South Korea July consumer inflation +2.1% y/y, as expected
On a monthly basis, the consumer price index rose 0.2%, the fastest in four months, after no change in the previous month.
The numbers were roughly in line with median forecasts of 2.13% and 0.22% tipped in a Reuters poll of economists.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
5 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The one thing Donald Trump isn't saying about tariffs
Donald Trump's words and actions rarely align perfectly. If you watch carefully, what he doesn't say can be just as telling as what he does. 'Starting on day one, we will end inflation and make America affordable again, to bring down the prices of all goods,' he told the nation ahead of his re-election. The US president declared on 2 April would 'forever be remembered as the day American industry was reborn', only to pause tariffs a week later. He promised peace in Ukraine on day one of his presidency, only to later clarify this was 'said in jest'; and has claimed very few people can beat him at golf, only for footage from Scotland to raise questions over just how honest that round might be. As a real estate mogul, reality TV star and political campaigner, Trump learned to bend narrative to his will, even if it meant straying from reality. As president, this often leaves a gap between what he says and what he does. In many cases, the administration's actions are more important to follow than the firehose of words. If you were, say, a US business buying coffee from Brazil, you might have rushed to import it last week after Trump insisted 1 August was the cast-iron deadline for new tariffs. 'It stands strong, and will not be extended,' he wrote on Wednesday – hours before signing an executive order that said new steep tariffs on the country would come into force on 8 August, after all. And if you're a US consumer, you might reasonably ask how inflation can be 'dead', as the White House has claimed, if you're still shelling out more on groceries each month. The president has an awful lot to say about tariffs. They will, he argues, raise 'trillions' of dollars for the US federal government; eliminate trade deficits with other countries; and even punish Brazil for putting his ally, the former president Jair Bolsonaro, on trial for allegedly seeking to seize power after losing the 2022 presidential election. The list goes on. But what about what the president doesn't say? Trump was re-elected last November after repeatedly pledging to rapidly bring down prices for Americans. This assurance formed a central pillar of his election campaign – a regular refrain in rallies, interviews and debates – as millions found it harder to make ends meet after years of inflation. Every policy comes at a cost. Every tax must be paid by someone, somewhere. For consumers, The Budget Lab at Yale estimates the short-term price impact of Trump's tariff changes is equivalent to an average per household income loss of $2,400. What Trump doesn't really talk about the impact of his aggressive tariff agenda on US is prices. One of the few times he has acknowledged it might actually exacerbate inflation led to a bizarre tangent about dolls back in May. Acknowledging that tariffs might cause price rises, Trump suggested American children might have to settle for having 'two dolls instead of 30 dolls'. Back then, Joe Biden was still to blame for any signs of strife in the economy, according to Trump. Now, he argues almost daily Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell is responsible. The biggest indication yet that the US economy is creaking on Trump's watch came on Friday, when official data revealed the labor market had stalled this summer. He unceremoniously fired the veteran official in charge of the statistics – and alleged, without evidence, that the numbers had been rigged. With higher US tariffs now in place on a string of countries, the president and his administration will inevitably say a lot about the benefits of his economic strategy. They are already trying to stifle evidence of drawbacks. They might even raise the prospect of a handout – pitched as a sign of this policy's success, rather than a concession that many Americans are still hard up. But if you're running a small business reliant on trade, or walking into the grocery store on a budget, reality supersedes rhetoric. Words don't pay the bills.
Glasgow Times
9 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Registrations of new cars down by 5% in July, figures suggest
Approximately 140,000 new cars were registered in July, compared with 147,517 during the same month in 2024. Battery electric vehicles (Bevs) held a 21% share of the new car market last month. The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), which released the preliminary figures, slightly upgraded its forecast for full-year new car registrations, to 1.9 million. Registrations in 2024 reached 1.95 million. Bevs are forecast to hold a full-year market share of 23.8%. At least 28% of new cars sold by each manufacturer in the UK this year are required to be zero emission – which generally means pure electric – under the Government's zero emission vehicle mandate. The first electric car models eligible for new Government grants were announced on Tuesday. Drivers will be able to save £1,500 with the purchase of new Citroen e-C3, e-C4, e-C5 and e-Berlingo cars. These are the first models approved under the new £650 million electric car grant. The scheme will enable motorists purchasing a new electric car to save either £1,500 or £3,750, depending on the vehicle's sustainability. Ian Plummer, commercial director at online vehicle marketplace Auto Trader, said the grant has provided a 'much-needed boost' for consumer interest in new electric cars, with EV consideration up 10 percentage points on Auto Trader. But the unveiling of the initiative on July 14 explains why it was a 'slow' month for sales as buyers 'wait to see just which models will get what level of grant'. He added that discounts – either through the grant or by brands cutting prices themselves – will 'trickle through to EV sales in the coming months'. Final figures for July's new car registrations will be published at 9am.
Telegraph
10 minutes ago
- Telegraph
If you come to Britain and can't support yourself, you must leave
For the 25 years up to 1997, according to the Centre for Policy Studies, net migration was 68,000. In the 25 years that followed, however, that figure shot up to nearly 6 million. Our immigration system is out of control. It isn't just about the number of people who've come here, unsustainable though that is. Our migration system has also been highly un-selective. The vast majority of those who've arrived in the last few years haven't come to work, and didn't need to be earning a particular salary – or often anything at all – to get their visa. Even those who did come here to work are often employed in low-paid jobs, and won't be paying enough in tax to account for the pressure that they put on public services, or the costs that they'll incur later in life. According to the researcher Karl Williams, 72 per cent of those who came as 'skilled workers' in 2022-23 earned below the UK average salary, with 54 percent likely earning less than half of that average. But after just five years here, most of these people will qualify for Indefinite Leave to Remain, or ILR. With ILR, migrants can access welfare, social housing, and free healthcare, as well as stay permanently in the UK and apply for citizenship. On average, the Government spends £34,000 looking after somebody in the last year of their life. Only a small minority of recent migrants will pay enough in tax to cover those costs over the entire time that they're here – let alone to cover the cost of the benefits and services that they and their family will use over their lifetimes. It's going to cost us hundreds of billions of pounds. We simply can't afford it. But it can be fixed. Earlier this year, the Conservatives proposed a plan to reform our immigration system, including by introducing a hard cap on visas and stopping ILR from entitling people to state support. We also proposed extending the qualifying period from five years to ten. This wouldn't just mean that it takes longer for migrants to be eligible for ILR status. It would also give us an opportunity to review the visas of those who are already here. Those who come to Britain from abroad must be able to support themselves, and must be earning enough to contribute more in tax than they will cost over their lifetime. If they can't, their visa must not be renewed, and they must leave. The Government voted against that plan, but they've committed to a consultation on ILR in the autumn. We must use that opportunity to push them not just to extend the qualifying period for ILR, including for those who are already here, but also to refuse to reissue visas to those who won't end up contributing enough. The era of mass migration has been a disaster. People can see it in their rising rents, in the pressure on their public services, and in their increasingly divided communities. Most disgracefully of all, the British people have voted to avert that disaster, time and time again. Government after government has failed to heed their warning. It's a complete scandal, and it's probably the single biggest reason why trust in our political system is in such short supply. Rebuilding that trust means building a migration system that's limited and selective – but it also means undoing the harm that has already been done. We can still avert the coming disaster around ILR, and we must.
