Evelyn Reynolds

The University of Michigan consumer survey showed that respondents expect inflation a year from now to be 4.3%, a 1 percentage point jump from January and the highest since November 2023.
Worries over inflation dovetailed with lower optimism overall, as the headline index fell to 67.8, a one-month drop of 4.6% and an 11.8% move lower from the same month a year ago.

People shop at a Whole Foods store on Feb. 3, 2025 in New York City.
Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images

Consumers grew dramatically more worried about near-term inflation as President Donald Trump pushed aggressive tariffs against major U.S. trading partners, a closely watched survey showed Friday.
The University of Michigan consumer survey for February showed that respondents expect the inflation rate a year from now to be 4.3%, a 1 percentage point jump from January and the highest level since November 2023.

Though Trump postponed tariffs against Canada and Mexico, the looming threat of price pass-throughs to consumers shook sentiment. China has levied retaliatory tariffs following Trump’s move. The survey window ran from Jan. 21, the day after Trump took office, to Feb. 3.
“Many consumers appear worried that high inflation will return within the next year,” said Joanne Hsu, the survey’s director. “This is only the fifth time in 14 years we have seen such a large one-month rise (one percentage point or more) in year-ahead inflation expectations.”
Longer-run expectations weren’t hit as much, with the five-year outlook drifting up to 3.3%, a 0.1 percentage point gain.
Worries over inflation dovetailed with lower optimism overall, as the headline index fell to 67.8, a one-month drop of 4.6% and an 11.8% move lower from the same month a year ago. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for a reading of 71.3.
The survey sometimes is influenced by shifting political winds. However, Hsu noted that declining sentiment was “pervasive, with Republicans, Independents, and Democrats all posting sentiment declines from January, along with consumers across age and wealth groups.”

Stocks turned lower after the report, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average initially off nearly 300 points.
“Higher prices from tariffs are the number one financial concern for Americans, as the weight of inflation is still oppressive to family budgets, especially among those with lower incomes,” said Robert Frick, corporate economist at Navy Credit Union. “Even slight increases in prices, especially in top pain points such as food, shelter, and transportation, would be acutely felt by millions.”
Hsu said overall declines in the various survey indexes reflect “a perception that it may be too late to avoid the negative impact of tariff policy.”
The current conditions index also slumped, down to 68.7, or 7.2% lower than January and down 13.5% from a year ago. Expectations declined to 67.3, for a respective drop of 2.9% and 10.5%.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

The unemployment rate for Black men spiked in January, but so did the percentage of eligible adults looking for jobs.
Asian Americans were the only other cohort to see a rise in jobless rates last month.
However, economist Elise Gould cautioned that a change in survey tools at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics makes it difficult to compare January’s data with previous months.

Jobseekers talk to recruiters during the New York Public Library’s annual Bronx Job Fair & Expo at the Bronx Library Center in the Bronx borough of New York, US, on Friday, Sept. 6, 2024.
Yuki Iwamura | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Unemployment among Black men surged in January as the number of those looking for work increased, according to data released Friday by the Department of Labor.
In January, Black workers saw their jobless rate edge higher to 6.2% from 6.1% in the month prior. This trend bucked the overall unemployment rate for the country, which ticked down to 4.0% in January from 4.1% in December. Asian Americans were the only other demographic to see a rise in jobless rates to 3.7% from 3.5%.

On the other hand, unemployment for white and Hispanic workers followed the overall trend and fell in January from the prior month. For the former, it decreased to 3.5% from 3.6%. For the latter, it fell to 4.8% from 5.1%.
But Black men experienced the biggest month-to-month spike in unemployment, with their jobless rates surging to 6.9% from 5.6%. On the other hand, the unemployment rate held steady at 5.4% for Black women.

While Hispanic men also saw their jobless rate hold steady at 4.0%, unemployment rates for their female counterparts dropped to 4.5% from 5.3%. The unemployment rate also fell for white men to 3.1% from 3.3% and marginally decreased to 3.3% from 3.4% for white women. The data breakdown by sex was not readily available for Asian Americans.
While the spike in unemployment rate for Black male workers certainly looks alarming on the surface, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics made some changes to their population controls and survey tools in January that makes it hard to compare the data to previous months, according to Elise Gould, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute. Gould also potentially attributed the surge to standard data volatility.
“I think you would need to see a few months of that elevation, and not just a blip in the data, to think that there was something sinister going on,” she told CNBC. Still, “obviously, just the simple fact that it’s so much higher than other groups is a systemic problem in and of itself.”

Gould added that part of the rise in unemployment rate for Black men could be due to the fact that more of the cohort joined the job market in January.
Last month, the labor force participation rate — the percentage of the population that is either employed or actively seeking work — ticked higher to 62.6% from 62.5%.

Among black workers, the rate rose to 62.5% from 62.4%. The rate jumped to 69% from 68.2% for Black men, while slightly increasing to 62.5% from 62.4% for Black women.
“When the unemployment rate rises, but there’s also an increase in participation, that can often mean that people are more optimistic or coming back in the labor market looking for jobs,” Gould added.
Among white workers, the labor force participation rate rose to 62.3% from 62.2%. Within Asian workers, the participation increased to 64.7% from 64.3%, and slipped among Hispanic workers to 66.8% from 67.5%.
– CNBC’s Gabriel Cortes contributed to this report. More

Minneapolis Federal Reserve President Neel Kashkari said Friday he expects to see interest rates lower this year if the economic data continue to move in the same direction.
Kashkari’s colleagues in recent days have expressed some concern over what fiscal policy could do to the inflation picture.

Minneapolis Federal Reserve President Neel Kashkari said Friday he expects to see interest rates lower this year if the economic data continues to move in the same direction.
In a CNBC interview, the central bank official expressed confidence that inflation will continue to drift down to the Fed’s 2% target, while Friday’s nonfarm payrolls report showed the labor market continues to look strong.

“Ultimately, our job is maximum employment and stable prices. If we see very good data on the inflation front while the labor market stays strong, then I think that would move me towards supporting easing further,” Kashkari said on “Squawk Box.” “I don’t know why we’d have to keep rates where they were if we really saw inflation coming down quickly.”
Headline inflation in December ran at a 2.6% annual rate, according to the Fed’s preferred personal consumption expenditures price index. Excluding food and energy, core inflation was a bit higher, at 2.8%.
That’s still considerably above the central bank’s 2% goal, though Kashkari said he expects housing-related data, particularly on rents, to ease through the year and eventually bring prices back to target. Kashkari is not a voter this year on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee but will vote in 2026.
“We will get inflation down to 2%. We’re committed to that,” he said.
However, Kashkari’s colleagues in recent days have expressed some concern over what fiscal policy could do to the inflation picture. President Donald Trump has pushed aggressive tariffs against the largest U.S. trading partners, and some economists worry that they could reignite inflation if they trigger a trade war.

“We’ll have to see where what that uncertainty looks like. What’s the range of the negotiation that’s taking place?” he said. “Obviously tariffs are hard, because it’s not simply what we do in America, it’s how other countries respond and the back and forth.”
Markets largely expect the Fed to be on hold until at least June. The Fed at its meeting in late January voted to keep its benchmark borrowing rate steady after a full percentage point of cuts in 2024.
“My colleagues and I basically have said we need to wait and see. We don’t know enough information about what’s going to be announced,” Kashkari said. “The good news is … the economy is in a good place. So, we’re in a very good place to just sit here until we get a lot more information on the tariff front, on the immigration front, on the tax front, etc. All of those are going to be important.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Getty Images

Health care was a bright spot once again for the U.S. economy in January, even as overall job growth showed signs of slowing.
Data on job growth in different areas of the economy from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed health care and social assistance as the leading category, adding 66,000 jobs. Retail trade and government were also strong, adding more than 30,000 jobs apiece.

The gains in health care were broadly in line with the growth rates from 2024. The jump in retail jobs was more surprising, as that sector showed “little net change” last year, according to the bureau.
There were some pockets of weakness, with professional and business services losing 11,000 jobs. Employment in leisure and hospitality, one of the biggest areas of job growth after the Covid pandemic, also shrank slightly.
Overall, the net job growth of 143,000 was well below the upwardly revised growth of 307,000 in December. However, the unemployment rate fell and wage growth was strong, pointing to a solid and steady job market despite the lower headline number.
Looking at January, “what we see is a labor market that’s basically operating at full employment. And so I think the real question going forward is: Can we sustain full employment?” University of Michigan professor and former Department of Labor chief economist Betsey Stevenson said Friday on “Squawk Box.” More

Nonfarm payrolls in January rose by a seasonally adjusted 143,000 for the month, down from 307,000 in December and below the 169,000 forecast. The unemployment rate nudged lower to 4%.
Job growth was concentrated in health care (44,000), retail (34,000) and government (32,000).
Wages rose more than expected: Average hourly earnings increased 0.5% for the month and 4.1% from a year ago, compared with respective estimates for 0.3% and 3.7%.
The report also featured significant benchmark revisions to the 2024 totals.

Job creation was lower than expected in January, though the unemployment rate edged down and worker wages rose sharply, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday.
Nonfarm payrolls climbed by a seasonally adjusted 143,000 for the month, down from an upwardly revised 307,000 in December and below the 169,000 forecast from Dow Jones. The unemployment rate nudged lower to 4%.

The report also featured significant benchmark revisions to the 2024 totals that saw substantial downward changes to the previous payrolls level though upward revisions to those who reported holding jobs.

The revisions, which the BLS does each year, reduced the jobs count by 589,000 in the 12 months through March 2024. A preliminary adjustment back in August 2024 had indicated 818,000 fewer jobs.
The level of those reporting at work, as computed in the household survey, soared by 2.23 million, the product of annual adjustments for population and immigration in the country. The household survey happens separately from the establishment survey used to tally total jobs.
Job growth for January was concentrated in health care (44,000), retail (34,000) and government (32,000). The total gain for the month was slightly off the average 166,000 in 2024, the BLS said. Social assistance added 22,000, while mining-related industries lost 8,000.
Along with the upward revision to the December count, the BLS took up the November total to 261,000, a change of 49,000. The two months together saw upward revisions of 100,000.

The unemployment rate moved lower as labor force participation increased, rising to 62.6%, up 0.1 percentage point from December. A broader measure that includes discouraged workers as well as those holding part-time jobs for economic reasons held steady at 7.5%.
While job gains were muted, wages rose more than expected: Average hourly earnings increased 0.5% for the month and 4.1% from a year ago, compared with respective estimates for 0.3% and 3.7%.

Markets showed little reaction to the report, with stock market futures around flat and Treasury yields higher.
“A lower-than-expected January payrolls number was more than offset by upward revisions to November and December’s totals and a downtick in the unemployment rate,” said Ellen Zentner, chief economic strategist at Morgan Stanley Wealth Management. “Those who’d hoped for a soft report that would nudge the Fed back into rate-cutting mode didn’t get it.”
The report is the first jobs count since President Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20 with plans to cut taxes, boost growth and level the global playing field on trade by slapping heavy tariffs on the biggest U.S. trading partners.
Federal Reserve officials are watching the numbers closely as they contemplate their next monetary policy moves. The Fed cut its benchmark rate by a full percentage point in the latter part of 2024, but policymakers of late have been advocating a more cautious pace ahead as they evaluate policy ramifications.
Markets expect the Fed to stay on hold until at least June, with a second cut down to about a 50-50 chance, according to futures pricing measured by the CME Group.
While some economists had expected that the California wildfires would reduce the job count, the bureau said they “had no discernible effect” on the total.
Correction: The unemployment rate fell to 4% in January. The headline on an earlier version misstated the move.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More