United States

More stories

  • 150 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Omicron Is an Economic Threat, but Inflation Is Worse, Central Bankers Say

    by

    Within 24 hours, the Federal Reserve, Bank of England and European Central Bank all stepped forward to deal with price increases.There is still a lot scientists do not know about Omicron. There is cautious optimism — but no certainty — about the effectiveness of vaccines against this fast-spreading variant of the coronavirus, and experts do not fully understand what it means for public health or the economy.But central banks have concluded they don’t have the luxury of waiting to find out.Facing surging inflation, three of the world’s most influential central banks — the Federal Reserve, Bank of England and European Central Bank — took decisive steps within 24 hours of each other to look past Omicron’s economic uncertainty. On Thursday, Britain’s central bank unexpectedly raised interest rates for the first time in more than three years as a way to curb inflation that has reached a 10-year high. The eurozone’s central bank confirmed it would stop purchases under a bond-buying program in March. The day before, the Fed projected three interest rate increases next year and said it would accelerate the wind down its own bond-buying program.The perception that the Bank of England would “view the outbreak of the Omicron variant with greater concern than it actually did” caused the surprise in financial markets, ” Philip Shaw, an economist at Investec in London, wrote in a note to clients. The Fed also “carried on regardless” with its tightening plans, he added.Aside from Omicron, the central banks were running out of reasons to continue emergency levels of monetary stimulus designed to keep money flowing through financial markets and to keep lending to businesses and households robust throughout the pandemic. The drastic measures of the past two years had done the job — and then some: Inflation is at a nearly 40-year high in the United States; in the eurozone it is the highest since records began in 1997; and price rises in Britain have consistently exceeded expectations.It is still unknown how Omicron will affect the economic recovery. Vaccine makers are still testing their shots against the variant.Alessandro Grassani for The New York TimesThe heads of all three central banks have separately decided that the price gains won’t be as temporary as they once thought, as supply chains take a while to untangle and energy prices pick up again.Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, said that policymakers in Britain were seeing things that could threaten inflation in the medium-term. “So that’s why we have to act,” he said on Thursday.“We don’t know, of course, a lot about Omicron at the moment,” he added. It could slow the economy, and already there are canceled holiday parties, fewer restaurant bookings, less retail foot traffic and signs that more people are staying home. But Omicron could also worsen inflationary pressures, he said. “And that’s, I’m afraid, a very important factor for us.”Already, price gains have popped higher this year as snarled supply chains and goods shortages have raised shipping and manufacturing costs. Depending on the severity of Omicron and how governments react, the variant could cause factories to shut down and could keep supply chains in disarray and workers at home, prolonging goods and labor shortages and pushing inflation higher.At the same time, policymakers are assuming the impact on the economy will be milder than previous waves of the virus. With each surge in cases and reintroduction of restrictions, the dent to the economy has gotten smaller and smaller. This would lessen the risk that the central banks end up tightening monetary policy into a downturn.Still, it is an awkward balancing act. On the same day the Bank of England raised rates, its staff cut half a percentage point from their growth forecasts for the final three months of the year. By the end of 2021, the British economy will still be 1.5 percent smaller than its prepandemic size, the bank estimated.Christine Lagarde, the president of the European Central Bank, said Omicron had created uncertainty in the face of a strong recovery.Pool photo by Ronald Wittek“From a macroeconomic perspective, it’s unlikely that the fourth wave is going to have as meaningful an impact as we’ve seen even during last winter,” said Dean Turner, an economist at UBS Global Wealth Management.The economic recoveries from the pandemic, though bumpy, haven’t been derailed yet. Unemployment rates are falling in Europe and the United States, and businesses are complaining that is difficult to hire staff. That, combined with the burst of inflation, was enough to bolster the case for some monetary tightening.“There’s a lot of uncertainty with the new variant, and it’s not clear how big the effects would be on either inflation or growth or hiring,” Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said on Wednesday. But there is a “real risk” inflation could be more persistent, he also said, which was part of the reason the bank sped up its plans to taper its bond purchases.Ending the Fed’s bond purchases sooner would give the central bank room to react to a wider range of economic outcomes next year, Mr. Powell said.“The data is pretty glaring,” Mr. Turner of UBS said of recent statistics on inflation and employment. “There’s only so much caution you can get away with,” before central banks need to take action, he said.Omicron has created uncertainty in the face of a strong recovery, Christine Lagarde, the president of the European Central Bank said on Thursday after she outlined how the bank would end its largest pandemic-era stimulus measure.Vaccine-makers are still testing their shots against Omicron and medical officials are encouraging restraint when it comes to socializing rather than implementing new lockdowns, but central bankers are marching ahead because time isn’t on their side. The effect of monetary policy decisions on the wider economy isn’t immediate.The Bank of England is forecasting that inflation will peak at 6 percent in April, three times the central bank’s target. Within such a short time frame, there is little policymakers can do to stop that from happening, but they can try to signal to businesses and unions setting wages that they will act to stop higher inflation from becoming entrenched, said Paul Mortimer-Lee, the deputy director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research in London. This may prevent higher prices from spilling over into significantly higher wages, which could cause businesses to raise prices even more.While all three central banks are facing similar problems with high inflation and are keeping watch over wage negotiations, their future challenges are different.The Federal Reserve and Bank of England are worried about the persistence of high inflation. For the European Central Bank, inflation in the medium term is too low, not too high. It is still forecasting inflation to be below its 2 percent target in 2023 and 2024. To help reach that target in coming years, the central bank will increase the size of an older bond-buying program beginning in April, after purchases end in the larger, pandemic-era program. This is to avoid “a brutal transition,” Ms. Lagarde said.She warned against drawing strong comparisons between Britain, the United States and the eurozone economies.“Those three economies are at a completely different states of the cycle,” she said. “We are in a different universe and environment,” even though there might be some spillover effects across countries from the actions each central bank takes.Melissa Eddy More

  • 113 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    What Causes Inflation and Should I Worry About It?

    by

    What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? A run through common questions about the ongoing price burst.Inflation has become central to the American zeitgeist in 2021 in a way that it hadn’t been for decades. Google searches are up. Supply chain issues feature into popular Instagram posts. The satire website The Onion warned in a recent headline that “higher prices may force Americans to eat reasonable portions on Thanksgiving.”Even as inflation hits its highest level since 1982 and inserts itself as a topic of popular discussion, trying to understand it can be a mind-bending task. Some people who have studied markets and the economy for years often do not know the ins and outs of how inflation is calculated. Its aftereffects on society — from who wins and who loses to whether it is good or bad news — are nuanced.Here’s a guide to help explain what inflation is, including how it is measured and what it means for your economic security and savings.What is inflation?Inflation is a loss of purchasing power over time: It means your dollar will not go as far tomorrow as it did today.Inflation is typically expressed as the annual change in prices for a basket of goods and services. In the United States, there are two main inflation gauges.One, the Consumer Price Index or C.P.I., measures the cost of things urban consumers buy out of pocket. The other, the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, or P.C.E., is released at more of a lag and measures things people consume, including things they do not pay for directly — notably health care, which insurance and government benefits help to cover. The two indexes are also built slightly differently.The Federal Reserve, America’s central bank and the institution in charge of keeping prices from increasing too rapidly, targets 2 percent annual increases in the P.C.E. index on average over time. A little bit of consumer price inflation is generally viewed as desirable, in part because it gives companies room to adjust to a changing economy — one where labor and commodities might cost more — without being forced out of business.What causes inflation?In the short term, high inflation can be the result of a hot economy — one in which people have a lot of surplus cash or are accessing a lot of credit and want to spend. If consumers are buying goods and services eagerly enough, businesses may need to raise prices because they lack adequate supply. Or companies may choose to charge more because they realize they can raise prices and improve their profits without losing customers.But inflation can — and often does — rise and fall based on developments that have little to do with economic conditions. Limited oil production can make gas expensive. Supply chain problems can keep goods in short supply, pushing up prices.The inflationary burst America has experienced this year has been driven partly by quirks and partly by demand.What to Know About Inflation in the U.S.The Fed’s Pivot: Jerome Powell’s abrupt change of course moved the central bank into inflation-fighting mode.Fastest Inflation in Decades: The Consumer Price Index rose 6.8 percent in November from a year earlier, its sharpest increase since 1982.Why Washington Is Worried: Policymakers are acknowledging that price increases have been proving more persistent than expected.Who’s to Blame for Rising Prices?: Here are the most obvious candidates — and where the evidence looks strongest.The Psychology of Inflation: Americans are flush with cash and jobs, but they also think the economy is awful.On the quirk side, the coronavirus has caused factories to shut down and has clogged shipping routes, helping to limit the supply of cars and couches and pushing prices higher. Airfares and rates for hotel rooms have rebounded after dropping in the depths of the pandemic. Gas prices have also contributed to heady gains recently.But it is also the case that consumers, who collectively built up big savings thanks to months in lockdown and repeated government stimulus checks, are spending robustly and their demand is driving part of inflation. They are continuing to buy even as costs for exercise equipment or outdoor furniture rise, and they are shouldering increases in rent and home prices. The indefatigable shopping is helping to keep price increases brisk.Where is inflation headed and should I be worried?Officials say they do not yet see evidence that rapid inflation is turning into a permanent feature of the economic landscape, even as prices rise very quickly: The C.P.I. measure rose by 6.8 percent in the year through November, the fastest pace since 1982.There are plenty of reasons to believe that the price burst will fade. Much of the increase this year owes to shortages of goods — from bicycles to cars and beds — that are likely to eventually ease as companies figure out how to produce and transport what people want to buy in a pandemic-altered economy. Many households also have built up savings, in part because of repeated stimulus payments, but they eventually could exhaust those.Plus, before the pandemic, aging demographics and high inequality in income and wealth had combined to drag inflation steadily lower for years as people preferred to save money instead of spending it, and those basic economic building blocks haven’t changed.But there are concerning signs that inflation is becoming stickier, meaning that it might last rather than fading with time. Rents have picked up sharply as home prices have risen and would-be buyers have found themselves locked out of ownership. Consumers are slowly starting to anticipate higher prices, though long-term inflation expectations have yet to jump drastically higher.In the longer term, the (sometimes contested) theory goes, high inflation can become entrenched if workers begin to expect it and can successfully negotiate wage increases to cover their climbing costs. Companies, facing higher labor bills, may manage to pass the costs onto consumers — and voilà, you have a situation where pay and prices push one another steadily upward.Is inflation bad?Whether inflation is “bad” depends on the circumstances.Most everyone agrees that super fast price increases — often called hyperinflation — spell trouble. They destabilize political systems, turn middle-class workers into paupers overnight, and make it impossible for businesses to plan. Weimar Germany, where hyperinflation helped to usher Adolf Hitler into power, is often cited as a case in point.Moderate price gains, even ones a bit above the Fed’s official goal, are a topic of more-serious debate. Slightly higher inflation can be good for people who owe money at fixed interest rates. If I sell coconuts for $1 and owe my bank $200 today, but next year I am suddenly able to charge $1.05 for my coconuts, my debt becomes easier for me to pay back: Now I only have to sell a little bit over 190 coconuts plus interest.But inflation can be tough for lenders. The bank to whom I owe my $200 is obviously not happy to get 190 coconuts worth of money instead of 200 coconuts worth. While politicians and the public rarely cry for bankers, the same is true for people with savings that bear low interest: Their holdings will not go as far. Inflation can be especially tough for people on fixed incomes, like students and many retirees.For workers taking home paychecks, whether inflation is a good or bad thing hinges on what happens with wages. If a worker’s pay goes up faster than prices increase, they can still find themselves better off in a high-inflation environment.Wages are growing quickly right now, especially for lower earners, but some measures suggest the growth is not keeping pace with inflation as it picks up steeply. Still, many households are also receiving transfers from the government — including an expanded Child Tax Credit — which could keep some families’ financial situations from deteriorating.How does inflation affect the poor?High or unpredictable inflation that isn’t outmatched by wage gains can be especially hard to shoulder for poor people, simply because they have less wiggle room.Poor households spend a bigger chunk of their budgets on necessities — food, housing and especially gas, which is often a contributor to bouts of high inflation — and less on discretionary expenditures. If rich households face high inflation and their wages do not keep up, they may have to cut back on vacations or dining out. A poor family may be forced to cut back on essentials, like food.“For lower income households, price increases eat up more of their budget,” said Laura Rosner-Warburton, a senior economist at MacroPolicy Perspectives, pointing out that some research suggests that poor people may even end up paying comparatively more for the same products. That may be partly because they lack the free cash to take advantage of temporary discounts.Around the world, poor people historically have reported greater concern around inflation, and that is also the case in the United States in the current episode.How does inflation affect the stock market?Really high inflation typically spells trouble for stocks, said Aswath Damodaran, who teaches corporate finance and valuation at New York University’s Stern School of Business. Financial assets in general have historically fared badly during inflation booms, Mr. Damodaran said, while real assets like houses have better held their value.The reason is simple.“You need to make higher returns to break even,” he explained. While it might have been attractive to invest money for a 3 percent annual payback before an inflationary burst, once inflation has taken off to 4 percent, your investment would actually be declining in terms of real-world purchasing power.Plus, inflation can be tough on the underlying business. Companies that lack pricing power — meaning that they cannot easily pass costs on to customers — suffer the worst, because they are forced to absorb input cost increases by taking a hit to their profit margin.High inflation can also spur the Federal Reserve to increase interest rates as it tries to cool off the economy and slow demand. If the central bank does so drastically, it could even plunge the economy into a recession, which would also be bad for stocks — along with everyone else.“The worse inflation is, the more severe the economic shutdown has to be to break the back of inflation,” Mr. Damodaran said. More

  • 100 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Touts Low Unemployment Rate Despite Economic Anxiety

    by

    Whether it’s reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, Times Video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world.Whether it’s reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, Times Video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world. More

  • 100 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    How Omicron Could Knock Economic Recovery Off Track

    by

    The latest zigzag in the pandemic has already curtailed travel, but its broader impact on growth and inflation isn’t likely to be known for several weeks.LONDON — This week, Marisha Wallace finally had to admit that her planned five-day ski holiday in Switzerland in mid-December was not salvageable: The Swiss government’s sudden decision to impose a 10-day quarantine on some international travelers meant she wouldn’t be able to leave her hotel or return home to London on her scheduled flight.“It’s the way of the world right now,” said Ms. Wallace, an actress and a singer. “You can’t plan anymore.”That provisional state, amplified across the world, has left the still-fragile economy in a state of suspense as spiking coronavirus infections and the new variant Omicron have popped up around the globe.“There’s no way to know how bad it will get,” said Ángel Talavera, head of European economics at Oxford Economics.The forecasting firm has sketched out three scenarios, including one that predicts no discernible effect on economic growth and one severe enough to slash next year’s in half. It will take several weeks before there is more clarity, Oxford concluded.The current round of restrictions has already reduced travel and dampened consumer confidence. A virulent, vaccine-resistant strain could send the economy into a tailspin again, while a mild one could leave health care systems unburdened and allow the recovery to get back on track.As a report released Wednesday from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development showed, although growth has been uneven, the world economy this year bounced back more quickly and strongly than had been anticipated. The report, compiled largely before the latest coronavirus news, nevertheless warned that growth was projected to slow: in the eurozone, to 4.3 percent next year from 5.2 percent in 2021; and in the United States, to 3.7 percent in 2022 from 5.6 percent.The organization characterized its outlook as “cautiously optimistic.” But it reiterated how much economic fortunes are inextricably tied to the coronavirus: “The economic policy priority is to get people vaccinated,” the report concluded.Travelers from South Africa being tested at the Amsterdam airport on Tuesday.Remko De Waal/Anp/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIndeed, Omicron’s threat to the recovery is just the latest in a series of zigzags that the world economy has endured since the coronavirus began its march across continents last year. Hopes that an ebbing pandemic would permit daily life and commerce to return to normal have been repeatedly frustrated by the virus.Even before this latest variant was discovered, a fourth wave of infections transformed Europe into a Covid hot spot and prompted new restrictions like lockdowns in the Netherlands and Austria.During earlier outbreaks, trillions in government assistance helped quickly resuscitate the struggling U.S. and European economies. It also brought some unexpected side effects. Combined with pent-up demand, that support helped produce a shortage of labor and materials and rising inflation.Given how much debt was racked up in the past 18 months, such aid is unlikely to recur even with a sharp downturn — and neither are wholesale closures. Vaccines provide some protection, and many people say they are unwilling to go back into hibernation.People and business alike have shifted into a wait-and-see mode. “A lot of things do seem like they are on hold, like labor market or overall consumption decisions,” said Nick Bunker, director of economic research for the job site Indeed.How that will affect unemployment levels and inflation rates is unclear. Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, indicated on Tuesday that concern about stubborn inflation was growing. The O.E.C.D. also warned that inflation could be higher and last longer than originally anticipated.Omicron’s appearance just adds to the uncertainty, Laurence Boone, the organization’s chief economist, said in an interview.The Nativity Hotel in Bethlehem. Israel on Sunday decided to close its borders to foreign tourists after the Omicron variant was detected.Hazem Bader/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“If it’s something we can cope with, like the virus we have so far, then it may prolong disruptions of the supply chain, and inflation could take longer to sort out,” she said. But if the new variant causes wider shutdowns and plunging confidence, she added, it could reduce the spending binge and dampen rising prices.In recent days, governments have reacted with a confusing hodgepodge of stern warnings, travel bans, mask mandates and testing rules that further cloud the economic outlook. That patchwork response combined with people’s varying tolerance for risk means that, at least in the short term, the virus’s latest swerves will have a vastly different effect depending on where you are and what you do.In France, Luna Park, an annual one-month amusement fair held in the southern city of Nice and slated to open this weekend, was called off after the government suddenly requisitioned the massive warehouse where roller coasters, shooting galleries and merry-go-rounds were being set up in order to convert the space to an emergency vaccination center.“Today I find myself trying to save my company, and I’m not sure that I can,” said Serge Paillon, park’s owner. He feared he would face huge losses, including 500,000 euros (about $566,000) he had already invested in the event, as well as refunds for tickets that had been on sale for several monthsMr. Paillon furloughed 20 employees. Another 200 festival workers who were coming from around the country to manage the 60 games and rides were told to stay home.“For a year and a half, it was already a disaster,” Mr. Paillon said. “And now it’s starting again.”Israel’s decision on Saturday to shut its borders to all foreign tourists for two weeks is likely to reduce the number of tourists in Israel and the occupied territories this December by up to 40,000, or nearly 60 percent of what was expected, according to a government estimate.Wiatt F. Bowers had to cancel his trip to Tel Aviv, the fifth time in 18 months he has had to scrap a planned trip to Israel.Agnes Lopez for The New York TimesWiatt F. Bowers, an urban planner, had planned to leave Jacksonville, Fla., for Tel Aviv on Wednesday but had to cancel — the fifth time in 18 months that he had to scrap a planned trip to Israel. He will rebook, but doesn’t know when.Foreign tourism, which brought a record 4.55 million tourists to Israel in 2019, had already nearly vanished. Between March 2020 and September 2021, nonresident foreigners were barred from entering Israel — and, by extension, the occupied territories, where entry and exit are controlled by Israel.In Bethlehem, where tourism is the main industry, income consequently fell more than 50 percent, said the mayor, Anton Salman, in a phone interview.Elias al-Arja, the chief of the Arab Hotel Association, which represents about 100 Palestinian hotels in the occupied territories, said he was concerned less about the short-term effect of the sudden travel ban than about the long-term message of unpredictability it sent to potential visitors.“The disaster isn’t the groups who canceled over the next two weeks,” Mr. al-Arja said. “How can I convince people to come to the Holy Land after we promised them that you can come, but then the government closes the border?”Reluctance to travel, though, could mean an upswing in other sectors if the new variant is not as harmful as people fear. Jessica Moulton, a senior partner at McKinsey & Company in London, said previous spending patterns during the pandemic showed that some money people would otherwise use for travel would instead be spent on dining.She estimated that the roughly $40 billion that British consumers saved on travel last summer was used for shopping and eating out.At the moment, Ms. Moulton said, “to the extent that Omicron decreases travel, which will happen as we head into Christmas, that will benefit restaurants.”Even before the latest variant was discovered, a fourth wave of infections transformed Europe into a Covid hot spot and prompted new restrictions like lockdowns in Amsterdam.Peter Dejong/Associated PressIn Switzerland, where travelers from Britain and 22 other countries must now quarantine, the effect of the policy change on hotels was immediate.“The majority of travelers from England — between 80 to 90 percent — have already canceled,” said Andreas Züllig, head of HotellerieSuisse, the Swiss hotel association.Ms. Wallace, who canceled her trip to the Cambrian Hotel in Adelboden, was one of several people who changed their reservations at the hotel after the Swiss government made its announcement on Friday, just one week before the slopes open.“This obviously has an impact on our very important winter and Christmas business,” said Anke Lock, the Cambrian’s manager, who estimated that 20 percent of the hotel’s December bookings were at risk.For now, though, most guests are watching and waiting, Ms. Lock said: “We’ve changed the bookings from guaranteed to tentative.”Extreme uncertainty about the economy may turn out to be the only certainty.Patrick Kingsley More

  • 150 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    European Steel Plan Shows Biden’s Bid to Merge Climate and Trade Policy

    by

    A potential agreement on steel trade provides the clearest look yet at how the Biden administration plans to implement a trade policy that is both protectionist and progressiveWASHINGTON — President Biden has promised to use trade policy as a tool to mitigate climate change. This weekend, the administration provided its first look at how it plans to mesh those policy goals, saying the United States and the European Union would try to curb carbon emissions as part of a trade deal covering steel and aluminum.The arrangement, which American and European leaders aim to introduce by 2024, would use tariffs or other tools to encourage the production and trade of metals made with fewer carbon emissions in places including the United States and European Union, and block dirtier steel and aluminum produced in countries including China.If finalized, it would be the first time a U.S. trade agreement includes specific targets on carbon emissions, said Ben Beachy, the director of the Sierra Club’s Living Economy program.“No U.S. trade deal to date has even mentioned climate change, much less included binding climate standards,” said Mr. Beachy.The announcement was short on details, and negotiations with European leaders are likely to face multiple roadblocks. But it provided an outline for how the Biden administration hopes to knit together its concerns about trade and climate and work with allies to take on a recalcitrant China, at a time when progress on multicountry trade negotiations at the World Trade Organization has stalled.“The U.S. leads the world in our clean steel technology,” Gina Raimondo, the secretary of commerce, said in an interview on Monday. She said the United States would work with allies “to preference cleaner steel, which will create an incentive to make more investments in technology,” resulting in fewer carbon emissions and more jobs.In the same interview, Katherine Tai, the United States Trade Representative, said the potential agreement would restrict market access for countries that don’t meet certain carbon standards, or that engage in nonmarket practices and contribute to global overcapacity in the steel sector — accusations that are often levied at China.The effort would seek to build “a global arrangement that promotes not just fair trade in steel but also pro-climate and responsible trade in steel,” Ms. Tai said.Kevin Dempsey, the president of the American Iron and Steel Institute, said at an industry forum in Washington on Tuesday that the arrangement would be “positive for the U.S. industry,” which has the lowest carbon intensity per ton of steel of the major steel-producing countries.China accounts for nearly 60 percent of global steel production. Its use of a common steel-production method causes more than twice as much climate pollution as does the same technology in the United States, according to estimates by Global Efficiency Intelligence.In its announcement on Saturday, the Biden administration also said it had reached a deal to ease the tariffs that former President Donald J. Trump had imposed on European metals while the governments work toward the carbon accord.The United States would replace the 25 percent tariff on European steel and a 10 percent tariff on European aluminum with a so-called tariff-rate quota. In return, the European Union would drop the retaliatory tariffs it imposed on other American products, like bourbon and motorcycles.Under the new terms, 3.3 million metric tons of European steel would be allowed to enter the United States duty-free each year, with any steel above that volume subject to a 25 percent tariff.European producers would be allowed to ship 18,000 metric tons of unwrought aluminum, which often comes in the form of ingots, and 366,000 metric tons of wrought or semifinished aluminum into the United States each year, while volumes above that would be charged a 10 percent tariff, the commerce department said.To qualify for zero tariffs, the steel must be entirely made in the European Union — a provision designed to keep cheaper steel from countries including China and Russia from finding a backdoor into the United States via Europe.Supporters of free trade have criticized the Biden administration for relying on the same protectionist trade measures used by the Trump administration, which deployed both tariffs and quotas to protect domestic metal makers.Jake Colvin, the president of the National Foreign Trade Council, said the announcement would ratchet down trade tensions between the United States and Europe. But he called the trade barriers “an unwelcome form of managed trade” that would add costs and undermine American competitiveness.Ms. Tai said the administration had made a deliberate choice not to heed calls “for the president to just undo everything that the Trump administration had done on trade.”Mr. Biden’s plan, she said, “is that we formulate a worker-centered trade policy. And that means not actually going back to the way things were in 2015 and 2016, challenging us to do trade in a different way from how we’ve done it earlier, but also, critically, to challenge us to do trade in a way different from how the Trump administration did.”A factory in southern China that makes steel parts. The trade proposal would block dirtier steel and aluminum produced in countries including China.The New York TimesThe focus on carbon emissions differs from that of the Trump administration, which rejected any attempts to negotiate on carbon mitigation and withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement on climate change.But negotiations with Europe will face challenges, among them developing a common methodology for measuring how much carbon is emitted as certain products are made. Still, the announcement suggests that the United States and Europe might be ready to work toward a collaborative approach on lowering carbon emissions, despite past differences on how the problem should be addressed.European leaders have long advocated an explicit price on the carbon dioxide that companies emit while making their products. In July, the European Union proposed a carbon border adjustment mechanism that would require companies to pay for carbon emissions produced outside Europe, to discourage manufacturers from evading Europe’s restrictions on pollution by moving abroad.An explicit tax on carbon has met with more resistance in the United States, where some politicians want to update regulatory requirements or put the onus on companies to invest in cleaner production technology.Todd Tucker, the director of governance studies at the Roosevelt Institute, said the latest announcement suggested that the European Union may be “a little bit more flexible” on how the United States and other partners would go about lowering emissions. Mr. Biden’s reconciliation bill, for example, contains a proposal for a “green bank” that could provide financing for firms to transition to cleaner technologies, he said.“If the U.S. ends up achieving decarbonization through more of an investments and industrial-policy approach, it seems like they’re OK with that,” Mr. Tucker said.Though the earliest negotiations over carbon emissions in the steel sector involve the European Union, the Biden administration says it wants to quickly extend the partnership to other countries.In twin announcements on Sunday, the Department of Commerce said it had begun close consultations with Japan and the United Kingdom “on bilateral and multilateral issues related to steel and aluminum,” with a focus on “the need for like-minded countries to take collective action.”Both Japan and the United Kingdom still face a 25 percent tariff on steel exports to the United States imposed by Mr. Trump.The talks suggest a template for how the Biden administration will try to engage allies to counter China’s growing economic heft and make progress on goals like climate and workers rights.The administration has rejected Mr. Trump’s “America First” approach to trade, saying the United States needs to work with like-minded countries. But they have also acknowledged that the inefficiency of negotiations at the World Trade Organization, and distanced themselves from broader, multicountry trade deals, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership.The announcements suggest that the Biden administration may not see comprehensive trade deals as the most effective way to accomplish many of its goals, but rather, industry-specific agreements among a limited number of democratic, free-market countries. That approach is similar to the cooperation the United States announced with the European Union for the civil aircraft industry in June.Ms. Raimondo said the agreement to ease the tariffs on the European Union was a “very significant achievement” that would help to alleviate supply chain problems and lower prices for companies that use steel and aluminum to make other products.“It’s all kind of a table setter to a global arrangement, whereby we work with our allies all over the world over the next couple of years,” she said. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Fed Expected to Announce Plan to Slow Bond Buying Amid Rapid Inflation

    by

    The Federal Reserve is expected to announce a plan to taper off its bond buying. With inflation surging, economists’ eyes are already turning to rates.Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, is on the cusp of accomplishing something that would have seemed like a victory a year ago: Central bankers are expected to announce a plan to wean the economy off their asset-buying program on Wednesday without roiling markets, a delicate maneuver that was in no way assured.Instead, Mr. Powell and his colleagues face pressing questions about their next steps.Inflation is running at its fastest pace in roughly three decades, and hopes that the jump in prices will quickly fade have dimmed as supply chain snarls deepen and fuel costs rise. Wages are increasing swiftly, and consumers and businesses are coming to expect faster price increases, pumping up the risk that high inflation will become a fixture as employers and workers adjust their behavior.Though the Fed is expected to announce this week that it will slow the $120 billion in asset purchases it has been carrying out each month to support the economy, Wall Street economists have already turned their attention to how worried the central bank is about brisk inflation and whether — and when — it might start raising interest rates in response.“The question in the mind of the market is 100 percent what comes next,” said Roberto Perli, a former Fed economist who is now head of global policy at Cornerstone Macro.Slowing bond buying could lead to slightly higher long-term borrowing costs and take pressure off the economy at the margin. But raising interest rates would likely have a more powerful effect when it comes to cooling off the economy. A higher federal funds rate would cause the cost of buying a car, a house or a piece of equipment to rise and would slow consumer and business demand. That could tamp down price gains by allowing supply to catch up to spending, but it would slow growth and weigh on hiring in the process.The Fed has signaled that bond buying could wrap up completely by the middle of next year. Economists increasingly expect the Fed to move its policy rate up from near-zero, where it has been since March 2020, as soon as next summer.Goldman Sachs economists now expect a rate increase to come in July 2022, a full year earlier than they had previously anticipated. Deutsche Bank recently pulled its forecast forward to December 2022. Investors as a whole now put better than 50 percent odds on a rate increase by the Fed’s June 2022 meeting, based on a CME Group tool that tracks market pricing.But raising rates poses a risky trade-off for Fed policymakers. If inflation moderates as the economy gets back to normal and pandemic-related disruptions smooth out, higher borrowing costs could leave fewer people employed for little reason. And with a smaller number of paychecks going out each month, demand would likely weaken over the longer run, which could drag inflation back to the uncomfortably low levels that prevailed before the start of the pandemic.“The risk is not really about the Fed beginning its rate hikes behind the curve,” said Skanda Amarnath, executive director of Employ America, a group focused on encouraging policies that help the work force. “The risk is that the Fed overreacts to this.”That markets are penciling in rate increases more quickly could suggest that they are optimistic about the economy’s chances, said Neil Dutta, head of U.S. economics at Renaissance Macro. The Fed has said that before lifting rates, it wants to see the economy return to full employment and inflation that exceeds its 2 percent target and is on track to average it over time. Investors might think those targets will be met by the middle of next year.“If it was a problem, why aren’t stocks falling?” Mr. Dutta said of the earlier rate increase expectations. “The economy has done better than anticipated.”Still, millions of jobs remain missing from the labor market, and employment growth has slowed sharply. Payrolls expanded by just 194,000 jobs in September, and while fresh hiring data due on Friday is expected to show that companies added 450,000 workers in October, the trajectory is anything but certain.If workers take a long time to come back to the job market, either because they lack child care or fear contracting the coronavirus, it could be the case that the Fed finds itself in a conundrum where inflation is high but full employment remains elusive. Mr. Powell has signaled that such a situation, in which the Fed’s goals are in conflict, is a risk. But he has also said the economy is not there yet.The future of Jerome H. Powell as the Fed chair is being debated within the Biden administration, complicating the decision on rates.Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times“I do think it’s time to taper,” Mr. Powell said at a recent virtual conference. “I don’t think it’s time to raise rates.”Understand the Supply Chain CrisisCard 1 of 5Covid’s impact on the supply chain continues. More

  • 150 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Stocks Hit a Record as Investors See Progress Toward a Spending Deal

    by

    After weeks of fluctuations driven in part by Washington gridlock, share prices hit another high and put a dismal September in the rearview mirror.Wall Street likes what it’s hearing from Washington lately.The S&P 500 inched to a new high on Thursday, continuing a rally aided by signs of progress in spending talks that could pave the way for an injection of some $3 trillion into the U.S. economy.The index rose 0.3 percent to 4,549.78, its seventh straight day of gains and a fresh peak after more than a month of volatile trading driven by nervousness over the still-wobbly economic recovery and policy fights in Washington.The S&P 500’s performance this year

    Source: S&P Dow Jones IndicesBy The New York TimesBut even baby steps by lawmakers have helped end a market swoon that began in September.Share prices began to rise this month when congressional leaders struck a deal to allow the government to avoid breaching the debt ceiling, ending a standoff that threatened to make it impossible for the country to pay its bills. The rally has gained momentum as investors and analysts grow increasingly confident about a government spending package using a recipe Wall Street can live with: big enough to bolster economic growth, but with smaller corporate tax increases than President Biden’s original $3.5 trillion spending blueprint.“It seems like we’re kind of reaching a middle ground,” said Paul Zemsky, chief investment officer, multi-asset strategies at Voya Investment Management. “The president himself has acknowledged it’s not going to be $3.5 trillion, it’s going to be something less. The tax hikes are not going to be as much as the left really wanted.”Share prices had marched steadily higher for much of the summer, hitting a series of highs and cresting on Sept. 2. But a number of anxieties sapped their momentum as the certainty that markets crave began to evaporate. Gridlock over government spending, continuing supply chain snarls, higher prices for businesses and consumers and the Federal Reserve’s signals that it would begin dialing back its stimulus efforts all helped sour investor confidence. The S&P 500’s 4.8 percent drop in September was its worst month since the start of the pandemic.It has made up for it in October, rising 5.6 percent this month. But it’s not just updates out of Washington that have renewed investors’ optimism.The country has seen a sharp drop in coronavirus infections in recent weeks, raising, once again, the prospect that economic activity can begin to normalize. And the recent round of corporate earnings results that began in earnest this month has started better than many analysts expected. Large Wall Street banks, in particular, reported blockbuster results fueled by juicy fees paid to the banks’ deal makers, thanks to a surge of merger activity.Elsewhere, shares of energy giants have also buoyed the broad stock market. The price of crude oil recently climbed back above $80 a barrel for the first time in roughly seven years, translating into an instant boost to revenues for energy companies.But the recent rally seemed find its footing two weeks ago. On Oct. 6, word broke that Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, was willing to offer a temporary reprieve allowing Congress to raise the debt ceiling. The market turned on a dime from its morning slump, finishing the day in positive territory. That week turned out to be the market’s best since August.Once done as a matter of course in Washington, raising the debt ceiling has been an increasingly contentious issue in recent years — with sometimes serious implications for the market. In August 2011, a rancorous battle over the debt ceiling sent share prices tumbling sharply as investors began to consider the prospect that the United States could actually default on its debts.But the recent deal on the ceiling — even though it only pushed a reckoning into December — suggested to investors that there’s little appetite in Washington for a replay of a decade ago.“I think that let some pressure out of the system,” said Alan McKnight, chief investment officer of Regions Asset Management. “What it signaled to the markets was that you can find some area of agreement. It may not be very large. But at least they can come together.”With the impasse broken, the rally gained strength. Last Thursday, the S&P 500 jumped 1.7 percent — its best day in roughly seven months — as financial giants like Morgan Stanley and Bank of America reported stellar results.Potential progress on a deal in Washington has only brightened investors’ outlook.“Democrats are now moving in the same direction, and hard decisions are being made,” wrote Dan Clifton, an analyst with Strategas Research, who monitors the impact of policy on financial markets, in a note to clients on Wednesday.Understand the U.S. Debt CeilingCard 1 of 6What is the debt ceiling? More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    As Western Oil Giants Cut Production, State-Owned Companies Step Up

    by

    In the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, government-owned energy companies are increasing oil and natural gas production as U.S. and European companies pare supply because of climate concerns.HOUSTON — After years of pumping more oil and gas, Western energy giants like BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Exxon Mobil and Chevron are slowing down production as they switch to renewable energy or cut costs after being bruised by the pandemic.But that doesn’t mean the world will have less oil. That’s because state-owned oil companies in the Middle East, North Africa and Latin America are taking advantage of the cutbacks by investor-owned oil companies by cranking up their production.This massive shift could reverse a decade-long trend of rising domestic oil and gas production that turned the United States into a net exporter of oil, gasoline, natural gas and other petroleum products, and make America more dependent on the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, authoritarian leaders and politically unstable countries.The push by governments to increase oil and gas production means it could take decades for global fossil fuel supplies to decline unless there is a sharp drop in demand for such fuels. President Biden has effectively accepted the idea that the United States will rely more on foreign oil, at least for the next few years. His administration has been calling on OPEC and its allies to boost production to help bring down rising oil and gasoline prices, even as it seeks to limit the growth of oil and gas production on federal lands and waters.The administration’s approach is a function of two conflicting priorities: Mr. Biden wants to get the world to move away from fossil fuels while protecting Americans from a spike in energy prices. In the short run, it is hard to achieve both goals because most people cannot easily replace internal-combustion engine cars, gas furnaces and other fossil fuel-based products with versions that run on electricity generated from wind turbines, solar panels and other renewable sources of energy.Western oil companies are also under pressure from investors and environmental activists who are demanding a rapid transition to clean energy. Some U.S. producers have said they are reluctant to invest more because they fear oil prices will fall again or because banks and investors are less willing to finance their operations. As a result, some are selling off parts of their fossil fuel empires or are simply spending less on new oil and gas fields.That has created a big opportunity for state-owned oil companies that are not under as much pressure to reduce emissions, though some are also investing in renewable energy. In fact, their political masters often want these oil companies to increase production to help pay down debt, finance government programs and create jobs.Saudi Aramco, the world’s leading oil producer, has announced that it plans to increase oil production capacity by at least a million barrels a day, to 13 million, by the 2030s. Aramco increased its exploration and production investments by $8 billion this year, to $35 billion.“We are capitalizing on the opportunity,” Aramco’s chief executive, Amin H. Nasser, recently told financial analysts. “Of course we are trying to benefit from the lack of investments by major players in the market.”Aramco not only has vast reserves but it can also produce oil much more cheaply than Western companies because its crude is relatively easy to pump out of the ground. So even if demand declines because of a rapid shift to electric cars and trucks, Aramco will most likely be able to pump oil for years or decades longer than many Western energy companies.“The state companies are going their own way,” said René Ortiz, a former OPEC secretary general and a former energy minister in Ecuador. “They don’t care about the political pressure worldwide to control emissions.”State-owned oil companies in Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Libya, Argentina, Colombia and Brazil are also planning to increase production. Should oil and natural gas prices stay high or rise further, energy experts say, more oil-producing nations will be tempted to crank up supply.The global oil market share of the 23 nations that belong to OPEC Plus, a group dominated by state oil companies in OPEC and allied countries like Russia and Mexico, will grow to 75 percent from 55 percent in 2040, according to Michael C. Lynch, president of Strategic Energy and Economic Research in Amherst, Mass., who is an occasional adviser to OPEC.If that forecast comes to pass, the United States and Europe could become more vulnerable to the political turmoil in those countries and to the whims of their rulers. Some European leaders and analysts have long argued that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia uses his country’s vast natural gas reserves as a cudgel — a complaint that has been voiced again recently as European gas prices have surged to record highs.A pump jack in Stanton, Texas. American companies have been cautiously holding back exploration and production.Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York TimesOther oil and gas producers like Iraq, Libya and Nigeria are unstable, and their production can rise or fall rapidly depending on who is in power and who is trying to seize power.“By adopting a strategy of producing less oil, Western oil companies will be turning control of supply over to national oil companies in countries that could be less reliable trading partners and have weaker environmental regulations,” Mr. Lynch said.An overreliance on foreign oil can be problematic because it can limit the options American policymakers have when energy prices spike, forcing presidents to effectively beg OPEC to produce more oil. And it gives oil-producing countries greater leverage over the United States.“Today when U.S. shale companies are not going to respond to higher prices with investment for financial reasons, we are depending on OPEC, whether it is willing to release spare production or not,” said David Goldwyn, a senior energy official in the State Department in the Obama administration. He compared the current moment to one in 2000 when the energy secretary, Bill Richardson, “went around the world asking OPEC countries to release spare capacity to relieve price pressure.”This time, state-owned energy companies are not merely looking to produce more oil in their home countries. Many are expanding overseas.In recent months, Qatar Energy invested in several African offshore fields while the Romanian national gas company bought an offshore production block from Exxon Mobil. As Western companies divest polluting reserves such as Canadian oil sands, energy experts say state companies can be expected to step in.“There is a lot of low-hanging fruit state companies can pick up,” said Raoul LeBlanc, an oil analyst at IHS Markit, a consulting and research firm. “It is a huge opportunity for them to become international players.”Kuwait announced last month that it planned to invest more than $6 billion in exploration over the next five years to increase production to four million barrels a day, from 2.4 million now.This month, the United Arab Emirates, a major OPEC member that produces four million barrels of oil a day, became the first Persian Gulf state to pledge to a net zero carbon emissions target by 2050. But just last year ADNOC, the U.A.E.’s national oil company, announced it was investing $122 billion in new oil and gas projects.Iraq, OPEC’s second-largest producer after Saudi Arabia, has invested heavily in recent years to boost oil output, aiming to raise production to eight million barrels a day by 2027, from five million now. The country is suffering from political turmoil, power shortages and inadequate ports, but the government has made several major deals with foreign oil companies to help the state-owned energy company develop new fields and improve production from old ones.Even in Libya, where warring factions have hamstrung the oil industry for years, production is rising. In recent months, it has been churning out 1.3 million barrels a day, a nine-year high. The government aims to increase that total to 2.5 million within six years.National oil companies in Brazil, Colombia and Argentina are also working to produce more oil and gas to raise revenue for their governments before demand for oil falls as richer countries cut fossil fuel use.After years of frustrating disappointments, production in the Vaca Muerta, or Dead Cow, oil and gas field in Argentina has jumped this year. The field had never supplied more than 120,000 barrels of oil in a day but is now expected to end the year at 200,000 a day, according to Rystad Energy, a research and consulting firm. The government, which is considered a climate leader in Latin America, has proposed legislation that would encourage even more production.“Argentina is concerned about climate change, but they don’t see it primarily as their responsibility,” said Lisa Viscidi, an energy expert at the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington research organization. Describing the Argentine view, she added, “The rest of the world globally needs to reduce oil production, but that doesn’t mean that we in particular need to change our behavior.” More