International Trade and World Market

More stories

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Faces Economic Turbulence Just as Recession Fears Eased

    by

    War in the Middle East, a strike by port workers and a devastating hurricane injected uncertainty into the U.S. economy.The United States economy is suddenly staring down new and potentially damaging crises, with tensions flaring in the Middle East and several states grappling with fallout from a devastating hurricane.The events hit just as American policymakers were gaining confidence that they had successfully tamed inflation without pushing the economy into a recession and as polls and consumer surveys suggested that Americans’ sour economic mood had begun to improve. But in just a week, new risks have emerged.The economy now faces the prospect of an oil price spike and the aftermath of a storm that could inflict more than $100 billion in damage upon large swaths of the Southeast. Economists have also been tracking potential consequences of a port workers’ strike, which was suspended on Thursday evening.“There’s new uncertainty,” said Joseph E. Gagnon, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “If we lose oil output in the Middle East, if the ports are not functioning, then both are inflationary.”That uncertainty is arriving just weeks before a presidential election in which the economy — in particular, inflation — is one of the biggest factors on voters’ minds and less than a month after the Federal Reserve began cutting interest rates from more than a two-decade high. The central bank has gained confidence that inflation is coming back to its 2 percent goal, but has been wary about the labor market weakening.Even before the new risks emerged, the International Monetary Fund was projecting that the U.S. economy would slow next year.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

  • 113 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    World Braces for Bigger Trade Wars if Trump Wins

    by

    Business owners and foreign governments are preparing for high tariffs and trade disruptions, depending on the outcome of the election.When you’re in the whiskey business, you’re always making predictions about the future.From the time grain grown around the Midwest enters Sonat Birnecker Hart’s distillery on the North Side of Chicago, it will be four to 10 years before the whiskey is shipped to buyers. So running her business requires careful projections about demand.Those calculations have become harder of late. With the U.S. presidential election looming, many businesses around the world are facing uncertainty about the future of American trade policy and the tariffs that products will face in global markets.For the whiskey industry, the stakes are particularly high. In March, a 50 percent tariff on American whiskey exports to Europe will snap into effect unless the European Union and the United States can come to an agreement to stop the levies.The outcome may depend on who is in office. Both former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have embraced tariffs, but their plans differ significantly. Ms. Harris’s campaign has said she would use tariffs in a “targeted” fashion — possibly mirroring the approach of President Biden, who recently imposed tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, silicon chips and solar panels. Like Mr. Biden, she has emphasized working closely with allies.Mr. Trump, in contrast, has said his approach to trade would be even more aggressive than the trade wars of his first term, when he imposed stiff tariffs on allies and rivals to obtain concessions and try to bolster American manufacturing. He has proposed a 60 percent tariff on products from China and a tariff of more than 10 percent on other goods from around the world.A 50 percent tariff on American whiskey exports to Europe will take effect in March unless the United States and European Union reach an agreement.Taylor Glascock for The New York TimesWe 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

  • 150 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Dockworkers’ Strike Halts Commerce at Newark Port, Affecting the Supply Chain Ecosystem

    by

    The strike by longshoremen has halted commerce at Newark and other ports on the East and Gulf Coasts, affecting an ecosystem of supply-chain workers.Every workday, on his early-morning drive to his job overseeing a warehouse in northern New Jersey, Sean Murphy takes in the frenetic scene of the busiest port on the East Coast.Towering cranes lift shipping containers off vessels newly arrived at Newark from points around the globe. Mile-long freight trains pull cargo to and from the docks. Belching trucks clatter down the highway, hauling containers to distribution centers from Maine to Florida.Not on Tuesday. As 45,000 dockworkers began a strike, shutting most of Newark and three dozen other shipping terminals along the Gulf and East Coasts, Mr. Murphy was confronted with the spectacle of a busy industrial hub now largely devoid of activity.Here was a visual encapsulation of the challenge confronting the global economy: cargo marooned, commerce frozen and no clarity on when normalcy will return.“It was eerie, like a ghost town,” Mr. Murphy said. “It was really creepy, if I can be honest with you. It was dead silent. I’ve never seen that in my entire life.”Beyond the atmospherics, the effective shutdown of Newark and other major ports threatens the livelihoods of millions of people who work near the affected docks — and businesses that depend on the flow of exports and imports.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 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    How the Port Strike Could Affect the Economy and Certain Products

    by

    Transportation and warehousing sectors are poised to first feel the pinch, with a broader economic fallout expected if the strike drags on.As dockworkers at East and Gulf Coast ports walk off the job, economists are bracing for the strike to reverberate across the American economy.The strike, a result of a monthslong impasse between the union representing roughly 45,000 longshoremen and port operators, began at 12:01 a.m. on Tuesday. It will halt almost all activity at some of the busiest ports in the United States, from Maine to Texas. The International Longshoremen’s Association is pushing for wage increases that exceed those offered by the United States Maritime Alliance, the port operators group.The president of the International Longshoremen’s Association said the workers were “making history” by walking off the job for the first time in nearly 50 years.Bryan Anselm for The New York TimesPresident Biden said on Sunday that he was not planning to invoke the Taft-Hartley Act, a nearly 80-year-old law, to force dockworkers back to work if they strike.A strike could cost the economy $4.5 billion to $7.5 billion, or a 0.1 percent hit to U.S. annualized gross domestic product, every week as truckers and other workers dependent on the ports are furloughed and manufacturers experience delivery delays, according to analysts at Oxford Economics. While those losses would be reversed once the strike was over, it would take a month to clear the backlog for each week of the strike, the analysts estimated.Here’s what else to know about the potential economic fallout of the strike.A strike could cost the economy $4.5 billion to $7.5 billion for every week of the work stoppage.Erin Schaff/The New York TimesWe 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 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Port Strike on the East and Gulf Coasts: What to Know

    by

    Thousands of dockworkers who load and unload cargo ships could walk off the job on Tuesday, halting nearly all activity at ports from Maine to Texas.Thousands of unionized dockworkers on the East and Gulf Coasts could go on strike as early as Tuesday, stranding cargo and sending ripples through supply chains for consumer goods and manufacturing parts.A contract between the operators of port terminals and the International Longshoremen’s Association, covering workers who load and unload cargo ships at three dozen ports, is set to expire on Monday. Their facilities include massive container ports in New Jersey, Virginia, Georgia and Texas, as well as the Port of Baltimore, a major hub for the import and export of vehicles and heavy machinery.The port operators group, the United States Maritime Alliance, and the union remain at an impasse over wage increases. Federal officials have said President Biden is not planning to invoke a nearly 80-year-old law to force dockworkers back to work if they strike. It would be the first such walkout at all these ports since 1977.Which ports and goods would be affected?Workers at ports from Maine to Texas would walk off the job at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday. These ports handle about half of all goods shipped to the United States in containers. One of them, the Port of New York and New Jersey, is the third busiest in the country.Longshoremen play a crucial role in the movement of cargo. They are responsible for loading and unloading ships, and they secure vessels that arrive and depart from U.S. ports. For the most part, ocean transport to and from these ports can’t happen without them.Cargo that could be affected by the strike includes everyday consumer goods, like bananas, many of which come through a port in Delaware. Just over half of imported apparel, footwear and accessories also come through East Coast ports. Manufacturing parts and cars move through these ports, too.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

    Trump’s Plans Could Spur Inflation While Slowing Growth, Study Finds

    by

    A nonpartisan economic analysis warned that deporting migrants and increasing tariffs would damage the U.S. economy.Former President Donald J. Trump’s proposals to deport millions of migrants and impose new tariffs on imports from around the world would slash U.S. economic growth and employment and cause inflation to rebound sharply, according to a new analysis published on Thursday by the nonpartisan Peterson Institute for International Economics.That analysis also assumed that Mr. Trump would try to encroach on the independence of the Federal Reserve. He has not floated such a proposal but has suggested that presidents should have input into the central bank’s policies and in the past tried to publicly push the Fed to lower interest rates.The assessment of Mr. Trump’s policies was published days after the Republican presidential candidate pitched his plan to create a manufacturing “renaissance” in America by cutting corporate taxes and regulations and increasing tariffs by as much as 200 percent. Economists have been skeptical about the viability of many of Mr. Trump’s proposals, and some of them could be difficult to enact. But the new report argued that if taken together, the policies would inflict significant damage on the U.S. economy.“While Trump promises to ‘make the foreigners pay,’ our analysis shows his policies will end up making Americans pay the most,” Warwick J. McKibbin, Megan Hogan and Marcus Noland wrote in their report.The study from the Peterson Institute, which tends to favor free trade, examined the effects of three prominent parts of Mr. Trump’s agenda: deporting 8.3 million unauthorized migrants, levying 10 percent tariffs on all imports and 60 percent tariffs on imports from China, and eroding the Federal Reserve’s independence by allowing the president to influence interest rate policy.The study suggested that Mr. Trump wanted to weaken the Fed’s independence, citing a Wall Street Journal article that said his allies were drawing up a plan to blunt the central bank’s ability to freely set interest rates. It also noted that Mr. Trump has said he believes presidents should have a “say” on interest rate policy.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 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Harris Now Has an Economic Plan. Can It Best Trump’s Promises?

    by

    A central question in the final stretch of the election is if Vice President Kamala Harris’s proposals will cohere into an economic argument that can top former President Donald J. Trump’s.Vice President Kamala Harris has a plan for the economy: a glossy, 82-page booklet detailing proposals on housing, taxes and health care that her campaign handed out to supporters gathered at a campaign event in Pittsburgh this week.Former President Donald J. Trump has nothing so detailed. The issues section of his campaign website is spare. He has coughed up a string of four- or five-word slogans promising tax cuts, some of which even his advisers cannot fully explain. He has toyed with a tariff as high as 20 percent on every good imported into the United States, promised to deport millions of immigrants to reduce the demand for housing and boasted that he can halve energy prices in a year.Even with such an improvisational, loosely defined agenda, he is still leading Ms. Harris on the economy in polls, though his advantage is shrinking in some surveys. Many economists have warned that Mr. Trump’s promises, if turned into concrete policy, could slow growth, raise consumer prices and balloon the federal deficit.But many voters find Mr. Trump’s punchy promises easy to grasp. His basic message of lower taxes, less regulation and less trade with other countries helped carry him to the White House once before. A majority of Americans fondly remember the economy in the first three years of his administration, before the pandemic and years of elevated inflation.A central question in the final stretch of the presidential race is if Ms. Harris’s more detailed — but in many cases still not fully formed — stack of policy proposals will cohere into an economic argument that can top that.To a remarkable degree in a deeply polarized country, Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump have many of the same stated goals for the economy. Lower costs. Reduce regulations. Cut taxes for the middle class. Incentivize corporations to build their products in the United States.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

  • 113 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Low-Tax, High-Tariff Strategy Could Clash With Economic Realities

    by

    The former president’s efforts to compel companies to remain in the United States had limited success while he was in the White House.As former President Donald J. Trump makes his closing economic argument ahead of the election, he is outlining a vision for a manufacturing renaissance that reprises a familiar pitch: Make goods in America and enjoy low taxes, or face punishing tariffs.Mr. Trump’s pitch combines the type of carrots-and-sharp-sticks approach that he called “America First” during his first term, when he imposed stiff tariffs on allies and competitors while lowering taxes on American firms.During a speech in Savannah, Ga., on Tuesday, Mr. Trump suggested he would go far beyond that initial approach and adopt what he rebranded a “new American industrialism.”The former president proposed creating “special” economic zones on federal land, areas that he said would enjoy low taxes and relaxed regulations. He called for companies that produce their products in the United States — regardless of where their headquarters are — to pay a corporate tax rate of 15 percent, down from the current rate of 21 percent. Businesses that try to route cars and other products into the United States from countries like Mexico would face tariffs as high as 200 percent.But Mr. Trump’s vision of a “manufacturing renaissance” comes when Americans are increasingly wary of foreign investment, particularly from Asia. And while he imposed steep tariffs during his presidency, his efforts to keep American companies from shifting production overseas ran into the harsh realities of lower-wage labor and technological advancements in other countries.While Mr. Trump was in office, manufacturing employment was essentially flat before the pandemic and had declined by the time he left office. In January 2021, the Alliance for American Manufacturing described his promises of an industrial resurgence as “mostly rhetoric.”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