More stories

  • in

    Charts suggest investors should buy these 3 stocks into weakness, Jim Cramer says

    Monday – Friday, 6:00 – 7:00 PM ET

    CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Monday advised investors to buy shares of Apple, Tesla and Microsoft if they decline.
    “The charts, as interpreted by Carolyn Boroden, suggest that Apple, Tesla and Microsoft might flatline for a bit here, or even pull back slightly,” the “Mad Money” host said.

    CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Monday advised investors to buy shares of Apple, Tesla and Microsoft if they decline.
    “The charts, as interpreted by Carolyn Boroden, suggest that Apple, Tesla and Microsoft might flatline for a bit here, or even pull back slightly as they brush up against resistance levels, but she recommends buying them into any weakness and believes their charts remain long-term bullish,” the “Mad Money” host said.

    Boroden decided to focus on Apple, Tesla and Microsoft after seeing a bullish pattern of higher highs and higher lows in the stocks, along with a five-day and 13-day exponential moving average crossover, according to Cramer.
    To start his explanation of Boroden’s analysis, Cramer first examined Apple’s daily chart.

    Arrows pointing outwards

    Boroden noted that Apple’s last rally appears to have created a ceiling of resistance at around $173, and that ceiling needs to be cleared before Apple’s run-up can continue, Cramer said. 
    He added that Boroden believes if Apple can rally less than a dollar and stay up, the price could then go up to $197.60 — a price target she calculated using Fibonacci ratios. Boroden and other market technicians use the Fibonacci strategy to spot patterns that can signal when a stock or other security could change directions. 
    Boroden also sees five Fibonacci timing cycles coming due between today and Friday, which means Apple’s more likely to change its trajectory during that period. In other words, the iPhone-maker’s stock could be heading for a decline.

    However, if it remains intact, the long-term chart is still bullish, according to Boroden.
    For more analysis, watch the full video of Cramer’s explanation below.

    Disclosure: Cramer’s Charitable Trust owns shares of Apple and Microsoft.

    Jim Cramer’s Guide to Investing

    Click here to download Jim Cramer’s Guide to Investing at no cost to help you build long-term wealth and invest smarter.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Dodge will discontinue its Challenger and Charger muscle cars next year

    Dodge will discontinue its gas-powered Challenger and Charger muscle cars at the end of next year, as the brand transitions to electric vehicles.
    Since being resurrected in the mid- to late 2000s, the Charger and Challenger have been stalwarts for Dodge and popular vehicles for a new generation of gearheads.
    But the cars have also been part of a fuel economy and emissions problem for Stellantis, formerly Fiat Chrysler.

    2022 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat (left) and 2022 Dodge Challenger SRT Super Stock

    DETROIT — Dodge will discontinue its gas-powered Challenger and Charger muscle cars at the end of next year, marking the end of an era for the brand as it starts to transition to electric vehicles.
    Since being resurrected in the mid- to late 2000s, the Charger and Challenger — names made popular in the 1960s and 1970s — have been stalwarts for Dodge and popular vehicles for a new generation of gearheads.

    The two-door Challenger particularly struck a cord of nostalgia with buyers thanks to its retro-inspired styling, while the four-door Charger has managed to achieve notable sales milestones despite consumers flocking from sedans to SUVs in recent years.
    Dodge has also been able to juice profits from the vehicles, which have starting prices ranging from the low-$30,000s to nearly $90,000 for its infamous Hellcat models that produce more than 700 horsepower.
    “Dodge, with the Challenger and Charger, they really found a way to really get to that muscle car root. These cars definitely expressed it … and were able to hold onto that essence,” said Stephanie Brinley, principal analyst at S&P Global. “Having that clear DNA and clear expression of what they’re supposed to be is helping make the transition to electric.”
    Dodge CEO Tim Kuniskis has alluded to the possibility that the Charger and Challenger names could be used for future electrified vehicles, including a forthcoming electric muscle car in 2024. He’s previously said he believes electrification — whether hybrid vehicles with less powerful engines or all-electric models — will save what he has called the new “Golden Age of muscle cars.”
    For several years, Kuniskis has warned that the end was coming for the gas-powered muscle cars due to emissions regulations. Dodge parent company Stellantis, formerly Fiat Chrysler, ranks the worst among major manufacturers for U.S. corporate average fuel economy and carbon emissions.

    As many brands switched to smaller and more fuel-efficient engines, Dodge rolled out Hellcat models and other high-performance vehicles. Such models helped generate attention for the brand but didn’t help the automaker’s carbon footprint, forcing it to buy carbon credits from automakers such as Tesla.
    “The days of an iron block supercharged 6.2-liter V-8 are numbered,” Kuniskis previously told CNBC, referring to engines like those in the Hellcat. “But the performance that those vehicles generate is not numbered.”

    Dodge CEO Tim Kuniskis speaks Aug. 13, 2021 during a media event. In the back, the Fratzog logo was used alongside Dodge’s current logo.
    Michael Wayland / CNBC

    Dodge is launching a litany of special vehicles and products to “celebrate” the end of the cars as they are today. Dodge’s plans include seven special-edition, or “buzz,” models; a commemorative “Last Call” under-hood plaque for all 2023 model-year vehicles; and a new dealer allocation process, among other measures.
    The new dealer process will see Dodge allocate 2023 Charger and Challenger models to lots all at once, instead of making orders available throughout the year. Dodge will provide customers a guide to locate specific models at each dealership.
    Kuniskis said the process is meant to assist customers in getting the specific vehicle they want.
    “We wanted to make sure we were celebrating these cars properly,” Kuniskis said during a media briefing for an event this week in Pontiac, Michigan.
    The Charger and Challenger are produced at Stellantis’ Brampton Assembly plant in Ontario, Canada. The company says it has produced more than 3 million Dodge vehicles at the plant, including 1.5 million Chargers and more than 726,000 Challengers sold in the U.S.
    Stellantis earlier this year announced plans to invest $2.8 billion in the plant and another Canadian facility, but it has not disclosed what vehicles will be produced at the facilities.
    “When we shut down Brampton it will be a 20-year run of Dodge muscle cars,” Kuniskis said. “We needed to do this right.”

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Stores and suppliers clash over price hikes as shoppers hit by sticker shock

    As inflation drives up costs, stores and suppliers have to negotiate whether to raise prices for customers.
    Profits are under pressure at consumer products companies such as Procter & Gamble as well as retailers including Walmart and Target.
    In the U.S., pricing disputes between retailers and manufacturers rarely result in empty shelves.

    A woman shops in a supermarket as rising inflation affects consumer prices in Los Angeles, California, June 13, 2022.
    Lucy Nicholson | Reuters

    Long before shoppers fill up their carts with hot dogs or detergent, supermarkets and suppliers negotiate — and sometimes clash — over how much the products should cost.
    Those delicate discussions spilled into public view this summer when Kraft Heinz proposed price hikes of as much as 30% on its foods in the United Kingdom, according to The Guardian, as people cope with rising costs for housing, energy and more. When British supermarket giant Tesco pushed back, it stopped getting shipments of Heinz products such as ketchup and baked beans.

    The two companies, which later struck a deal, did not respond to requests for comment.

    A similar dynamic is heating up in the U.S., as retailers and consumer packaged goods companies get squeezed by higher costs for fuel, materials and labor. Companies have to walk a tightrope of keeping prices high enough to drive profits, yet low enough to hold on to customers. That can fuel tense discussions as retailers and their suppliers hash out how much of their extra costs to pass on to shoppers.
    “It’s like buying a car,” said Olivia Tong, an analyst for equity research firm Raymond James who covers consumer packaged goods. “Normally, there’s some bit of negotiation. When it’s any major price move, there’s always going to be a little like, ‘Oh, no, that’s too much.’ And then you finally get to a happy medium where nobody’s happy.”

    Feeling the squeeze

    Company profits — and household budgets — are under pressure because of higher costs.
    Inflation has climbed at the fastest pace in decades, hitting grocery stores particularly hard. Food prices have soared by 10.9% over the past 12 months as of July. Many items have jumped far higher. The price of eggs is up 38%, coffee is up more than 20%, lunchmeat is up 18%, and peanut butter is up about 13% over the past year.

    Beyond price hikes, manufacturers are scrambling to find ways to cut costs or boost profits in ways people won’t notice as much. For instance, suppliers can speed up manufacturing, load up each truck with more goods and shrink the size of a package, a practice known as “shrinkflation.”
    Retailers are feeling the squeeze too. Walmart and Target have already cut their profit outlooks for the year and will shed light this week on how their businesses are faring when they report their quarterly earnings. Walmart is among the companies that have taken a hard look at ways to improve profits and keep prices down.
    In early July, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon told reporters that the retailer is talking to suppliers about finding “an innovative way to avoid cost increases,” such as changing packaging and placing orders earlier. But if that doesn’t work, he said Walmart has another lever it can pull: turning it into a competition.
    “So we will say to a group of suppliers, ‘Here’s what we’re trying to achieve. Which one of you wants to help us?’ And some suppliers will lean in and find a way to grow market share or in some way provide value to the customer that helps us not have to pass something on to a customer.”
    Makers of toilet paper, frozen meals and salty snacks have offered few details about how conversations around price hikes have gone with retailers — but acknowledge they don’t make anyone happy.
    “Nobody is pleased about the continued inflationary trends that we’re seeing,” Andre Schulten, chief financial officer of consumer goods giant Procter & Gamble, said in late July on an earnings call.
    P&G said price hikes aren’t covering all the higher costs across its portfolio, which includes Pampers diapers, Pantene shampoo and Tide laundry detergent. So far, the company hasn’t seen shoppers trade down as much as it expected, but it’s waiting for the other shoe to drop.
    Some manufacturers have argued that without price hikes, future sales could be in jeopardy. Conagra Brands has told retailers that if it can’t maintain its profit margins, then it can’t invest in creating new or upgraded products, CEO Sean Connolly said at the company’s investor day.
    Price hikes can alienate customers, too. About 56% of Americans feel companies are raising prices more than needed in order to boost profits, according to a late July survey of more than 1,000 consumers by consulting firm Deloitte.
    It isn’t just consumers pointing fingers. President Joe Biden’s administration has blamed big meat and oil companies for inflation, shaming the two industries for their high profits. Both industries have pushed back, blaming high demand, supply constraints and labor shortages instead.

    A carrot-and-stick approach

    Since early this year, regional supermarket chain Giant Eagle has seen a spike in the number of suppliers requesting price increases. Typically, those companies ask for a small increase every couple of years. Now they wanted to raise prices by 9%, 10% or more, said Don Clark, chief merchandising officer for the Pittsburgh-based grocer, which has more than 400 locations.
    “We knew our answer couldn’t just be flat out ‘no,'” he said. “Otherwise, the consequence of that is the supplier would say, ‘We can’t ship to you then because we have to take this cost increase.’ But we would negotiate and so we would have conversations with suppliers to help them understand that we can’t absorb all of it either.”
    The retailer has used a carrot-and-stick approach, he said. For suppliers willing to minimize price hikes, the grocer gives the brand more attention with a promotion or store display. And when suppliers insist on a sharp increase, he said Giant Eagle sometimes steps up the promotion of its lower-priced private label products by putting them at eye level or at the end of the aisle. In some cases, it drops a product altogether.
    Clark declined to name specific brands or products.
    Before Giant Eagle agrees to any increase, he said, suppliers must show proof of higher costs, such as commodity or labor reports that break down how much more ingredients, labor or transportation are costing.
    “Not all of our suppliers are benevolent,” he said. “This is an opportunity at times to try to pass on as much cost to try to pad profits.”
    With each price hike, he said, Giant Eagle realizes it puts its own business at risk. Customers may have sticker shock and decide to buy less or go to a dollar store, warehouse club or discounter such as Walmart instead.
    With some big brands that have loyal customers, he acknowledged, the grocer has less negotiating power.

    Worst-case scenario

    It’s rare that pricing standoffs between retailers and manufacturers in the U.S. result in empty shelves.
    That’s more common in countries where a small number of retailers hold more market share, according to Ken Harris, managing partner at Cadent Consulting.
    After Brexit, Tesco also found itself in a stalemate with Unilever over price hikes on Magnum Ice Cream bars, Marmite, Hellman’s Mayonnaise and other food items. Unilever and other food suppliers were experiencing higher costs, but Tesco didn’t want its customers to pay the price. It took several months — and more promotional spending from Unilever — to end the stalemate.
    Earlier this year, Canadian grocery giant Loblaw’s pulled Frito-Lay’s products from its shelves over a pricing dispute. For two months, Canadian consumers couldn’t find Cheetos, Doritos or Lay’s ketchup potato chips.
    In the United States, manufacturers gained more power to raise their prices over the last year because they could point to specific costs rising, such as for sunflower seed oil or coffee beans, according to Harris. Retailers pushed back much more when inflation was low and relatively stable.
    Now as some shoppers start to buy less or reach for cheaper brands, Harris said, the pendulum is swinging back to favor retailers. Suppliers might fight back but ultimately need their products on shelves.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Walmart strikes exclusive streaming deal to give Paramount+ to Walmart+ subscribers

    Walmart has reached an exclusive deal with Paramount+ to offer the streaming service as part of its Walmart+ offering.
    Walmart+ subscribers will get an ad-supported Paramount+ subscription included.
    Paramount Global CEO Bob Bakish has set a 100 million goal for Paramount+ subscribers by 2024.

    In this photo illustration, a woman’s silhouette holds a smartphone with the Walmart logo displayed on the screen and in the background.
    Rafael Henrique | Lightrocket | Getty Images

    Walmart has reached a deal to offer Paramount Global’s streaming service as a perk of its Walmart+ membership program, the companies confirmed on Monday.
    Starting in September, customers who belong to the retailer’s program will get free access to an ad-supported plan on Paramount+, which includes movies and shows such as “Star Trek,” “Paw Patrol,” “The Godfather” and “SpongeBob Squarepants.”

    Walmart launched Walmart+ nearly two years ago to drive sales and deeper customer engagement. The program costs $98 per year, or $12.95 per month, and is the company’s answer to Amazon Prime, but with a different set of perks. It includes free shipping of online purchases, free grocery deliveries for orders of at least $35 and discounts on prescriptions and gas.
    Now it will also include access to the “essential tier” of Paramount+, which typically costs $4.99 per month and includes commercials. Paramount also sells a premium product without ads for $9.99 per month.
    “With the addition of Paramount+, we are demonstrating our unique ability to help members save even more and live better by delivering entertainment for less, too,” Chris Cracchiolo, general manager of Walmart+, said in a news release.
    Walmart said in a news release on Monday that it has had positive membership growth every month since its launch in September 2020. But since launching the service, the retail giant has declined to share its subscriber total.
    According to estimates by market research firm Consumer Intelligence Research Partners, Walmart+ had 11 million customers as of July — the same as in the April. A survey by equity research firm Morgan Stanley pegged the subscriber count higher at about 16 million members as of May.

    Paramount+ is one of the many services that compete for eyeballs in the streaming industry. Paramount Global announced earlier this month that Paramount+ has 43.3 million subscribers around the world. The company aims to reach 100 million subscribers by 2024.
    The deal with Walmart will give Paramount+ a new distribution channel to add subscribers as well as a branding boost. Paramount+ is the only streaming service that has struck a deal with Walmart and wanted to launch exclusively to get full marketing attention, according to a person familiar with the deal who was not authorized to speak publicly about it.
    Jeff Shultz, chief strategy officer and chief business development officer of Paramount Streaming, said the two companies have worked closely together for years by selling consumer products in Walmart’s stores.
    The Wall Street Journal first reported the news of the deal.
    Walmart will report its second-quarter earnings on Tuesday.
    WATCH: Walmart+ members to get access to Paramount+

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Drivers are paying an average $702 monthly for new cars: Here's why that record high was 'inevitable,' says analyst

    In addition to elevated transaction prices on new vehicles, higher interest rates are adding to the cost of financing a car.
    Manufacturer discounts also have dropped 54.7% from a year ago, according to recent data.
    There are some things you can do to help keep the cost down for a new car.

    Skynesher | E+ | Getty Images

    Why drivers are spending more to buy a new vehicle

    The average new-car transaction in July was $45,869, according to the J.D. Power/LMC Automotive forecast. That’s down a tad from the record $45,988 set in June.
    Several factors are playing into higher costs, experts say:

    Higher interest rates for auto loans: The average is about 5.5%, up from 4.5% a year ago, Edmunds data shows. That rate could tick higher, given that the Federal Reserve is expected next month to again raise a key interest rate that many consumer loans derive from.

    Supply chain constraints: In the midst of a persisting shortage of computer chips needed to complete today’s cars, consumer demand continues to outstrip supply, which has led to elevated prices. Over the last year, prices on new cars have risen 10.4%, according to the latest Consumer Price Index.

    Vehicle popularity: Consumer preference also has shifted over the last decade or so to SUVs and trucks from sedans, which may cost less.

    Fewer incentives: With dealers not struggling to make sales, manufacturer discounts have fallen to an average of $894 per vehicle, down 54.7% from a year ago, according to the J.D. Power/LMC estimate. It’s the first time the average has fallen below $900.

    How to save money when financing a new car

    If you plan to finance the purchase of a new car, there are some things to consider that could lower the amount you need to finance.

    For starters, keep in mind that consumers with higher credit scores are able to secure the best loan terms.
    “Boosting your score might make all the difference in an auto loan … the higher you can get it, the better the rate you’ll be offered,” said certified financial planner Malcolm Ethridge, an executive vice president and financial advisor at CIC Wealth in Rockville, Maryland.

    Additionally, if you plan to use dealer financing, you may be able to negotiate the interest rate down, Ethridge said. “People probably don’t focus on that,” he said.
    You also should be realistic about how much car you actually need. Some cars may have features that push the price up but that you could live without, he said.
    “Pay attention to finding one that has fewer features … because that can bring down the price of the car,” Ethridge said.

    Trade-in values remain ‘extremely good’

    And if you’re trading in a car, that also will reduce the amount you need to finance. Depending on the specifics of the car, it could be worth more than you anticipate.
    Trade-in values “are still extremely good compared to what it would have been worth in typical times,” said Drury at Edmunds. For instance, for 5-year-old cars, “you are still thousands of dollars ahead of where you technically should be,” he added.
    “If you look at a 5-year-old car five years ago versus one today, there’s no comparison,” Drury said. “You have so much equity in that car.”

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Dollar General hit with nearly $1.3 million in fines for worker safety violations at Georgia stores

    Dollar General was hit with nearly $1.3 million in fines for worker safety violations.
    Since 2017, the Labor Department said Dollar General has been fined more than $6.5 million.
    Earlier this month, rival Dollar Tree was also hit with $1.2 million in fines for worker safety violations.

    A Dollar General store in Creve Coeur, Illinois.
    Daniel Acker | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Dollar General is being hit with nearly $1.3 million in fines for worker safety violations after visits by federal inspectors to three of the company’s Georgia locations, the Department of Labor said Monday.
    The department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration said it found violations in March that included obstructed exit routes, unsafely stacked merchandise and electrical panels that were difficult to access.

    The Labor Department said the company has 15 days to comply with its citations and penalties, request a meeting with OSHA or contest the proposed fines.
    “Following these inspections, we took immediate action to address issues and reiterated our safety expectations with store teams,” Dollar General said in a statement. “The safety of our employees and customers is of paramount importance to us, and we will continue to work cooperatively with OSHA.”
    Since 2017, the Labor Department said Dollar General has been fined more than $6.5 million for various violations. Earlier this month, rival Dollar Tree was also hit with $1.2 million OSHA fines for worker safety violations.
    “Dollar General continues to demonstrate a willful pattern of ignoring hazardous working conditions and a disregard for the well-being of its employees,” said Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Doug Parker in a statement. “Despite similar citations and sizable penalties in more than 70 inspections, the company refuses to change its business practices.”

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Republicans are falling out of love with America Inc

    To american executives, Rob Portman is the ideal senator. Smart, reasonable and experienced, he served as the top trade representative and budget director for George W. Bush, the Republican president from 2000 to 2008, before becoming a senator for Ohio more than a decade ago. Mr Portman has just one shortcoming: he is retiring. The party’s nominee to replace him is J.D. Vance, backed by Donald Trump, the most recent Republican commander-in-chief. Mr Vance calls big technology firms “enemies of Western civilisation” and casts elite managers as part of “the regime”, with interests anathema to those of America’s heartland. Democrats, with their leftier lean, remain companies’ most persistent headache—firms were caught off guard this month by Senate Democrats’ passage of a rise in corporate-tax rates and new restrictions on the pricing of drugs. But, in the words of an executive at a big financial firm, “We expect Democrats to hate us.” What is new is disdain from those on the right. There used to be a time, one lobbyist recalls with nostalgia, when “you would walk into a Republican office with a company and the question would be, ‘How can I help you?’” Those days are over. The prospect of Republicans sweeping the mid-term elections in November and recapturing the White House in 2024 no longer sends waves of relief through American boardrooms. Executives and lobbyists interviewed by The Economist, speaking on condition of anonymity, described Republicans as becoming more hostile in both tone and, increasingly, substance. Public brawls, such as Disney’s feud with Ron DeSantis, Florida’s Republican governor, over discussion of sexual orientation in classrooms, or Republicans blasting BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, for “woke” investments, are only its most obvious manifestations. “It used to be the axis was left to right,” says an executive at one of America’s biggest firms. “Now it is an axis from insiders to outsiders; everyone seems intent on proving they are not part of the superstructure and that includes business.” Long-held right-of-centre orthodoxies—in favour of free trade and competition, against industrial policy—are in flux. As Republicans’ stance toward big business changes, so may the contours of American commerce. The close partnership between Republicans and business has helped shape American capitalism for decades. Companies’ profit-seeking pursuit of free trade abroad and free enterprise at home dovetailed with Republicans’ credo of individual freedom and anti-communism. By the 1990s even Bill Clinton and other Democrats embraced new trade deals, giving firms access to new markets and cheaper labour. As Glenn Hubbard, former dean of Columbia Business School and a top economic adviser to Mr Bush, puts it, “social support for the system was a given and you could argue over the parameters.” The 2012 presidential battle between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney “felt like a big deal at the time”, says Rawi Abdelal of Harvard Business School. “But in terms of the business stakes, it wouldn’t have mattered at all.” Four years later Republicans were still attracting about two-thirds of spending by corporate political-action committees (pacs), which give money to candidates in federal elections, and a big corporate-tax cut in 2017 was the main legislative achievement of Mr Trump’s term. Yet Mr Trump had campaigned on ordinary Americans’ sense that they were being left behind. Executives hoping that his fiery campaign rhetoric would be doused by presidential restraint instead had to contend with his trade war with China, curbs on immigration and dangerous positions on climate change and race. Bosses felt compelled to speak out out against his policies, which appalled many of their employees and customers. In the eyes of Trump supporters, such pronouncements cast the ceos as members of the progressive elite bent on undermining their champion. After Mr Trump’s defeat to Mr Biden, companies wondered if their old alliance with Republicans might be restored. In July 17 Republican senators voted for a bill to provide, among other things, $52bn in subsidies to compete with China by making more computer chips in America—which chipmakers such as Intel naturally applauded. This month nearly all Republicans opposed the Democracts’ $700bn climate and health-care bill, known as the Inflation Reduction Act (ira), which raises taxes on large companies and enables the government to haggle with drugmakers over the price of some prescription medicines. This apparent business-friendliness-as-usual conceals a deeper shift, however. The Republican Party has attracted more working-class voters—an evolution accelerated by Mr Trump’s willingness, on paper if not always in practice, to put the interests of the American worker ahead of those of the American multinational. For most of the past 50 years more Republicans had a lot of confidence in big business than had little or no confidence in it, often by double-digit margins, according to Gallup polls. Last year the mistrustful outnumbered the trusting by a record 17 percentage points, worse than at the height of the global financial crisis of 2007-09. Republican election war chests are increasingly filled either by small donors or the extremely rich. Both of these groups are likelier to favour ideologues over pragmatists, notes Sarah Bryner of OpenSecrets, an ngo which tracks campaign finance and lobbying. The result of all this is growing Republican support for policies hostile to America Inc. Josh Hawley, a senator from Missouri, wants companies with more than $1bn in revenue to pay their staff at least $15 an hour. His colleague from Florida, Marco Rubio, has backed the formation of workers’ councils based at companies, an alternative to unions. In March Tom Cotton of Arkansas called for Americans to “reject the ideology of globalism” by curbing immigration, banning some American investments in China and suggesting Congress “punish offshoring to China”. Republicans in Congress have co-sponsored several bills with Democrats to rein in big tech. Mr Vance, who has a good shot at joining them after the mid-terms, has proposed raising taxes on companies that move jobs abroad. Mr Trump himself repeatedly promised to lower drug prices. That Republicans opposed the ira—and other business-wary Democratic initiatives—may mean simply that they loathe Democrats more than they dislike big business. Many bosses fret that the Republican Party will advance punitive policies once it is back in power. “There is no person who says, ‘Don’t worry’,” sighs one pharmaceutical executive. “You ignore what a politician says publicly at your peril,” warns another business bigwig. That is already evident at the state level, where Republicans often control all levers of government and are therefore free to enact their agenda in a way that is impossible in gridlocked Washington. After Disney spoke out against a Florida law to restrict discussion of gender and sexual orientation in schools, Mr DeSantis signed a law revoking the company’s special tax status. Texas has a new law restricting the state from doing business with firms that “discriminate against firearm and ammunition industries”. Kentucky, Texas and West Virginia have passed similar laws barring business with banks and other firms that boycott fossil-fuel producers; about a dozen other Republican-run states are considering doing the same.Such laws present a problem for companies. In July West Virginia’s treasurer said that anti-fossil-fuel policies of some of America’s biggest financial firms—BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo—made them ineligible for state contracts. The definition of what counts as discriminating or boycotting is hazy. JPMorgan Chase, which does not lend to firms that sell military-style weapons to consumers, first said that the Texan law prevented it from underwriting municipal-bond deals in that state, then bid for a contract (unsuccessfully). In Texas, Republican lawmakers are threatening to prosecute firms that pay for staff to travel out of state for abortions, which the Texan legislature has severely restricted. Right-wing culture-warriors have always been part of the Republican Party but the line between them and their pro-business country-club colleagues has collapsed. These days, worries another business grandee, both parties see it as “acceptable to use state power to get private entities to conform to their viewpoints”. “esg is a four-letter word in some Republican offices,” says Heather Podesta of Invariant, a lobbying firm, referring to the practice, championed by BlackRock among others, of considering environmental, social and governance factors, not just returns, in investment decisions. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has blamed Larry Fink, BlackRock’s boss, for high petrol prices. “Every time you fill up your tank,” he growled in May, “you can thank Larry for the massive and inappropriate esg pressure.”Companies are adjusting to this new, more volatile political reality. Some are creating more formal processes for reviewing the risks of speaking out on a particular social issue that may provoke a political backlash, including from Republicans. The way companies describe their strategy to politicians is changing, too. Lobbying is no longer confined to the parties’ leaders in the two houses of Congress. Because politicians of both parties are increasingly willing to flout party leadership, says an executive, “you have to go member by member.” Neil Bradley, policy chief of the us Chamber of Commerce, which represents American big business, says that his organisation has had to redouble efforts to “find people who have interest in governing”. Sometimes that means supporting more Democrats. In 2020 the chamber endorsed more vulnerable freshman Democratic incumbents, who were mostly moderate, than in previous years. That prompted Kevin McCarthy, then the top Republican in the House of Representatives, to say he didn’t want the organisation’s endorsement “because they have sold out”. So far this year corporate pacs have funnelled 54% of their campaign donations to Republicans, down from 63% in 2012 (see chart). Firms’ employees have beaten an even hastier retreat, with just 46% donating to Republican candidates, compared with 58% ten years ago, according to OpenSecrets. If the result of this is divided government, that would suit American business just fine. As one executive remarks, “We might not have improvements but we won’t get more cataclysmic policies.” ■ More

  • in

    Investors flock to green energy funds as Congress passes climate bill. What to know as assets reach ‘new territory’

    Investor Toolkit

    There’s been a surge of interest in green energy funds as President Joe Biden prepares to sign a bill allocating $369 billion for climate and energy funding.
    This month, investors have already poured $425.5 million into U.S. renewable energy exchange-traded funds through Aug. 12, according to Morningstar Direct.
    However, “what looks like a home run today may not work out tomorrow,” said certified financial planner John McGlothlin III with Southwest Retirement Advisors.

    The expansion of renewables comes at a time when concerns about the speed of the planet’s shift away from fossil fuels have been heightened following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
    Imaginima | E+ | Getty Images

    There’s been a surge of interest in green energy funds as President Joe Biden prepares to sign a bill allocating $369 billion for climate and energy funding.
    This month, investors have already poured $425.5 million into U.S. renewable energy exchange-traded funds through Aug. 12, compared with $112.8 million in July, according to estimates from Morningstar Direct.

    “I think we’re entering new territory,” said certified financial planner John McGlothlin III with Southwest Retirement Advisors in Austin, Texas, who specializes in values-based investing.
    The Inflation Reduction Act, passed by the House on Friday, includes funding for manufacturing, research and development, preserving natural resources and more, including individual tax incentives. The bill aims to cut U.S. carbon emissions by about 40% by 2030. 
    More from Personal Finance:75% of families don’t know key date for college financial aidNew climate bill extends $7,500 electric vehicle tax creditPeople may get thousands in new federal climate incentives
    “This is something that’s going to create a lot of investment and makes the economics of a lot of clean energy technologies better,” Dan Pickering, chief investment officer of Pickering Energy Partners told CNBC’s “Worldwide Exchange” on Monday. 
    Green energy funds also got a boost in March as Russia’s war on Ukraine renewed interest in energy security following months of investors leaving the space.   

    Still, experts say there are important things to consider before piling into these assets.

    ‘The landscape has changed dramatically this year’

    The renewable energy investing process may begin similarly to investing in other assets, McGlothlin said. Typically, he speaks with clients about their goals, investing timeline and risk tolerance.
    Green energy allocations generally start around 5% of the portfolio, depending on the investor’s preferences, he said. However, allocations may shift significantly higher when there’s a “separate bucket of money” the client doesn’t rely on for retirement, McGlothlin said.
    “After that, there’s still a lot of pretty fine slicing and dicing that we can do,” he said. 
    There are options for broad market exposure, which may move more like the rest of your portfolio, or opportunities to focus on a specific part of the green energy space, such as solar, wind and others.

    Of course, individual stocks or more narrow niches within the green energy space can be volatile.
    Generally, the “more tailored and specific” you get, the more volatility you’re likely to see. And with the industry in flux, it may be difficult to pick winners for the long term, McGlothlin said.
    “What looks like a home run today may not work out tomorrow,” he said, pointing to changing regulations, technology and consumer preferences.
    Regardless of which renewable funds you choose, you’ll want to review those assets periodically to be sure the allocation still aligns with your goals.
    “The landscape has changed dramatically this year,” he added. More