US factory orders slump in April
WASHINGTON, June 3 (Reuters) - New orders for U.S.-manufactured goods dropped sharply in April and business spending on equipment appeared to have lost momentum at the start of the second quarter as the boost from front-loading of purchases ahead of tariffs faded.
Factory orders fell 3.7% after an unrevised 3.4% jump in March, the Commerce Department's Census Bureau said on Tuesday. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast factory orders declining 3.1%. They rose 2.0% on a year-on-year basis in April.
Manufacturing, which accounts for 10.2% of the economy, has been pressured by President Donald Trump's aggressive tariffs.
An Institute for Supply Management survey on Monday showed manufacturing contracted for a third straight month in May and suppliers took the longest time in nearly three years to deliver inputs to factories.
Trump sees the tariffs as a tool to raise revenue to offset his promised tax cuts and to revive a long-declining industrial base, a feat that economists argued was impossible in the short term because of labor shortages and other structural issues.
Commercial aircraft orders plunged 51.5% in April. Orders for motor vehicles, parts and trailers dropped 0.7%, helping to depress transportation equipment orders by 17.1%. Orders for computers and electronic products gained 1.0%, while those for electrical equipment, appliances and components slipped 0.3%.
Machinery orders rose 0.6%. Excluding transportation, orders fell 0.5%, matching March's decline.
The government also reported that orders for non-defense capital goods excluding aircraft, which are seen as a measure of business spending plans on equipment, decreased 1.5% in April rather than 1.3% as estimated last month.
Shipments of these so-called core capital goods fell by an unrevised 0.1%. Business spending on equipment rebounded sharply in the first quarter, largely driven by front-running of information processing equipment ahead of tariffs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
21 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Nato set to approve new military purchases as part of a defence spending hike
The 'capability targets' lay out goals for each of the 32 nations to purchase priority equipment such as air defence systems, long-range missiles, artillery, ammunition, drones and 'strategic enablers' such as air-to-air refuelling, heavy air transport and logistics. Each nation's plan is classified, so details are scarce. 'Today we decide on the capability targets. From there, we will assess the gaps we have, not only to be able to defend ourselves today, but also three, five, seven years from now,' Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte said. 'All these investments have to be financed,' he told reporters before chairing the meeting at Nato's Brussels headquarters. US President Donald Trump and his Nato counterparts will meet on June 24-25 to agree to new defence investment goals. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth said that 'to be an alliance, you've got to be more than flags. You got to be more than conferences. You need to keep combat ready capabilities'. Spurred on by their own security concerns, European allies and Canada have already been ramping up military spending, including arms and ammunition purchases, since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. At the same time, some allies balk at US demands to invest 5% of their gross domestic product in defence – 3.5% on core military spending and 1.5% on the roads, bridges, airfields and sea ports needed to deploy armies more quickly – when they have already struggled to grow their budgets to 2% of GDP. The new targets are assigned by Nato based on a blueprint agreed upon in 2023 – the military organisation's biggest planning shake-up since the Cold War — to defend its territory from an attack by Russia or another major adversary. Under those plans, Nato would aim to have up to 300,000 troops ready to move to its eastern flank within 30 days, although experts suggest the allies would struggle to muster those kinds of numbers. The member countries are assigned roles in defending Nato territory across three major zones – the high north and Atlantic area, a zone north of the Alps, and another in southern Europe. Nato planners believe that the targets must be met within five to 10 years, given the speed at which Russia is building its armed forces now, and which would accelerate were any peace agreement reached to end its war on Ukraine. Some fear Russia might be ready to strike at a Nato country even sooner, especially if Western sanctions are eased and Europe has not prepared. 'Are we going to gather here again and say 'OK, we failed a bit', and then maybe we start learning Russian?' Lithuanian Defence Minister Dovile Sakaliene said. Swedish Defence Minister Pal Jonson also warned that while Russia is bogged down in Ukraine right now, things could quickly change. 'We also know after an armistice or a peace agreement, of course, Russia is going to allocate more forces closer to our vicinity. Therefore, it's extremely important that the alliance use these couple of years now when Russia is still limited by its force posture in and around Ukraine,' Mr Jonson said. If the targets are respected, the member countries will need to spend at least 3% of GDP on defence. Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans said his country calculates in the medium term that 'we should spend 3.5% at least on defence, which in the Netherlands means an additional 16 to 19 billion euro (£13-16 billion) addition to our current budget.' The Netherlands is likely to buy more tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and long-range missile systems, including US-made Patriots that can target aircraft, cruise missiles and shorter-range ballistic missiles.
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Biden probe to focus on alleged use of autopen
The Trump administration has launched an investigation into former President Joe Biden 's actions, alleging his aides concealed his 'cognitive decline' and questioning who was truly running the country during his presidency. The investigation will examine Biden's executive actions and the alleged use of an 'autopen' to sign official documents, for which no evidence has yet been presented. Biden has responded to the claims as 'ridiculous' and 'false,' saying that he made all the decisions regarding pardons, executive orders, and legislation during his presidency. White House counsel David Warrington will lead the investigation, with Attorney General Pam Bondi consulting. Democrats, including Congressman Dan Goldman, have criticized the investigation as a distraction from President Donald Trump's controversies.
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Elizabeth Warren claims Musk enriched himself to the tune of $100B during his time in the White House
Senator Elizabeth Warren has accused Elon Musk of using his role in the Donald Trump administration to increase his net worth by $100 billion, issuing a report that cites more than 100 instances in which he might have benefited financially from his position. The world's richest man's 130-day tenure as a special government employee came to an end on Friday, drawing a line under a chaotic four months in which he led DOGE in its mission to cut excess spending, waste, and fraud and oversaw the mass firing of tens of thousands of federal employees. Senator Warren has greeted his departure from the political scene with the publication of a new report alleging large-scale profiteering during his time in Washington, entitled: Special Interests Over the Public Interest: Elon Musk's 130 Days in the Trump Administration. 'Before Trump took office, Musk's companies faced at least $2.37bn in potential liability from pending agency enforcement actions,' her report states. 'Now many of those enforcement actions have stalled or been dismissed.' She continues: 'Musk's companies have received or are being considered for large contracts with the federal government, with foreign governments, and with other private sector companies. 'Musk and individuals acting on his behalf have been involved in dozens of questionable actions that raise questions about corruption, ethics, and conflicts of interest.' Once an enthusiastic Trump supporter who poured $288m into the Republican's presidential campaign last year, Musk has since cut a disgruntled and beleaguered figure, angrily attacking the president's 'big beautiful bill' as a 'disgusting abomination' as it makes its way through the Senate, winning the support of conservative fiscal hawks in the process. Warren makes clear that not all of the instances she goes on to cite constitute lawbreaking but argues that Musk 'violated norms at an astonishing pace' and, in some cases, 'engaged in action that may have violated the statutory prohibition regarding federal employees' participation in particular matters in which a government official has a financial interest.' Her report lists 130 alleged offences in total, one for every day he served, some of which occurred in plain sight, notably Trump using the White House lawn as a showroom forecourt from which to promote Musk's Tesla electric vehicle range and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick advising Fox News viewers to invest in Tesla stock during an interview with Jesse Watters. Warren also gives behind the scenes examples of conduct she argues might have benefited the billionaire, including his recommending changes at Nasa to suit SpaceX and alleged attempts to convince federal agencies to use his Starlink satellite technology, a rejection of which has been mooted as one of the central reasons for Musk's relationship with Trump beginning to disintegrate.
