Trump Didn't Actually Undo Tariffs
Subscribe here: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Overcast | Pocket Casts
Perhaps yesterday you went for a walk at lunchtime and fretted about your 401(k). President Donald Trump had announced record-high tariffs on dozens of countries. Stocks had been tanking for days. You already had to look up the meaning of stagflation (high unemployment plus high inflation, yikes). And that morning had brought more dismal news: Investors were rapidly pulling out of bond markets. Bond markets! The safe zone! The place your overanxious mother would tell you to park your money! Then maybe you got back from your walk, checked the news, and saw the headlines that Trump had 'paused' the tariffs or 'reversed course'—for everywhere except China, whose exports were now taxed at 125 percent.
What does this mean? Is the economy stable again? Is your 401(k) safe? Is anything still predictable? To help us understand the extraordinary volatility of the past few weeks, we invite Justin Wolfers, economist at the University of Michigan, to speak with us on the latest episode of Radio Atlantic.Hanna Rosin: Was today real? Honestly, today just seemed like an unreal day. Truly.
Justin Wolfers: Was this week real?
Rosin: Was this week real? Exactly.
Wolfers: What day's today, Hanna? It's Wednesday.
Rosin: It's only Wednesday.
Wolfers: Okay. So in 11 minutes we will have been at this for seven days in a row.
Rosin: Yeah. Yeah. What's 'this'?
Wolfers: The confused mumblings of an old man who didn't do very well in his college economics course.
Rosin: Are you talking about the president?
Wolfers: I might be.
[]
Rosin: Okay. In one single day this week—I'm talking about Wednesday, yesterday—two extraordinary things happened: In the morning, we woke up to the news that investors had started rapidly selling off U.S. bonds, which worried economists because U.S. bonds are the safe haven, and it's a very bad sign for the U.S. economy if investors no longer trust the safe haven.
And then, midday, Donald Trump made the announcement that he was gonna reverse course on tariffs. Sort of. We'll get into it.
President Donald Trump: Well, I thought that people were jumping a little bit out of line. They were getting yippy, you know? A little bit yippy, a little bit afraid …
Rosin: Which, around lunchtime, caused the second extraordinary thing: The stock market surged. Had one of its biggest single-day jumps in history.
What is happening?
[]
I'm Hanna Rosin. This is Radio Atlantic. We are living in a world in which the president makes decisions with enormous global consequences and then unmakes them 24 hours later. So today we are going to try and get a handle on all this volatility.
Is it over? Are we still in it?
Wolfers: Yep. Do we still need to do levels or any of that magic?
Rosin: To help us, we have University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers.
Wolfers: It's been crazy, but that's all of us, right?
Rosin: Okay. I'm just gonna tell you my experience of the day: It's Wednesday afternoon—that's when we're recording. I feel like what happened today for a lot of people who track the news: You go to lunch. You're worried about tariffs. You're worried about what's gonna happen. You come back from lunch, and it's like, Trump backs down, pauses tariffs for 90 days. Is that what happened to you today?
Wolfers: Yeah. Actually, I was in my home office, and I suddenly heard this enormous belly laugh coming from downstairs.
Rosin: Your wife?
Wolfers: My better half, Betsey Stevenson, is also an economics professor, and she saw the humor in it. And it's kind of stunning. But we've seen this movie before, and that's what's so funny.
This is what Trump did in the first term to NAFTA. The United States had a free-trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. Basically you'd had President Clinton and the leaders of Canada and Mexico get in the room and negotiate that there would be zero tariffs on everything. But each leader was allowed a couple of little asterisks because there were a few politically sensitive groups in each country.
Trump comes along, rips the whole thing up, and says, I need a better deal. Now, just to be crystal clear, it's very hard to get tariffs below—they were effectively zero percent before. It's very hard to get them below zero percent. So he caused a trade war with Canada in the first term. And then basically came back with what we would say is a rebranded NAFTA. For all intents and purposes, it's exactly the same, and he declares a win.
What just happened? He launched us headlong into a trade war with every country on Earth. Now says, Oh, they all wanna negotiate. Now, here's the really important thing to understand, Hanna: Almost every country on Earth had very low tariffs as of last Tuesday. Like, 1 or 2 percent because governments all around the world have been liberalizing trade for decades now. There really aren't many tariffs out there. That matters because if the next act of this play is the president just threatens to blow the world up and then everyone calls him and says, Let's make a deal, the best they can do is restore back to where we were on Tuesday.
Rosin: So we've just gone around the world and come back to where we were. Is that what you're saying?
Wolfers: I think that's the end game. That's not where we are right now. So here, I wanna be crystal clear. Everyone saw the president's announcement: Oh my goodness. He's getting rid of reciprocal tariffs. But he's not. For one of our most important trading partners, China, tariffs are now up to 125 percent, and for every country around the world, they're 10 percent, which means there's been no change for many countries. But some of the worst excesses of what he announced before have gone away. We are still in the midst of tariff-mageddon.
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: And we're still in the midst of an incredibly disruptive tariff regime.
The American average tariff rate today will be 10 times higher than it was in January. It will be roughly as high, possibly higher, than the Smoot-Hawley tariffs during the Great Depression. It will be 10 and sometimes 20 times higher than most of our trading partners, and the United States probably has no longer got the highest tariffs in the world, something we had this morning, but we will have the highest tariffs in the industrialized world. So among advanced economies—and it's not even close.
Rosin: Got it. So what you are saying, what I understand you to be saying, is: crisis not averted. He reset our expectations in the course of that week to some absurd level and then lowered them back to what is still too dangerously high a level.
Wolfers: Yes. Now, you might then say, 'cause I know that you love to track financial markets minute-by-minute.
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: If we only got rid of a quarter of the tariffs, why did stocks soar on the news? And I think what's happened is there's been two sets of shocks over the last week. One shock is a shock to tariffs. They rose enormously. The second shock is we thought, for most of the last seven days, we'd learned how profoundly incompetent this administration was, and that the president was willing to look down the barrel of a recession and say, Let's just keep going. And that there were no adults in the White House. This was a rollout that was laughably awful from start to finish.
Rosin: Now there was speculation that it was because of the bond market that he backed down. Can you explain what the bond market is and why it's important?
Wolfers: Okay, so let me get to other speculations first, 'cause they may be bigger.
Rosin: Okay, go ahead.
Wolfers: The first is: The chances of recession skyrocketed.
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: We were—are, still are—looking straight down the barrel of a recession in 2025. That would wipe out the Republican House. I think that has a lot of people freaking out—and they should, because recessions are really, really, really bad. The second thing you saw was every time Trump moved towards tariffs, stocks fell dramatically. Every time he backed off, they rose. He'd knocked off roughly $6 trillion from the value of the U.S. stock market in the week he was going—actually might be more, so it might be a trillion a day. So realize that when Elon Musk was saving us with DOGE, he was like, saving 1 billion here, 1 billion there. This was a thousand billion every day. So that is causing a lot of pain, particularly to the Republican donor class.
And then you asked about the bond market. So things started to go crazy in bonds. So what is a bond? Well, when I go to the bank and put money in the bank, it might not feel this way, but what I'm doing is lending money to the bank. It has my money for a while, it can use it, and it'll give it back to me when I want it back. That's how it works for you and I. But if you want to borrow money or lend money and you're a big corporation, what you do is to lend money to a corporation, you sell them bonds. And to borrow money, if you're a corporation, you buy bonds, and what a bond is, is you say, Hey, can I have your money and I'll give it back to you in 10 years with interest. U.S. government bonds—that's how we fund the government debt—typically regarded as the safest asset in the world because the U.S. government is in charge of an amazing economy and we'd never screw things up.
Rosin: And safe is the important word here. Like, an investment advisor would tell you, Do you wanna be safe? Do you wanna rest easy? Safety, it's our safe space.
Wolfers: It's the only thing safer than money under the mattress.
Rosin:. Yes. Right.
Wolfers: So, because it's safe, people are willing to lend money to the U.S. government at a low interest rate. And that actually saves all of us tons of money. 'cause the U.S. government owes a lot of money. Just, if you've ever seen your family mortgage and thought about What would it be if the interest rate changed a little? You'll see it makes a huge difference to your family's finances. That's the same for bond yields. So what happened over the past couple of days is bond yields—so interest rates—spiked. What normally happens when the world's in chaos is the opposite, because everyone's worried, Oh my goodness, there's chaos.
Let me go and buy the safe thing. Let me hide it under the covers. So how do you make sense of all of this? This is essentially the rest of the world saying, If I wanna be safe, I don't want to be associated with America.
Rosin: Right. So the volatility, such as it is already so far, has made America a less predictable place, made the foreign investors' appetite dip.
Wolfers: And domestic investors, too.
Rosin: Yeah. Okay.
Wolfers: And lest the bond market feel distant from listeners' lives—
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: —we do, just like your family pays on a mortgage, the federal government has to pay interest on its debt, and it's one of the biggest expenses in the federal budget. And so when the interest rate rises, we have to pay more, which means there's less money for roads and schools and tax cuts, if that's what—it's real money.
Rosin: Yeah. So Justin, everything you just said, the cycle of events you just described, actually could make one feel safer because it suggests that what seemed chaotic, unpredictable, capricious is actually responding to real-world inputs. So if I'm a business owner and I'm trying to make decisions about sourcing or investments or whatever, you know, am I feeling like, Oh, the future is predictable. The president actually does respond to changes in the market when, when it gets really serious?
Wolfers: Right, so one, you should feel a little bit more relieved than you felt this morning. But this morning, what we had was a madman raising tariffs so that we had the highest tariffs in the world, essentially cutting Americans off, imposing sanctions on Americans. Cutting us off from the global economy, even as recession threats were rising, and saying, I'm gonna stay the course.
So it's good that at some point the guy's persuadable. That is an enormous relief. It is terrible that we just had the week we had. It's awful that three-quarters of the tariffs are still in place and the stock market is still well below where it was when he was elected. And it's not just that I care about your 401(k), but that stock market is essentially a bet on the future of the American economy. And people are betting we're less healthy than we were a week ago and certainly less healthy than we were on Election Day. And there's one more thing I wanna scare you about.
Rosin: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Wolfers: So here's the cycle from the first term: Trump does something dumb, markets react, Trump listens, markets go back to normal. We just saw that play out again this week. But if what happens next time is: Trump does something dumb; markets think he's going to react and undo it, so they don't bother freaking out. If they don't bother freaking out, he's not gonna undo it.
Rosin: Does anyone stand to gain from this kind of volatility? You know, he did tweet, This is a great time to buy, and some people speculated he was setting a sign to followers before juicing the market again. That's maybe paranoid, I don't know.
Wolfers: No, it's not. It's before the announcement.
Rosin: Okay. So you don't think it's paranoid? Yeah.
Wolfers: This is corrupt on its face. This is saying, You want to time the market, you watch me, you look at me, you listen to me. It would land anyone else in jail.
Rosin: After the break, how this might affect the chances of a recession for all of us—or the thing economists fear the most: stagflation.
[]
Rosin: So we've been through a couple of recessions, near recessions: 2008, the pandemic. The words that economists are using—depression and stagflation—why? What's the likelihood of those? How do you think about those?
Wolfers: Right. So what we're worried about is a recession. None of us are quite sure how deep it might be. The good news, for those looking for the silver lining, is it's crystal clear. We've got the early data from the first quarter of the Trump administration, and all the data from the last quarter of the Biden administration:
It's crystal clear that the economy's in very good shape fundamentally. So we are hitting whatever this cavalcade of bad news is with a lot of momentum.
But the extent to which the president has undermined confidence is quite dramatic. What we have at the moment is what economists call a split between the hard data and the soft data. Soft data is when you ask people, Are you optimistic? Do you plan to make investments? Do you think unemployment's gonna rise or fall? And when you look at those numbers, they're terrible. They're all at recession levels.
Rosin: That's because of everything you've talked about: trust—people don't trust. It's unpredictability. You can't make decisions if you're in an unpredictable environment.
Wolfers: Look, on January 1, there wasn't much to worry about. And on April 9, there's a lot to worry about.
Rosin: Got it. Okay. That makes sense. That's the soft numbers.
Wolfers: And everyone has understood that.
Rosin: Got it.
Wolfers: When you look at the hard numbers, like how many people have jobs, how much money they're spending—they're substantially stronger. They're actually quite good. Now, they're also a little more dated. We get the soft numbers before the hard numbers. So the question is Which of those two stories wins the day?
So that's an ordinary, run-of-the-mill recession. What we're worried about now is actually something called stagflation, which is, if you like inflation and you like recessions, two great flavors together. We call it stagflation. Stag: stagnating output, stagnating labor markets.
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: Flation: inflation.
Rosin: So it's high unemployment and high inflation at the same time.
Wolfers: Terrific, isn't it?
Rosin: And why is that every economist's worst nightmare? Why is that the worst thing?
Wolfers: Well, do you like one bad thing at a time or two?
Rosin: Got it. It's just because it's the doubling of terrible outcomes. And it's hard to know how to control that.
Wolfers: It's very hard to know what to do, because for Jay Powell and the Fed, normally if you've got unemployment, you'll lower interest rates. And if you've got inflation, you raise interest rates.
Rosin: Right, right, right.
Wolfers: So go to bed at night thinking to yourself, you're not running the Fed.
Rosin: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You wouldn't have any levers to pull, you wouldn't know what to do, so you're stuck.
Wolfers: Yes.
Rosin: Okay. So we know what Americans are worried about. The investing advice is always Wait it out. Just wait it out. Is that actually good advice? Are there any safe havens? If I were a smart economist, would I be doing something totally different than what the average American is being told to do?
Wolfers: Well, fortunately, if you invest in my new crypto coin, Justin Coin—
Rosin: Justin Coin.
Wolfers: —I can guarantee enormous—
Rosin: You didn't even name it after Betsey. It's not even called Betsey Coin.
Wolfers: You know Trump did Trump coin before he did Melania coin.
Rosin: Okay, fair, fair, fair.
Wolfers: So Betsey Coin's coming tomorrow, for those who want the complete set.
Okay, so let me be clear about what I can say and what I can't. So I wanna start with what I can't say. Realize people in financial markets are paid a lot of money to keep track of what's going on. What that means is all of the madness from earlier today is already priced in. So coming in later this afternoon and saying, Well, now that he's backing off the tariffs a bit, I should buy stocks. No, they were a good buy before anyone else knew, but as soon as anyone knew, they were no longer a good buy.
Rosin: Right.
Wolfers: So that's the source of the usual argument, Don't try to time the market. It's too hard. If someone tells you that they know which way the market's going, the right answer is to never talk to them again.
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: They're a grifter.
Rosin: So you don't know either. Nobody knows.
Wolfers: I don't know either. What I do know is that we live in dangerous times.
Rosin: Mm-hmm.
Wolfers: If you don't have the stomach for that, then you wanna pull the money and put it, you know, in a low-interest savings account. Now, should you have the stomach for it? You know, here's some good news: When risk is high, it's usually paired with high reward.
Rosin: Okay. A last thing: Let's say you're not in the stock market at all. Is there any downside to what's happening right now?
Wolfers: Is there any downside? Yes.
Rosin: You could be unemployed.
Wolfers: The economy's on the cusp of recession. Currently, betting markets say it's a 53 percent chance of recession this year. I don't care about the stock market based on it being rich people's wealth. But the stock market is two things. It's rich people's investments, and it's also a betting market on the future of the economy.
So when stocks are down, that's telling you very, very smart people in very fancy suits, running very complicated computer models who ring up all the world's data are less optimistic about the future of American business.
Rosin: And that's gonna trickle down to you, whoever you are.
Wolfers: That is going to affect your income, your unemployment, the inflation rate, the interest rates you pay, on and on. And so that—it's just that it's a signal of how the economy is going to affect your life. Now, it's true that the stock market is not the economy. That's an old expression people use. So you shouldn't take what I said too far, but to the extent that the Trump tariffs are meant to have any positive effects on America, they're meant to boost American businesses and then all the positive effects on you and I are downstream of that. So the fact that they have actually undermined the stock value of American businesses tells you that the overall effect of the Trump tariffs is going to be negative.
Rosin: Although Trump would say that's just not yet, but you know, I know what you mean.
Wolfers: You mean Trump would say that he understands the true value of American business and the stock market doesn't?
Rosin: Better than you do? Yeah.
Wolfers: Remember two minutes ago I said if someone ever says that to you?
Rosin: Right, exactly. Exactly. Okay. I'm gonna summarize this conversation:
It's a teeny, teeny bit better than it was a day ago, but we are definitely not out of crisis yet. Is that fair?
Wolfers: Spot on.
Rosin: Okay. Thanks, Justin.
Wolfers: Wish I had happier news, Hanna.
Rosin: That's okay.
[]
Rosin: This episode of Radio Atlantic was produced by Jinae West and edited by Claudine Ebeid. It was engineered by Rob Smierciak.
Claudine Ebeid is the executive producer of Atlantic audio, and Andrea Valdez is our managing editor.
Listeners, if you like what you hear on Radio Atlantic, remember you can support our work and the work of all Atlantic journalists when you subscribe to The Atlantic at theatlantic.com/podsub. That's theatlantic.com/podsub.
I'm Hanna Rosin. Thank you for listening.
Article originally published at The Atlantic
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How President Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax bill could affect retirement planning
Listen and subscribe to Decoding Retirement on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" has made it to the Senate, but it still faces a long road before some version of it becomes law. The bill's current form, which spans more than 1,000 pages, contains a number of tax provisions that may have significant implications for seniors and those planning for retirement. But given the uncertainty, Lisa Featherngill, national director of wealth planning at Comerica Wealth Management, advised against making major financial decisions based on a proposed bill that could change significantly during the legislative process. "We're just in a wait-and-see mode," she said in a recent Decoding Retirement podcast (see video above or listen below). "That is one thing I have learned over the years. You do not take the House version or the Senate version and make any plans. At least wait until we've got something coming out of Conference committee." This embedded content is not available in your region. That said, Featherngill sees at least one provision in the House version of the bill as having a good chance of becoming law: a proposed $4,000 additional standard deduction for individuals 65 and older. If enacted, this deduction would apply to tax years 2025 through 2028 and, unlike the current age-based standard deduction, would be available to both itemizers and non-itemizers. It would phase out gradually at a 4% rate for single filers with modified adjusted gross income over $75,000 and for married couples filing jointly with income above $150,000. With nearly 58 million Americans ages 65 and older as of 2022, Featherngill believes this provision has broad appeal and could be among those that make it into the final version of the legislation. "It affects a lot of people, and it's not a huge dollar amount," she said. "I'm going to say it stays." According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, this provision would cost $72 billion from fiscal years 2025 through 2034. The proposed legislation has some additional tax considerations for retirees, though they could be subject to revisions. For starters, the bill would extend the $10,000 cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions first enacted under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). It also introduces a higher cap for certain taxpayers: Beginning in 2025, individuals would be able to deduct up to $40,000 of their state and local taxes, with the benefit phasing out at a rate of 30% for those earning more than $500,000. Both the $40,000 cap and the $500,000 income threshold would increase by 1% annually through 2033. Read more: 4 ways to save on taxes in retirement The SALT cap provision evolved on the House floor from a $30,000 deduction that phased out at $400,000 of income, Featherngill noted. That's a modest improvement for high-income earners, especially in high-tax states like California and New York, but it still offers limited relief. And given the political sensitivity and ongoing negotiations, there's a good chance the final version will look different, Featherngill said. Additionally, the bill would make permanent the higher estate tax exemption, which is currently set to expire after 2025. Under the bill, the exemption would be set at $15 million starting in 2026, with annual adjustments for inflation. "There hasn't seemed to be much controversy around that," Featherngill said. "So I think that has a good chance of moving forward." The "big, beautiful bill" also has some tax implications for Roth IRA conversions, Featherngill explained. Those looking to make a Roth IRA conversion have two key questions to consider: Do you have the liquidity to pay the taxes due on the conversion, and is the upfront tax cost worth it over time? That calculation often hinges on your current and future tax brackets. "Normally, we think about the break-even point if we're looking at there being a lower tax bracket later," Featherngill said. "Usually, there's a break-even point because you're accelerating the tax expense. And so at what point would you have been better off just waiting to take that money? You have to look at what your tax bracket is going to be down the road versus if you brought in that income through the Roth conversion." Read more: How do Roth IRA taxes work? And that's where the latest tax proposal comes into play — it maintains the wider tax brackets introduced by the TCJA that provide some breathing room. "The thing to remember is that it's not just the rates, it's the brackets," Featherngill said. "Whereas it used to be you would get into the 39% bracket at about $400,000, in the current world, you're not even getting into the 37% bracket until you're well above that. So there's a lot of room to plan and to do some good tax arbitrage.' Each Tuesday, retirement expert and financial educator Robert Powell gives you the tools to plan for your future on Decoding Retirement. You can find more episodes on our video hub or watch on your preferred streaming service.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Tap into these big trends to grow your portfolio
Listen and subscribe to Stocks In Translation on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite time to view your portfolio with a long-term mindset. In this episode of Stocks in Translation, Tematica Research CIO Chris Versace joins Markets and Data Editor Jared Blikre and Producer Sydnee Fried to break down everything having to do with thematic investing - an approach that involves investing in companies poised to benefit from long-term structural trends, like AI and or clean energy. Versace stresses the importance of using daily news signals to validate or reassess thematic exposure as well as his concerns about future inflation from tariff-driven price hikes. Twice a week, Stocks In Translation cuts through the market mayhem, noisy numbers and hyperbole to give you the information you need to make the right trade for your portfolio. You can find more episodes here, or watch on your favorite streaming service. This post was written by Lauren Pokedoff Welcome to Stocks and Translation, Yahoo Finance's video podcast that cuts through the market mayhem, the noisy numbers, and the hyperbole to give you the information you need to make the right trade for your portfolio. I'm Jared Blicker, your host, and with me is the People's Voice, Sydney Fried. She's here to ask the people's questions, speaking as the people's spirit moves. First, please like, subscribe, and comment on stocks and translation on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon, or YouTube, and today,We are going to be digging into various investment strategies. Our phrase of the day is thematic investing. Themes can transcend sectors and styles, so how to mix them into your portfolio. And this episode is brought to you by the number 55%. That is a chance that we get a Fed rate cut by September, but how much do rate cuts really matter? To help us with all of this today, we are welcoming for the first time, Chris Versace, CIO of and portfolio manager of the portfolio. Good to finally get you on the show here. I, you know, I think I was supposed to be here and I unfortunately fell victim of COVID a fewmonths ago. It wouldn't be the first time COVID has interrupted our plans this century. Um, tell us how you're seeing the market, please. So Imean, where, where are we today, right? So from a technical perspective, the market is kind of closing in on those high RSI levels near you know, the market, I also think is kind of reacting to the May CPI print that was on the headline, a little weaker than expected. So good news for the market if you're pro uh Fed rate cuts, but as we were talking before we started.I do have some concerns about that data, right? You know, um, I think companies were winding down inventories right ahead of the tariffs. So if they have to replenish, prices could be a little bit higher. And then if we take a look at some of the announcements that we got Walmart, Mattel, uh, Macy's, Ford, and a rash rash of others, price increases are coming to help offset the pressure of those tariffs. So I think the market is really trying to figure out where are we, what's next, and I'm sitting here companies are gonna be dealing with all this likely when we get into the June quarter earnings season. I'm watching second half of the year guidance. All right, very good. We're gonna talk about the Fed in a little bit. We want to focus now on our phrase of the day, which is thematic investing, which is investing in companies with the aim of benefiting from long-term structural trends could be AI, aging populations, clean energy, rather than sticking to uh to traditional sectors or style just kind of break down thematic investing in for for us and how it works for you. So there's a lot of interpretations for thematic investing. So let me just give you my, OK? So we look for structural change across the shifting landscapes of economics, demographics, psychographics, technology, and regulatory mandates, and what we want to do.I isolate the companies with the greatest exposure to the things that we create based on those structural changes, and we do this with a thematic scorecard. So we actually rank companies based on their sales or profit exposure to the strategy. So we can capture those that are really gonna benefit, sidestep those that are not. And if you like to go short, Jared, you know, sometimes you might be able to say, well, these companies, they're being left behind. They're not responding to the structural change. So if you're an aggressiveinvestor. Value stocks. Maybe, maybe not. You know, when companies get left behind, they, they oftentimes have problems. So we're trying to identify structural tailwinds to keep it simple, structural headwinds. Is thematic investing always in the form of an ETF? That's where you're just pulling a bunch of stocks together. It can be, but I would also say that I think you've got to be a little careful. So we, we have some at Somatic we have a couple of clients over in Europe and we've helped create some thematic ETFs for them. We build the the but oftentimes you see folks kind of putting filler or stuff that doesn't really fit, so you really have to, in my opinion, if you're looking for an ETF, look for something with high purity, and there are ETF issues out there who'll say, well, if a company has 50% might be fine. Then what about the other 50% have a word in their name. That could be it too. That, that could be it too. That could be it too. But you, so you need really high, high purity levels, I think. I would say 80% or higher. What's the non-ETF example then of thematic investing just names you can do individual stocks or you are seeing um some, you know, service providers create models which would be a smaller we have created models as well, usually between 6 to 8 stocks again with very high thematic purity that are poised to benefit from these strategies or themes that we've identified. Could you just give us some individual stock examples then of current themes that you like and then some of the leaders? Oh, sure, I mean, I'd be remiss if I didn't rip out art artificial intelligence like everybody else. So that would be obviously your Nvidia is, your Marvels, but we also have safety and security, so we like that, which is uh a play not only on tasers less and less but body cameras, cloud services, and burgeoning artificial intelligence into the public safety sector. And what's interesting about that, you, you, you guys should ask me this. Well, you just said AI is a theme, but you got AI over here in public safety, and that's one of the great things about thematic investing because I come from a background of, uh, being an equity research analyst at Wall Street firms where you have your vertical wow, can't you identify some pretty interesting compelling stuff when you look horizontally across the transformation that's unfolding? I think AI is poised to be one of those, um, disruptive and transformational technologies. I mean, it's gonna beeverywhere eventually, at Starbucks, even Starbucks apparently. I evaluating the performance of like your thematic investments different than evaluating the performance ofAny other of your investments. So if you're asking like could you do the standard PE stuff valuation stuff? Yes, do you haveto read the prospects for all these companies in the world so, so with our thematic scorecard, right, we try to rank every company that we're, uh, that we've identified in the universe. So it could be a prospectus. There's a lot of 10Ks company presentations, earnings call transcripts, you know, a lot of reading, a lot of reading. So, so you can really identify, um, what percentage of their business sales profits, whatever, whatever is, you know, um, shared publicly that tells you, yes, this not only fits, but it is should be ranked a certain score, it should be in the strategy. But Iguess I'm also wondering like if you'reDoing AI thematic investing, how to judge whether those investments are doing better than if I just went into tech and I had more exposure to other technical like. Oh, I see. Um, so for some of the models that we have, we do have some additional screening factors that we do, EPS growth and and things like that. Um, but I will also tell you though thatWhat I think helps, and this might be a differentiation from just buying tech to buying um AI or some or digital infrastructure or digital lifestyle or some of the other strategies we have. The really cool thing about thematic investing is it's actually and around us in our daily lives. So every week we publish signals, right, ripped from the headlines, confirmation points about what's unfolding. Subway ads even, um, could very well be, could very well be aging the population. A lot of plastic surgery ads here on the New York City subway system. So why not? Gotcha. Well, do you ever layer in technicals on top of that or just some of the fundamentals? So, um, it's fundamental work. There is some technical work you know, when we look at our models, you know, uh, we're looking at, you know, is there a death cross or what have you. So there is some of that, yeah. OK. What's uh is there a specific allocation you recommend someone to have in their portfolio for thematic investing? So this is an interesting question, right? Because we tend to you tend to hear advisers talk about core and satellite, and I would say this, these models fit into the satellite exposure, right? What what's the extraExposure you want the kicker, the sweetener, call it what you will, um, you know, are we tinkering with some core models? Yeah, we are, but I would say the thematic models fit really into that satellite approach. So is the core then passive? Is it just a generic passive strategy or is that your core strategy? Oh, I'm just talking just conceptually how RIAs and others about core. Is it important for a passive investor to even bother withthis? I would say if you're looking to capitalize on areas of growth with well positioned companies, the answer would be yes. All right, so I'm just, I'm like I'm getting tips from my own portfolio that's fine. That's fine. All right, um, so we've talked about, we've talked about theory quite a bit. You've given a few examples. What in the data is leaning you towards certain strategies like what are you seeing?What are some of these signals you're seeing on a daily basis that tell you, all right, I need to pay a little bit more attention tothis. So, you know, as you guys kind of picked up, there's a lot of paying attention to what's unfolding, you know, whether it's news articles, stories, company comments, right? So there are, and I will say this, not all thematics are going to work at the same time or all the for example, right now we're seeing a lot of headlines about chocolate prices moving higher and you might say, OK, chocolate prices great Hershey, Mars, Tootsie Roll, yeah, what, yeah, exactly. So we kind of take that as a signal that maybe our guilty pleasure theme is not really in vogue right now, right? We're also seeing the rise of non-alcoholic beer, which is becoming the second largest category in beer, very exactly favorable for guilty pleasure. So, and, and on the flip side, we're seeing, um, you know, some warning signs earlier this year about luxury goods and spending and softness there as well as tariffs taking a bite out of that business as well. So again, maybe some near term tailwinds, sorry, headwinds headwinds for our luxury buying boom model. So not again, not everything's in vogue at the same time. And how much do you pay attention to some of the generational aspects like maybe the younger generation Gen Z is just eschewing luxury so we don't want any part of that. Do you try to make those determinations? Uh, you know, it's if that were happening, we would try to do that, but the data doesn't seem to point to that. If, if any, if anything, they're more affordable luxury or more, um, aspirational luxury. Got you. All right, um, so we, you touched on the, the weak CPI that we got earlier this week. What does that tell you about the macro picture in the US right now? Well, I think if we take a look at the new order data that we saw in the May ISMPMI numbers that uh technically in contraction territory for uh manufacturing largely on a month over month basis for the services sector, it tells us the economy is going to slow, especially relative to some of these, I can only say wacky Atlanta Fed GDP now numbers that we've been seeing 3%, 4 numbers I've ever seen. I, you know, I personally prefer the New York Fed nowcast model. Uh, I think historically they, they've been a little more um on track with the, with what, excuse me, with what is really happening in the the Atlanta Fed numbers, and while I like Bostic, um, I just, like, they're all over the place and they have a history of missing to the upside, missing to the downside. Hold that thought, we need to take a short break, but coming up we're gonna be talking Fed rate cuts and a mouthwatering, if not soupy, runway battle. Stay episode is brought to you by the number 55%. That's the chance that the Fed pulls the rate cut trigger again by its September meeting. The number got a slight boost after the cooler than expected inflation read earlier this week, and all of this data, by the way, comes to us from our beloved sponsor, the bond market. Got bonds? All uh, Ray cut odds this year. Um, I can imagine what the is, I can imagine what your answer might be, but is it gonna happen? Is it gonna happen by December, September. So what I've been saying, we, we follow the data, right, as you can imagine. So as we get more data, we, we will, uh, revise our view. But what we have been saying is that the odds of two rate cuts very low in our opinion, and I think after the ISM data that we saw, the same May data I was just referring to, we saw the prices component on services jump, we saw the the prices component in the manufacturing number remained extremely elevated and then the May employment report had a big jump in wages on a year over year basis. Our thinking was, you know, it's got to be more like 1, not 2, and if you take my comments about how I think the market might be setting up for a little head fake with the May CPI numbers, I continue to think that there's more likely a chance we get 1, concern is now what's the Fed going to say next week when they update their set of economic projections? I was thinking they were going to take it down to one.I think the May CPI report gives them a little room to keep 2 on the table for now. What would it take to get to? What would it take to get to? Well, there's two levers to that, right? We could see inflation cool on a sustained basis, move even lower in the June July data, right, because the Fed's going to have plenty of time to that September, uh, timetable for its policy meeting. So a lot more data, and I think that's why you'll ultimately see Powell go, we need to see more good data. I just like it. But the other side of that is the economy, right? And you know, while I was making fun of the Atlanta Fed numbers recently, um, you know, they, they support the notion that the Fed doesn't need to do anything. So unless we see those numbers come down, potentially contract, don't think we're going to see it, but if they come down sub 2%, closer to 1%, maybe sub 1% in the next 3 months, then you'll see people getting a little more enthused about rate cuts. The other thing to watch would be the employment I say that because job growth did surprise 139,000 in the month of May, a little weaker than the last couple of months, but still growing. But if that if that changes, then all of a sudden I think you can see people get a little more concerned about the speed of the economy, saying, oh, maybe more rate cuts are needed. Um, the other thing I'll, I'll mention on just on jobs is the Doge, you know, buyouts, right? If you carefully read the May employment report, anybody who's receiving them is still counted for now as employed, and that rolls over September. Oh, OK, so September's report or the next month's October. Are we hyper fixated on one or two cuts or like that's a that's a great the Fed, I think do Fed rate cuts, how much do they actually matter these days? Well, immediately they don't, right? You know, they, there is a lag effect for them going into the market and, you know, affecting, um, you know, mortgages and other rates. So I, I would say that it's important only because it kind of denotes that if we get one cut, the odds of another one coming are probably that much greater because of the data that's prompting the Fed to do it. Yeah. Um, so, all right, we talked about the Fed. I'm gonna give you the floor here. Anything else in the macro picture that we didn't touch on that you wanna, you wanna you'reyou're giving me my last question that I use no, no, I know. I'm just saying, I'm, I'm just saying this, this is like, um, I would, this might be a pivot because it's not really on the macro side, but it's more of a market question that ties into the economy and I think it'll bring us back to it's that, it's that guidance, right? Because as, as we're sitting here, like, you know, we're we're volleying around a lot of topics and I think Jamie Dimon said it um yesterday when he was presenting at the Morgan Stanley uh conference thatBetween, you know, tariffs, geopolitics, and other things, there's a lot of moving pieces here. And my, my concern is that when we move into the June quarter earnings season, a lot of this will still be this soup, if you will, will still be with us and a lack of clarity, you know, I think companies err on the conservative side. That means that guidance expectations will probably get reset for the second half of the year for the S&P 500. And if I'm the question is by how much am I right? because that can trigger a whole valuation question from a simple PE basis even for the S&P 500. I gotta, I gotta say the last earnings round, uh, earnings season when I was, we were just entering, I think Walmart, they suddenly cut their guidance and I thought, OK, there's gonna be a swath of companies that are just gonna say this is a but I didn't really see that happen. It wasn't as bad as I expected anyway. Um, what does it take for earnings to really take down the S&P 500, the big market overall? Well, I think you got to take a look at, you know, who are some of the top constituents, right? You got your Microsoft, you got your Nvidia, you got Apple, and, you know, the kit and caboodle of the rest of the Mach 7, right?So you have to watch those guys, but it's also going to be, um, you know, other retailers, other folks that are really, I think, feeling the continued pain of tariffs if we don't get any of this clarity. But even if we do, you know, I was just saying, you know, this morning that, oh, so President Trump is saying there'll be 55% tariffs on Chinese imports. The average tariff on Chinese imports in January of this year was around 21%.So there's still going to be some inflation pressures there whether or not people have to pass through or margins get hit because they can't pass pricing through. So again, a lot of uncertainty for that second half of the year, at least as we sit here today, likely to be with us as earnings season kicks in for June. So asan investor, how do you navigate this potentially uncertain second half? Well, so the way I would answer that is as an investor, are you buying the market or are you buying?you know, well positioned companies benefiting from structural changes, yada yada yada. Well, I would say thematic or targeted exposure, right? Because what we want to capture is where is the growth. So we are gonna pivot hard pivot here to our runway battle. Today our runway battle trades in heels for ladles. First down the catwalk is broth, crystal clear consummate, a single unmistakable flavor note. Think pure play themes, one bet, no delusion, butDon't slurp too fast because lumbering right behind is chowder, thick, chunky, loaded with potatoes, clams, and 12 kinds of risk factors, Sid. That's your diversified basket, layered like a fact set model. Now, Chris likes to preach, listening to the data, yet even the cleanest reads can get cloudy when the market starts whisking in surprise rate cuts or earnings misses. And in case you're wondering about the theme today, Chris was once featured in a Progresso soup which dish compliments investors' portfolios the best this season, the sleek, transparent sip that tells you exactly what's inside, or the hearty meal that can mask a few unwanted ingredients. Spoons up, let's taste some alpha crisp. OK, so I, I'll say this, as much as I love the clear consumme, right, it's just, it's exactly what you expect you're going to get packed full of flavor, very confirming, living up to I'm a fan of, I think you called it the chowder, right? Because whenever there's, um, chowder to me is kind of like, oh, what's that? Oh, a little spicier or uh maybe, oh, I didn't know what that was. Whenever you get that when you're investing, there are disruptions that when that happens, if you're a prepared investor, you can be opportunistic, potentially entering a great company at a better price than you might have had before you sat down for that bowl of spicy soup. That is a brilliant answer. Unprepared, even though I love soup, I wanted to bomb a little in that want to go more personals now, so I want to hear a little bit about your career and kind of how you started learning about the markets in the firstplace. Oh wow. All right, so I'll tell you the true story, true story. I, I got out of college and I didn't know what I wanted to do at in fact, while my senior year of college, while everybody was getting jobs, I was like, I'm going backpacking to Europe for 7 weeks. Oh, you're that guy. I, I was that guy. And I and I and I and I did it and then when I came back, I wasn't sure what I wanted to do and I had an opportunity to teach, and some computer science classes at my high school so I double majored math and economics in college and so I took it and then I read this book, no again, no joke one up on Wall Street by Peter Lynch, OK? And I read it and I was, I was sitting there in the math office one day and I just said, you know, I got nothing to lose. I call Fidelity. I asked for Peter phone rings. Lynch. And I said, oh, Peter Lynch, this is blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. How, how, how, how do I get into this business? Do you have any idea how many calls I get like this every week? I was gonna say you did it right and that encouraged and that and I what I liked about that book, whereas if you think about the the greatest example that everybody touts, it's how he would walk around the mall, follow his wives or her friends, and see what they were buying, and I think Legs pantyhose was the great example that he talked about. But that if you think of what I said earlier, follow the data, see where the changes are, where are people buying these all kind of come back and I would like to say I had it perfectly figured out 30 years ago. I did not, all come around and it kind of fits in with some of this thematic investing. Great story and thank you for showing up here today and talking with us, Chris. And we have wound things down here at Stocks and Translation. Be sure to check out our other episodes of our video podcast on the Yahoo Finance site and mobile app. We're also on all your favorite podcast platforms, so be sure to like, to like, leave a comment, and subscribe wherever you get your podcast, and we will see you next time on Stocks in Translation. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Americans' views on inflation are finally turning a corner
Consumers' expectations for inflation dropped in May for the first time in 2025. CPI data has been steadily improving, but sentiment readings have lagged the hard data. Improved consumer sentiment could boost markets and help prevent a recession. Americans are finally starting to feel less anxious about inflation. Consumer price index data showed inflation cooled in May. That comes alongside a brightening of inflation expectations in the latest survey data. This embedded content is not available in your region. The New York Fed's survey of consumer expectations, published on Monday, showed that consumers' forward-looking inflation outlook declined in May for the first time this year. The median one-year-ahead inflation expectation decreased, dropping from 3.6% in April to 3.2%. Three-year-ahead and five-year-ahead inflation expectations also declined, falling from 3.2% to 3.0% and from 2.7% to 2.6%, respectively. The survey marks a turning point in the gap between "soft" and "hard" economic data, with the vibes in the economy starting to more closely align with the facts on the ground. Inflation and labor market data have been looking more and more upbeat, but forward-looking gauges like inflation expectations and consumer sentiment have headed in the opposite direction. Last Friday's jobs report also showed higher-than-anticipated job creation and unemployment levels hovering near historic lows. Yet, May's University of Michigan consumer sentiment reading plunged to from 52.2 to 50.8, the second-lowest reading ever recorded. Wall Street has been more focused on the hard data. May was a strong month for markets as slowing inflation and US-China trade relations led stocks to recover their Liberation Day losses. Recession expectations have come down from 60% to as low as 30% among some forecasters. As stocks continue to gain after April's peak tariff volatility, strategists are also recalibrating their inflation expectations. While inflation could spike later this summer, as it could take three months or more for retailers to pass on tariff-related price increases to consumers, Goldman Sachs believes inflation will only see a temporary uptick from tariffs in 2025 before heading back down in 2026. Now, it seems like consumers are finally getting on the same page. In addition to the improved inflation outlook reported by the New York Fed, the Consumer Confidence Index rebounded, increasing 12.3 points in May to 98.0 — its first increase after falling for five consecutive months. Goldman Sachs said that for past event-driven recessions, soft data has usually bottomed around 60 days after a catalyst. As Liberation Day moves further into the rearview, Americans appear to be adjusting their economic outlooks. Darrell Cronk, chief investment officer of Wells Fargo, echoed this perspective. "What people forget is that sentiment is a reflection of what has happened already, not what will happen in the future," Cronk said during the bank's midyear outlook conference on Tuesday. More optimistic sentiment could be a tailwind for markets, according to Goldman Sachs. Pessimistic consumers have pulled back on spending, especially in discretionary categories like airfare and travel. With consumer spending making up roughly two-thirds of GDP, sentiment improvement could help prevent a recession and boost markets. Read the original article on Business Insider