Economic Conditions and Trends

More stories

  • 138 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Inside Trump’s Reversal on Tariffs: From ‘Be Cool!’ to ‘Getting Yippy’

    by

    Economic turmoil, particularly a rapid rise in government bond yields, caused President Trump to reverse course on the steep levies.For the past week, President Trump has been urging calm in the face of the financial chaos that he created and resisting calls for him to rethink his approach.“I know what the hell I’m doing,” he told Republicans on Tuesday as the massive tariffs he had imposed sent global markets into a tailspin. “BE COOL!” he said in a social media post on Wednesday morning. “Everything is going to work out well.”At 9:37 a.m. Wednesday, the president was still bullish on his policy, posting on Truth Social: “THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!”But in the end, it was the markets that got him to reverse course.The economic turmoil, particularly a rapid rise in government bond yields, caused Mr. Trump to blink on Wednesday afternoon and pause his “reciprocal” tariffs for most countries for the next 90 days, according to four people with direct knowledge of the president’s decision.Asked to explain the decision, Mr. Trump told reporters: “Well, I thought that people were jumping a little bit out of line. They were getting yippy, you know, they were getting a little bit yippy, a little bit afraid.”Behind the scenes, senior members of Mr. Trump’s team had feared a financial panic that could spiral out of control and potentially devastate the economy. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and others on the president’s team, including Vice President JD Vance, had been pushing for a more structured approach to the trade conflict that would focus on isolating China as the worst actor while still sending a broader message that Mr. Trump was serious about cracking down on trade imbalances.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

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariff Goal Is to Eliminate Trade Deficits. Economists Have Doubts.

    by

    Behind Trump’s new tariffs is a goal that is as ambitious as it is unrealistic: eliminating the bilateral trade deficit with every U.S. trading partner.Behind President Trump’s decision to hit some of America’s largest trading partners with stiff tariffs is his fixation on the trade deficit that the United States runs with other nations. But many economists say that is a poor metric for judging the quality of a trade relationship.The steep tariffs, which went into effect on nearly 60 trading partners on Wednesday, were calculated based on bilateral trade deficits, or the gap between what the United States sells to each country and what it buys.Mr. Trump has long viewed that gap as evidence that America is being “ripped off” by other countries. He argues that other countries’ unfair behavior has made trade so skewed and that the United States needs to be able to manufacture more of what it consumes. But economists argue this is a flawed way to approach the issue, given that bilateral trade deficits crop up for many reasons beyond unfair practices.“It’s totally silly,” Dani Rodrik, an economist who studies globalization at Harvard University, said of Mr. Trump’s focus on bilateral deficits. “There’s no other way to say it, it makes no sense.”Some economists do agree with the Trump administration that America’s overall trade deficit with the rest of the world reflects a problem for the U.S. economy, because the United States is so dependent on manufacturing elsewhere, including in China. But others don’t see it as an issue. And nearly all economists say that focusing on imbalances from country to country can be highly misleading.Last year, for example, the United States ran bilateral trade surpluses with 116 countries globally. It ran bilateral trade deficits with 114 countries, according to World Bank data.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

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Japan Lacks a ‘Viable Option’ for Retaliating to Trump’s Tariffs

    by

    After being smacked with double-digit percentage tariffs by a key ally, Japan finds itself with few retaliatory options.Since President Trump began threatening broad tariffs in January, Japan has pursued a conciliatory strategy, with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba pledging in February to boost U.S. investment to $1 trillion.Up until the day before Mr. Trump’s tariff announcements on Wednesday, prominent business executives in Tokyo said they were hopeful Japan would be spared. Those hopes were dashed when Mr. Trump said U.S. imports from Japan would face a 24 percent tariff. Last week, he said that cars, Japan’s top export to the United States, would be subject to a 25 percent tax.While other places affected by the U.S. tariffs — including the European Union, Canada and China — have declared their intentions to retaliate with their own taxes on American goods, Japanese officials have refrained from talking about a similar move.That is in part because the state of Japan’s economy and the importance of its trade with the United States would make it difficult to do so, analysts say.Over the past few years, inflation, largely driven by rising energy and food costs, has surged in Japan and strained its economy. Japan’s imports from the United States are largely commodities, including natural gas and agricultural products.That is why imposing retaliatory tariffs on U.S. imports would be “self-defeating” and “simply not a viable option,” said Stefan Angrick, a senior economist at Moody’s Analytics in Tokyo. “The only remaining strategy is to shift the narrative and emphasize Japan’s willingness to import more commodities,” he said.American officials, including Mr. Trump, have repeatedly raised concerns about Japan’s non-tariff trade barriers, specifically citing import restrictions on agricultural products like rice and automotive standards that they contend put American manufacturers at a disadvantage.At a news conference on Thursday, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, Yoshimasa Hayashi, declined to comment on what Japan would be willing to consider conceding in trade negotiations with the United States. Other officials, including the prime minister, refrained from talk of retaliation.Japan’s standards for certifying automobiles for use in the country are based on those established by the United Nations, Mr. Hayashi said. He also said that he has explained to his counterparts in Washington the details and logic behind Japan’s rice-import policies.“Despite this, it is extremely regrettable that the U.S. government has announced the recent reciprocal tariff measures mentioning rice,” Mr. Hayashi said. “In any case, Japan will continue to strongly urge the United States to review its measures.” More

  • 175 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Has Hinted at a Xi Visit. China Is Still Wondering What He Wants.

    by

    Chinese experts say Beijing is open to talks but is being stonewalled by the State Department and other official channels.President Trump fueled new speculation this week about a meeting with China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, when he told reporters that Washington needed to be cleaned up to prepare for a summit between the two leaders in the “not too distant future.”Mr. Trump provided no details, and China has said nothing publicly about any such meeting. The stakes of a visit would be high: President Trump has imposed 20 percent tariffs on China’s shipments to the United States, and may order another round next month. China wants to try to head off further escalations in the trade war that would set back its efforts to revive the country’s beleaguered economy, experts say.But before any summit can take place, China still needs answers to two pressing questions: What does Mr. Trump want? Who can Beijing talk to in Washington who Mr. Trump might listen to?To try to answer these questions, China sent scholars to the United States to take part in unofficial diplomatic talks last month with Trump administration officials and American foreign policy experts. China has grown concerned that the officials Beijing have been dealing with at the State Department and the National Security Council, who are outside Mr. Trump’s inner circle, are not conveying their messages to him, some of the scholars said.“We talk through the diplomatic channel. That’s the normal channel. But can that reach President Trump? Do those people we talked to really know what President Trump is thinking?” said Da Wei, the director of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing, who was among the scholars.China has also been publicly signaling its interest in talks. The Chinese commerce minister said earlier this month that he wrote a letter to the U.S. commerce secretary and U.S. trade representative inviting them to meet. And Chinese officials describing Beijing’s efforts to curtail the production of fentanyl last week urged the United States to return to dialogue.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

  • 163 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Latest Tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China Could Be His Biggest Gamble

    by

    President Trump has offered a mix of reasons for upending global trade relations, baffling and angering America’s biggest trading partners.President Trump made one of the biggest gambles of his presidency Tuesday by initiating sweeping tariffs with no clear rationale on imports from Canada, Mexico and China, triggering a trade war that risks undermining the United States economy.His actions have upended diplomatic relations with America’s largest trading partners, sent markets tumbling, and provoked retaliation on U.S. products — leaving businesses, investors and economists puzzled as to why Mr. Trump would create such upheaval without extended negotiations or clear reasoning.Mr. Trump has offered up a variety of explanations for the tariffs, saying they are punishment for other countries’ failure to stop drugs and migrants from flowing into the United States, a way to force manufacturing back to America and retribution for countries that take advantage of the United States. On Tuesday, he cited Canada’s hostility toward American banks as another reason.Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said it was difficult to understand Mr. Trump’s rationale for the tariffs but posited that his intent was to cripple Canada. “What he wants is to see a total collapse of the Canadian economy, because that’ll make it easier to annex us,” Mr. Trudeau said during a news conference on Tuesday. “That’s never going to happen. We will never be the 51st state.”Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said Tuesday afternoon that the president might reach some sort of accommodation with Canada and Mexico and announce it on Wednesday. “I think he’s going to figure out, you do more, and I’ll meet you in the middle some way,” Mr. Lutnick said.Canada announced a series of retaliatory tariffs on $20.5 billion worth of American imports, and Mr. Trudeau said that other “non-tariff” measures were forthcoming.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

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    What Germany’s Election Result Means for Its Economy

    by

    The next German government faces calls to loosen borrowing rules, slash energy costs and spur innovation. It won’t be easy.Friedrich Merz and his center-right Christian Democrats emerged victorious in Germany’s election on Sunday, but the celebrations may be short. The next government, almost certainly led by Mr. Merz as chancellor, faces a stagnant economy, President Trump’s threat to put tariffs on the country’s crucial export industries and a fourth year of war in Ukraine.What’s more, the ability to address these issues is hamstrung by strict limits on government debt and deficits, making it difficult to finance higher military spending, update crumbling infrastructure and carry out other initiatives that economists say are crucial to spur growth.A dispute over this rule, known as the debt brake, brought down the government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz of the center-left Social Democrats, paving the way for Sunday’s early election. But relaxing the rule would require a two-thirds majority in Parliament to amend the Constitution, and the election outcome suggests it would be difficult to muster that much support.Already on Monday, Mr. Merz was facing calls from other politicians, economists and even the traditionally conservative central bank for the new government to find a way to adjust the spending limits to fit the country’s urgent economic demands.“In principle,” the Bundesbank wrote in a report on Monday, “it is entirely justifiable to adapt the debt brake’s borrowing limit to changing conditions when the public debt ratio is low.” German government debt is just over 60 percent of gross domestic product, far lower than in countries like Britain, France and the United States, where debt is near or above 100 percent of G.D.P.But after Sunday’s election, the two-party coalition that Mr. Merz hopes to form between his Christian Democrats, which won 208 seats, and the Social Democrats, with 120, will have to rely on other parties to achieve the two-thirds majority in Parliament necessary to change the Constitution.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

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariffs Would Reverse Decades of Integration Between U.S. and Mexico

    by

    Ties between the United States and Mexico have deepened over 30 years of free trade, creating both benefits and irritants.When Dennis Nixon started working at a regional bank in Laredo, Texas, in 1975, there was just a trickle of trade across the border with Mexico. Now, nearly a billion dollars of commerce and more than 15,000 trucks roll over the line every day just a quarter mile from his office, binding the economies of the United States and Mexico together.Laredo is America’s busiest port, and a conduit for car parts, gasoline, avocados and computers. “You cannot pick it apart anymore,” Mr. Nixon said of the U.S. and Mexican economies. Thirty years of economic integration under a free trade deal has created “interdependencies and relationships that you don’t always understand and measure, until something goes wrong,” he said.Now that something is looming: 25 percent tariffs on Mexican products, which President Trump plans to impose on Saturday as he looks to pressure the Mexican government to do more to curb illegal immigration. Mr. Trump is also expected to hit Canada with 25 percent levies and impose a 10 percent tax on Chinese imports.A longtime proponent of tariffs and a critic of free trade deals, Mr. Trump seems unafraid to upend America’s closest economic relationships. He is focusing on strengthening the border against illegal immigration and the flow of fentanyl, two areas that he spoke about often during his 2024 campaign.But the president has other beefs with Mexico, including the economic competition it poses for U.S. workers. The president and his supporters believe that imports of cars and steel from Mexico are weakening U.S. manufacturers. And they say the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade deal Mr. Trump signed in 2020 to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement, needs to be updated — or perhaps, in some minds, scrapped.Many businesses say ties between the countries run deeper than most Americans realize, and policies like tariffs that seek to sever them would be painful. Of all the world’s major economic partners, the United States and Mexico are among the most integrated — linked by business, trade, tourism, familial ties, remittances and culture. It’s a closeness that at times generates discontent and efforts to distance the relationship, but also brings many benefits.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

  • 138 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Economic Toll of Los Angeles Fires Goes Far Beyond Destroyed Homes

    by

    The ongoing disaster will affect residents’ health, local industries, public budgets and the cost of housing for years to come.After decades of mounting damage from climate-fueled natural disasters, researchers have compiled many misery-filled data sets that trace the economic fallout over weeks, months and years.The fires still burning in Los Angeles are sure to rank among America’s most expensive — but there is no perfect analogue for them, making it difficult to forecast the ultimate cost.The main reason is that wildfires have typically burned in more rural locations, consuming fewer structures and attacking smaller metropolitan areas. The Los Angeles conflagration is more akin to a storm that hits a major coastal city, like Houston or New Orleans, causing major disruption for millions of people and businesses.“It looks a lot more like the humanitarian situation from a flood or a hurricane than a wildfire that people are watching in the hills,” said Amir Jina, an assistant professor at the University of Chicago’s Harris School of Public Policy, who has studied the economic impact of climate change.On the other hand, several mitigating factors could lead to lower costs and a stronger rebound relative to other places. The cinema capital’s wealth and industrial diversity, along with other natural advantages from geography and weather, may allow Los Angeles to stave off a worst-case scenario.Estimating the likely economic losses is tricky at this stage. The weather data company AccuWeather has offered a figure of $250 billion to $275 billion, though a Goldman Sachs report said it found the estimate high. (Declining to provide a breakdown because its methodology is “proprietary,” AccuWeather said it considered many factors including long-run health impacts as well as short-term losses in the value of public companies exposed to the disaster.)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