Bank of America CEO responds to Trump's claim he was rejected as a customer
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Apple set to dodge bulk of India tariffs
Apple (AAPL) is set to largely escape the Trump administration's upcoming promise of 50% tariff on goods made in India destined for the US. A White House official confirmed Wednesday that Apple's semiconductor-powered devices, which include its iPhone, will be unaffected by Trump's 25% 'reciprocal' tariffs set to go into effect Thursday. The same goes for an upcoming promise of an additional 25% levy related to India's use of Russian oil that is set to be in place in about 3 weeks' time. IPhones and other similar products will be subject to a separate tariff authority which has not yet been unveiled. Apple said during its most recent earnings call that it made the majority of its US-bound iPhones in India. The news comes after The White House announced that Apple will announce an additional $100 billion investment in US manufacturing during a 4:30 pm ET press event Wednesday. That's in addition to the $500 billion Apple said earlier this year it would invest in the country. Trump has criticized Apple's decision to move manufacturing from China to India and not the US, saying during his May trip to the Middle East that he had a 'little problem' with CEO Tim Cook. Other Trump administration officials have also lambasted Apple for not producing its phones in the US, with trade adviser Peter Navarro calling it the 'longest-running soap opera in Silicon Valley,' during a July interview with CNBC. But according to experts, it would take years for Apple to stand up a smartphone supply chain base in the US. What's more, there are no phone manufacturers in the country and not enough workers to fill the necessary roles. Todd Weaver, developer of Purism's Liberty Phone, a privacy-centric smartphone that uses US-built electronics, says it took his company years to set up the facilities and source the necessary components to ensure the phone's processing and communications features all come from America. Even so, he explained, the phone's body is still made overseas. Apple began expanding its supply chain beyond China following the lockdowns and disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. But it started specifically concentrating US iPhone manufacturing in India to avoid Trump's tariffs on Chinese goods. Apple hasn't been entirely immune from the impact of tariffs, though. In Q3, the company said it took an $800 million hit from Trump's levies and it expects an additional $1.1 billion in charges in the fourth quarter. While Apple might be able to dodge tariffs on goods out of India, the company isn't entirely out of the woods. The Trump administration is expected to unveil the results of its Section 232 investigation into semiconductor tariffs, which could impact everything from smartphones to automobiles. The exact timing for the tariff announcement is still up in the air, but Trump has said he could reveal them as soon as next week. Email Daniel Howley at dhowley@ Follow him on X/Twitter at @DanielHowley. Sign in to access your portfolio
Fast Company
3 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Trump accuses banks of political discrimination. Here's what to know
The White House was preparing to act against banks for allegedly dropping customers for political reasons, as President Donald Trump said he believes that banks, including JPMorgan and Bank of America, had discriminated against him and his supporters. A draft of the executive order, which was reviewed by Reuters, instructs regulators to review banks for 'politicized or unlawful debanking' practices. The order could authorize monetary penalties or other disciplinary measures against violators. It is likely to be announced as early as this week, two industry sources said. The White House had no immediate comment on the reported order. Trump's criticism adds pressure on America's largest lenders, but it also shows how the president's personal slights and business interests are getting reflected in the administration's policies — something that critics say raises issues of conflicts of interest. The sprawling Trump business empire has been placed into a trust, but it is still ultimately owned by the president. An executive order against the banks would come after Trump said in a CNBC interview on Tuesday that the country's top two lenders had previously rejected his deposits. Trump said, without providing evidence, that the banks' refusal to take his deposits indicated that the administration of former President Joe Biden had encouraged regulators to 'destroy Trump.' 'They did discriminate,' Trump said of actions taken by JPMorgan after his first term in office. 'I had hundreds of millions, I had many, many accounts loaded up with cash … and they told me, 'I'm sorry sir, we can't have you. You have 20 days to get out.' 'They totally discriminate against, I think, me maybe even more, but they discriminate against many conservatives,' he said. Trump said he subsequently tried to deposit funds with Bank of America and was also refused, and eventually split the cash. 'I ended up going to small banks all over the place,' he said. 'I was putting $10 million here, $10 million there, did $5 million, $10 million, $12 million,' he said, without naming the lenders. In a statement, JPMorgan did not address the president's specific claims about his account. 'We don't close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with President Trump that regulatory change is desperately needed,' JPMorgan said. 'We commend the White House for addressing this issue and look forward to working with them to get this right.' BofA also did not address Trump's specific claims. 'Reputational risk' issue During Biden's administration, regulators were able to scrutinize banks' decisions on the basis of reputational risks, a source familiar with the matter said. Lenders were under intense scrutiny and pressure to weigh reputational risks when dealing with Trump because of his legal woes, another source familiar with the situation said. JPMorgan continues to have a banking relationship with members of the Trump family that dates back years, and it also banks a number of campaign accounts linked to Trump, the source said. After Trump took power, the Federal Reserve announced in June it was directing its supervisors to no longer consider reputational risk when examining banks, a metric that had been a focus of industry complaints. 'What the White House is doing is telling the banks not to hide behind regulations to deny loans or banking relationships,' said Wells Fargo bank analyst Mike Mayo. 'Banks can use their normal underwriting standards and deny services, but not blame regulators or use reputational risk as a justification.' BofA said it welcomed the administration's efforts to clarify the policies. 'We've provided detailed proposals and will continue to work with the administration and Congress to improve the regulatory framework,' the bank said. Trump in January admonished the CEOs of JPMorgan and BofA for denying services to conservatives. At the time, the two banks denied making banking decisions based on politics. 'Regulatory overreach' Banks have consistently argued that any complaints about 'debanking' should be aimed at regulators, as they argue onerous rules and overzealous bank supervisors can discourage them from engaging in certain activities. 'The heart of the problem is regulatory overreach and supervisory discretion,' the Bank Policy Institute, an industry group, said in a statement. Lenders have held discussions around debanking and weighed scenarios around a potential order, the first source said. Banks are also hopeful the administration may change anti-money laundering laws that they say are outdated and burdensome, the source added.
CNBC
4 minutes ago
- CNBC
Wharton word guru on 3 simple language fixes that can turn failure to communicate into success
Wharton School marketing professor Jonah Berger has advised Google, Nike, Apple and Coca-Cola, among other major firms, on how small language choices can be the difference between failure and success with customers and partners. The same is true for any individual, he says, whether it be at work, in business, or when seeking to influence those who surround us in personal life. "We all use language all the time, when writing emails, making presentations, talking to clients and team members," Berger said at CNBC's Small Business Playbook virtual event on Wednesday. "We think a lot about ideas we want to communicate, but we think a lot less about specific words we use when we communicate, and unfortunately, that's a mistake," he said in an interview with CNBC's Kate Rogers at the small business event. "Small shifts in language we use can have a big impact," he said. In fact, according to Berger, adding one word to a request — recommend, as in "I recommend" — can make the listener about 50% more likely to say yes. Berger's research, covered in his book "Magic Words," shows that language choices can be make-or-break when it comes to everything from office conversations to applying for loans, but we are often under-prepared to choose the right words to get what we want. Berger, along with a larger team, has analyzed the language of customer calls, sales pitches, and tens of thousands of written content pieces to analyze how to increase the odds of success. "At core, what we find is that it is not random, it's not luck, not chance. There is a science of how language works, whether trying to get a colleague on board or a client to say 'yes' or someone in our personal life to agree or support what we are going after," he said. Berger provided three examples of how to make small changes in the words we use to get the results we want with the "Small Business Playbook" audience. One easy change to make is based on research conducted years ago among pre-school children, which Berger says applies equally to adults. Researchers wanted to know how to increase influence over others and get others to support initiatives, and used classroom cleanup duties as the laboratory. What they found was that when children were asked to "help" rather than to be "helpers," they were less likely to willingly follow through on the task. That "infinitesimal difference in letters," according to Berger, just adding the "er" to the end of the word, made one-third of children more likely to say yes. That research was later corroborated among adults who were either asked to "vote" or be a "voter." "A small one-letter difference," according to Berger, "led to a 12% increase in willingness to turn out." He explained that what the research reveals is that people are more likely to respond to an identity they desire to be known for rather than an action they are asked to take. "We all know we should take certain actions ... but we are busy. What we care a lot more about is holding desired identities. We all want to see ourselves as smart, engaged citizens," he said. When actions become a way to claim a desired identity, through a shift from action language to identity language, we are more likely to follow through, he said. While doing work for a large consumer electronics firm analyzing social media language and what got attention in a world where competition for attention is intense across cold calls, emails and social, Berger says research showed that use of "you, you'll, your" — all the second-person pronouns — can make a big difference. "It acts like a stop sign," he said. "Imagine reading the headline of an email '5 tips to save money,' but if it says '5 tips to save money,' you pay more attention," he said. It doesn't matter whether you are trying to reach one person or many, he said. "It acts like a stop sign to dial in and pay attention and it gets more engagement," he added. Berger said there is one important caveat. In some situations, the use of the second-person pronouns can become accusatory and work against the intended goal. Personal life is one example, he said. "Did you make dinner? Did you walk the dog?" In Berger's analysis, this is not the way to frame such questions, as they will lead the person being asked to think (if not also say) "Why is it my job?" And there is a parallel in the office world, the difference between "Did you do that report?" and "Did that report get taken care of?" "You can suggest blame in ways you don't intend," he said. "You need to be careful of accusatory use of it." Berger said it also doesn't work in the context of customer support pages. "Yes, 'you' is good at getting attention, but for the customer support page, where you already have given your attention, the benefit is not there," he said. In fact, Berger says that this is one more use case that can lead people to think they are being blamed. Research on the way financial advisors discuss investments with clients found that the more certain an advisor is in the language they use, the more likely a client is to take their recommendations and stay in business with them. An advisor who is 95% sure a stock will go up is preferred to an advisor who is 65% sure, even if both are proven correct with their recommendations in the end. This may seem obvious: more certain language, words that clearly suggest something particular will happen, are what others want to hear. But according to Berger, the issue is that this approach is in direct contrast to how most of us speak. When we inevitably use "probably" and "potentially," we undermine our impact on listeners, Berger said. "Ditch the hedges," he said. "We hedge because it's convenient, filling conversational space. What we need to do is pause instead. Pausing can be beneficial. It shows people we are thinking about what they might have asked," he added. "People talk about being overconfident, but there is also the danger of being under-confident." Berger says it can be instructive, if painful, to record yourself and listen to how often you hedge, and also how often you use filler words like "err" and "like." "I've done it before with myself and it's cringeworthy," Berger said, but he added it is important to understand the difference between a practiced pause that shows you are paying attention and thinking, and a filler word that leads a listener to doubt your certainty and knowledge. This doesn't mean it's never a good idea to communicate uncertainty. As in the financial advisor example, there are times when a range of variables exists that could influence outcomes. But Berger said there are good ways to say "Hey, I am not sure." "I think this is a great course of action, but for this to work, these three things need to happen. I'm confident, but I can't predict the future." Or as Berger put it, "Be clear about where the uncertainty is and where it isn't."
