ECB's Panetta Suggests Inflation Is Almost Defeated in Euro Zone
European Central Bank Governing Council member Fabio Panetta signaled that inflation is nearly fully tamed, while cautioning that further interest-rate cuts require finely balanced judgments.
Speaking on the day that his country and two other major euro-zone economies release consumer-price data, the Bank of Italy governor hailed policymakers' progress but warned that their decisions from now on about whether to keep reducing borrowing costs won't get any easier.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Officials under fire for allegedly funneling hundreds of millions to Elon Musk-owned companies: 'It is unacceptable'
A controversy is brewing after a document obtained by Agence France-Presse revealed that the European Union paid hundreds of millions of euros to companies headed by Elon Musk, as reported by The Hindu. According to The Hindu, the document shows that the EU paid Tesla €159 million (around $176 million) to build electric vehicle charging stations in 2023. That year, it also doled out more than €600,000 for advertising on the social platform X before halting publicity amid concerns that Musk — the richest person in the world — was manipulating the social platform to promote his values or opinions to influence European affairs. Last year, the EU also handed Musk's SpaceX a contract worth roughly $197 million for the European Galileo satellite system amid commission delays for the Ariane 6 launch system. Musk's polarizing involvement in the United States federal government and global politics has contributed to strained transatlantic relations. The EU has also said that X, which Musk acquired in 2022, has run afoul of some of its regulations. In short, the U.S. and the EU have different legal frameworks surrounding data protection and privacy. Arkansas State University explained in a 2020 breakdown of key regulatory differences: "The U.S. favors a bottom-up approach, reflecting states' rights in governing, while the EU likes top-down, which balances intergovernmental and supranational policies." The EU's Digital Services Act also outlines strict obligations for online intermediaries and platforms to prevent "illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation." Last year, the EU said Musk's X violated DSA transparency rules, per CNBC. Musk has fired back by referring to EU digital laws as censorship. German Green EU lawmaker Daniel Freund wrote to the European Commission in March arguing that the EU shouldn't continue to make payments to the billionaire, per The Hindu. "This man is an outspoken enemy of the EU and our core values. It is unacceptable that we continue to pay the richest man in the world hundreds of millions," Freund wrote. Do you think Tesla's vehicles have lost some of their appeal? Definitely No way Some models — but not others For some drivers — but not others Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Based on the most recent data analyzed by Bankrate, Tesla is Musk's most valuable investment, valued at approximately $1.22 trillion as of February. However, the company that pioneered modern electric vehicles — coveted among drivers for their lower maintenance and operating costs, as well as their status as cleaner, less polluting modes of transportation — is on shakier-than-usual ground at the outset of 2025. Tesla failed to meet sales expectations in Q1, experiencing a 13% year-over-year dip in deliveries. The automaker's stocks also took a nosedive. Despite Tesla's troubling start to 2025, consumers shouldn't have to worry about EVs going the way of the dinosaur. While Musk's political activities contributed to Tesla's slide, with some viewing their support of the brand as giving their seal of approval to Musk, so did growing competition in the EV market. According to the International Energy Agency, the first three months of 2025 saw EV sales increase by 35% year-over-year. The robust used-EV market is also helping to connect consumers with more affordable EVs, proving to be a win for sellers and buyers alike. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the in to access your portfolio
Forbes
36 minutes ago
- Forbes
These 5 Tech Big Caps Are Unable To Reach New All-Time Highs: So Far
Microsoft, Nvidia getty Big cap tech stocks dropped this year from highs and they're having trouble getting all the way back up. Since these five make up so much of the S&P 500 weighting, it keeps the index from new highs. The likely reason: the 'strategic uncertainty' of on again/off again tariffs policy which amounts to simple uncertainty for investors. The feeling among economists is that tariffs and inflation go together. As the rise in prices continues, Fed experts take note and before you know it, interest rates stop going down. The new uncertainty, largely unspoken, is that rates will go up. Typically, that's the wrong direction as far as equities go. Microsoft Microsoft weekly price chart, 5 31 25. The all-time high price for the big software firm came in June/July 2024 at 462.52. The stock failed to make it to that level this week. It was close but no cigar. The 50-week moving average has turned back up and the 200-week moving average has not stopped heading upward on this chart. Note the RSI negative divergence to price from January 2024 to the summertime high. Microsoft's market capitalization is $3421 billion. Nvidia Nvidia weekly price chart, 5 31 25. The semiconductor chip designer is weaker than Microsoft. This week's high of $143.49 is below the previous all time highs of above $150 from November 2024 and January 2025. The negative divergence of the RSI is clear from its peak of March 2024 to the price highs of late 2024. Nvidia's price trades above a weakening 50-week moving average. Market cap is $3297 billion. Apple Apple weekly price chart, 5 31 25. This is the most surprising relative weakness among these big caps: Apple peaked late last year at near $260 and now goes for $200. Although that's a gain from the early April 2025 low, it's not keeping up with the others. The 50-week moving average appears to be turning over and beginning to trend downward. The 200-week moving average looks strong, even with the springtime price dip below it. Apple's market cap is $2999 billion. Broadcom Broadcom weekly price chart, 5 31 25. The Palo Alto-based semiconductor company hit an all time high in December 2024 of $250. This week's buying took the stock to $246.07 and that's where the selling came in. Friday's close was $242.07. This is another big cap tech name where the RSI peaked years ago and no longer makes it above 70 even as price keeps rising. The 50-week and the 200-week moving averages are non-stop upward. Market cap for Broadcom is $1138 billion. Salesforce Salesforce weekly price chart, 5 31 25. The peak for this software application firm came in November 2024 at just under the $370 level. The March/April 2025 price dip took it below the 200-week moving average, briefly. Since then, the stock in early May bounced to above the 50-week moving average but couldn't hold above it. It now trades at $265.37 with a price chart similar to Apple, given the inability to move back up to former peaks. Market cap for Salesforce is $253 billion. Stats courtesy of Charts courtesy of No artificial intelligence was used in the writing of this post. More analysis and commentary at
Entrepreneur
39 minutes ago
- Entrepreneur
Historic Perspectives on Tariff Policies and Modern Impacts
Today, global trade debates over tariffs and trade policies often dominate headlines. A closer examination of these issues reveals that the roots of today's tariff practices extend far back in... This story originally appeared on Due Today, global trade debates over tariffs and trade policies often dominate headlines. A closer examination of these issues reveals that the roots of today's tariff practices extend far back in history. Once designed to aid the recovery of nations emerging from conflict, these policies have taken on new dimensions in today's global economy. The discussion centers on how a policy intended to support post-war reconstruction now influences automotive trade and international business strategies. The Origins of Tariff Policies Tariffs were initially implemented with specific goals in mind. After World War II, several countries that suffered significant devastation had to rebuild their economies. In that context, the United States allowed other nations to impose taxes on American exports. This arrangement helped protect developing markets by limiting the competition from large, well-established American companies. The measure was not designed to penalize the United States. Instead, it was a way for many European and Asian cities, which had endured extensive damage during the war, to gain a foothold in their economic recovery. Cities such as Berlin, Tokyo, and London were among those that benefited. These measures enabled local industries to grow and stabilize, thereby supporting broader recovery efforts during a time when rebuilding was paramount. Over the decades, however, the global economy has seen substantial changes. While the original intention was clear and rooted in the necessities of the post-war period, many of these tariffs have persisted in modern trade regulations. The continued existence of such tariffs now invites scrutiny and debate, as they impact international competition and domestic industries in ways that were not foreseen at their inception. View this post on Instagram Modern Applications and Effects Today's tariff policies continue to influence global trade practices. Authorities still enforce tariffs that were initially designed for a very different time. A key example is evident in the auto industry, where tariffs play a significant role in shaping market dynamics and international competitiveness. The persistence of older tariff rules has led many experts and market watchers to question their continued application. They argue that there is little justification for protecting specific international auto industries when market conditions have evolved dramatically since the post-war era. European manufacturers, such as those from Germany, have grown strong enough to compete in global markets without the need for the historical shields that once protected their nascent industries. The Case of the Auto Industry The automotive sector serves as a clear example where historical tariff policies clash with modern market demands. European countries impose higher tariffs on American-made cars. This protection was once beneficial when U.S. auto makers were expanding their reach and dominating global trade. However, the industry dynamics have shifted. In addition to the auto industry, other sectors are also feeling the impact. The historical justification for high tariffs was protection and recovery support. However, local and international players now argue that tariffs can hinder competitiveness and increase costs for consumers. These criticisms suggest that policy reforms in the tariff system may be necessary to better align with modern market dynamics. Contemporary Critiques of Tariff Policies Recent political debates have brought new perspectives to the forefront. Recent events have sparked controversy over measures to implement reciprocal tariffs. Critics of these new policies see them as mismatched to modern economic circumstances. Some prominent figures have openly questioned the merits of such measures. They point out that the current policies are an extension of historical practices that may no longer have the same benefit. Their arguments assert that applying these old policies in a modern context might create more tension than support economic recovery or growth. The market reactions have been mixed. On one hand, the introduction of reciprocal tariffs has generated political support among certain groups. On the other hand, many economic experts criticize these moves as ill-suited for a globalized market. They argue that such tariffs have a historical basis that does not justify their blanket application in modern times. Examining the Historical Context To fully appreciate the current debates over tariffs, it is essential to examine their historical context. After World War II, Europe and parts of Asia were in dire need of support to rebuild their industries and economies. The tax measures imposed on U.S. goods were part of a broader strategy aimed at jumpstarting these economies. The case of tariffs on automobiles effectively demonstrates this point. With separate tariff rates for U.S. vehicles and those produced elsewhere, questions of fairness and relevance are continually raised. Consumers ultimately bear the costs, and the protective measures may end up stifling competition rather than promoting it. Historical Intent: Tariffs were initially introduced to help rebuild economies after a major conflict. Tariffs were initially introduced to help rebuild economies after a major conflict. Modern Challenge: Outdated tariff rules now clash with current economic realities. Outdated tariff rules now clash with current economic realities. Sector Impact: Industries such as automotive manufacturing face differing tariff rates that affect international trade. Balancing Policy with Modern Economy Modern trade policies must navigate the challenge of adhering to historical precedents while remaining relevant to today's dynamic economy. Policymakers face the task of determining whether longstanding tariff rates continue to serve the best interests of contemporary industries and consumers. The auto industry story is a clear indicator of the broader implications. As European countries impose higher tariffs on American vehicles, the inherent inequities in the system become more pronounced. Industry observers note that the protection once extended to struggling domestic sectors may now contribute to market inefficiencies. For many, the answer lies in modernizing these systems to reflect current global trade practices. Reducing or realigning tariffs could lead to improved relationships between trading nations and more balanced competition. Such adjustments might also foster an environment where domestic companies are encouraged to innovate and compete on a level field. Confronting Political and Economic Debates Political discourse surrounding tariffs has intensified in recent years. The debate centers on whether these measures, which once helped rebuild economies, still play a valuable role. Critics argue that policies introduced many decades ago do not translate well into the current era. They express concerns that continuing with such policies helps fuel trade tensions and creates economic challenges for consumers. Some political figures have been vocal in their criticism. They point out that reciprocal tariffs, intended to create balance, have instead become a source of contention. Critics note that these tariff adjustments often seem disproportionate and fail to address the underlying changes in market conditions. As the debate continues, it is clear that finding a balance will require input from economists, policymakers, and industry representatives alike. The situation calls for a collaborative approach that considers historical context and the demands of modern trade. Looking Ahead The discussion on tariffs is far from over. As international trade evolves, so too will policy debates about how best to protect domestic industries while engaging in a fair exchange with other nations. The historical reasons for imposing tariffs now serve as a reminder of a past era. Yet they also challenge today's policymakers to decide whether these measures continue to meet their intended goals. Looking forward, adjusting these policies might not only reduce tensions but also pave the way for a more efficient trading system. As industries mature and global competition intensifies, many believe that a careful reevaluation of tariff rates is warranted. Such reconsideration could lead to a reduction in consumer costs and stimulate further economic growth. Though tariff policies have deep historical roots, the current economic climate presents an opportunity for reform. The evolution of technology and production methods means that nations can engage in trade with less dependency on protectionist measures. A modern approach could encourage fairer competition and promote innovation in a way that benefits both producers and consumers. Many experts, market analysts, and policymakers continue to monitor trade discussions. They suggest that this issue is not about discarding history but rather about adapting policy to serve modern economies better. The lessons from decades past inform the current debate, and in doing so, offer guidance for possible future changes. In conclusion, examining the history behind tariff policies provides valuable insights into why they exist and how they affect today's industries. The auto industry stands as a clear example where historical practices continue to influence modern trade. With ongoing debates and a call for reform, the future of tariff policies remains a topic that warrants close attention from both policymakers and the public. Featured Image Credit: Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko; Pexels The post Historic Perspectives on Tariff Policies and Modern Impacts appeared first on Due.
