
Why Warren Buffett and other top investors may find troubled UnitedHealth appealing right now
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
30 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trade deals don't make Trump's emergency tariffs legal
President Trump has taken an expansive view of his authority to levy tariffs in his second term trade war with nearly every U.S. trading partner. Calling on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Trump administration has imposed tariffs at rates not seen since the 1930s, claiming to address a national emergency caused by fentanyl trafficked across the border and persistent trade deficits. Defending those actions, on Monday, Trump's Justice Department entered an extraordinary letter into the tariff litigation now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which will soon issue a ruling. That letter points to a recurrent theme in Trump's trade approach, a weak legal foundation for his actions papered over with an even more flimsy rationale for preserving it. The letter from Solicitor General D. John Sauer and Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate claims that President Trump's July announcement of 'the largest trade agreement in history' with the European Union, plus other recent deals with Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan and the United Kingdom, proved the tariffs should stay in place. That argument might make for a good press release. But in a court of law, it's entirely beside the point. The central question before the court isn't whether the president's tariffs have produced diplomatic headlines (even though they don't amount to much). It's whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act gives the president the authority to impose them in the first place. Congress passed the act to give presidents a way to address genuine national emergencies, things like hostile foreign actions, espionage or terrorism — not as a catch-all to impose peacetime tariffs whenever it might create negotiating leverage. In fact, the U.S. Court of International Trade, whose decision to vacate Trump's tariffs is now under appeal, held that the government's argument for using tariffs to 'pressure' countries to address the proclaimed emergencies 'does not comfortably meet the statutory definition of 'dealing with' the cited emergency.' It reached that stance because the argument would allow the president 'to take whatever actions he chooses simply by declaring them 'pressure' or 'leverage' tactics' to extract concessions unconnected to the declared threat. The Justice Department continues to push for an expansive reading of the president's authority to levy tariffs. But the letter takes this a step further. It offers a string of doomsday predictions: Without international emergency powers tariffs, 'trillions of dollars' from other countries won't be paid, the U.S. could see a '1929-style result,' millions might lose their homes and jobs, even Social Security and Medicare could be 'threatened.' That's not legal analysis. It's fearmongering. And it's untethered from any evidence in the record. Most of the so-called deals are not even written down, or available to review. Of the announcements made on the content of those deals, serious questions have been raised about the level of commitments, and their durability. Furthermore, the promised investment may not even be possible, and contradict the president's goal of lowering the trade deficit, which is central to his actions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. It also contradicts the Justice Department's previous arguments for a stay of the lower court's ruling, claiming that the government could refund the tariffs if it lost the appeal. Even if the deals the president cites were, in fact, secured because of these tariffs, it still wouldn't make them legal. You don't get to break the law to make a deal, then point to the deal as proof the law should bend to fit your actions. That's bootstrapping, plain and simple. Nor is it true that the U.S. has no other trade tools at its disposal. There are various other trade authorities that the president could lean on. The president could also negotiate actual trade agreements with the support of Congress. The irony is that the Justice Department's own letter inadvertently proves the critics' point. If the president believes these tariffs are so essential, he should ask Congress for the authority to impose them. That's how the separation of powers works. In the meantime, the courts are there to ensure that even the most popular, politically expedient or 'powerful' policy stays within legal bounds. Tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act were never legal. No amount of retroactive dealmaking can change that. Grasping at straws for a new rationale for Trump's self-inflicted tariff wound adds insult to that injury. The Court of Appeals should not be swayed by this desperate appeal. A clear and decisive ruling against the tariffs is necessary to stop further abuses of executive authority on trade, otherwise, this version of 'emergency powers' will become the new normal in U.S. trade law, and Americans will pay the price, not just in their wallets.


CNBC
31 minutes ago
- CNBC
Eli Lilly and health-care stocks are week's big winners, 3 sectors in the red
Every weekday, the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer releases the Homestretch — an actionable afternoon update, just in time for the last hour of trading on Wall Street. Market update: Stocks are headed lower on Friday, but the S & P 500 is still on pace for a weekly gain of about 1%. This week had some counter-trend components, with value stocks outperforming while more momentum-based companies lagged. Top grade this week : Health care was the best-performing sector this week, and the group was near the top of the leaderboard even before a 13F filing from Berkshire Hathaway revealed that the company had purchased a stake in the beleaguered UnitedHealth Group in the second quarter. Eli Lilly was another large-cap health-care stock that bounced back. The pharma giant had an ugly sell-off last week on disappointing data from its oral GLP-1 trial, but sentiment improved after SEC filings showed a rush of insider buying activity. Also, the company said on Thursday it will increase the list price of its GLP-1 drug Mounjaro for out-of-pocket patients in the United Kingdom. Worst performers : Three sectors posted negative returns this week: Consumer staples, utilities, and technology. The industrials were about flat as of the time of writing. Tech fell as the momentum trade stalled, and the market sold year-to-date winners and rotated into laggards. Utilities declined, but remember, the sector is interest-rate sensitive. When interest rates climb, the group typically underperforms. The weakness in staples was easy to define, as grocery-related stocks like Kroger , Walmart , and Target dropped after Amazon announced a significant expansion to its same-day delivery grocery service. Next week: We're in the part of earnings season when we hear from retail and enterprise software. The retail reports should start to get interesting because they are some of the more tariff-exposed companies in the market, and could struggle to pass on prices to consumers. In total, 14 companies in the S & P 500 are scheduled to report. Within the portfolio, we'll hear from Palo Alto Networks on Monday, Home Depot on Tuesday, and TJX Companies on Wednesday. A few other notable companies reporting are Walmart, Toll Brothers , Target , Lowe's , Intuit , and Workday . On the data side, it's a lighter week with housing starts, weekly jobless claims, and existing home sales. But Fed commentary will be in focus. Next week is the annual Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium and Chair Jerome Powell will give his outlook on Friday at 10 a.m. ET. It's a toss-up if Powell will hint at rate cuts as soon as the Sept. 17 meeting or reiterate his wait-and-see stance. As of mid-day Friday, the probability of a 25-basis-point cut at the September meeting was about 91%. (See here for a full list of the stocks in Jim Cramer's Charitable Trust.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust's portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Amazon Just Gave Uber Stock Bad News. Should You Sell UBER Here?
Amazon's (AMZN) massive grocery expansion sent shockwaves through delivery stocks, with Uber (UBER) shares falling 1% after the announcement as the e-commerce giant cranked up competitive pressure on gig-economy platforms. Amazon announced same-day grocery delivery to over 1,000 cities, expanding to 2,300 locations by year-end, which Wedbush analysts called a "shot heard round the warehouse." The service integrates fresh groceries into Amazon's existing logistics network, allowing Prime members to order milk alongside electronics with free delivery on orders over $25. More News from Barchart UnitedHealth Stock Soars as Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Discloses $1.57B Stake Palantir CEO Alex Karp Sees More Gains Ahead With America-Focused Growth Strategy, Calls U.S. The 'Leader of the Free World' Lucid Motors Is Caught in a Tariff Trap. Is LCID Stock More Likely to Hit $1 or $7 in 2025? Tired of missing midday reversals? The FREE Barchart Brief newsletter keeps you in the know. Sign up now! The expansion represents Amazon's most significant grocery push, addressing a category where it has "struggled historically" with perishables. Previously, Prime grocery orders required separate Amazon Fresh or Whole Foods deliveries with higher minimums and fees. Despite the competitive headwinds, Uber maintains its "Strong Buy" rating from analysts. The company's diversified platform extends beyond grocery delivery into ride-sharing, freight, and advertising, revenue streams that Amazon's grocery push doesn't directly threaten. Amazon's move validates the massive grocery delivery market opportunity, which remains fragmented with room for multiple players. Uber's established driver network, restaurant partnerships, and operational efficiency could help defend market share. Is Uber Stock a Good Buy Right Now? Uber delivered a record-breaking quarter in Q2, showcasing the resilience of its platform strategy amid intensifying competition. CEO Dara Khosrowshahi highlighted the company's unique competitive advantage: consumers using both mobility and delivery services generate 35% higher retention rates and 3x the gross bookings of single-service users. With fewer than 20% of consumers currently active across both platforms, Uber sees massive expansion potential. The appointment of Andrew McDonald as COO signals a focus on platform integration, with both mobility and delivery leaders now reporting to him. This structural change should accelerate cross-promotion efforts that leverage the company's 36 million Uber One members, who spend 3x more than non-members. Uber's autonomous vehicle (AV) partnerships expanded significantly, with new deals involving Baidu (BIDU), Lucid (LCID), Nuro, and Wayve complementing existing Waymo operations. Uber revealed that average Waymo vehicles achieve higher utilization than 99% of human drivers, validating the economic model. Management outlined three potential AV business models: merchant (predictable partner revenue), agency (revenue sharing), and asset ownership with software licensing. The $20 billion share buyback authorization demonstrates confidence in balancing AV investments with shareholder returns. Uber's "barbell strategy" showed strong momentum, with premium services exceeding $10 billion in gross bookings (up 35%) while Moto two-wheeler services reached $1.5 billion (up 40%). Its ability to capture both ends of the market spectrum provides multiple growth vectors while competitors typically focus on single segments. What is the Target Price for UBER Stock? Analysts tracking UBER stock forecast revenue to increase from $44 billion in 2024 to $81.6 billion in 2029. Comparatively, free cash flow (FCF) is forecast to expand from $6.9 billion to $16 billion in this period. Today, the stock trades at 18.5x forward FCF, which is reasonable. If it can maintain a similar multiple, it could gain over 60% over the next three years. Of the 47 analysts covering UBER stock, 33 recommend 'Strong Buy,' four recommend 'Moderate Buy,' and 10 recommend 'Hold.' The average price target is $107, above the current price of $91. While Amazon's grocery expansion creates near-term pressure, Uber's broader ecosystem and execution track record suggest investors shouldn't rush to sell. The delivery wars are intensifying, but Uber has proven resilient in competitive battles before. Indeed, UBER stock has already bounced back about 2% since Amazon's announcement earlier this week. On the date of publication, Aditya Raghunath did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data