Stagflationary Data Puts Pressure on Bitcoin, Stocks
What one hour ago was looking like another positive day in markets has turned decidedly negative as the latest economic data fueled growing stagflation fears.
First up was ADP jobs numbers for April. Coming two days ahead of the government's own employment data for April, the ADP report showed just 62,000 private sector jobs created this month, well shy of estimates for 108,000 and March's 147,000. It was the weakest print since July 2024.
Next was the government's first estimate of first quarter GDP growth, which came in at negative 0.3% against estimates for positive 0.2%. While the quarter ended in March, economic actors — fully aware of coming tariffs — front-loaded imports early in the year. Going back to Econ 101, rising imports (absent a corresponding gain in exports) are a drag on GDP growth.
Indeed, the export-import imbalance cut GDP growth by nearly 5% in the first quarter. Also at work was the Trump administration's DOGE efforts, with government spending a drag on GDP for the first time since 2022.
Turning to inflation, the Core PCE price index embedded within the GDP report rose 3.5% versus estimates for a gain of just 3.1%.
It's all adding up to a big drop in U.S. stocks, with the Nasdaq lower 2% and S&P 500 by 1.5%. That's hitting bitcoin (BTC), which has slipped about 1% alongside to $94,300.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Affirms Prior Delaware District Court Rulings in Favor of Acadia in NUPLAZID® (pimavanserin) Composition of Matter Patent
- Composition of matter patent affirmed, provides protection into 2030 - Builds on recent ruling in favor of Acadia for formulation patent expiring in 2038 SAN DIEGO, June 09, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Nasdaq: ACAD) today announced that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware in December 2023 confirming validity of the NUPLAZID® (pimavanserin) '740 composition of matter patent. The affirmance came in Acadia's litigation against MSN Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. and MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. In its affirmance, the Appeals Court applied the precedent established in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited, holding that "a first filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim cannot be invalidated by a later-filed, later-issued, earlier-expiring reference claim having a common priority date." "We are gratified that the U.S. Federal Appeals Court has affirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of our composition of matter patent for NUPLAZID, securing protection into 2030 for this patent, and beyond based on the recent favorable ruling for our formulation patent providing patent protection for NUPLAZID 34 mg capsule formulation into 2038," said Catherine Owen Adams, Chief Executive Officer. "These decisions reinforce our commitment to safeguarding the intellectual property that underpins our innovations in addressing serious, unmet medical needs." This follows the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware ruling in favor of Acadia regarding its '721 formulation patent for NUPLAZID which ruled in favor of Acadia on both infringement and validity arguments in its formulation patent litigation against Aurobindo Pharma Limited and other ANDA (Abbreviated New Drug Application) filers. About Acadia Pharmaceuticals Acadia is advancing breakthroughs in neuroscience to elevate life. Since our founding we have been working at the forefront of healthcare to bring vital solutions to people who need them most. We developed and commercialized the first and only FDA-approved drug to treat hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson's disease psychosis and the first and only approved drug in the United States and Canada for the treatment of Rett syndrome. Our clinical-stage development efforts are focused on Prader-Willi syndrome, Alzheimer's disease psychosis and multiple other programs targeting neuroscience and neuro-rare diseases. For more information, visit us at and follow us on LinkedIn and X. Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include all statements other than statements of historical fact and can be identified by terms such as "may," "will," "should," "could," "would," "expects," "plans," "anticipates," "believes," "estimates," "projects," "predicts," "potential," "continue" and similar expressions (including the negative thereof) intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements contained in this press release, include, but are not limited to, statements about: (i) the impact of the court ruling on our business and our ability to defend ourselves in the future; (ii) the continued patent protection for NUPLAZID; and (iii) the anticipated timing for termination of such protections. Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied by our forward-looking statements. Such risks, uncertainties and other factors include, but are not limited to: our ability to maintain, protect and enhance our intellectual property; the outcome of other existing and potential future lawsuits challenging our intellectual property; and our ability to continue to stay in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Given the risks and uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. For a discussion of these and other risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to differ, please refer to our annual report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 as well as our subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time. The forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of the date hereof, and we undertake no obligation to update them after this date, except as required by law. View source version on Contacts Investor Contacts: Acadia Pharmaceuticals Kildani(858) 261-2872ir@ Acadia Pharmaceuticals Tieszen(858) 261-2950ir@ Media Contact: Acadia Pharmaceuticals Kazenelson(818) 395-3043media@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Gizmodo
16 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Massive Tech Layoffs May Be the Fault of a 2017 Trump Tax Cut
The good times in Silicon Valley are over—at least as far as the current generation of coders is concerned. The software industry is shrinking and, since 2023, the tech industry has been hemorrhaging jobs at an astounding rate. Workers who would've been secure several years ago are now out on their asses. While the reasons for this are diverse (AI is often discussed as a potential culprit and the overall economy has had its ups and downs over the past several years), one potential driver could also be the tax cuts that Trump passed in 2017. It turns out that a little-known provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 altered a longstanding loophole, known as Section 174, that allowed the tech industry to offload the cost of its research and development operations onto the federal government. Prior to the TCJA, tech companies could deduct 100 percent of the costs of R&D, allowing tech businesses the freedom to commit significant resources towards innovation. Bloomberg reports that, as Congress sought to find a way to offset the cost of giving big tax cuts to billionaires, one place where they discovered fat to trim was the tech industry's R&D funding. 2017's bill shifted the deduction from a full write-off to funding that would have to be parsed out over a period of several years. The provision that pared back the funding did not kick in until 2022, however. Not long after it went into effect, the tech industry began shedding jobs like nobody's business. Indeed, 2023 and 2024 were historically bad years for the tech industry, with major companies like Meta, Amazon, and Google booting workers by the thousands. Quartz took a deeper look at the ties between this policy shift and the tech industry's troubles and now speculates that there is a positive correlation: …the delayed change to a decades-old tax provision — buried deep in the 2017 tax law — has contributed to the loss of hundreds of thousands of high-paying, white-collar jobs. That's the picture that emerges from a review of corporate filings, public financial data, analysis of timelines, and interviews with industry insiders. One accountant, working in-house at a tech company, described it as a 'niche issue with broad impact,' echoing sentiments from venture capital investors also interviewed for this article. Some spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive political matters. Quartz also notes that the policy change would have translated into a loss of income for a variety of positions: The tax benefits of salaries for engineers, product and project managers, data scientists, and even some user experience and marketing staff — all of which had previously reduced taxable income in year one — now had to be spread out over five- or 15-year periods. The reality of the government's subsidization of Silicon Valley is particularly ironic given the rabid anti-government sentiment currently circulating in the industry. People like Marc Andreessen would have you believe that tech's R&D can be funded through private money alone, despite no reputable track record of it happening. Elon Musk's DOGE, meanwhile, recently attacked the very parts of the government that have been responsible for helping companies like his own (Tesla) flourish. It's yet another sign that America's billionaires are so greed-addled that they're willing to shoot a gift horse in the mouth and call it victory. Not everybody in the tech industry is an idiot, however. There is currently a concerted effort to reestablish the government's R&D subsidy. The American Innovation and R&D Competitiveness Act, which was introduced by a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, would restore the full flow of federal dollars for tech's development needs. Last month, representatives from major tech firms reportedly signaled to the Trump administration that they might pull back from previous pledges of U.S. investment if the full tax subsidy didn't return.
Politico
17 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump may have to choose: Making trade deals or keeping his car tariffs
President Donald Trump is telling domestic audiences he won't cut his 25 percent tariffs on foreign cars as part of any trade deals he negotiates. But other countries — who collectively send millions of vehicles to the U.S. each year — haven't gotten that message. Trading partners like the EU, Japan and South Korea are laboring under the impression that the auto tariffs, which Trump imposed in April, are still on the table, according to two people familiar with the talks between Trump officials and those countries, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. If Trump is really unwilling to lower or eliminate his tariffs on foreign cars, it could prove to be a major hurdle to securing meaningful trade deals with some of the country's top trading partners. Japan, South Korea and Germany sold more than $121 billion in cars and car parts in the U.S. in 2024. The White House did not answer when asked if auto tariffs were on the table for negotiations and instead reiterated the goal of the tariffs. 'No president has taken a greater interest in reviving America's once-dominant auto industry than President Trump, and the auto industry is a key focus of the Trump administration's trade and economic policies,' said Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson. 'Discussions with our major trading partners continue, and the Trump administration continues to seek better trade deals for American industries and workers.' A decision to lift the tariffs for more countries, particularly those whose companies compete most fiercely with American carmakers, risks alienating a powerful manufacturing bloc and undercutting a central tenet of Trump's trade agenda — forcing companies to build more products in the U.S. The Trump administration has assured American automakers that when it comes to auto tariffs being used as a bargaining chip, they have 'nothing to worry about,' according to a person familiar with discussions between the administration and Detroit's 'Big Three' auto companies, granted anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the talks. Trump has said a deal to lower the tariff on a small number of British cars, announced last month, was an exception. 'I won't do that deal with cars' for other countries, Trump said when announcing the terms of negotiation with the U.K. on May 8. The British auto brand Rolls-Royce is 'a very special car and it's a very limited number too. It's not one of the monster car companies that makes millions of cars,' he noted. Even that agreement, which lowered the tariff on 100,000 cars, less than 1 percent of total U.S. annual car sales, drew a sharp rebuke from U.S. automakers. 'This hurts American automakers, suppliers, and auto workers,' the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, said at the time, saying they hoped it 'does not set a precedent for future negotiations with Asian and European competitors.' The tension between the two goals — boosting domestic auto production while also negotiating delicate agreements to lower trade barriers — highlights the challenge facing the administration as it races to secure deals with dozens of countries before the president's double-digit 'reciprocal' tariffs are slated to kick back in next month. 'To ease the sting of those tariffs on the auto sectors for Korea and Japan is of course a high priority for them,' said Michael Beeman, a former assistant U.S. trade representative who focused on Japan and South Korea. 'I think for those countries, to be able to declare success from the talks at home, they would expect some sort of consideration.' The auto tariffs have already been a sticking point in negotiations with Japan and South Korea, both of which are invested in maintaining a high level of domestic auto manufacturing. Auto exports from South Korea to the U.S. have exploded over the past 20 years, from $8.7 billion in 2005 to $37.3 billion in 2024, according to data collected by the Census Bureau. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has said publicly that any trade deal with Japan would have to result in lower auto tariffs. Now, as the two countries are on their fifth round of talks, with a planned meeting between Ishiba and Trump at the G7 in Canada in two weekends, both countries are projecting optimism about a deal. 'I think we'll also need to address, at a minimum, the auto [Section] 232 tariffs,' said Wendy Cutler, a former negotiator with the U.S. trade representative's office and the vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said when asked what it would take to get a deal with Japan. Cutler said any deal with Japan or South Korea could have a lower tariff for a certain number of vehicles, similar to the deal with the U.K. Or, 'they could also just be very vague and say that the U.S. notes Japan's concern on the auto tariffs, and both sides agree to negotiate possible lowering of the tariffs in this detailed negotiation to follow,' she said. Trump has already agreed to lower tariffs on automobiles once. In his first trade agreement since imposing a global 10 percent tariff on nearly every U.S. trading partner and potentially higher rates on more than 60 countries, Trump struck an agreement with the U.K. that would allow the country to ship 100,000 vehicles into the country at a 10 percent tariff — lower than the current 25 percent tariff on automobiles and auto parts. The deal drew condemnation from American automakers, who noted that it meant a lower tariff on cars imported from the U.K. than on North American-made cars that include U.S.-made parts. They expressed concern that lowering tariffs with major auto manufacturing countries like Japan, South Korea and Germany would make it more expensive to build cars with parts from North America — creating an unfair playing field and effectively undercutting the administration's effort to boost domestic auto manufacturing. Vehicles made across the integrated North American supply chain still face a 25 percent tariff on non-U.S. made content, even if the vehicle is compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement that Trump negotiated in his first term. The Trump administration has continued to press foreign automakers to move production to the U.S. Last week, Trump met with German automakers, who offered $100 billion in investment in the U.S., according to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Trump — and Republicans on Capitol Hill — say those commitments are a sign that tariffs are working. 'They make BMWs in South Carolina, Volvo. They make Mercedes in Alabama,' Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) pointed out during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing Wednesday. Under Trump, 'They're talking about making the engine now in South Carolina. They're talking about more content in South Carolina.' There has yet to be an uptick in U.S. auto manufacturing, however, a reminder that the investment pledges will take years to fully develop. Auto manufacturing jobs held steady between April and May, though there were 2,240 fewer auto manufacturing jobs in May, compared to 2024, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. While welcoming the announcements, the Trump White House has given no indication the investment pledges will convince the president to lower auto tariffs on foreign countries. 'I mean, unless somebody shows me that there's another kind of a car that's comparable to a Rolls-Royce,' Trump said in May, 'and there aren't too many.'
