More stories

  • in

    Trade feuds aside, Chinese firms are committed to the U.S. market, survey shows

    About 90% of Chinese enterprises in the U.S. plan to maintain or boost their investment levels in the country, according to the survey.
    The results come despite 60% reporting a deteriorating business environment amid concerns about policy and U.S.-China trade relations.

    GP: American flag and Chinese flag
    Matt Anderson Photography | Moment | Getty Images

    A recent survey of Chinese enterprises in the U.S. has found that a majority remain bullish on the market long term despite growing concerns about U.S.-China relations and the broader business environment. 
    The annual survey conducted by the China General Chamber of Commerce in the U.S. found that nearly 60% of companies aim to maintain a stable level of investment and that about 30% plan to boost it. 

    “A notable degree of long-term optimism persisted, with the majority expressing positive future revenue expectations,” CGCC said, adding that the survey reflected “a commendable sense of optimism, determination, and resilience.” 
    The survey was conducted in April and May of this year, polling nearly 100 Chinese companies across various industries about performance and outlook.
    The report said Chinese firms remain committed to the U.S. market despite growing negative sentiment about the overall business environment amid rising trade tensions between the world’s two largest economies. 
    Over 60% of survey respondents saw a deteriorating business environment in the U.S. Meanwhile, the rate of concern regarding a “stalemate in Sino-US bilateral relations political and cultural relations” surged to 93% from 81% a year prior.
    Over the past year, the Biden administration has ramped up curbs on Chinese businesses, scrutinizing certain China-dominated industries, placing new sanctions on various Chinese firms and goods and trying to outright block Chinese ownership of certain companies and platforms.

    In the survey, more than 65% of respondents identified a “complexity and vagueness” of U.S. regulatory and sanction policies toward Chinese companies as the main challenge in branding and marketing in the U.S.
    “Pervasive anti-China sentiment in American public opinion” was ranked as the second largest branding and marketing challenge, according to 59% of respondents.
    “These [results] highlight the intricate policy environment and the hostile public sentiment influenced by ongoing US-China trade tensions,” the report said.
    The survey said a challenging market environment has broadly impacted Chinese companies’ profitability levels, with firms facing a “significant performance downturn” last year similar to that of 2020 during the coronavirus pandemic. 
    More companies reported falling revenue, particularly those with significant declines of more than 20%. Companies in that category rose from 13% in 2022 to 21% in 2023. 
    Hu Wei, CGCC chairman and president and CEO of Bank of China U.S.A., called on companies from both China and the U.S. to strengthen coordination to reduce trade frictions and policy barriers. 
    “From a longer-term perspective, trade and investments have always been the cornerstone of the U.S.-China relations,” he said, adding that despite various uncertainties, China remains the U.S.’ third-largest trading partner and largest importer. More

  • in

    Fed Governor Bowman says she’s still open to raising rates if inflation doesn’t improve

    Michelle Bowman, governor of the US Federal Reserve, speaks during the Exchequer Club meeting in Washington, DC, US, on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2024. 
    Kent Nishimura | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Federal Reserve Governor Michelle Bowman said Tuesday the time is not right yet to start lowering interest rates, adding she would be open to raising if inflation doesn’t pull back.
    “Should the incoming data indicate that inflation is moving sustainably toward our 2 percent goal, it will eventually become appropriate to gradually lower the federal funds rate to prevent monetary policy from becoming overly restrictive,” Bowman said in prepared remarks for a speech in London. “However, we are still not yet at the point where it is appropriate to lower the policy rate.”

    Those comments reflect a prevailing sentiment at the central bank, in which most policymakers have said in recent weeks that, while they still expect inflation to get back to the Fed’s 2% target, they need more evidence.
    Recent readings have shown moderating inflation, with the Fed’s preferred indicator running just under 3%. However, the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee noted after its last meeting that there has been only “modest further progress.”
    Bowman noted that there are “a number of upside risks” prevailing that could accelerate her outlook, which is among the most hawkish of all policymakers.
    “I remain willing to raise the target range for the federal funds rate at a future meeting should progress on inflation stall or even reverse,” she said. “Given the risks and uncertainties regarding my economic outlook, I will remain cautious in my approach to considering future changes in the stance of policy.”
    The Commerce Department on Friday will release its reading on the May personal consumption expenditures price index, the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones expect a 12-month inflation rate of 2.6% on both the all-items and core, which excludes food and energy prices.

    While that would represent a nudge lower from April, Bowman said she still expects the Fed to hold its key overnight borrowing rate in a range between 5.25%-5.50% “for some time.”
    Moreover, she indicated she is not being swayed by rate reductions from the Fed’s global counterparts such as the European Central Bank, which recently lowered its key rates by a quarter percentage point. Bowman said “it is possible over the coming months that the path of monetary policy in the U.S. will diverge from that of other advanced economies.”
    Bowman’s remarks come with other officials saying Monday that they’re hesitant to cut.
    San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly rejected the idea of doing a preemptive cut to hedge against deterioration in the labor market and a slowing economy.
    “I do think that preemptive cutting is something that you do when you see risks,” Daly told CNBC’s Deirdre Bosa during a public event in San Francisco. “We’re going to be resolute until we finish the job. That’s why not taking preemptive action when it’s not necessary is so important.”
    Also, Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee told CNBC’s Steve Liesman earlier on Monday that if he sees “more months” of good inflation data, then he would question whether policy needs to be as restrictive as it has been, paving the way for cuts.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • in

    Many CEOs Still Support Biden Over Trump

    Corporate executives complain about some of President Biden’s policies, along with his rhetoric. But so far they have not abandoned him en masse.When the White House chief of staff, Jeffrey Zients, met with dozens of top executives in Washington this month, he encountered a familiar list of corporate complaints about President Biden.The executives at the Business Roundtable, a group representing some of the country’s biggest corporations, objected to Mr. Biden’s proposals to raise taxes. They questioned the lack of business representation in the Cabinet. They bristled at what they called overregulation by federal agencies.While the meeting was not antagonistic, it was indicative of three and a half years of executive grousing about Mr. Biden. Business leaders have criticized his remarks on “corporate greed” and his appearance on a union picket line. They chafe at the actions of officials he has appointed — particularly the head of the Federal Trade Commission, Lina Khan, who has moved to block a series of corporate mergers.A number of prominent figures in Silicon Valley and on Wall Street — including the venture capitalists David Sacks and Marc Andreessen, and the hedge fund magnate Kenneth Griffin — have grown increasingly vocal in their criticism of Mr. Biden, their praise of former President Donald J. Trump, or both.Still, that shift mostly reflects movement among executives who already supported Republican politicians but had not previously embraced Mr. Trump. There is little evidence of a major shift in allegiance among executives away from Mr. Biden and toward Mr. Trump.Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a Yale School of Management professor who is in frequent contact with corporate leaders, said most chief executives he had spoken to preferred Mr. Biden to Mr. Trump, “some of them enthusiastically and some of them biting their lip and holding their nose.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Fact-Checking Biden’s and Trump’s Claims About the Economy

    We fact-checked claims about inflation, jobs and tax policy from both presidential candidates.Consumer sentiment about the state of the economy could be pivotal in shaping the 2024 presidential election.President Biden is still grappling with how to address one of his biggest weaknesses: inflation, which has recently cooled but soared in his first years in office. Former President Donald J. Trump’s frequent economic boasts are undermined by the mass job losses and supply chain disruptions wrought by the pandemic.Here’s a fact check of some of their more recent claims about the economy.Both candidates misrepresented inflation.A grocery store in Queens, New York, earlier this year.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesWhat Was Said“They had inflation of — the real number, if you really get into the real number, it’s probably 40 percent or 50 percent when you add things up, when you don’t just put in the numbers that they want to hear.”— Mr. Trump at a campaign event in Detroit in June“I think it could be as high as 50 percent if you add everything in, when you start adding energy prices in, when you start adding interest rates.”— Mr. Trump in a June interview on Fox NewsThis is misleading. Karoline Leavitt, a spokeswoman for the Trump campaign, cited a 41 percent increase in energy prices since January 2021, and prices for specific energy costs like gasoline rising more than 50 percent during that time.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Democrats’ Dream of a Wealth Tax Is Alive. For Now.

    A narrow Supreme Court ruling left the door open for Congress to expand taxes on billionaires, but it’s not a guarantee.For years, liberal Democrats have agitated for the United States to tax wealth, not just income, as a way to ensure that rich Americans who derive wealth from real estate, stocks, bonds and other assets were paying more in taxes.On Thursday, that dream survived a Supreme Court scare, but just barely.Thanks to a narrow court ruling, a raft of plans to use the tax code to address the gaping divide between the very richest Americans and everyone else appear set to live for years to come in the campaign proposals and official budgets of top Democrats.The idea of a wealth tax was not directly before the court on Thursday. Justices were considering the constitutionality of a new tax imposed under former President Donald J. Trump that applies to certain income earned by businesses overseas. But in taking the case, the court could have pre-emptively ruled federal wealth taxation unconstitutional.It did not, and liberal groups celebrated the victory.“The Supreme Court also could have taken an activist turn of the worst kind by pre-emptively ruling federal wealth taxes unconstitutional today,” Amy Hanauer, the executive director of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which supports higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy, said in a statement. “To its credit, the court did not do so.”But the case also offered a window into the legal fight to come over various iterations of a wealth tax should Congress ever adopt one. It showed a solid four justices firmly opposed to such a tax — and two more who appeared skeptical.“This is a narrow decision,” Joe Bishop-Henchman, the vice president of the National Taxpayers Union, which opposes wealth tax proposals, said in a statement on Thursday. But, he added, “the court makes clear it is not opening the door to a wealth tax.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    New Home Construction Slows as Mortgage Rates Remain High

    Home building in May fell to its slowest pace in four years despite a supply shortage. That trend could put even greater strain on buyers.Construction of new homes in the United States dropped below expectations in May as builders pull back on new residential projects largely in response to high interest rates, reinforcing concerns about stubbornly high housing prices.Government data released on Thursday showed that new-home construction, or housing starts, fell 5.5 percent last month to an annualized rate of 1.28 million, a sign of more cracks in the already shaky housing market. Slower construction of both single-family and multifamily homes contributed to the overall drop. Building permits dipped 3.8 percent, pointing to less future construction.This downturn in home building comes as the average rate on 30-year mortgages, the nation’s most popular home loan, has reached highs not seen in decades, though the rate dipped slightly this week to 6.87 percent, Freddie Mac reported on Thursday.The magnitude of the decrease in construction last month underscores that high interest rates are both weakening housing demand and raising costs for builders — two dynamics that are ultimately contributing to builders’ reluctance to start projects. Home builder sentiment dropped in May to its lowest level this year before falling even further this month, suggesting relatively tepid home construction data in the coming months, Daniel Vielhaber, an economist at Nationwide, said in a statement.The weakening in construction, in turn, is only putting more strain on prospective home buyers.“If you’re a consumer, if you’re someone looking to buy a home, what you ultimately want is a lot more supply,” said Chen Zhao, who leads the housing economics team at the real estate services company Redfin. “The key to having more housing supply is that we need more building. So any time we see that there is less building, that is bad news.”The latest housing construction data, released by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, reinforces that consumers are unlikely to see home prices drop by much over the next couple of years, Ms. Zhao said. The data point, she added, represents “one more factor that would keep home price growth high” because it points to a tighter housing supply in the next year or two.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    The Weird Housing Market, in 5 Charts

    The Housing Market Is Weird and Ugly. These 5 Charts Explain Why.Home prices have held up better than expected amid high interest rates. But that doesn’t mean the housing market is healthy. More

  • in

    IMF chief says Europe looks like ‘an ideas supermarket’ for the U.S., calls for further integration

    Speaking to CNBC’s Karen Tso, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said Europe’s economic performance was strengthening and inflation was clearly on a downward trajectory.
    “We come with this relatively good news and with a warning: There is no time to waste for the euro zone to concentrate on productivity,” Georgieva said.
    “Right now, Europe looks like an ideas supermarket for the United States,” she added.

    IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva arrives at a briefing in Washington, D.C., on Friday, April 19, 2024.
    Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    The head of the International Monetary Fund on Thursday called on Europe to achieve the full potential of its prized single market, lamenting what she described as a situation that makes the region look like “an ideas supermarket” for the U.S.
    Speaking to CNBC’s Karen Tso, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said Europe’s economic performance was strengthening and inflation was clearly on a downward trajectory.

    Georgieva said that the IMF observing an uptick in consumption and expected interest rate cuts from the European Central Bank spelled out good news for investment in the euro zone. She said it would bolster the 20-member bloc’s economic performance.
    “We come with this relatively good news and with a warning: There is no time to waste for the euro zone to concentrate on productivity,” Georgieva said.
    “That means two things. One, to achieve the full potential of the single market. It is not there yet. We want to see more labor market flexibility in Europe, we want to see [a] deepening [of] the financial markets, integrating them [and] we want to see the banking union, the capital union in place,” she continued.
    “And two, we want to see much more attention to innovation, investing in [research and development], making it possible to have business based on innovation in Europe to materialize in Europe. Right now, Europe looks like an ideas supermarket for the United States,” Georgieva said.

    “A lot of what is invented here ends up being commercially viable and on scale over there and when you look at the main obstacle? 27 countries not yet integrated in a single market.”

    U.S. productivity gap

    The European Union’s single market seeks to guarantee the unrestricted movement of goods, capital, services and labor throughout the territory.
    Established more than 30 years ago, the single market is designed to allow EU citizens to live and work across the EU and to provide consumers with a wider choice of high-quality services and products.
    The IMF believes deeper single-market integration could further boost the region’s economic growth.
    In May, the Washington, D.C.-based institute said in a blog post that an IMF report published in 2023 estimated that reducing remaining barriers to the single market for goods and services by 10% could raise European output by as much as 7 percentage points over the long term.
    “The euro area is now focusing on critical questions for the future. Among them, number one, how to lift up productivity at par with competitors, especially with the U.S.,” Georgieva said.
    The IMF chief reinforced the fund’s growth outlook for the euro zone, saying the bloc was on track to register a growth rate of 0.8% in 2024, compared with 0.4% in 2023 — and increase by 1.5% next year.
    Correction: A previous version of this article misstated the month that the IMF said a 10% reduction would boost European output by up to 7 percentage points. More