Federal Reserve System

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Investors Brace for Another Big Week in the Markets

      by

      A new batch of inflation data and earnings from major retailers will again put the spotlight on consumer confidence and economic growth.After a topsy-turvy week, investors brace for more volatility.Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesWhy markets are still worried A sense of calm has returned to global markets on Monday, but the economic conditions that triggered last week’s roller coaster swings are still on many minds ahead of a pivotal week.Here’s the latest:S&P 500 futures were up slightly after fears of a slowdown in growth and hiring rocked the benchmark index last week. Investors endured both a stomach-churning rout on Monday and a bounce-back rally on Thursday. Despite that, the S&P 500 ended the week down just 0.04 percent.Investors rushed back into tech stocks even as a “bubble” warning loomed about Nvidia, the chipmaker at the heart of the artificial intelligence boom.Stocks in Europe and Asia gained on Monday, as did the price of oil and crypto.The big event this week is Wednesday’s inflation data. Economists forecast that the Consumer Price Index will show a slight uptick. Yet Wall Street doesn’t think that will dissuade the Fed from cutting interest rates at its next meeting in September. That said, Michelle Bowman, a Fed governor, still sees inflation as “uncomfortably above the committee’s 2 percent goal.”With markets on edge, traders see a big potential swing in the S&P 500 after the report comes out.Interest rates are a concern for consumers, too. If the central bank doesn’t “start taking them down relatively soon, you could dispirit the American consumer,” Brian Moynihan, the C.E.O. of Bank of America, warned in a CBS News interview on Sunday.Markets are still on edge. Early last week, the VIX, Wall Street’s so-called fear gauge, spiked near to levels last reached during the early days of the Covid pandemic and the 2008 global financial crisis. Investors are anxious after tepid jobs and manufacturing data suggested a slowdown was on the horizon.The mountain of levered bets in the market probably added to the volatility. To cash in on a yearlong rally, more traders have borrowed funds to pay for new trades. One favorite: the so-called carry trade involving Japanese equities. But when the outlook soured last week, such trades began to unravel, triggering a stampede of investors selling even profitable positions to cover losses elsewhere.The underlying problems aren’t fixed, economists warn. Lower-income consumers have been pulling back on spending for months. That brings this week’s earnings calls into focus with Home Depot and Walmart set to report on Tuesday and Thursday. 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

    • 238 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Fed Rate Cuts Are Expected Soon, as Inflation Cools. But Will They Be Early Enough to Avoid a Recession?

      by

      The Federal Reserve was about to cut interest rates, turning the corner after a long fight with inflation. But now, its soft landing is in question.The Federal Reserve’s fight against inflation was going almost unbelievably well. Price increases were coming down. Growth was holding up. Consumers continued to spend. The labor market was chugging along.Policymakers appeared poised to lower interest rates — just a little — at their meeting on Sept. 18. Officials did not need to keep hitting the brakes on growth so much, as the economy settled into a comfortable balance. It seemed like central bankers were about to pull off a rare economic soft landing, cooling inflation without tanking the economy.But just as that sunny outcome came into view, clouds gathered on the horizon.The unemployment rate has moved up meaningfully over the past year, and a weak employment report released last week has stoked concern that the job market may be on the brink of a serious cool-down. That’s concerning, because a weakening labor market is usually the first sign that the economy is careening toward a recession.The Fed could still get the soft landing it has been hoping for — weekly jobless claims fell more than expected in fresh data released on Thursday, a minor but positive development. Given the possibility that everything will turn out fine, central bank officials are not yet ready to panic. During an event on Monday, Mary C. Daly, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, suggested that officials were closely watching the job market to try to figure out whether it was cooling too much or simply returning to normal after a few roller-coaster years.“We’re at the point of — is the labor market slowing a lot, or slowing a little?” Ms. Daly said, as she pointed to one-off factors that could have muddled the latest report, like Hurricane Beryl and a recent inflow of new immigrant workers that left more people searching for jobs.“It’s clear inflation is coming down closer to our target, it’s clear that the labor market is slowing, and it’s to a point where we have to balance those goals,” she said.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump and His Allies Seize on Market Downturn to Attack Harris

      by

      Economists blamed a variety of factors for Monday’s slide. But Donald Trump was trying to disrupt weeks of momentum for Vice President Kamala Harris and her party.Donald J. Trump didn’t wait for the opening bell before blaming Monday’s market sell-off on Vice President Kamala Harris.“Stock markets are crashing, jobs numbers are terrible, we are heading to World War III, and we have two of the most incompetent ‘leaders’ in history,” the former president and Republican presidential nominee wrote in a post on Truth Social at 8:12 a.m. Eastern time. “This is not good.”Mr. Trump did not mention that markets had suffered far greater single-day losses when he was president, or that economists blamed a variety of factors — including a disappointing July jobs report, a plunge in Japanese markets earlier in the day and a growing consensus among investors that the Federal Reserve has waited too long to start cutting interest rates — for Monday’s slide.He also did not mention that earlier this year, he had claimed credit for a surge in stock prices, which he said reflected confidence he would be re-elected.What Mr. Trump was engaged in was a calculated attempt at political marketing. By 9:45 a.m. on Monday, less than an hour after U.S. markets opened, Mr. Trump branded what would become a 3 percent decline for the day in the S&P 500 the “Kamala Crash.”By lunchtime, it was official party messaging: The Republican National Committee hyped the “Great Kamala Crash of 2024,” and the Trump campaign had produced and circulated on social media a video tying the vice president to Monday’s dip in the markets. By the afternoon, the Trump forces had turned “KamalaCrash” into a “trending” subject on X.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

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Stocks Drop as Jobs Report Shakes Market

      by

      Stocks skidded on Friday, capping off a turbulent week for Wall Street, as investors were jolted by data showing that hiring slowed and unemployment rose in July.The spiking uncertainty about the economic outlook, and the question of whether the Federal Reserve has been too slow to raise interest rates, was evident across financial markets.The S&P 500 fell 2.4 percent within the hour after the jobs report was released, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq dropped 3 percent. Yields on government bonds, which are sensitive to expectations for the economy, dropped sharply, and oil prices were lower too.The U.S. economy added 114,000 jobs on a seasonally adjusted basis, much fewer than economists had expected and a significant drop from the average of 215,000 jobs added over the previous 12 months. The unemployment rate rose to 4.3 percent, the highest level since October 2021.“That all-important macro data we have been hammering for months is finally starting to turn in an ominous direction,” said Alex McGrath, chief investment officer at NorthEnd Private Wealth.Markets are now predicting a half a percent cut in interest rates at the Fed’s next meeting in September, up from the quarter-point cut investors had been anticipating as of Thursday, according to CME FedWatch. The two-year Treasury yield, which is also reflective of short-term interest rate expectations, fell 20 basis points, to 3.96 percent.This week had already been a rocky one for Wall Street. The Federal Reserve’s indication on Wednesday that it was moving closer to cutting interest rates in September prompted an accelerated market rally, and the S&P 500 rose 2 percent on comments by Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair.But the market sold off on Thursday, with the S&P 500 falling 1.4 percent, led lower by a drop in chip stocks and economic data suggesting the economy is cooling. The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield — which underpins many other borrowing costs — also dropped below 4 percent on Thursday.All this comes as investors started reconsidering their appetite for big technology stocks last month and bought up shares of smaller companies, which are particularly sensitive to borrowing costs and stand to benefit from interest rate cuts. Also driving this shift is a rethink among investors about the potential for artificial intelligence to continue to drive gains at big companies like Microsoft, Nvidia and Alphabet, after shares of those businesses surged in the past year. More

    • 163 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Why You Should Be Taking a Hard Look at Your Investments Right Now

      by

      After big gains in stocks and mediocre returns for bonds, investors are taking on undue risk if they don’t rebalance their holdings, our columnist says.All eyes were on the Federal Reserve this past week, or so several market analysts solemnly said. This was true even though the Fed essentially did nothing in its latest meeting but hold interest rates high to fight inflation, just as it has done for many months.To be fair, there was a little news: The Fed did appear to affirm the likelihood of rate cuts starting in September, and that’s important. But so are the big performance shifts in the market, away from highflying tech stocks like Nvidia and toward a broad range of less-heralded, smaller-company stocks. In fact, there’s a great deal to think about once you start focusing on the behavior of the markets and the health of the economy in an election year.But what is perhaps the most important issue for investors rarely gets attention.In a word, it is rebalancing.I’m not talking about a yoga pose, but rather about another discipline entirely: the need to periodically tweak your portfolio to make sure you’re maintaining an appropriate mix of stocks and bonds, also known as asset allocation. If you haven’t considered this for a while — and if nobody has been doing it for you — it’s important to pay attention now because without rebalancing, there’s a good chance you are taking on risks that you may not want to bear.The rise in the stock market over the last couple of years, and the mediocre performance of bonds, has twisted many investment plans and left portfolios seriously out of whack. I found, for example, that if you had 60 percent of your investments in a diversified U.S. stock index fund and 40 percent in a broad investment-grade bond fund five years ago, almost 75 percent of your investments would now be in stock. That could make you more vulnerable than you realize the next time the stock market has a big fall.Asset AllocationThe Securities and Exchange Commission defines asset allocation as “dividing an investment portfolio among different asset categories, such as stocks, bonds and cash.” It’s an important subject, but it’s not as straightforward as that description seems.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 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Consumer Watchdog’s Funding

      by

      A decision against the agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, could have cast doubt on all of its regulations and enforcement actions.The Supreme Court rejected a challenge on Thursday to the way the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is funded, one that could have hobbled the bureau and advanced a central goal of the conservative legal movement: limiting the power of independent agencies.The vote was 7 to 2, with Justice Clarence Thomas writing the majority opinion.Had the bureau lost, the court’s ruling might have cast doubt on every regulation and enforcement action it had taken in its 13 years of existence, including ones concerning mortgages, credit cards, consumer loans and banking.The central question in the case was whether the way Congress chose to fund the bureau had violated the appropriations clause of the Constitution, which says that “no money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.”Justice Thomas said the mechanism was constitutional.“Under the appropriations clause,” he wrote, “an appropriation is simply a law that authorizes expenditures from a specified source of public money for designated purposes. The statute that provides the bureau’s funding meets these requirements. We therefore conclude that the bureau’s funding mechanism does not violate the appropriations clause.”Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., joined by Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented.The bureau, created after the financial crisis as part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, is funded by the Federal Reserve System, in an amount determined by the bureau so long as the sum does not exceed 12 percent of the system’s operating expenses. In the 2022 fiscal year, the agency requested and received $641.5 million of the $734 million available.A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans, ruled in 2022 that the bureau’s funding method ran afoul of the appropriations clause.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

    • 75 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Is Flirting With Quack Economics

      by

      More than 30 years ago, the economists Rudiger Dornbusch (one of my mentors) and Sebastian Edwards wrote a classic paper on what they called “macroeconomic populism.” Their motivating examples were inflationary outbreaks under left-wing regimes in Latin America, but it seemed clear that the key issue wasn’t left-wing governance per se; it was, instead, what happens when governments engage in magical thinking. Indeed, even at the time they could have included the experience of the military dictatorship that ruled Argentina from 1976 to 1983, which killed or “disappeared” thousands of leftists but also pursued irresponsible economic policies that led to a balance-of-payments crisis and soaring inflation.Modern examples of the syndrome include leftist governments like that of Venezuela, but also right-wing nationalist governments like that of Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, who insisted that he could fight inflation by cutting interest rates.Will the United States be next?I wish people would stop calling Donald Trump a populist. He has, after all, never demonstrated any inclination to help working Americans, and his economic policies really didn’t help — his 2017 tax cut, in particular, was a giveaway to the wealthy. But his behavior during the Covid-19 pandemic showed that he’s as addicted to magical thinking and denial of reality as any petty strongman or dictator, which makes it all too likely that he might preside over the type of problems that result when policies are based on quack economics.Now, destructive economic policy isn’t the thing that alarms me the most about Trump’s potential return to power. Prospects for retaliation against his political opponents, huge detention camps for undocumented immigrants and more loom much larger in my mind. Still, it does seem worth noting that even as Republicans denounce President Biden for the inflation that occurred on his watch, Trump’s advisers have been floating policy ideas that could be far more inflationary than anything that has happened so far.It’s true that inflation surged in 2021 and 2022 before subsiding, and there’s a vigorous debate about how much of a role Biden’s economic policies played. I’m skeptical, among other things because inflation in the United States since the beginning of the Covid pandemic has closely tracked with that of other advanced economies. What’s notable, however, is what the Biden administration didn’t do when the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates to fight inflation. There was a clear risk that rate hikes would cause a politically disastrous recession, although this hasn’t happened so far. But Biden and company didn’t pressure the Fed to hold off; they respected the Fed’s independence, letting it do what it thought was necessary to bring inflation under control.Does anyone imagine that Trump — who in 2019 insisted that the Fed should cut interest rates to zero or below — would have exercised comparable restraint?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