Fed's Powell repeats warning about tariffs as some GOP senators accuse him of bias
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs will likely push up inflation in the coming months, even as some Republican senators suggested the chair was biased against the duties.
On the second day of his twice-yearly testimony before the House and Senate, Powell said that consumers will likely have to shoulder some of the cost of the import taxes. Most Fed officials support cutting rates this year, Powell added, but the central bank wants to take time to see how inflation changes in the months ahead.
'There will be some inflation from tariffs coming," Powell said under questioning from members of the Senate Banking Committee. 'Not yet, but over the course of the coming months.'
Powell noted that the duties would likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars annually, and 'some of that is going to fall on the consumer. We're just kind of waiting to see more data on that."
Some GOP senators criticized Powell, however, for characterizing tariffs as a potential driver of inflation. Sen. Pete Ricketts, a Republican from Nebraska, argued that the duties could simply act as a one-time increase in prices that wouldn't fuel inflation.
And Sen. Bernie Moreno, a Republican from Ohio, echoed some of Trump's complaints about Powell's reluctance to cut rates and accused Powell of political bias.
'You should consider whether you are looking at this through a fiscal lens or a political lens because you just don't like tariffs,' Moreno said. Powell didn't respond.
But the Fed chair reiterated that most central bank officials do support cutting the Fed's key rate this year. And Powell added that it is possible that tariffs won't increase inflation by very much.
Trump has sharply criticized Powell for not reducing borrowing costs, calling him a 'numbskull' and a 'fool.' Trump has pushed for rate cuts in order to reduce the interest costs the federal government pays on its debt. Yet some Fed officials have pushed back against that view, saying that it's not their job to lower the government's borrowing costs.
So far, inflation has steadily cooled this year despite widespread concerns among economists about the impact of tariffs. The consumer price index ticked up just 0.1% from April to May, the government said last week, a sign that price pressures are muted.
Compared with a year ago, consumer prices rose 2.4% in May, up from a yearly increase of 2.3% in April.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
29 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Interactive Brokers' Stock Split: Time to Buy Shares?
A stock split does not change anything about the underlying business fundamentals of a stock, and yet, stock-split stocks tend to outperform over the 12 months following a split. This makes them interesting to pay attention to. One under-the-radar stock split that occurred this month is Interactive Brokers (NASDAQ: IBKR), performing a 4-to-1 split on its common shares. The technology-focused investing brokerage has grown users, revenue, and earnings at an impressive rate in the last 10 years, with customers drawn to its advanced trading platform. Does this make the stock a perfect buy for investors right now? Let's take a closer look at why Interactive Brokers is a winning stock to add to your portfolio. Comprehensive offering for the masses Interactive Brokers is an advanced trading platform that brings professional service to the masses. By enabling its customers to trade virtually any foreign market, currency, bonds, futures, and more, the brokerage has built up a better value proposition than traditional brokerages, even online-focused ones. It has an easy-to-use mobile application as well as more advanced trading tools, helping it cater to the more sophisticated individual investor as well as professional investors and hedge funds. It does all this at a reasonable price, including free stock trading on its IBKR Lite platform. This consistent focus on a wide swath of trading capabilities at a reasonable price has helped Interactive Brokers convince investors to switch to its brokerage platform. Back in 2012, Interactive Brokers only had 200,000 active customers, a minnow in the brokerage world. Today, it has 3.6 million customers that skew toward wealthier, advanced, and professional traders. This is a valuable set of customers with high lifetime values. To keep furthering its brokerage offering, Interactive Brokers is now offering more cryptocurrency trading and the fast-growing prediction marketplace, which allows users to bet on things such as the outcome of a country's election. The more types of trades you can make on Interactive Brokers, the more valuable it is for customers. This is why investors are switching from legacy players to Interactive Brokers. An impressive run of earnings growth Typically, fast-growing companies are not very profitable because of how much they need to spend on advertising, marketing, and technological development. Not Interactive Brokers. The company has built up a culture of efficiency and product-led growth combined with a highly automated brokerage platform that needs fewer employees to manage. Last quarter, Interactive Brokers had a pre-tax profit margin of 74%, which is one of the best profit margins of any company globally. The average profit margin for the S&P 500 index has ranged from 10% to 15%. Interactive Brokers has used this increasing operating leverage to put up impressive earnings growth in the last few years. Net income is up 400% in the last five years, hitting $793 million over the last 12 months. With only a small portion of investors using Interactive Brokers, the company has plenty of room to keep growing in the years to come; it is nowhere near one of the largest players in the brokerage market today. IBKR PE Ratio data by YCharts Should you buy IBKR stock? Investors who are backward-looking may think they have missed out on owning Interactive Brokers stock. It is up 67% in the last 12 months and just went through a stock split. I believe these investors are missing the forest for the trees. At today's stock price, Interactive Brokers trades at a price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) of 28. Most value investors would look at this high earnings ratio and scoff at investing in this company. However, we need to remember that Interactive Brokers has put up impressive levels of user, revenue, and earnings growth in the last five years and still has a long runway to keep stealing market share of brokerage customers. Its superior platform is not going to be replicated overnight, and it keeps improving its breadth of products and services every year. If Interactive Brokers can keep growing its earnings at a fast clip (which I think it can), the stock is a great buy after its recent stock split. Should you invest $1,000 in Interactive Brokers Group right now? Before you buy stock in Interactive Brokers Group, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Interactive Brokers Group wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $689,813!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $906,556!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is809% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to175%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025 Brett Schafer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Interactive Brokers Group. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2027 $175 calls on Interactive Brokers Group and short January 2027 $185 calls on Interactive Brokers Group. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Winnipeg Free Press
34 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump attacks the media for reporting on intelligence assessment of Iran strikes
President Donald Trump is repeatedly condemning CNN and The New York Times for reports that call into question the damage caused by last weekend's U.S. strikes of Iran — and downplaying his own intelligence analysts in the process. Trump on Wednesday called on CNN to throw out 'like a dog' a reporter who has worked on the story and suggested Times reporters were 'bad and sick people' who were attempting to demean American pilots involved in the strikes. Both news outlets defended their reporting. The president is angry about stories that a preliminary assessment by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency had said Saturday's strike of three nuclear sites had set back Iran's nuclear program by a few months. The assessment 'suggests that President Trump's claim that Iran's nuclear facilities were 'obliterated' was overstated,' The Times said in a six-bylined story on Tuesday night. Shortly after the reports began circulating, Trump disputed them, saying in a social media post that the nuclear sites were completely destroyed, and he doubled down on Wednesday. 'They tried to demean the great works our B-2 pilots did, and they were wrong in doing so,' Trump wrote. 'These reporters are just BAD AND SICK PEOPLE. You would think they would be proud of the great success we had, instead of trying to make our Country look bad.' Newspaper says Trump's criticism was fake news The Times noted that Trump had initially called the report fake news, but he and his national security team subsequently confirmed that the report was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency. 'So their statement was fake, not the Times's reporting,' Times spokesman Charles Stadtlander said. 'We'll continue to report fully on the administration's decision-making, including the president's dispute with the Defense Intelligence Agency, as we did this morning.' Trump specifically singled out CNN reporter Natasha Bertrand and called for her firing. 'I watched her for three days doing Fake News,' the president wrote. 'She should be immediately reprimanded, then thrown out 'like a dog.'' CNN said that it stood by Bertrand and the network's reporting. The network has made clear that it was an initial finding that could change with additional intelligence, and reported the president's own skepticism about what his experts had found. 'We do not believe it is reasonable to criticize CNN reporters for accurately reporting the existence of the assessment and accurately characterizing its findings, which are in the public interest,' the network said in a statement. Trump amplifies his certainty about Iran strikes The White House, in its own statement criticizing CNN, called parts of the early defense agency report an 'inconclusive, low-confidence intelligence assessment' that was leaked to undermine Trump and pilots who conducted the mission. Weekly A weekly look at what's happening in Winnipeg's arts and entertainment scene. 'Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on their targets: Total Obliteration,' the White House said, repeating the phrase Trump has used repeatedly to describe the mission. The release quoted assessments from different agencies on bomb damage. In calling patriotism into question, the president and his allies also attempted a strategy used in the past to demean reporters and create doubts about their work. In an interview with CNN's Kaitlin Collins on Tuesday night, GOP Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullins pushed back against questions on the strike, saying it should be celebrated and not be 'something we are bringing division on.' Collins replied that it's her job to ask questions, not to celebrate. ___ David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at and
National Post
35 minutes ago
- National Post
Alan Kessel: Trump puts an end to American ambivalence
The Middle East has entered a precarious calm. On June 24, a ceasefire brokered by United States President Donald Trump brought a sudden halt to a week of escalating hostilities between the U.S., Israel, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The missiles have stopped — for now — but the implications of what unfolded are still reverberating across the region, and far beyond it. Article content Article content This was not just a military flare-up. It was a decisive geopolitical moment that revealed a strategic realignment — and the unmistakable reassertion of American power. Article content Article content For Iran's regime, the confrontation exposed its growing vulnerability. For the United States, it marked the end of ambiguity. And for the world, it was the clearest evidence in years that America is not withdrawing from the world — it is re-engaging with purpose. Article content This was not merely an Israeli campaign. It was a moment of joint resolve between Washington and Jerusalem. For the first time, the United States gave explicit operational backing to Israel to strike deep into Iran's strategic core. The long-standing policy of restraint — a combination of caution and geopolitical fatigue — was abruptly discarded. Article content Israel took the operational lead in the opening days of the campaign, targeting Iran's military infrastructure and command-and-control systems with surgical precision. These strikes laid the groundwork for what followed. Once Iranian air defences and key communication nodes were degraded, U.S. B-2 stealth bombers entered the theatre and delivered the coup de grâce: coordinated precision strikes on Iran's three most sensitive nuclear enrichment sites: Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan. These were not symbolic targets. They were the beating heart of Iran's atomic ambitions. Article content Article content The damage was most acute at Fordo — the most important of the three sites, and once thought untouchable — where early satellite imagery analysis suggests that extensive subterranean infrastructure may have been compromised. The message was unmistakable: the West not only knows where Iran's weapons infrastructure lies, it now has the political will and operational reach to neutralize it. Article content Article content Trump, who had long vowed that Iran would never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, followed the strikes with a televised addres s from the White House. The message was stark: Iran must choose peace or risk further devastation. Three days later, under intense pressure, Tehran accepted a ceasefire. Whether that choice holds is uncertain — but the balance of risk has now shifted. Article content For the Islamic Republic, the week of strikes marked its most dangerous crisis since the revolution of 1979. Already crippled by sanctions, riven by internal dissent, and diplomatically cornered, it now saw its nuclear and missile infrastructure laid bare. Iran's deterrence posture — based on ambiguity, asymmetry, and impunity — cracked under the weight of co-ordinated force.
