Economists warn tariffs may affect jobs
According to the latest Employment Situation Summary, issued by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics on May 2nd, for total nonfarm payroll employment, 177,00 jobs were added in April. This was down slightly from 185,000 jobs added in March, while the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 4.2 percent.
Things seem to be looking good, except for the fact that even pre-tariffs, the U.S. GDP shrunk for the first time in three years (decreasing at an annual rate of 0.3 percent) from January to March.5 jobs hiring right now
However, it wasn't until April 2nd that President Trump announced a minimum 10 percent tariff on all U.S. imports, effective from April 5th, with higher tariffs on imports from 57 countries, ranging from 11% to 50%.
Referring to the latest Employment Situation Summary, Appcast economist Andrew Flowers asked in a recent video: 'Is this the last 'before' jobs report?'
He highlights that healthcare added 50,000 jobs, leisure and hospitality added 24,000 jobs, while professional and business services added 17,000 jobs.
Discussing the 'before', Flowers says a job gain of 29,000 in transportation and warehousing jobs in April was indicative of consumers and businesses frontloading their purchases of foreign goods.
As a consumer, you've probably already been targeted by online price reduction ads on items before retail prices are raised due to tariffs. This has caused influxes of sales and increased the need for trucking and warehousing staff. But how sustainable is this rise?
He also points to federal workforce reductions of 9,000 last month, which was expected.
Reflecting on the April jobs report, Flowers' outlook on Q2 is mixed. 'It's showing strength, but the tariffs are a major shock. We've seen huge declines in transoceanic shipments. There's anecdotal evidence from businesses that inventories are being depleted as consumers and businesses are preparing for the tariff impacts that could really materialize in the coming weeks and months.'
Meanwhile, Glassdoor's lead economist Daniel Zhao agrees that this report might be the benchmark we'll measure tariff impacts against, but May might be too soon.
In a lengthy LinkedIn post, he highlighted much of the same figures as Andrew Flowers did, but also shared that manufacturing employment fell by 1,000 in April.
Though a modest decline and early days, it may disappoint voters who took a punt on the president's campaign promises to revive American manufacturing.
Zhao stresses that the true impact of the tariffs won't show up quickly. 'Keep in mind that the job market can be a lagging indicator for the overall economy as it takes time for businesses to hire and fire workers at a scale that shows up in the national economic data.''Tariff impacts will also be staggered as many employers took anticipatory measures to build up inventories in advance and some sectors are more exposed than others. The back half of the year is really where the full impact of tariffs are likely to become clear. And of course, this all depends on what tariffs look like over the next few months as tariff policy feels like it's changing on a near-daily basis.'
This means many companies and organizations are sitting tight, and are avoiding making any big decisions. Spooked by unpredictability, many companies have paused or canceled hiring until the economy is on clearer footing.
It's already a tough job market out there, as anyone hunting will know, and this uncertainty doesn't help matters.
Concurrently, the federal firing freeze will last until July 15th at least, plus there's the fact that over 121,000 federal employees were laid off in the first quarter of 2025, not including those who took voluntary buyouts.Competition is fierce, and job opportunities are fewer and fewer. Overall job postings are down 7.4% year-over-year as of April 2025, according to Aura Intelligence.Plus, real-time data from KPMG shows that job postings are down in major states such as California, New York, and Massachusetts, and with especially notable declines in Washington, DC, Virginia, and Maryland due to federal government cuts.
It hasn't been this difficult to job hunt in a very long time. Additionally, those who are already employed but seeking a new opportunity may be burdened by extra workloads due to hiring freezes, and may be too burnt out to job hunt in the evenings and weekends. If you're navigating this challenging job market, you can stay informed about new opportunities as they become available on The Hill's Job Board.
Updated daily with a range of roles in policy, communications, and related fields, it's an extremely valuable resource. Bookmark the link below, and visit regularly to stay up to date.
Ready to find a new role? Browse thousands of jobs on The Hill Job Board
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
3 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Harvard and the Trump administration are nearing a settlement including a $500 million payment
WASHINGTON (AP) — Harvard University and the Trump administration are getting close to an agreement that would require the Ivy League university to pay $500 million to regain access to federal funding and to end investigations, according to a person familiar with the matter. The framework is still being sorted out with significant gaps to close, but both sides have agreed on the financial figure and a settlement could be finalized in coming weeks, according to the person who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The agreement would end a monthslong battle that has tested the boundaries of the government's authority over America's universities. What began as an investigation into campus antisemitism escalated into an all-out feud as the Trump administration slashed more than $2.6 billion in research funding, ended federal contracts and attempted to block Harvard from hosting international students. The university responded with a pair of lawsuits alleging illegal retaliation by the administration after Harvard rejected a set of demands that campus leaders viewed as a threat to academic freedom. Details of the proposed framework were first reported by The New York Times. A $500 million payment would be the largest sum yet as the administration pushes for financial penalties in its settlements with elite universities. Columbia University agreed to pay the government $200 million as part of an agreement restoring access to federal funding, while Brown University separately agreed to pay $50 million to Rhode Island workforce development organizations. Details have not been finalized on where Harvard's potential payment would go, the person said. The Republican president has been pushing to reform prestigious universities that he decries as bastions of liberal ideology. His administration has cut funding to several Ivy League schools while pressing demands in line with his political campaign. None has been targeted as frequently or as heavily as Harvard, the richest U.S. university with an endowment valued at $53 billion. More than a dozen Democrats in Congress who attended Harvard cautioned against a settlement on Aug. 1, warning the university it may warrant 'rigorous Congressional oversight and inquiry.' Capitulating to political demands, they said, would set a dangerous precedent across all of higher education.
Forbes
4 minutes ago
- Forbes
Why A New College Loan Rule Can't Show The Real Value Of Your Degree
A little-known provision in President Trump's recently signed One Big Beautiful Bill Act could reshape who gets to borrow for college — and which degrees survive. While headlines focus on $10.5 billion to shore up Pell Grants and a new Workforce Pell program, the law quietly bars federal loans for programs whose graduates don't meet minimum earnings thresholds. The bill, signed into law on July 3, prohibits college students from accessing federal student loans for enrolling in undergraduate, graduate, and graduate certificate programs that do not meet an earnings threshold. To qualify for loans, undergraduate programs must show that their graduates' median earnings exceed those of working adults aged 24-35 in the state with a high school diploma. Likewise, graduate degree and certificate programs must demonstrate that their graduates' median earnings are higher than those of bachelor's degree holders in the same state. Although it may seem like a small detail, the new accountability rule impacts almost every higher education institution, including for-profit schools. Nearly 6,000 institutions provide federal loans, and each year, 30% to 40% of undergraduates borrow from the federal government. This involves about 7 million students. Splitting credentials into those with perceived economic value and those without oversimplifies a more complex issue: many factors influence students' choices of college majors. There are advantages and disadvantages to consider. Potential Benefits On one hand, students should understand that some degrees may not provide a good return on investment. Traditionally, many have believed that attending college is essential to the American Dream, and that any degree will do. However, employment and labor market data show this isn't always the case. The new accountability requirements may act as a behavioral nudge that encourages students to avoid programs that don't meet their earning expectations. This could be good for students who might unwittingly enroll in a program without understanding the labor market implications of their choice. At the very least, the new earnings requirements hold colleges accountable for their claims about students' economic prospects after they graduate with degrees in hand. Potential Downsides However, there are disadvantages to simplifying complex earning differences into a binary distinction. Doing so masks key factors influencing earnings in various markets that students and their families need to understand to improve their chances of a positive return on investment. Five Factors Beyond the Threshold While the new requirement could help some students avoid programs with poor returns, it also reduces the value of a degree to a single number—median earnings. But the economic value of a degree depends on much more than a threshold. Here are five factors that can dramatically influence a graduate's earnings. There is a huge variation in earnings by major. Entry-level college graduates with Science, Technology, Mathematics, and Engineering majors, such as computer science and engineering, generally lead to higher salaries — often higher than $75,000 a year — while humanities and liberal arts degrees like English and psychology fall more in the $40,000-$50,000 range, according to Indeed. The difference between the lowest- and highest-paying majors— early childhood and petroleum engineering — is $3.4 million over a lifetime, according to an analysis by the Center for Education and the Workforce at Georgetown University. Earnings also vary by industry. People who start in finance or technology generally make more than those in education or social services. The same degree can lead to different wages depending on the industry. For example, a computer systems analyst in the aerospace industry earns a median yearly salary of $133,510, while the same role at a university earns $93,310, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Graduates attending our nation's most selective colleges tend to earn more. Ivy League schools provide a higher return on investment than less selective colleges over 10 years, according to CEW. However, selective schools also have both high- and low-paying majors. A graduate with a STEM degree from a regional college might earn more than a graduate with a liberal arts degree from a selective school. Some of the earnings differences are probably due to graduates from selective schools coming from high-income backgrounds. Still, students from low-income backgrounds who attend selective colleges are more likely to become high earners. Earnings from a degree can vary based on who you are. Black and Latine graduates tend to earn less than their white and Asian peers, even with the same degree, same GPA, and institutions with the same selectivity, according to the CEW. Women earn less than men in nearly every major. Graduates from high-income families earn more than their low-income peers, even with the same major. This could be associated with differences in access to social and professional networks. The geographic location where college graduates work can influence earnings. Those who work in major metropolitan areas and on the coasts typically earn more than those who work in rural areas to offset the cost of living. For example, starting salaries for engineering graduates in the mid-Atlantic region are estimated at around $80,000-$82,000, but that drops to $70,000-$74,000 for those starting in the Plains, according to an analysis by Bankrate. Choosing what to study in college is one of the biggest investments you'll ever make. To improve your chances of a strong return, you need to look beyond an earnings threshold. Consider how your major performs across industries, how selective your school is, the quality of its internships and networks, and what alumni — especially those who share your racial background and gender — are earning. The better you understand these factors before you commit, the more likely you are to graduate with a degree that truly pays off.
Business Insider
4 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Why the economy could be headed for an inflation roller coaster ride
If you're tired of seeing inflation in the headlines, you're probably not going to get much relief soon. That's according to Liz Ann Sonders, the chief investment strategist at Charles Schwab, who thinks that inflation is going to be on a roller coaster ride going forward as the economy digests the impacts of President Donald Trump's tariffs. Economists have warned that tariffs could be inflationary, but so far the effect on prices has been relatively mild. Members of Trump's administration have said tariffs could cause a "one-time" price increase as companies make that transition. However, Sonders said that's unlikely, pointing to how the president's guidance around tariffs has whipsawed in recent months. "The problem is, there is no one time as it relates to the implementation of tariffs. It has been rifle-shot on, off, delays, tariffs being used as a tool beyond just raising revenues or improving the trade deficit. So I think we've got the rolling nature of this," Sonders said, speaking to Bloomberg on Wednesday. Sonders pointed to her previous view that the economy had been through a rolling recession over the last few years, referring to the idea that a downturn doesn't strike all at once, but rather there are "pockets" that crop up at different times. "I think that's manifesting itself in the inflation data too, the rolling nature of it, where you see pockets of impact on the upside, you maybe get some pockets of offset on the downside as opposed to anything that is one-time in nature," she added. Trump has often pushed hard on tariff policies before softening his tone. The president announced his " Liberation Day" tariffs in early April, before delaying most of the duties by 90 days and then by another month as he worked to secure trade agreements with other nations. The deadline for higher tariffs on China has also been extended for 90 days. The pace of inflation has fluctuated so far in 2025. Price growth peaked at the start of the year at around 3%, before declining and rising again in the months following April, when Trump first introduced his sweeping array of tariffs.
