Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Fed Rate Increases Have ‘A Ways to Go,’ Top Official Says

    Christopher Waller, a Federal Reserve governor, said he favored a quarter-point move. Many of his colleagues agree — or haven’t ruled it out.Christopher Waller, a Federal Reserve governor, added his voice on Friday to a chorus of central bank officials who favor slowing rate increases at the central bank’s Feb. 1 meeting. That most likely locks in place market expectations for a return to smaller policy adjustments after a series of jumbo rate moves.Mr. Waller spoke on the eve of the central bank’s quiet period before its meeting, which means investors will not hear any more commentary from Fed officials before they make their rate decision. His comments were in line with what many of his colleagues have said: Several openly support slowing down rate increases at the meeting, and top policymakers who haven’t made up their minds have not ruled it out.Central bankers raised rates rapidly in 2022, lifting borrowing costs in three-quarter-point increments for much of the year, before slowing to a half-point move in December. But they are entering a new phase that is focused more on how high interest rates rise and less on how quickly they get there. The thinking is that rates are now high enough to meaningfully slow the economy, and that adjusting them more gradually will give policymakers time to see how their policy is working.That has nudged policymakers toward a quarter-point increase, also known as 25 basis points, an increment that was common before the pandemic.“After climbing steeply and using monetary policy to significantly raise interest rates throughout the economy, it was apparent to me that it was time to slow, but not halt, the rate of ascent,” Mr. Waller said of the December downshift. “There appears to be little turbulence ahead, so I currently favor a 25-basis-point increase” at the Fed’s next meeting, he said.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • 175 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Here’s what you need to know about a blockbuster court fight over Cuba’s debt

    The Cuban government is facing a high-stakes court case over unpaid commercial debt.
    If Cuba loses, it could ultimately cost the island nation billions.
    The loans in question were denominated in German Deutschmarks, a currency that no longer exists.

    A Cuban pilgrim participates in the San Lazaro procession at El Rincon church in Havana, on December 16, 2022.
    Yamil Lage | AFP | Getty Images

    Accusations of bribery, an imprisoned Cuban bank official and Interpol all feature in a high-stakes case against the Cuban government set to start Monday in the United Kingdom’s High Court.
    The legal battle is over a portion of Cuba’s unpaid commercial debt dating back to the 1980s. If Cuba loses, it could ultimately cost the island nation billions in long overdue payments — and, in a worst-case scenario, lead to the seizure of government-owned assets such as oil tankers and in-bound wire transfers.

    Investment fund CRF1, originally called the Cuba Recovery Fund, is suing Cuba for roughly $72 million in principal and past due interest on two loans it now owns. They were originally granted to the Caribbean island nation by European commercial banks in the 1980s, and were denominated in German Deutschmarks, a currency that no longer exists.
    This is the first time Cuba is facing legal action for what is estimated to be about $7 billion in outstanding commercial loans from the 1970s and 1980s. If CRF wins this case on this small slice of that debt, it could lead to further lawsuits from creditors with claims rising into the billions. Any unpaid judgments could lead to asset seizures.
    If they don’t reach a deal, Cuba could then face yet another court fight over whether it finally has to pay. If CRF is successful, it could lead to many other creditors filing suit, with claims rising into the billions.
    Cuba would be unable to borrow in the international capital markets until its debts are settled. According to the World Bank, Cuba’s gross domestic product in 2020 was $107 billion, slightly larger than New York City’s budget. The country has managed to survive for decades on the largess of other sympathetic governments: the former Soviet Union, Venezuela and China. But with Venezuela financially strained and China facing a weaker economy, those lifelines look increasingly undependable.
    Because of the U.S. embargo against Cuba, American investors are prohibited from owning and trading Cuban debt, which frustrates some frontier-market hedge fund managers in the U.S. They argue that holding Cuban debt would better serve U.S. foreign policy interests because it would give Americans a seat at some future negotiating table.

    An old American car passes by the Floridita bar in Havana on December 27, 2022.
    Adalberto Roque | AFP | Getty Images

    Beyond the commercial debt, there are still nearly 6,000 claims outstanding from Americans and American companies whose properties were confiscated by the Cuban government after former leader Fidel Castro came to power in a coup in 1959.
    John Kavulich, the longtime head of the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, a private, nonpartisan nonprofit, says the lawsuit “may prove stimulative” to the U.S. and Cuban administrations “to negotiate a settlement for the 5,913 claims valued at $1.9 billion.”

    Details of the case

    The trial is expected to last eight days. It will feature remote testimony from an imprisoned former employee of the Banco Nacional de Cuba, Raul Eugenio Olivera Lozano.
    According to documents filed in the case, Lozano is serving a 13-year prison sentence after he was convicted in Cuba for accepting bribes of more than $25,000 in exchange for processing paperwork that allowed the loans in question to be reassigned to CRF from Chinese-owned ICBC Standard Bank. 
    In filings with the court, CRF says the bribery claims are “scurrilous” and that Lozano was railroaded by the Cuban government for the purpose of not having to pay back the loans. Human rights organizations have long criticized Cuba for arbitrary detention and lax rule of law. Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch describe it as one of the most repressive regimes in the world.
    There are other costs to consider, too. Thus far, the Cuban government has spent roughly $3 million on legal fees in its defense, and the plaintiffs have spent about $2.6 million. In the U.K., the loser pays the winner’s legal fees, so one of the parties will be out nearly $6 million. 
    Cuban officials and their lawyers declined to comment.
    Also expected to testify is Jeet Gordhandas. He is a representative of CRF whom the plaintiffs say was prevented from entering Mexico after the Cuban government issued a “Red Notice” through Interpol for his arrest, claiming he initiated the bribe.

    Cuban boxers prepare for their fights in the first official women’s boxing program in Cuba at the Giraldo Cordova boxing school in Havana, on December 17, 2022.
    Yamil Lage | AFP | Getty Images

    In more recent filings, the Cuban government appears to have backed away from the bribery accusation. Instead, it is arguing that the bank executives who facilitated the reassignment of the debt did not have the authority to do so.
    Cuba also argues that CRF, which is registered in the Cayman Islands, is a “vulture fund, which invests in distressed Cuban sovereign debt for enforcement purposes.”  David Charters, the chairman of CRF, pushed back: “Characterizing us as a vulture fund is a gross misrepresentation of us.”
    CRF, meanwhile, says in court filings that it first reached out to Cuba 10 years ago to settle the debt but were ignored. The fund also says it didn’t file suit until it made multiple attempts over the decade to meet with Cuban authorities.
    In 2018, CRF says in filings, the fund offered the Cuban government a better deal than the one the country struck in 2015 with bilateral creditors for billions in unpaid debts. Cuba also ignored that overture, according to CRF. Bilateral loans are government-to-government loans. 
    CRF would rather not go to court, Charters said in an interview, days before the trial.
    “We are seeking to engage Cuba even at this late stage. Even today we are ready to talk,” he said. “You make offers, and nothing happens, you are either ignored or rebuffed, so what do you do? It’s been a decade.”

    What happens to bad old debt

    Defaulted loans trade on the secondary market. There are investors who specialize in buying them at discounts to the loan’s face value and then in negotiating with the government in question to finally settle them. Usually, it’s at a discount to face value and some portion of the past due interest. 
    Often, the settlement is not in the form of cash, but rather in some other type of long-term financial instrument. One example is a GDP warrant, which pays out based on the growth level of country’s GDP over an extended period.
    GDP warrants were used in the Greek debt restructuring in 2012. Sometimes debts are settled via a debt-for-equity swap, in which the creditor receives a concession or ownership of a government-owned property such as an airport or a port, and the creditors receive a share of the revenues generated by the assets.
    For decades, Cuban debt has traded around 8 to 10 cents on the dollar, with occasional spikes driven by events such as the death of former Cuban dictator Fidel Castro in 2016 or the temporary thawing of U.S.-Cuba relations under then-President Barack Obama in 2014, in the hopes that a settlement was more likely.  
    Getting paid on very old, defaulted debt isn’t without precedent. Iraqi debt traded between 8 and 10 cents on the dollar for a decade, and then settled for roughly 32 cents on the dollar after the U.S. invasion in 2003.
    Even though Cuba’s defaulted debt is nearly 40 years old, there’s a precedent for bondholders waiting even longer. More than 300,000 holders of czarist-era Russian bonds, which the Bolsheviks defaulted on in 1917 after the revolution, received payment in 2000. 
    Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, a CNBC contributor, has 30 years of experience at the nexus of finance, economic development, and communication.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    New Orleans Port Expansion Shows Optimism on Future of Global Trade

    NEW ORLEANS — The pandemic-era collapse of supply chains spurred speculation that globalization was on the decline, as companies vowed to become less reliant on foreign providers of goods and services. But if New Orleans is any example, the world is headed for less of a retreat from global trade and more of an overhaul to how it operates.A critical gateway between the Mississippi River and global oceans, New Orleans has been an entry and exit point for the United States since before the Louisiana Purchase. The city is now betting that position will continue — and even deepen — as the world enters a new era of global integration.The New Orleans port is one of the nation’s busiest for agricultural exports like soybeans and corn. But it has struggled to compete for the lucrative imports that are ferried on huge ships from Asia in part because those vessels cannot fit under a local bridge. As global supply chains rearrange in the pandemic’s wake, New Orleans’s proximity to Mexico and its position on the Mississippi River could help make it a crucial stop in what many expect to be a more resilient and supply chain of the future.Executives at the New Orleans port are wagering on that transformation: They recently unveiled a plan to spend $1.8 billion on expanding the port to a new site that can handle more trade and accommodate bigger boats.That optimism about the future of trade breaks with some of the worst fears of the past few years, as pandemic-related supply chain disruptions, Covid lockdowns in China and Russia’s war with Ukraine shook confidence in the global trading system. Policymakers and company executives vowed to become less reliant on China and to locate supply chains closer to home. That prompted predictions that the world was headed for a period of “de-globalization,” in which the trade and financial ties that have brought countries closer in recent decades would spin into reverse.So far, economic data show few signs of such a sharp retreat. Global trade volumes are growing more slowly, but they continue to reach new highs, with significantly more goods and currency crossing international borders than ever before.New Orleans has long been a key artery through which products made in the America’s South and Midwest flow to buyers overseas.Some firms are looking beyond China for manufacturing capacity, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are retreating from global integration: Many are turning to countries like Mexico, India and Vietnam. And even as pandemic supply chain issues have alerted companies to the risks inherent in the existing trading system, that seems to be encouraging them to diversify their global supply chains, not dismantle them.The trends, and the way institutions like the Port of New Orleans, are responding underscore that globalization is evolving rather than unraveling altogether. The changes to trade now underway seem likely to rework who partners with whom and could make international commerce less efficient and more expensive. But the profit motives that have encouraged companies to search out the globe for parts, workers and new markets are still going strong.“When I hear people say the word ‘globalization,’ what I hear is ‘cost minimization,’” Raphael Bostic, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, said in an interview on Jan. 7. “The new globalization is not going to have that second part to it.”Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • 113 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    The U.S. Hit Its Debt Limit. What Happens Next?

    The Treasury Department has started employing “extraordinary measures,” but the path to raising the debt ceiling is likely to be a long one.The United States hit a limit this week on how much money it can borrow, forcing the Treasury Department to initiate so-called extraordinary measures to make sure the nation has enough cash to fulfill its financial obligations.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen has told lawmakers that those measures will allow the United States to keep paying military salaries, retiree benefits and interest to bondholders through at least early June.But initiating those extraordinary measures is just the first step in a series of moves that will take place as the Treasury tries to keep the United States from defaulting on its debt. Ultimately, it will be up to Congress to decide whether to let the country borrow more money or allow it to default on its debt by failing to pay investors who expect interest and other payments.At stake is the fate of the U.S. economy, which could face a financial crisis and fall into a deep recession if lawmakers cannot reach an agreement.Among the looming questions is when the United States will hit the so-called X-date — the point at which the government can no longer find creative ways to stay beneath the $31.4 trillion debt limit and will need to borrow more money or fail to pay its bills.The other big question: Will Congress agree to raise the borrowing cap?So far, House Republicans have vowed to oppose any increase in the debt limit without spending cuts. President Biden has said the debt limit needs to be raised without conditions. That has set up what could be a protracted fight to ensure that the United States does not default on its debt.Here are some of the key moments to expect over the next few months.A Spring Budget BattleThe White House is expected to unveil its annual budget proposal in early March, outlining Mr. Biden’s spending priorities. That could serve as an opening bid for any negotiations between the Biden administration and Republicans in Congress, who have been calling for spending cuts and are likely to seize on this document as evidence of what they say is “runaway spending.”Understand the U.S. Debt CeilingCard 1 of 5What is the debt ceiling? More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    White House Aims to Reflect the Environment in Economic Data

    The Biden administration has set out to measure the economic value of ecosystems, offering new statistics to weigh in policy decisions.Forests that keep hillsides from eroding and clean the air. Wetlands that protect coastal real estate from storm surges. Rivers and deep snows that attract tourists and create jobs in rural areas. All of those are natural assets of perhaps obvious value — but none are accounted for by traditional measurements of economic activity.On Thursday, the Biden administration unveiled an effort to change that by creating a system for assessing the worth of healthy ecosystems to humanity. The results could inform governmental decisions like which industries to support, which natural resources to preserve and which regulations to pass.The administration’s special envoy for climate change, John Kerry, announced the plan in a speech at the World Economic Forum, the annual gathering of political and business leaders in Davos, Switzerland. “With this plan, the U.S. will put nature on the national balance sheet,” he said.The initiative will require the help of many corners of the executive branch to integrate the new methods into policy. The private sector is likely to take note as well, given rising awareness that extreme weather can wreak havoc on assets — and demand investment in renewable energy and sustainable agriculture.In the past, such undertakings have been politically contentious, as conservatives and industry groups have fought data collection that they saw as an impetus to regulation.A White House report said the effort would take about 15 years. When the standards are fully developed and phased in, researchers will still be able to use gross domestic product as currently defined — but they will also have expanded statistics that take into account a broader sweep of nature’s economic contribution, both tangible and intangible.Those statistics will help more accurately measure the impact of a hurricane, for example. As currently measured, a huge storm can propel economic growth, even though it leaves behind muddied rivers and denuded coastlines — diminishing resources for fishing, transportation, tourism and other economic uses.“You can look at the TV and know that we’ve lost beaches, we’ve lost lots of stuff that we really care about, that makes our lives better,” said Eli Fenichel, an assistant director at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “And you get an economist to go on and say, ‘G.D.P.’s going to go up this quarter because we’re going to spend a lot of money rebuilding.’ Being able to have these kinds of data about our natural assets, we can say, ‘That’s nice, but we’ve also lost here, so let’s have a more informed conversation going forward.’”John Kerry, the White House’s special envoy on climate, in Davos, Switzerland, this week. A Biden administration plan would incorporate the value of ecosystems into measurements of economic activity.Markus Schreiber/Associated PressTaking nature into economic calculations, known as natural capital accounting, is not a new concept. As early as the 1910s, economists began to think about how to put a number on the contribution of biodiversity, or the damage of air pollution. Prototype statistics emerged in the 1970s, and in 1994, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis proposed a way to augment its accounting tools with measures of environmental health and output.But Congress ordered the bureau to halt its efforts until an independent review could be completed. States whose economies depend on drilling, mining and other forms of natural resource extraction were particularly worried that the data could be used for more stringent regulation.“They thought that anything that measured the question of productivity of natural resources was inherently an environmental trick,” a Commerce Department official said afterward. Five years later, that independent review was completed in a report for the National Academy of Sciences. The academy panel — led by the Yale economist William Nordhaus, who went on to win the Nobel Prize for his work on the economic impact of climate change — said the bureau should continue.“Natural resources such as petroleum, minerals, clean water and fertile soils are assets of the economy in much the same way as are computers, homes and trucks,” the report read. “An important part of the economic picture is therefore missing if natural assets are omitted in creating the national balance sheet.”While the United States lagged, other countries moved ahead with incorporating nature into their core accounting. The United Nations developed a framework for doing so over the last decade that supported decisions such as assessing the impact of shrinking peat land and protecting an endangered species of tree. Britain has been publishing environmental-economic statistics for several years as well. International groups like the Network for Greening the Financial System, which includes most of the world’s central banks, use some of these techniques for assessing systemic risk in the financial system.The proposed plan will take into account a broader sweep of nature’s economic contribution, both tangible and intangible.Chanell Stone for The New York TimesSkepticism about including environmental considerations in economic and financial decision-making remains in the United States, where conservatives have disparaged investing guidelines that put a priority on a company’s performance along environmental, social and governance lines. The social cost of carbon, another measurement tool for assessing the economic impact of regulations through their effect on carbon emissions, was set close to zero during the Trump administration and has been increased significantly under President Biden.Understand Inflation and How It Affects YouFederal Reserve: Federal Reserve officials kicked off 2023 by grappling with a thorny question: How should central bankers understand inflation after 18 months of repeatedly misjudging it?Social Security: The cost-of-living adjustment, which helps the benefit keep pace with inflation, is set for 8.7 percent in 2023. Here is what that means.Tax Rates: The I.R.S. has made inflation adjustments for 2023, which could push many people into a lower tax bracket and reduce tax bills.Your Paycheck: Inflation is taking a bigger and bigger bite out of your wallet. Now, it’s going to affect the size of your paycheck in 2023.Benjamin Zycher, a senior fellow at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, expressed concern Thursday that the new approach would introduce a degree of subjectivity.“I think there’s a real danger that if in fact they’re trying to put environmental quality values into the national accounts, there’s no straightforward way to do that, and it’s impossible that it wouldn’t be politicized,” Dr. Zycher said in an interview. “That’s going to be a process deeply fraught with problems and dubious interpretations.”Few economic statistics are a perfect representation of reality, however, and all of them have to be refined to make sure they are consistent and comparable over time. Measuring the value of nature is inherently tricky, since there is often no market price to consult, but other sources of information can be equally illuminating. The Bureau of Economic Analysis has undertaken other efforts to measure the value of services that are never sold, like household labor.“That’s exactly why we need this sort of strategy,” said Nathaniel Keohane, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, a research and advocacy group. “To really develop the data we need so that it’s not subjective, and make sure we are really devoting the same quality control and focus on integrity that we do to other areas of economic statistics.”The strategy does not pretend to cover every aspect of nature’s value, or solve problems of environmental justice simply by more fully incorporating nature’s contribution, particularly for Indigenous communities. Those concerns, said Rachelle Gould, an associate professor of environmental studies at the University of Vermont, will need to be prioritized separately.“There are a lot of other ways nature matters that can’t be accounted for in monetary terms,” Dr. Gould said. “It’s appropriately cautious about what might be possible.” More

  • 163 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    As Fed Nears Next Rate Decision, Its Vice Chair Cites Reasons for Hope

    Lael Brainard, the vice chair of the Federal Reserve, emphasized that non-wage causes had driven inflation in a sweeping speech.The Federal Reserve’s second-in-command offered a hopeful analysis of America’s inflation situation on Thursday, emphasizing that many of the factors that have driven prices higher over recent years may be poised to fade.“It remains possible that a continued moderation in aggregate demand could facilitate continued easing in the labor market and reduction in inflation without a significant loss of employment,” Lael Brainard, the Fed’s vice chair, said in a speech at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business.Ms. Brainard spoke just days before Fed officials are set to begin the quiet period ahead of their Feb. 1 interest rate decision.In some ways, she broke with what her colleagues have been saying about the forces that could keep inflation high. Many central bankers have emphasized the roles that a tight labor market and strong wage growth are likely to play in propping up price increases, but Ms. Brainard focused on other factors that have sped up price increases, particularly when it comes to services.“There are a range of views on what it will take to bring down this component of inflation to prepandemic levels,” Ms. Brainard acknowledged in the remarks. She noted that wages are an important cost for services firms, so “one possible channel is through a weakening in labor demand.”But she added that “to the extent that inputs other than wages may have been responsible in part for important price increases,” a reversal in those factors could help to lower services inflation.In particular, Ms. Brainard noted that supply chain issues and jumps in fuel prices might be passing through to elevate some service costs, and that those could fade away, assuming supply chains continue to heal and gas stays relatively cheap.And Ms. Brainard also cited the reversal of swollen profit margins as something that could help inflation to moderate.Companies have enjoyed an unusual burst of pricing power in the pandemic era as repeated supply chain issues and resilient consumer demand have given them both a reason to try to raise prices and the wherewithal to do so without scaring away shoppers. Many firms have lifted what they are charging more than they needed to cover climbing costs, swelling their profits.“The labor share of income has declined over the past two years and appears to be at or below prepandemic levels, while corporate profits as a share of G.D.P. remain near postwar highs,” Ms. Brainard said.But that might be changing as demand wanes and price sensitivity returns.“The compression of these markups as supply constraints ease, inventories rise and demand cools could contribute to disinflationary pressures,” she said.The Fed is expected to raise interest rates again at its upcoming meeting as it tries to ensure that rapid inflation comes back under control. Officials slowed from a string of three-quarter-point moves in 2022 to a half-point move in December, and several have signaled that they would favor slowing to a quarter-point move at the February gathering.While Ms. Brainard did not speculate on what size rate move would be warranted in her prepared remarks, she did emphasize that borrowing costs will need to remain high to make sure that inflation moderates fully.“Policy will need to be sufficiently restrictive for some time to make sure inflation returns to 2 percent on a sustained basis,” she said. More

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    America Set to Hit Its Borrowing Limit Today, Raising Economic Fears

    The milestone will not immediately affect markets or growth, but it sets the stage for months of entrenched partisan warfare.WASHINGTON — The United States is expected to hit a congressionally imposed borrowing limit on Thursday, requiring the Treasury Department to engage in accounting maneuvers to ensure the federal government can keep paying its bills.The milestone of hitting the country’s $31.4 trillion debt cap is the product of decades of tax cuts and increased government spending by both Republicans and Democrats. But at a moment of heightened partisanship and divided government, it is also a warning of the entrenched partisan battles that are set to dominate Washington in the months to come, and that could end in economic shock.Newly empowered Republicans in the House have vowed that they will not raise the borrowing limit again unless President Biden agrees to steep cuts in federal spending. Mr. Biden has said he will not negotiate conditions for a debt-limit increase, arguing that lawmakers should lift the cap with no strings attached to cover spending that previous Congresses authorized.Treasury officials estimate the measures that they will begin employing on Thursday will enable the government to keep paying federal workers, Medicare providers, investors who hold U.S. debt and other recipients of federal dollars at least until early June. But economists warn that the nation risks a financial crisis and other immediate economic pain if lawmakers do not raise the limit before the Treasury Department exhausts its ability to buy more time.The episode has prompted fears in part because of the lessons both parties have taken from more than a decade of debt-limit fights. A bout of brinkmanship in 2011 between House Republicans and President Barack Obama nearly ended in the United States defaulting on its debt before Mr. Obama agreed to a set of caps on future spending increases in exchange for lifting the limit.Most Democrats have solidified in their position that negotiations over the debt limit only enhance the risks of economic calamity by encouraging Republicans to use it as leverage. That is particularly true of Mr. Biden, who successfully stared down Republicans and won an increase in 2021 with no stipulations.Newly elected Republicans, emboldened by anger among their base and conservative advocacy groups over failures in the past to exact concessions for raising the limit, have pledged not to let that happen again.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen has dismissed ideas for lifting the borrowing cap unilaterally, such as minting a $1 trillion coin, as fanciful.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesIn reality, both parties have approved policies that fueled the growth in government borrowing. Republicans repeatedly passed tax cuts when they controlled the White House over the last 20 years. Democrats have expanded spending programs that have often not been fully offset by tax increases. Both parties have voted for large economic aid packages to help people and businesses endure the 2008 financial crisis and the 2020 pandemic recession.Federal spending declined from its pandemic high in 2022, reaching nearly $6 trillion in the fiscal year, or just under 24 percent of the economy. The federal budget deficit, which is the shortfall between what the United States spends and what it takes in through taxes and other revenue, topped $1 trillion for the year. That is a decline from the past two years as emergency pandemic spending expired, though the Biden administration predicts the deficit will rise again in the current fiscal year.Understand the U.S. Debt CeilingCard 1 of 4What is the debt ceiling? More

  • 113 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell tests positive for Covid

    Powell, 69, is “experiencing mild symptoms,” according to the announcement.
    “Chair Powell is up to date with COVID-19 vaccines and boosters. Following Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, he is working remotely while isolating at home,” a news release said.

    Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell has tested positive for Covid-19, the central bank announced Wednesday morning.
    Powell, 69, is “experiencing mild symptoms,” according to the announcement.

    “Chair Powell is up to date with COVID-19 vaccines and boosters. Following Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, he is working remotely while isolating at home,” a news release said.
    No further details were provided.
    The policymaking Federal Open Market Committee next meets Jan. 31-Feb. 1. Markets widely expect the Fed to approve a 0.25 percentage point interest rate increase that would take the benchmark borrowing rate to a targeted range of 4.5%-4.75%.
    Powell’s most recent public appearance was a panel discussion Jan. 10 at the Riksbank in Sweden.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More