Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 100 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Senate Confirms Philip Jefferson as a Fed Governor

    Philip N. Jefferson, a college administrator and academic economist, was confirmed to the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors on Wednesday.Senators approved him for the job in an overwhelming bipartisan 91-7 vote. He is the third of President Biden’s nominees to secure a spot on the Fed’s seven-person board: Lisa D. Cook was confirmed as a governor on Tuesday, and Lael Brainard was confirmed as vice chair last month.Mr. Jefferson, who was most recently vice president for academic affairs at Davidson College, was born in Washington, D.C., and holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Virginia. He has been an economist at the Fed board, and has written about poverty and monetary policy’s effect on the labor market, among other topics.The White House has also renominated Jerome H. Powell as Fed chair, though Mr. Powell is still awaiting a final confirmation vote. Senators said that vote was expected as soon as Thursday.The administration’s nominee for the final open Fed job — the vice chair for supervision — has yet to have a committee hearing and vote. Mr. Biden’s initial nominee for the position, Sarah Bloom Raskin, withdrew from consideration after it became clear that she would not pass the Senate. Michael S. Barr was put up for the job more recently.If those picks are confirmed, Mr. Biden will have nominated or renominated five of the Fed’s seven governors. The Fed is independent of politics, so those appointments are the main way that the White House can shape the future of monetary policy, which is used to keep inflation stable and employment high.Governors at the Fed’s board in Washington hold constant votes on monetary policy and oversee the nation’s largest banks. They set interest rates to guide the economy alongside 12 regional reserve bank presidents, five of whom hold a vote on monetary policy at any given time.Mr. Jefferson and Ms. Cook are likely to support the Fed’s current project: reining in rapid inflation. Consumer prices climbed 8.3 percent in the year through April, data released Wednesday showed, an uncomfortably rapid pace of increase. Fed officials are raising rates at the fastest pace in decades as they try to tamp down price pressures and bring the situation under control.“The spike in inflation we are seeing today threatens to heighten expectations of future inflation,” Mr. Jefferson said during his confirmation hearing. “The Federal Reserve must remain attentive to this risk and ensure that inflation declines to levels consistent with its goals.” More

  • 75 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Inflation Is Still Climbing Rapidly

    Inflation data showed a slowdown in annual price increases in April, but a closely watched monthly price measure continues to rise at an uncomfortably brisk rate. More

  • 163 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    New F.T.C. Majority Gives Lina Khan a Chance to Push an Aggressive Agenda

    The confirmation of a third Democrat creates an opportunity for Lina Khan, the Federal Trade Commission’s chair, to advance efforts to rein in corporate power.WASHINGTON — The confirmation of a third Democrat to the Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday broke a partisan deadlock at the agency. That’s good news for Lina Khan, the agency’s chair and a Democrat.It is also a test.With the F.T.C.’s new Democratic majority — which came with the confirmation of Alvaro Bedoya, who becomes the fifth commissioner, in a slot that had been vacant since October — Ms. Khan’s allies and critics are watching to see if she pushes forward plans to address corporate power. That could include filing an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon, setting online privacy rules and tapping little-used agency powers to clip the wings of companies like Meta, Apple and Google.As Congress remains gridlocked and the midterm elections near, agencies like the F.T.C. and the Department of Justice are likely the best remaining hope for activists and policymakers who want the government to restrain corporate power. President Biden, who has promised to crack down, last year ordered the F.T.C. and other federal agencies to take steps to limit concentration.Under Ms. Khan, 33, who became the chair in June, the F.T.C. has already tried tamping down mergers by threatening to challenge deals after they close. The commission has said it will punish companies that make it hard for users to repair their products. And it settled a case with the company once known as Weight Watchers over a diet app that collected data from young children.But Ms. Khan’s new Democratic majority is essential for a broader “realization of her vision,” said William E. Kovacic, a former chair of the F.T.C. “And the clock’s ticking.”In a statement, Ms. Khan said she was “excited” to work with Mr. Bedoya and the other commissioners. She did not address how the F.T.C.’s new majority would affect her plans.The F.T.C.’s previous split between two Republicans and two Democrats led to impasses. In February, the commission couldn’t reach an agreement to move forward with a study of the practices of pharmacy benefit managers.Sarah Miller, the executive director of the American Economic Liberties Project, a progressive group that wants more antitrust enforcement, described the F.T.C.’s two Republicans, Noah Phillips and Christine Wilson, as “libertarian holdouts” who have “kind of thrown the brakes” on Ms. Khan’s ability to advance her agenda.Mr. Phillips said in an email that he supported the commission’s “long tradition of bipartisan work to advance the interests of American consumers.” But he will not support Ms. Khan’s agenda when it “exceeds our legal authority,” raises prices for consumers or harms innovation, he said.Ms. Wilson pointed to three speeches she gave over the last year criticizing Ms. Khan’s philosophy. In one speech last month, Ms. Wilson said Ms. Khan and her allies were drawing on tenets from Marxism.Alvaro Bedoya, a Democrat, was confirmed on Wednesday as the fifth member of the F.T.C.Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic majority leader, said Wednesday’s vote confirming Mr. Bedoya was “pivotal to unshackling the F.T.C.”Now Ms. Khan may gain the ability to pursue a legal case against Amazon. She wrote a student law review article in 2017 criticizing the company’s dominance. The F.T.C. began investigating the retail giant under the Trump administration; some state attorneys general have also conducted inquiries into the company.Ms. Khan could file a lawsuit to challenge Amazon’s recent purchase of the movie studio Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. When the $8.5 billion transaction closed in March, an F.T.C. spokeswoman noted that the agency “may challenge a deal at any time if it determines that it violates the law.”Ms. Khan may put her stamp on other deals. The agency is examining Microsoft’s $70 billion purchase of the video game publisher Activision Blizzard and sent a request to the companies this year for additional information.An executive order from Mr. Biden last year encouraging more aggressive antitrust policy pushed the F.T.C. and the Justice Department to update the guidelines they use to approve deals, which could lead to stricter scrutiny. Ms. Khan is likely to need the support of the commission’s two other Democrats, Mr. Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, to approve aggressive new guidelines or to challenge major mergers.Ms. Khan has also said she wants to bulk up the agency’s powers by considering regulations governing privacy and how algorithms make decisions. She has said that the F.T.C. underutilized its role as a rules-making body and that regulations would enhance its mandate to protect consumers.“Given that our economy will only continue to further digitize, marketwide rules could help provide clear notice and render enforcement more impactful and efficient,” she said last month at a privacy conference.The F.T.C. could also act on requests from progressive activist groups that want the agency to ban data-driven advertising business models and forbid noncompete agreements that stop workers from taking a job with a competitor of their current employer.But former F.T.C. officials said Ms. Khan faced challenges, even with the Democratic majority. The creation of privacy regulations could take years, said Daniel Kaufman, a former deputy head of the agency’s consumer protection bureau. Businesses are likely to challenge rules in court that don’t fit into the F.T.C.’s mandate to protect consumers from deceptive and unfair practices.“The F.T.C.’s rule-making abilities are not designed to tackle behavioral advertising so I’ve been telling my clients the agency could kick something off with a lot of press but it’s unclear where it will go,” Mr. Kaufman, a partner at the law firm BakerHostetler, said.Ms. Khan’s efforts are also sure to continue facing opposition from Mr. Phillips and Ms. Wilson. Mr. Phillips has said he has reservations about the agency’s becoming a more muscular regulator. In January, he said Congress, not the F.T.C., should be the one to make new privacy rules.Ms. Wilson recently posted screenshots of an internal survey showing that satisfaction among the F.T.C.’s career staff has fallen. “New leadership has marginalized and disrespected staff, resulting in a brain drain that will take a generation to fix,” she said.To overcome their opposition, Ms. Khan will have to keep her majority intact. That gives leverage to Mr. Bedoya, a privacy expert who has focused on the civil rights dangers of new technologies, and Ms. Slaughter, a former top member of Senator Schumer’s staff.Ms. Slaughter said in a statement that Mr. Bedoya’s privacy expertise would serve the F.T.C. well. She did not comment on the agency’s Democratic majority.Mr. Bedoya was tight-lipped about his own plans, saying only that he was “excited” to work with his new F.T.C. colleagues. More

  • 150 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Child-care benefits could help ease the worker crunch, an advocacy campaign says.

    Almost half of mothers with young children who left the work force cited child care as a reason for the move, according to a survey released Wednesday, and 69 percent of women looking for a job said child-care benefits could sway their decision on where to work.The survey of more than 1,000 workers, by the consulting firm McKinsey & Company and Marshall Plan for Moms, a campaign focused on the economic participation of mothers, adds to research exploring how the lack of child care continues to drag on the economy and tighten an already-hot labor market.“Companies are scrambling for talent,” said Reshma Saujani, who founded Marshall Plan for Moms and Girls Who Code, a nonprofit aimed at closing the gender gap in tech. “Our report shows that you can attract, retain and advance women in the work force only through the provision of offering child-care benefits.”Child care has long been too scarce or too expensive for most families. And during the pandemic, the industry more or less collapsed, as day-care centers struggled to stay open and child-care workers quit en masse.Many executives and child-care activists had hoped that President Biden’s sprawling infrastructure plan would provide support for the industry. But the pared-back bill was signed into law without big investments in child care. Ms. Saujani says the onus is now on the private sector.Most salaried and hourly workers do not have access to child-care benefits. Six percent of hourly workers surveyed and 16 percent of salaried workers said they had access to child-care subsidies. The same percentage of hourly workers, and even fewer salaried workers, reported that their employer provided backup child care or offered pretax flexible spending accounts that could be used to pay for care. About 30 percent of respondents said they had flexible working hours.Ms. Saujani’s campaign is forming a business coalition that includes Patagonia and Archewell, the production company founded by Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. To sign on, companies must offer a child-care subsidy or benefit or intend to provide one, Ms. Saujani said. Once they join the coalition, businesses can share and learn best practices from one another.Synchrony, a financial services firm that is part of the coalition, found that offering its employees creative child-care options led to a surge in job satisfaction and an influx of applications for job openings, said Carol Juel, the company’s chief technology and operating officer.In the summer of 2020, the company created a virtual summer camp, putting high school and college children of their employees in charge of keeping 3,700 campers occupied in exchange for mentorship training and college credit. And the company would “send out, every Friday, the next week’s schedule so that workers could plan their meetings around this,” Ms. Juel said.Fast Retailing USA, which operates apparel brands including Uniqlo, Theory and Helmut Lang and is also part of the coalition, has started offering monthly child-care stipends of up to $1,000 for many employees, including store managers. The money can be spent in any way they see fit rather than being tied to specific providers.“A lot of the people who were involved in sponsoring this policy, myself included and some of our heads of human resources, all have kids the same age,” said Serena Peck, Fast Retailing’s chief administrative officer and general counsel. They were seeing firsthand how “the market was shrinking for good child care” and “felt like we had to do something.” More

  • 88 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Fear and Loathing Return to Tech Start-Ups

    Workers are dumping their stock, companies are cutting costs, and layoffs abound as troubling economic forces hit tech start-ups.Start-up workers came into 2022 expecting another year of cash-gushing initial public offerings. Then the stock market tanked, Russia invaded Ukraine, inflation ballooned, and interest rates rose. Instead of going public, start-ups began cutting costs and laying off employees.People started dumping their start-up stock, too.The number of people and groups trying to unload their start-up shares doubled in the first three months of the year from late last year, said Phil Haslett, a founder of EquityZen, which helps private companies and their employees sell their stock. The share prices of some billion-dollar start-ups, known as “unicorns,” have plunged by 22 percent to 44 percent in recent months, he said.“It’s the first sustained pullback in the market that people have seen in legitimately 10 years,” he said.That’s a sign of how the start-up world’s easy-money ebullience of the last decade has faded. Each day, warnings of a coming downturn ricochet across social media between headlines about another round of start-up job cuts. And what was once seen as a sure path to immense riches — owning start-up stock — is now viewed as a liability.The turn has been swift. In the first three months of the year, venture funding in the United States fell 8 percent from a year earlier, to $71 billion, according to PitchBook, which tracks funding. At least 55 tech companies have announced layoffs or shut down since the beginning of the year, compared with 25 this time last year, according to Layoffs.fyi, which monitors layoffs. And I.P.O.s, the main way start-ups cash out, plummeted 80 percent from a year ago as of May 4, according to Renaissance Capital, which follows I.P.O.s.An Instacart shopper at a grocery store in Manhattan. The company slashed its valuation to $24 billion in March from $40 billion last year. Brittainy Newman/The New York TimesLast week, Cameo, a celebrity shout-out app; On Deck, a career-services company; and MainStreet, a financial technology start-up, all shed at least 20 percent of their employees. Fast, a payments start-up, and Halcyon Health, an online health care provider, abruptly shut down in the last month. And the grocery delivery company Instacart, one of the most highly valued start-ups of its generation, slashed its valuation to $24 billion in March from $40 billion last year.“Everything that has been true in the last two years is suddenly not true,” said Mathias Schilling, a venture capitalist at Headline. “Growth at any price is just not enough anymore.”The start-up market has weathered similar moments of fear and panic over the past decade. Each time, the market came roaring back and set records. And there is plenty of money to keep money-losing companies afloat: Venture capital funds raised a record $131 billion last year, according to PitchBook.But what’s different now is a collision of troubling economic forces combined with the sense that the start-up world’s frenzied behavior of the last few years is due for a reckoning. A decade-long run of low interest rates that enabled investors to take bigger risks on high-growth start-ups is over. The war in Ukraine is causing unpredictable macroeconomic ripples. Inflation seems unlikely to abate anytime soon. Even the big tech companies are faltering, with shares of Amazon and Netflix falling below their prepandemic levels.“Of all the times we said it feels like a bubble, I do think this time is a little different,” said Albert Wenger, an investor at Union Square Ventures.On social media, investors and founders have issued a steady drumbeat of dramatic warnings, comparing negative sentiment to that of the early 2000s dot-com crash and stressing that a pullback is “real.”Even Bill Gurley, a Silicon Valley venture capital investor who got so tired of warning start-ups about bubbly behavior over the last decade that he gave up, has returned to form. “The ‘unlearning’ process could be painful, surprising and unsettling to many,” he wrote in April.The uncertainty has caused some venture capital firms to pause deal making. D1 Capital Partners, which participated in roughly 70 start-up deals last year, told founders this year that it had stopped making new investments for six months. The firm said that any deals being announced had been struck before the moratorium, said two people with knowledge of the situation, who declined to be identified because they were not authorized to speak on the record.Other venture firms have lowered the value of their holdings to match the falling stock market. Sheel Mohnot, an investor at Better Tomorrow Ventures, said his firm had recently reduced the valuations of seven start-ups it invested in out of 88, the most it had ever done in a quarter. The shift was stark compared with just a few months ago, when investors were begging founders to take more money and spend it to grow even faster.That fact had not yet sunk in with some entrepreneurs, Mr. Mohnot said. “People don’t realize the scale of change that’s happened,” he said.Sean Black, the founder and chief executive of Knock. “You can’t fight this market momentum,” he said.Jeenah Moon for The New York TimesEntrepreneurs are experiencing whiplash. Knock, a home-buying start-up in Austin, Texas, expanded its operations from 14 cities to 75 in 2021. The company planned to go public via a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, valuing it at $2 billion. But as the stock market became rocky over the summer, Knock canceled those plans and entertained an offer to sell itself to a larger company, which it declined to disclose.In December, the acquirer’s stock price dropped by half and killed that deal as well. Knock eventually raised $70 million from its existing investors in March, laid off nearly half its 250 employees and added $150 million in debt in a deal that valued it at just over $1 billion.Throughout the roller-coaster year, Knock’s business continued to grow, said Sean Black, the founder and chief executive. But many of the investors he pitched didn’t care.“It’s frustrating as a company to know you’re crushing it, but they’re just reacting to whatever the ticker says today,” he said. “You have this amazing story, this amazing growth, and you can’t fight this market momentum.”Mr. Black said his experience was not unique. “Everyone is quietly, embarrassingly, shamefully going through this and not willing to talk about it,” he said.Matt Birnbaum, head of talent at the venture capital firm Pear VC, said companies would have to carefully manage worker expectations around the value of their start-up stock. He predicted a rude awakening for some.“If you’re 35 or under in tech, you’ve probably never seen a down market,” he said. “What you’re accustomed to is up and to the right your entire career.”Start-ups that went public amid the highs of the last two years are getting pummeled in the stock market, even more than the overall tech sector. Shares in Coinbase, the cryptocurrency exchange, have fallen 81 percent since its debut in April last year. Robinhood, the stock trading app that had explosive growth during the pandemic, is trading 75 percent below its I.P.O. price. Last month, the company laid off 9 percent of its staff, blaming overzealous “hypergrowth.”SPACs, which were a trendy way for very young companies to go public in recent years, have performed so poorly that some are now going private again. SOC Telemed, an online health care start-up, went public using such a vehicle in 2020, valuing it at $720 million. In February, Patient Square Capital, an investment firm, bought it for around $225 million, a 70 percent discount.Others are in danger of running out of cash. Canoo, an electric vehicle company that went public in late 2020, said on Tuesday that it had “substantial doubt” about its ability to stay in business.Baiju Bhatt, left, and Vlad Tenev, founders of Robinhood, at the New York Stock Exchange last year for the company’s initial public offering. Robinhood recently laid off 9 percent of its workers.Sasha Maslov for The New York TimesBlend Labs, a financial technology start-up focused on mortgages, was worth $3 billion in the private market. Since it went public last year, its value has sunk to $1 billion. Last month, it said it would cut 200 workers, or roughly 10 percent of its staff.Tim Mayopoulos, Blend’s president, blamed the cyclical nature of the mortgage business and the steep drop in refinancings that accompany rising interest rates.“We’re looking at all of our expenses,” he said. “High-growth cash-burning businesses are, from an investor-sentiment perspective, clearly not in favor.” More

  • 100 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Says Inflation Is His ‘Top Domestic Priority’

    President Biden tried on Tuesday to deflect blame for rising prices with a direct attack on Republicans for pursuing what he called an “ultra-MAGA agenda,” a phrase he has used in recent days as a reference to former President Donald J. Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan.Mr. Biden’s critics have assailed the president for months as inflation has risen to 8.5 percent, the fastest 12-month pace since 1981. A news release from the Republican National Committee on Tuesday accused him of being “desperate to blame anyone but himself for the worst inflation in 40 years,” adding that “the American people know he is responsible.”Seeking to turn the debate over the economy against his opponents six months before the midterm congressional elections, Mr. Biden and his top White House aides insisted that “extreme” policy ideas from Republicans would make inflation worse, not better.“Look, the bottom line is this: Americans have a choice right now between two paths, reflecting two very different sets of values,” Mr. Biden said in a speech at the White House. “My plan attacks inflation and grows the economy by lowering costs for working families, giving workers well-deserved raises, reducing the deficit by historic levels and making big corporations and the very wealthiest Americans pay their fair share.”By contrast, he said, Republican policies would help the wealthiest Americans and big corporations while leaving working families to bear the brunt of cost increases.The president’s message on Tuesday was part of an attempt to change the national conversation about the economy in ways that Democrats hope will shield them from a punishing result at the ballot box in November.Mr. Biden delivered his remarks a day before another economic report was expected to show uncomfortably high prices. While the Consumer Price Index, which will be released on Wednesday morning, could show that inflation cooled somewhat from March, most economists still expect the report to show inflation running above 8 percent.Understand Inflation and How It Impacts YouInflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Inflation Calculator: How you experience inflation can vary greatly depending on your spending habits. Answer these seven questions to estimate your personal inflation rate.Interest Rates: As it seeks to curb inflation, the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates for the first time since 2018. Here is what the increases mean for consumers.State Intervention: As inflation stays high, lawmakers across the country are turning to tax cuts to ease the pain, but the measures could make things worse. How Americans Feel: We asked 2,200 people where they’ve noticed inflation. Many mentioned basic necessities, like food and gas.But Mr. Biden has seized on a program set forth by Senator Rick Scott of Florida, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, called the “11-Point Plan to Rescue America,” which critics have said would impose taxes on millions of Americans who pay none now and phase out programs like Social Security and Medicare after five years.Other Republicans, including Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, have repudiated elements of the plan, which Mr. Scott put forward as a platform for the midterm elections. But the White House on Tuesday ignored any disagreement among Republicans, describing the proposal as the only comprehensive economic plan put forth by the party to deal with inflation.“This is not the last you’ve heard from us about Chairman Scott’s tax plan that will raise taxes,” Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, promised. She pointed out that Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, had praised Mr. Scott’s plan, as had some congressional Republicans.Ms. Psaki said it was Mr. Biden’s decision to use the phrase “ultra-MAGA” to refer to Mr. Scott’s plan and other Republican policies, saying he believed it added “a little extra pop” to his critique of the Republican agenda. And she said the president’s speech on Tuesday was just the beginning.“I can tell you, whether it’s tomorrow or in days and weeks ahead, you will all continue to hear him talk more about his concern about ultra-MAGA Republicans,” she said.Earlier Tuesday, the president sought to convince Americans that he understood the pain they were feeling from rising prices and that his administration was taking steps to address higher costs for fuel, food and other goods.“I know that families all across America are hurting because of inflation,” Mr. Biden said. “I understand what it feels like. I come from a family where, when the price of gas or food went up, we felt it.”He added, “I want every American to know that I’m taking inflation very seriously and it’s my top domestic priority.”Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • 150 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    April's consumer price index report expected to show inflation has already peaked

    Investors are eyeing what could be a pivotal consumer price index report for April, anticipating that the data shows inflation has already reached its height.
    Economists warn that prices could remain elevated. The issue is how fast inflation could decline when it comes to determining how the Federal Reserve will respond with interest rate hikes.
    CPI is expected to rise 0.2% in April or 8.1% on an annualized basis. That’s compared with a 1.2% monthly increase or 8.5% gain year-over-year in March.

    Shoppers inside a grocery store in San Francisco, California, U.S., on Monday, May 2, 2022. 
    David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    April’s consumer price index report is expected to show inflation has already reached a peak — a development that some investors say could temporarily soothe markets.
    But economists say, even with a reprieve in headline inflation, core inflation could gain on a monthly basis and stay elevated for months to come. Core inflation excludes food and energy costs.

    The CPI report is expected to show headline inflation rose 0.2% in April, or 8.1% year-over-year, according to Dow Jones. That compares with a whopping 1.2% increase in March, or an 8.5% gain year-over-year. The April data is expected at 8:30 a.m. ET Wednesday.
    Core CPI is expected to rise 0.4% or 6% year-over-year. That compares with 0.3% in March, or 6.5% on an annualized basis.

    Stocks gyrated Tuesday ahead of the much-anticipated data. The S&P 500 ended the day with a 0.25% gain, and the Nasdaq added 0.98%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 84.96 points.
    The closely watched benchmark 10-year Treasury yield retreated to about 2.99% Tuesday after a sharp run up to 3.20% Monday. Bond yields — which move opposite price — have been running higher at a rapid pace on expectations of aggressive Federal Reserve interest rate hikes.

    “I wouldn’t say tomorrow’s CPI matters by itself. I think the combination of March, tomorrow’s and May’s data will kind of be the big inflection point,” said Ben Jeffery, a fixed income strategist at BMO.

    But Jeffery said the report has a good chance of being a market mover, no matter what.
    “I think it will either reassert the selling pressure we saw that took 10s to 3.20% … Or I think it will inspire more dip-buying interest for investors who have been waiting for signs that inflation is starting to peak,” he said.

    Loading chart…

    A potential turning point for stocks

    In the stock market, some investors say the data could signal a turning point if April’s inflation comes in as expected or is even weaker.
    “I think the market, from a technical standpoint, is very focused on trying to divine how much the Fed is going to move,” said Tony Roth, chief investment officer at Wilmington Trust Investment Advisors.
    A hotter report would be a negative since it could mean the Fed will take an even tougher stance on interest rates. Last week, Fed Chair Jerome Powell signaled the central bank could hike rates by 50 basis points, or a half-percent, at each of the next couple of meetings.
    The market has been nervous about inflation and that the Fed’s response to it could trigger a recession.
    “I don’t think this is the end of the drawdown in the market … The market needs to go down 20% at a minimum. If we get a series of better inflation data, then I think 20% could be the bottom,” Roth said. The S&P 500 is off nearly 17% from its high.
    “If the inflation data is not as good as we think it will be, not just this month but consecutive months, then I think the market prices for a recession, and then it’s down 25% to 40%,” said Roth.

    Two risks emerge

    Roth said there are two potential exogenous risks in inflation data, and either could prove to be a problem for markets. One is the unknowns around the oil and gas supply strains and price shocks caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the other is China’s latest Covid-related shutdowns and the impact on supply chains.
    “Nobody knows how they’re going to play out … Either one of these could be a bigger problem than the market is anticipating right now,” Roth said.
    Aneta Markowska, chief financial economist at Jefferies, said she is expecting a hotter-than-consensus report, with 0.3% gain in headline CPI and a 0.5% jump in core. She thinks the market’s focus is wrong and investors should be concerned more with how much inflation can decline.
    “I think a lot of folks are focusing on the year-over-year rate slowing, and I think that helps consumers because it looks like real wages will actually be positive for a change in April on a month-over-month basis,” she said. “But if we get that acceleration in core back to 0.5% that we are projecting, that’s a problem for the Fed. If you annualize that, you’re running at 6%, and that would really mean no slowdown.”
    Markowska noted the central bank assumes inflation will slow to 4% this year and 2.5% next year. “The question we have to ask is are we on track to hit that forecast and if not, the Fed could have a bigger policy overshoot than they envisioned,” she said.
    The perception is that inflation problems are supply chain-driven, but those issues are going away, Markowska added.
    “I think that ship has sailed. We’re past supply chains. This is the services sector. This is the labor market,” she said. “Just because we peak and core goods inflation is coming down, that doesn’t fix the problem. The problem is now everywhere. It’s in services. It’s in the labor market, and that’s not going to go away on its own … We need core inflation to get down to 0.2%, 0.3% month-over-month pace, and we need it to stay there for a while.”
    Barclays U.S. economist Pooja Sriram said she does not think investors should get too excited about inflation peaking, since what will matter is how quickly the level comes down.
    “For the Fed to be pacified that inflation is coming down, we need to get a really weak core CPI print,” she said. “Headline CPI is going to be hard to come down because the energy component is swinging.”
    The energy index was up 11% in March, and it may be less of a contributor to overall inflation in April because gasoline prices fell. Economists say energy will be a bigger issue in May data, since gasoline is rising to record levels again.
    Some economists expect used-car prices will come down in April, but Markowska said data she monitors shows increases at the retail level.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Fed Confronts Why It May Have Acted Too Slowly on Inflation

    Central bankers have been asking whether they should have reacted faster to rising inflation last year — and are learning from the recent past.Some Federal Reserve officials have begun to acknowledge that they were too slow to respond to rapid inflation last year, a delay that is forcing them to constrain the economy more abruptly now — and one that could hold lessons for the policy path ahead.Inflation began to accelerate last spring, but Fed policymakers and most private-sector forecasters initially thought price gains would quickly fade. It became clear in early fall that fast inflation was proving to be more lasting — but the Fed pivoted toward rapidly removing policy support only in late November and did not raise rates until March.Several current and former Fed officials have suggested in recent days that, in hindsight, the central bank should have reacted more quickly and forcefully last fall, but that both profound uncertainty about the future and the Fed’s approach to setting policy slowed it down.Officials had spent years dealing with tepid inflation, which made some hesitant to believe that rapidly rising prices would last. Even as they became more concerned, it took the Fed’s large group of policymakers time to come to an agreement on how to respond. Another complicating factor was that the Fed had made clear promises to markets about how it would remove support for the economy, which made adjusting quickly more difficult.“It was a complicated situation with little precedent — people make mistakes,” Randal K. Quarles, who was the Fed’s vice chair for supervision in 2021, said at a conference last week.Mr. Quarles, who left the Fed at the end of the year, argued that it should have begun to pull back support aggressively after September. He added, however, that the rate increases that central bankers were now making could still fix the situation.Even so, the delay could come with consequences. By the time the Fed completely stopped buying bonds and began raising rates in March, prices were rising 8.5 percent from a year earlier, the fastest rate since 1981. Consumer price increases are expected to remain rapid when fresh data are released Wednesday.Understand Inflation and How It Impacts YouInflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Inflation Calculator: How you experience inflation can vary greatly depending on your spending habits. Answer these seven questions to estimate your personal inflation rate.Interest Rates: As it seeks to curb inflation, the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates for the first time since 2018. Here is what the increases mean for consumers.State Intervention: As inflation stays high, lawmakers across the country are turning to tax cuts to ease the pain, but the measures could make things worse. How Americans Feel: We asked 2,200 people where they’ve noticed inflation. Many mentioned basic necessities, like food and gas.And as high prices have lingered, inflation expectations have been creeping up, threatening to change household and business behavior in ways that perpetuate the problem.Because inflation is eating away at paychecks and making it more difficult for families to afford groceries and cars, it has emerged as a major political issue for President Biden, whose approval ratings have fallen over concerns about his handling of the economy. During remarks at the White House on Tuesday, Mr. Biden called inflation his “top domestic priority” and said his administration was taking steps to contain it. He also sought to push back on Republicans, who have spent months blaming him for stoking inflation, saying their policy ideas were “extreme” and would hurt working families.“I want every American to know that I’m taking inflation very seriously,” Mr. Biden said, noting that the Fed has the “primary role” in trying to tame price increases.The Fed is now raising rates quickly to wrestle the situation back under control. Officials lifted borrowing costs half a percentage point this month, their biggest increase since 2000, while broadcasting that two more large adjustments could be coming. They are also going to start shrinking their $9 trillion balance sheet of bond holdings next month.If the Fed continues to rapidly adjust policy this year as it tries to catch up, policymakers risk slamming the brakes on a speeding economy. Such hard stops can hurt, pushing up unemployment and possibly tipping off a recession. Officials typically prefer to apply their policy brakes gradually, increasing the chances that the economy can slow down painlessly.Still, several Fed officials pointed out that it was easier to say what the Fed should have done in 2021 after the fact — that in the moment, it was difficult to know price increases would last. Inflation initially came mainly from a few big products that were in short supply amid supply chain snarls, like semiconductors and cars. Only later in the year did it become obvious that price pressures were broadening to food, rent and other areas.“I try to give some grace, and say: In a very uncertain time, with an unprecedented setting, with no real models to guide us, people are going to do the best they can,” Raphael Bostic, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, said in an interview Monday. Mr. Bostic was an early voice suggesting that the Fed should stop buying bonds and think about raising interest rates.Officials have said it was the acceleration in inflation data in September, followed by rising employment costs, that convinced them that price gains might last and that the central bank needed to act decisively. The Fed chair, Jerome H. Powell, pivoted on policy in late November as those data points added up.“It was a complicated situation with little precedent — people make mistakes,” said Randal K. Quarles, who was the Fed’s vice chair for supervision in 2021.Erin Scott/ReutersWhile Mr. Quarles argued that the Fed should have responded as the September data came in, he suggested that there had been a complicating factor: Mr. Powell was waiting to see if he would be reappointed by the Biden administration, which did not announce its decision to renominate him until mid-November.Mr. Quarles, on a “Banking With Interest” podcast episode last week, said reacting to the data was “hard to do until there was clarity as to what the leadership going forward of the Fed was going to be.”Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More