above 50 represents growth.

    The return to modest growth was helped by falling energy prices and an easing of supply chain stress, which helped temper rising input costs for producers.

    The uptick was accompanied by a sharp improvement in optimism about the year ahead, as the recent reopening of China’s economy following the lifting of Covid restrictions helped push confidence to its highest level since last May. Growing optimism in Europe that China’s consumers will start spending again was reflected in Swiss watch maker Swatch

    (SWGAF)
    ’s prediction Tuesday of record sales for 2023.

    “A steadying of the eurozone economy at the start of the year adds to evidence that the region might escape recession,” said Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, the company that publishes the survey of executives at private sector companies.

    Williamson added, however, that a “renewed slide into contraction” should not be ruled out as borrowing costs rise off the back of interest rate hikes by the European Central Bank. But any downturn “is likely to be far less severe than previously feared,” he said.

    Berenberg chief economist Holger Schmieding said in a research note that “the still-low level of consumer confidence and the lagged impact of ECB rate hikes still point to a slight contraction in eurozone GDP near-term before the recovery can start to take hold.”

    Consumer sentiment in Germany, the region’s biggest economy, looks set to improve for a fourth consecutive month in February from a very low base, according to a separate survey published by GfK Tuesday.

    The picture looks far less promising in the United Kingdom, however, where January’s PMI survey showed the steepest decline in business activity since the national Covid lockdown two years ago, as higher interest rates and low consumer confidence depressed activity in the dominant services sector.

    The initial reading fell to 47.8 in January, from 49 in December, to remain in a state of contraction for the sixth consecutive month. The UK survey is conducted in conjunction with the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply.

    “Weaker-than-expected PMI numbers in January underscore the risk of the UK slipping into recession,” Williamson said. “Industrial disputes, staff shortages, export losses, the rising cost of living and higher interest rates all meant the rate of economic decline gathered pace again at the start of the year,” he added.

    The UK economy lost more working days to strikes between June and November 2022 than in any six-month period over the previous 30 years, according to data published last week by Britain’s Office for National Statistics.

    Williamson said Tuesday’s data reflected not only short-term hits to growth, such as strike action, but “ongoing damage to the economy from longer-term structural issues such as labor shortages and trade woes linked to Brexit.”

    Despite the gloomy start to the year, UK business expectations for the year ahead hit their highest level for eight months, driven by hopes of an improving global economic backdrop and cooling inflation.

    Separate data published by the ONS on Tuesday showed that UK government borrowing hit £27.4 billion ($33.7 billion) in December, the highest figure for that month since records began in 1993. This was driven by a sharp increase in spending on support for household energy bills, as well as the soaring cost of paying interest on government debt.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Asia’s richest man Gautam Adani is addicted to ChatGPT | CNN Business

    Asia’s richest man Gautam Adani is addicted to ChatGPT | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New Delhi
    CNN
     — 

    Asia’s richest man Gautam Adani says he is addicted to ChatGPT, the powerful new AI tool that interacts with users in an eerily convincing and conversational way.

    In a LinkedIn post last week, the 60-year-old India tycoon said that the release of ChatGPT was a “transformational moment in the democratization of AI given its astounding capabilities as well as comical failures.”

    The billionaire admitted to “some addiction” to ChatGPT since he has started using it.

    The tool, which artificial intelligence research company OpenAI made available to the general public late last year, has sparked conversations about how “generative AI” services — which can turn prompts into original essays, stories, songs and images after training on massive online datasets — could radically transform how we live and work.

    Some claim it will put artists, tutors, coders, and writers out of a job. Others are more optimistic, postulating that it will allow employees to tackle to-do lists with greater efficiency.

    “But there can be no doubt that generative AI will have massive ramifications,” Adani wrote in his post, adding that generative AI holds the “same potential and danger” as silicon chips.

    “Nearly five decades ago, the pioneering of chip design and large-scale chip production put the US ahead of rest of the world and led to the rise of many partner countries and tech behemoths like Intel, Qualcomm, TSMC, etc,” Adani, who has businesses in sectors ranging from ports to power stations, wrote.

    “It also paved the way for precision and guided weapons used in modern warfare with more chips mounted than ever before,” he added. The race in the field of generative AI will quickly get as “complex and as entangled as the ongoing silicon chip war,” he said.

    Chipmaking has emerged recently as a new flashpoint in US-China tensions, with Washington blocking sales of advanced computer chips and chip-making equipment to Chinese companies. Some Chinese investments in European chipmaking have also been blocked.

    The Indian infrastructure magnate believes that China has an edge over the United States in the AI race because Chinese researchers published twice as many academic papers on the subject as their American counterparts in 2021, he wrote in the post published on Friday after attending the World Economic Forum in Davos.

    Back home, Adani is also considering taking five new businesses to the stock market in the next five years, according to his conglomerate’s chief financial officer Jugeshinder Singh.

    Speaking to reporters on Saturday in the western Indian city of Ahmedabad — where the Adani empire is headquartered — Singh said the group’s metals and mining, energy, data center, airports, and roads businesses will likely be spun off between 2025 to 2028.

    Adani Enterprises, the conglomerate’s flagship company, functions as an incubator for Adani’s businesses. Once they have matured, they are often given their independence via a stock market listing. Many of Adani companies have become leading players in their respective sectors.

    Later this month, Adani Enterprises is also raising 200 billion rupees ($2.5 billion) by issuing new shares. It would be India’s biggest ever follow-on public share offering.

    A college dropout and a self-made industrialist, Adani is worth over $120 billion, making him the world’s third richest man, ahead of Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates.

    Shares of Adani’s seven listed companies — in sectors ranging from ports to power stations — have seen turbocharged growth in the last few years. But some analysts fear that this growth comes at a huge risk as Adani’s $206 billion juggernaut has been fueled by a $30 billion borrowing binge, making his business one of the most indebted in the country.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s what will happen to the economy as the debt ceiling drama deepens | CNN Business

    Here’s what will happen to the economy as the debt ceiling drama deepens | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Minneapolis
    CNN
     — 

    After the United States hit its debt ceiling on Thursday, the Treasury Department is now undertaking “extraordinary measures” to keep paying the government’s bills.

    A default could be catastrophic, causing “irreparable harm to the US economy, the livelihoods of all Americans and global financial stability,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has warned.

    Yellen on Friday told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that the impacts would be felt by every American.

    “If that happened, our borrowing costs would increase and every American would see that their borrowing costs would increase as well,” Yellen said. “On top of that, a failure to make payments that are due, whether it’s the bondholders or to Social Security recipients or to our military, would undoubtedly cause a recession in the US economy and could cause a global financial crisis.”

    She added: “It would certainly undermine the role of the dollar as a reserve currency that is used in transactions all over the world. And Americans — many people — would lose their jobs and certainly their borrowing costs would rise.”

    Dire warnings of debt ceiling trouble aren’t new. Federal lawmakers have reached agreements in the past, and this Congress has some time — until at least early June, according to Yellen’s public estimates — to reach an agreement on whether to raise or suspend the debt limit.

    Many economists say they expect an agreement will be reached. However, given the current “extremely fractious political environment,” it could be a long process that would contribute to “flare-ups” in financial market volatility, Moody’s Investors Service said in a note Thursday.

    Such volatility is coming at a time when the Federal Reserve is trying to bring down inflation while navigating a soft (or softish) landing with minimal harm to the economy.

    So what happens to the economy in a worst-case scenario of default?

    It’s an understandable question with an unsatisfying answer, said Michael Pugliese, vice president and economist with Wells Fargo’s corporate and investment bank.

    “The honest truth is, no one knows,” he said. “A widespread default by the US government is not something we’ve ever experienced and not something we’ve ever even come close to experiencing.”

    While a default isn’t something that can be modeled in the way a more historically common economic event such as a recession can be, the events of 2011 could lend some perspective as to what would happen if the debt ceiling drama turns into a debacle, said Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon.

    “2011 was the first time in a long time that we came close to a debt ceiling breach,” he said. “And that was a time when there was a lot of political fragmentation and there was a strong desire to essentially attach spending cuts to any debt ceiling increase.”

    The current environment includes similar brinksmanship and desires to attach spending cuts, he said.

    But some fear this fight may be tougher than those in the past, a concern reinforced by the fact it took 15 ballots to elect the Speaker of the House in what is normally the easiest vote taken by a new Congress.

    The economy nearly 13 years ago was different, as well.

    At the time, the Fed was in an easy monetary policy mode and the economy in a weaker position, as it was still recovering from the Great Recession of 2008, Pugliese said. Unemployment was north of 9% in July 2011.

    That same year, Treasury projected the “X date” — the date on which it would be unable to pay its obligations on time — would fall on August 2, 2011. That ultimately was the date when Congress passed, and President Barack Obama enacted, a law increasing the ceiling.

    The actual economic impact of the debt ceiling run-up in 2011 is hard to isolate and quantify, Pugliese said, noting how the sluggish US economic recovery also experienced spillover effects from global events, notably Europe’s sovereign debt crisis.

    Still, there were some indications that the protracted congressional battle contributed to a shake-up in the economy then, he said. Real GDP growth was a weak -0.1% on a quarter-over-quarter annualized basis in the third quarter of 2011. Financial markets were roiled, consumer confidence weakened, the US economic policy uncertainty index set a new high and Standard & Poor’s credit rating agency downgraded the United States to AA+ from AAA.

    “I think you would be hard pressed to say [the debt ceiling debacle] was a positive thing,” he said. “I think of it more as one other hurdle among a lot of other hurdles for the economy as it emerged from 9% unemployment at the time.”

    This time, if the X date were to come without a resolution, there is speculation that the Treasury could prioritize principal and interest payments to prevent a technical default, Pugliese said. There are potentially other “break the glass” options from the Treasury and Federal Reserve, but those are untested and short-term solutions, he added.

    “Someone, somewhere is going to get shortchanged if the government doesn’t have all of its money, whether that’s Social Security beneficiaries, defense contractors, civil service employees, veterans, [etc.],” he said.

    Joggers run past the Treasury Department on January 18, 2023, in Washington, DC.

    Adding to the uncertainty is the current economic climate, Daco said.

    “We are going into this delicate period at a time when the US economy is clearly slowing down and at a time when the global economic backdrop is also weakening … so the economic environment against which this debt ceiling debacle is unfolding is one of increased economic softening.”

    While a self-inflicted recession would be likely after the point when an X date is hit, some upheaval could come sooner, Daco said.

    “Financial markets and private sector actors tend to react ahead of that date,” he said. “If there is the anticipation that we will get very close to that drop-dead date, then financial market volatility generally tends to increase, stock prices tend to react adversely.”

    A Treasury default would undermine the global financial system, said Louise Sheiner, policy director at the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy and former senior economist with the Fed and the Council of Economic Advisers.

    “If Treasuries become something that people are worried about holding, then that has ripple effects throughout capital markets throughout the world, in ways that are really difficult to predict,” she said.

    Considering the potential consequences in the United States and abroad, Sheiner believes the debt ceiling will be lifted or suspended — eventually.

    “There’s no other way around it,” she said. “There’s no way that Congress is going to cut spending 20% in the middle of the year. It would plunge the economy into a recession. It would be a terrible policy.”

    She added: “If you care about the long-term debt, you have to actually change different laws, Social Security law, Medicare, or the tax law … you want to do that in the appropriate process, you want to do it well thought out. It’s not the kind of thing that should be done under duress.”

    CNN’s Maegan Vazquez, Matt Egan and Tami Luhby contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What we learned at Davos: The economy is a mess, but there’s still hope | CNN Business

    What we learned at Davos: The economy is a mess, but there’s still hope | 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
     — 

    Friday marks the end of the annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, an elite gathering of some of the wealthiest people and world leaders.

    The glitzy retreat into the Swiss Alps looks increasingly out of date as the biggest war in Europe since 1945 deepens splits in the world economy. But that doesn’t mean it’s not important.

    The meetings between CEOs, politicians, and global figures at Davos can help set the tone for the year ahead. Here are some of the key talking points from this week.

    It’s a mess: The big stories coming out of Davos this year are full of phrases like “fragmenting global economy,” “economic uncertainty” and “the year of inflation.”

    While many executives and economists are now striking a more optimistic tone, global leaders are still fretting about the economic outlook. That’s not surprising since they’re contending with worrisome uncertainties — Russia’s war in Ukraine is still raging, inflation and interest rates remain elevated, there are looming energy and food crises, supply chain kinks and the debt limit standoff in the United States, not to mention the threat of global recession.

    The meeting began with a new report by the WEF that dubbed this decade the “turbulent 20s” and the “age of the polycrisis.” Business executives, politicians and academics, the report said, are bracing for a gloomy world battered by intersecting crises, as rising volatility and depleted resilience boost the odds of painful simultaneous shocks.

    Gita Gopinath, the number two official at the International Monetary Fund, said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal that the IMF is worried globalization is in retreat. “We’re very concerned about geoeconomic fragmentation,” she said. The issue had come up a lot in meetings with member countries at the conference, she added.

    CEOs and political officials are also worried about the United States hitting its borrowing cap on Thursday, forcing the Treasury Department to start taking “extraordinary measures” to keep the government open.

    If an agreement isn’t reached, markets could plunge (like they did the last time this happened in 2011) and the United States risks having its credit rating downgraded again. The situation is a “mess,” said Peter Orszag, CEO of financial advisory at Lazard.

    JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon told CNBC from Davos on Thursday that the reputation of the United States as creditworthy is “sacrosanct.” To even question it, he said, is the wrong thing to do. “That is just a part of the financial structure of the world. This is not something you should be playing games with at all.”

    But it may not be that bad: Many leaders’ economic forecasts actually struck a semi-positive tone, even as they factored in strong headwinds.

    So far, energy supplies have held up in Europe, and the US and China are engaging in diplomatic relations — Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He met in Zurich on Wednesday.

    China’s removal of strict coronavirus restrictions late last year is also expected to unleash a wave of spending that may offset economic weakness in the United States and Europe.

    Climate change was a hot topic: The rich and powerful do love to flock to Davos in their carbon-emitting private jets to discuss climate change. But this year, severe warnings were issued to global leaders.

    The UN Secretary General accused fossil fuel producers and their financial backers of “racing to expand production, knowing full well that their business model is inconsistent with human survival.”

    Speaking at Davos on Wednesday, António Guterres said the commitment to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels is “going up in smoke.”

    “We are flirting with climate disaster. Every week brings a new climate horror story,” he said.

    Swedish activist Greta Thunberg also made her way to Switzerland and delivered a “cease and desist letter” to fossil fuel CEOs — signed by more than 800,000 people.

    The AI revolution is here: Some CEOs at Davos admitted that they’re using the revolutionary new AI bot, ChatGPT, to do their work for them, reports my colleague Julia Horowitz.

    Jeff Maggioncalda, the CEO of online learning provider Coursera, said that he uses the tool to bang out emails.

    “I use it as a writing assistant and as a thought partner,” Maggioncalda told CNN from Davos.

    Christian Lanng, CEO of digital supply chain platform Tradeshift, said he uses the ChatGPT to write emails and claims no one has noticed the difference. He even had it perform some accounting work, a service for which Tradeshift currently employs an expensive professional services firm.

    “I see these technologies acting as a copilot, helping people do more with less,” Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella told an audience in Davos this week.

    There’s a saying on Wall Street that bad news for the economy is actually good news for the stock market and vice versa, reports my colleague Paul R. La Monica.

    That’s because investors often bet that dismal headlines will eventually prompt the Federal Reserve and other central banks to cut interest rates and provide more stimulus that can help boost corporate profits…and stock prices.

    But the debt ceiling debate in Washington is changing all of that.

    Wednesday’s big market sell-off and the continued slide Thursday might represent a turning point for market sentiment. Still, after a promising start to the year, stocks have seemingly taken a turn for the worse. Bad news actually might be bad news.

    “We’ve been snuggled up in expectations of a soft landing for the US economy,” said Kit Juckes, chief global foreign exchange strategist at Societe Generale, in a report Thursday. “Take away the blanket and it feels chilly.”

    Netflix announced Thursday that its founder Reed Hastings is stepping down as co-CEO at the company and will serve as executive chairman. Hastings will be replaced by co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, reports my colleague Clare Duffy.

    Under Hastings’ leadership, Netflix disrupted legacy movie rental companies like Blockbuster and helped shake up Hollywood by kicking off an arms race investing in original content.

    Last year, however, Netflix saw its stock and reputation take a hit after losing subscribers amid heightened competition from rival streaming services. In response, Netflix introduced a lower-priced, ad-supported tier for the first time in its history.

    Those changes may be paying off. In its earnings report on Thursday, the streamer said it added more than 7.6 million subscribers during the final three months of last year, well above the 4.5 million additions it had projected, for a total of more than 230 million paying subscribers worldwide.

    “Reed Hastings stepping down from his current role raises a lot of questions about Netflix’s future strategy,” Jamie Lumbley, analyst at investment firm Third Bridge, said in a statement. “While the subscriber growth numbers are encouraging, revenue growth is sluggish with the backdrop of a potential recession looming on everyone’s mind.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Federal Reserve is testing how climate change could hurt big banks | CNN Business

    The Federal Reserve is testing how climate change could hurt big banks | 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
     — 

    The largest six banks in the United States have been given until July to show the Federal Reserve what effects disastrous climate change scenarios could have on their bottom lines.

    Noting the risks could be “material,” the Fed said the banks will have to show how their finances fare under a number of climate stress tests, including heat waves, wildfires, floods and droughts, according to details of a new Fed pilot program released on Tuesday.

    “The pilot exercise includes physical risk scenarios with different levels of severity affecting residential and commercial real estate portfolios in the Northeastern United States and directs each bank to consider the impact of additional physical risk shocks for their real estate portfolios in another region of the country,” wrote the Fed.

    The Federal Reserve first announced the pilot program in September, noting that Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo would participate.

    Climate activists said that the project was long overdue (Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has been questioned about it multiple times over the last year), and that other central banks are far ahead of the Fed on climate risk assessments. The Bank of England ran a similar exercise in 2021.

    They also said the proposal lacked any real teeth. In its announcement the Federal Reserve stressed that the exercise “is exploratory in nature and does not have capital consequences.” It also said that it would not publish individual banks’ results.

    San Francisco Federal Reserve President Mary Daly told CNN in October Thursday that this was a learning and exploratory exercise for the Federal Reserve. It would be “incredibly premature to jump to the conclusion that any new policies or programs would come out of it,” she said.

    The other side: Critics of the pilot program have argued that the Federal Reserve was overstepping its boundaries and that they might soon begin to enforce financial penalties.

    “The Fed’s new ‘pilot’ program is the first step toward pressuring banks into limiting loans to and investments in traditional energy companies and other disfavored carbon-emitting sectors,” wrote former Republican Senator Pat Toomey, then a ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee. “The real purpose of this program is to ultimately produce new regulatory requirements.”

    Powell said last week that the central bank would not become a “climate policymaker.”

    “Today, some analysts ask whether incorporating into bank supervision the perceived risks associated with climate change is appropriate, wise, and consistent with our existing mandates,” Powell said last Tuesday. “In my view, the Fed does have narrow, but important, responsibilities regarding climate-related financial risks. These responsibilities are tightly linked to our responsibilities for bank supervision. The public reasonably expects supervisors to require that banks understand, and appropriately manage, their material risks, including the financial risks of climate change.”

    The discovery, movement and use of oil has played an outsized role in shaping geopolitics over the past century and a half. But over the next 50 years, global interaction and wealth are more likely to be influenced by microchips, Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger told CNN Tuesday.

    “Where the technology supply chains are, and where semiconductors are built, is more important for the next five decades,” Gelsinger said in an interview with CNN’s Julia Chatterley at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

    Intel (INTC) is betting those predictions prove true. The company announced in 2021 it would invest $20 billion to build two new US chipmaking facilities, as well as up to $90 billion in new European factories, aimed at reasserting its position as the leader of the semiconductor industry, reports my colleague Clare Duffy.

    Gelsinger said the company’s investment in new manufacturing facilities in the United States, Europe and elsewhere is important not only for the company’s future, but for the “globalization of the most critical resource to the future of the world.”

    “We need this geographically balanced, resilient supply chain,” he said.

    The announcements also came amid concerns about the concentration of manufacturing for chips, in Asia, particularly China and Taiwan, during the Covid-19 pandemic and as geopolitical tensions grew. Issues in the chip supply chain in recent years have caused shortages and shipping delays of everything from desktop computers and iPhones to cars.

    “If we’ve learned one thing from the Covid crisis and this multi-year journey that we’ve been on it’s we need resilience in our supply chains,” Gelsinger said, adding that Intel’s manufacturing investments are aimed at “leveling that playing field so that good investment decisions can be made.”

    The years following the peak of the Covid pandemic have not been good for wealth equality.

    The world’s wealthiest residents have been getting far richer, far faster than everyone else over the past two years, reports my colleague Tami Luhby.

    The fortune of the 1% soared by $26 trillion during that period, while the bottom 99% only saw their net worth rise by $16 trillion, according to Oxfam’s annual inequality report released Sunday.

    And the wealth accumulation of the super-rich accelerated during the pandemic. Looking over the past decade, they netted just half of all the new wealth created, compared to two-thirds during the last few years.

    Meanwhile, many of the less fortunate are struggling. Some 1.7 billion workers live in countries where inflation is outpacing wages. And poverty reduction likely stalled last year after the number of global poor skyrocketed in 2020.

    “While ordinary people are making daily sacrifices on essentials like food, the super-rich have outdone even their wildest dreams,” said Gabriela Bucher, executive director of Oxfam International.

    “Just two years in, this decade is shaping up to be the best yet for billionaires — a roaring ’20s boom for the world’s richest,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Yen falls after Bank of Japan maintains ultra-easy policy | CNN Business

    Yen falls after Bank of Japan maintains ultra-easy policy | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    The yen plunged on Wednesday after the Bank of Japan decided to maintain its ultra-easy monetary policy, defying market expectations that rising inflation could force the central bank to move away from low interest rates.

    The BOJ kept its yield curve control (YCC) targets unchanged as it concluded a two-day policy meeting on Wednesday. It left the short-term interest rate at an ultra-dovish minus 0.1% and the 10-year Japanese Government Bonds (JGB) yield around 0%.

    The YCC policy is a pillar of the central bank’s effort to keep interest rates low and stimulate the economy.

    “Japan’s economy, despite being affected by factors such as high commodity prices, has picked up as the resumption of economic activity has progressed while public health has been protected from Covid-19,” the central bank said in its quarterly outlook report, adding that slowdowns in overseas economies could put downward pressure on growth.

    The Japanese yen tumbled against the US dollar shortly after the announcement. It last traded at 131.34 yen per dollar, down 2.5%. Last Friday, it hit a seven-month high of 127.46 against the greenback.

    Last month, the BOJ shocked global markets by allowing the 10-year JGB yield to move 50 basis points on either side of its 0% target, in a move that stoked speculation the central bank may follow the same direction as other major economies by allowing rates to rise further.

    The unexpectedly hawkish decision caused stocks to tumble, while sending the yen and bond yields soaring.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Federal student loan office has lots to do but no new money to do it | CNN Politics

    Federal student loan office has lots to do but no new money to do it | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Big headaches for student loan borrowers could be on the horizon.

    Their monthly payments could restart as early as this summer after a three-year pause. And the federal office that oversees the student loan system is operating under the same budget as last year – which could complicate any efforts to make sure the repayment process goes smoothly, as well as the office’s plans to overhaul the system.

    When Congress passed the government’s annual budget in December, the Federal Student Aid office got about $800 million less than what the Biden administration had asked for. After granting steady increases in previous years, lawmakers left funding for the office’s operations flat at about $2 billion.

    Republican lawmakers touted how Congress provided no new funding to help implement President Joe Biden’s controversial student loan forgiveness plan – which is currently tied up in the courts. If the Supreme Court allows the forgiveness program to move forward, it would also be a huge lift for the Federal Student Aid office.

    “I think it’s particularly unfortunate for borrowers that the political fight over loan forgiveness has resulted in flat funding this year,” said Jonathan Fansmith, assistant vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, an advocacy group for colleges and universities.

    “Wherever the cracks start to show, borrowers are going to be impacted,” Fansmith added.

    The Federal Student Aid office, which has about 1,400 employees and provides about $112 billion in grant, work-study and loan funds annually, has a lot on its plate.

    The office oversees the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio but has also taken on additional work to revamp the federal student aid application form, known as the FAFSA, and to overhaul some federal student loan programs. Last week, it announced a plan to start making significant changes to its income-driven repayment program this year.

    “I think certainly a number of their priorities will either not get done on the timeline that they had originally hoped for, or not get done at all,” said Michele Shepard, senior director of college affordability at The Institute for College Access and Success, an advocacy group.

    But the Department of Education says it can still meet the timelines it has set.

    “The several hundred-million-dollar shortfall will of course have an impact on these important bipartisan priorities, but we will continue to do everything we can with the available resources to better serve students and protect taxpayer dollars,” the department said in a statement sent to CNN.

    Still, that means the Federal Student Aid office would be doing more work with less money. Here are some of the tasks it is expected to tackle this year:

    Federal student loan borrowers have not had to make any payments since March 2020, thanks to a pandemic-related pause that has been extended by both the Trump and Biden administrations several times.

    Most recently, Biden extended the pause after his student loan forgiveness program was halted by federal courts. The administration had told borrowers debt relief would be granted before payments restarted.

    The payment pause will now last until 60 days after litigation over Biden’s student loan forgiveness program is resolved. If the program has not been implemented and the litigation has not been resolved by June 30, payments will resume 60 days after that.

    Bringing roughly 44 million borrowers back into repayment at one time is an unprecedented task. Many people may be confused about how much they owe, when to pay and how. Missing payments can result in monetary fees.

    The government contracts with several outside organizations, such as MOHELA and Nelnet, to handle servicing the federal student loans. But it’s up to the Federal Student Aid office to communicate with the servicers about when payments restart and how.

    “To be kind, the quality of student loan servicing has not been stellar,” Fansmith said.

    “If you multiply all of these issues, even if small, by 44 million borrowers, it’s a massive national problem,” he added.

    In late February, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases concerning Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, which could deliver up to $20,000 of debt relief for millions of low- and middle-income borrowers.

    A decision on whether the program is legal and can move forward is expected by June. Until then, it is on hold and no debt will be discharged under the program.

    Biden’s student loan forgiveness program has faced several legal challenges since the president announced it in August. The Department of Education had received about 26 million applications for debt relief by the time a federal district court judge struck down the program on November 10.

    The legal back-and-forth has created confusion for borrowers around the status of the program. Adding to the uncertainty, about 9 million people received an email from the Department of Education in the fall that mistakenly said their application for student loan forgiveness had been approved.

    The Biden administration has plans to overhaul some of its student loan repayment programs and the Federal Student Aid office is charged with rolling those out.

    In July, the Department of Education plans to implement permanent changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program to make it easier for government and nonprofit workers to qualify for debt relief after making 10 years of payments. The program has long been plagued with loan servicing problems.

    Big changes to the department’s income-driven repayment plans are also in the works, aimed at reducing monthly debt burdens as well as the total amount borrowers pay over the lifetime of their loans.

    The new regulations are expected to cap payments at 5% of a borrower’s discretionary income, down from 10% that is offered under most current income-driven plans. As a result, single borrowers making less than $30,600 per year would not need to make any payments under the proposal, up from the current $24,000 threshold.

    The changes would also forgive remaining balances after 10 years of repayment, instead of 20 or 25 years, as well as cover the borrower’s unpaid monthly interest.

    The Department of Education said last week that it expects to start implementing some of these provisions later this year.

    Each year, as part of its normal work, the Federal Student Aid office processes millions of FAFSA applications from students. Generally, the form is released in October for the following academic year.

    Every college student needs to fill out the FAFSA in order to qualify for federal student loans, grants and work-study aid. But it has long been criticized as too long and complicated.

    Congress passed a law in 2021 that simplifies the FAFSA form, and the Federal Student Aid office has been working on implementing the changes – which financial aid experts hope will be done before October this year.

    The office was supposed to have had the changes already done, but the effective date was pushed back by a year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Forget inflation, it’s all about earnings | CNN Business

    Forget inflation, it’s all about earnings | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    To everything there is a season and now is the time for earnings.

    Over the past few weeks investors have been squarely focused on inflation and Fed policy, but now market reactions are getting bigger for earnings (especially the misses) and smaller for economic data.

    What’s happening: “We expect earnings to take the center stage going forward,” wrote Bank of America strategists Savita Subramanian and Ohsung Kwon in a note on Friday. They noted that over the last three quarters, S&P 500 reactions to earnings beats and misses have soared higher and have now surpassed the one-day market reaction to both CPI inflation and Fed policy meeting decisions.

    Companies that missed on both sales and earnings-per-share during the last quarter underperformed the S&P 500 by nearly six percentage points on average the next day, the largest reaction to earnings misses on record.

    Shares of Disney sank 13.16% last November — their lowest level in more than two years — when they missed earnings estimates. Meta shares plummeted 24% after showing a drop in third-quarter revenue in October, the company’s second consecutive quarterly revenue decline. And shares of Palantir closed down more than 11% in November after it missed estimates only slightly.

    “We see this as a narrative shift in the market from the Fed and inflation to earnings: reactions to earnings have been increasing, while reactions to inflation data and FOMC meetings have been getting smaller,” wrote Subramanian and Kwon.

    So we can expect some serious volatility over the next few weeks as companies report their fourth quarter corporate earnings.

    Bank of America’s predictive analytics team analyzed earnings transcripts to calculate sentiment scores and found that corporate sentiment remained flat in the third quarter, well off its highs, which points to a potential earnings decline ahead.

    Similarly, companies’ references to of better business conditions (specific usage of the words “better” or “stronger” vs. “worse” or “weaker”) remained well below the historical average, and mentions of optimism dropped to the lowest level since the first quarter of 2020.

    So far, swings have been to the downside. S&P 500 fourth-quarter earnings-per-share estimates have dropped by about 7% since October. Early earnings reports from some of the largest financial institutions point to a bleak quarter.

    Bad news ahead: The estimated earnings decline for the S&P 500 in the fourth quarter of 2022 is -3.9%, according to a FactSet analysis. If that is indeed the actual drop, it will mark the first earnings decline reported by the index since the third quarter of 2020.

    Over the past few weeks, reported FactSet, earnings expectations for the first and second quarters of 2023 switched from year-over-year growth to year-over-year declines.

    The latest: JPMorgan beat estimates for fourth-quarter revenue but also increased the amount of money for expected defaults on loans. The bank added a $2.3 billion provision for credit losses in the quarter, a 49% increase from the third quarter.

    The move was driven by a “modest deterioration in the Firm’s macroeconomic outlook, now reflecting a mild recession in the central case,” said the report. On a subsequent call, JPMorgan CFO Jeremy Barnum told reporters that the bank expects a recession to hit by the fourth-quarter of 2023.

    Bank of America

    (BAC)
    also beat earnings expectations but CEO Brian Moynihan said Friday that the bank is preparing for rising unemployment and a recession in 2023. “Our baseline scenario contemplates a mild recession,” he said. The bank added a $1.1 billion provision for credit losses, a sharp change from last year when that number was negative.

    What’s next: Hold on to your hats. During the upcoming week, 26 S&P 500 companies are scheduled to report results for the fourth quarter.

    Apple CEO Tim Cook has responded to angry shareholders by recommending that the company cut his pay this year, reports my colleague Anna Cooban.

    Cook was granted $99.4 million in total compensation last year. The vast majority of his 2022 compensation — about 75% — was tied up in company shares, with half of that dependent on share price performance.

    But shareholders voted against Cook’s pay package after Apple’s stock fell nearly 27% last year. The vote is nonbinding, but the board’s compensation committee said Cook himself requested the reduction.

    “The compensation committee balanced shareholder feedback, Apple’s exceptional performance, and a recommendation from Mr. Cook to adjust his compensation in light of the feedback received,” the company said in its annual proxy statement released Thursday.

    But don’t cry for Tim Cook just yet. This year, the executive’s share award target is $40 million. About $30 million, or three-quarters, of that is linked to share price performance. The tech boss, who has headed up Apple

    (AAPL)
    since 2011, is estimated to have a personal wealth of $1.7 billion, according to Forbes.

    The bottom line: Apple’s share price, like other tech companies, plunged last year as coronavirus lockdowns shuttered some of its factories in China. Supply chain bottlenecks and fears that a global economic slowdown would crimp demand also dragged down its stock.

    Angry investors believe that the person at the helm of the company should also see a drop in pay.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • George Santos said accused ‘Ponzi scheme’ he worked at was ‘100% legitimate’ when accused of fraud in 2020 | CNN Politics

    George Santos said accused ‘Ponzi scheme’ he worked at was ‘100% legitimate’ when accused of fraud in 2020 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Republican Rep. George Santos, said a company later accused of running a “Ponzi scheme” was “100% legitimate” when it was accused by a potential customer of fraud in 2020, more than a year before it was sued by the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Once the company, where he worked, came under federal scrutiny, Santos claimed publicly that he was unaware of accusations of fraud at the firm, a CNN KFile review of Santos’ social media and statements found.

    Santos, the embattled freshman Republican, faces growing pressure to resign after he lied and misrepresented his educational, work and family history, including falsely claiming he was Jewish and the descendant of Holocaust survivors. Santos admitted to “embellishing” his resume, but has maintained he is “not a criminal.”

    Santos worked at Harbor City Capital Corp. in 2020 and 2021, a company the SEC said was a “classic Ponzi scheme” in an April 2021 complaint against the firm. A Ponzi scheme is a type of fraud where existing investors are paid with funds from new investors, often promising artificially high rates of return with little risk. Santos was not named in the SEC complaint.

    Joseph Murray, an attorney for Rep. Santos, told CNN in an email on Thursday that Santos was unaware of wrongdoing at the company.

    “As to any questions about Harbor City Capital, in light of the ongoing investigation, and for the benefit of the victims, it would be inappropriate to respond other than to say that Congressman Santos was completely unaware of any illegal activity going on at Harbor City Capital,” Murray told CNN.

    Santos told The Daily Beast in 2022 that he was “as distraught and disturbed as everyone else” to learn of allegations against Harbor City. But in a since-removed tweet on his since-deleted personal Twitter account, a potential customer questioned claims the company had a 100% bank guarantee on their investment in the form of a stand by line of credit (SBLC).

    “The market instability is leading to sever (sic) capital erosion. @HarborCityCap offers you a strategy that mitigates loss and risk while creating cash flow, meanwhile your principle is 100% secured by an SBLC held by various major institutions. #fixedincome #alternativeinvestment #win,” Santos tweeted in April 2020 under the name George Devolder, using his mother’s family name.

    In June, a potential customer responded to that tweet from Santos saying he looked into a SBLC from Harbor City and found it to be fraudulent.

    “George, this SBLC I received from Harbor City was looked into, and Deutsche Bank claims is a complete fraud and not signed by the bank officer on the document. How do you explain this?,” the user said.

    “I’m sorry I’m not following you. Could you please send me an email at George.devolder@harborcity.com and we can go over this together. Our SBLC is 100% legitimate and issued by their institution. I look forward to hearing from you,” responded Santos.

    In fact, according to the SEC complaint, “at no point” was Harbor City Capital “ever issued a SBLC,” despite claims from the company.

    Dylan Riddle, a spokesman for Deutsche Bank, told CNN on Monday that they had no affiliation with Harbor City Capital.

    “Harbor City Capital was not a client of Deutsche Bank,” he said.

    Attorney Katherine C. Donlon, the court-appointed receiver for Harbor City Capital told CNN in an email on Friday Santos was affiliated with Harbor City Capital from mid January 2020 through April 2021.

    On Wednesday, the Nassau County GOP and several New York Republican congressmen called on Santos to resign. Santos still has the tacit support of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who said it was up to the voters to decide.

    In other media reviewed by CNN’s KFile from 2020, Santos called himself “the head guy” at the Harbor City office in New York and the executive at the company. In one 2020 interview, Santos said he managed a $1.5 billion fund for the company with returns of 12% and 26% on investors’ money.

    “Currently at Harbor City Capital, I manage a 1.5 billion fund, right?,” said Santos. “And I know how to manage it well. I give record returns to anybody who watches this, they’ll understand. I’m giving, a 12% fixed yield income return a year, which nobody in the market’s giving four and we’re giving 12. We’re also giving up to 20 to 26% in IRR return on our investors’ capital. So if there’s something I know how to do, it’s manage dollars and grow them.”

    The SEC filed a complaint in April 2021 against Harbor City Capital and founder Jonathan P. Maroney, alleging that Maroney raised $17.1 million by deceiving more than 100 hundred investors through a series of unregistered fraudulent security offerings and used the money to enrich himself and his family. The SEC claimed that of the investor money collected and deposited into Harbor City Capital bank accounts “at most” only $449,000 were used for business expenses.

    Neither Santos nor other Harbor City Capital employees were named in the complaint.

    In October, Maroney was granted a stay in federal court for the SEC’s civil lawsuit, after Maroney noted that he “is currently the target in a related criminal investigation.” He is representing himself in the case.

    CNN reached out to Maroney for comment but did not receive a response.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bank earnings fail to impress investors as recession worries rise | CNN Business

    Bank earnings fail to impress investors as recession worries rise | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and asset management giant BlackRock posted results that topped Wall Street’s forecasts Friday, but investors were nonetheless a little disappointed at first.

    Trading was choppy, with most bank stocks falling at the open before rebounding. Shares of JPMorgan Chase

    (JPM)
    were up about 2.5% in late afternoon trading while BofA

    (BAC)
    was up 2%. Wells Fargo

    (WFC)
    , which reported earnings that missed Wall Street’s targets, reversed earlier losses and was up 3%. Citi

    (C)
    was up 2% while BlackRock

    (BLK)
    was flat.

    “The earnings were solid, but the market is concerned with recession fears,” said John Curran, managing director and head of North American bank coverage at MUFG.

    Investors might have been concerned by the downbeat tone of the big banks. Executives are clearly still worried about inflation and the threat of a recession this year following several big interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve.

    JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said in the bank’s earnings statement that although the economy is still strong and that consumers and businesses are spending and healthy, “we still do not know the ultimate effect of the headwinds coming from geopolitical tensions including the war in Ukraine, the vulnerable state of energy and food supplies, persistent inflation that is eroding purchasing power and has pushed interest rates higher.”

    The bank added in the earnings release that it now expects a “mild recession” as a base economic case. CFO Jeremy Barnum added during a conference call with reporters that in addition to the slowdown that has already started in its home lending unit, it is starting to see “headwinds” in auto lending.

    Meanwhile, BofA CEO Brian Moynihan noted that this is “an increasingly slowing economic environment” and Wells Fargo CEO Charlie Scharf said “we are carefully watching the impact of higher rates on our customers.” Wells Fargo recently announced plans to pull back on its massive mortgage business.

    Banks are clearly worried about a looming recession, and Wall Street has taken notice.

    Moody’s Investors Service analyst Peter Nerby noted in a report that “credit provisions are rising” at JPMorgan Chase and that Citi “built capital and reserves in anticipation of a slowdown in core markets.”

    The Fed’s rate hikes aren’t helping either.

    “Higher than expected interest rates pose a significant risk to the outlook for credit quality, loan growth and net interest margins,” said David Wagner, a portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors, in an email.

    Concerns about the economy were one reason why stocks plunged in 2022, suffering their worst year since 2008. As a result of the Wall Street slump, there was a major slowdown in merger activity and initial public offerings.

    That hurt the investment banking businesses for the top banks. JPMorgan Chase and Citi each said that advisory fees plummeted nearly 60% in the quarter.

    Goldman Sachs

    (GS)
    and Morgan Stanley

    (MS)
    will give more color about the health of Wall Street next Tuesday when they both report their fourth quarter results.

    Goldman Sachs, which has aggressively built up a consumer banking unit over the past few years, has struggled to make money in that division. Goldman Sachs disclosed in a regulatory filing Friday that it has lost more than $3 billion in its consumer business since 2020.

    There were some signs of optimism though. BlackRock, which owns the massive iShares family of exchange-traded funds, reported a rebound in assets under management from the third quarter to the fourth quarter as stocks soared in October and November.

    “The current environment offers incredible opportunities for long-term investors,” said BlackRock CEO Larry Fink in the earnings release.

    [ad_2]

    Source link