US on 'Precipice of Recession,' Warns Leading Economist
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A leading economist believes that recent reports on the health of the U.S. economy point to an impending downturn.
"The economy is on the precipice of recession. That's the clear takeaway from last week's economic data dump," Moody's Chief Economist Mark Zandi posted to X on Sunday. "Consumer spending has flatlined, construction and manufacturing are contracting, and employment is set to fall."
Why It Matters
Zandi has sounded several similar alarms about the state of the U.S. economy in recent months, and the risks of a recession, which he has attributed largely to the trade policies of the administration and viewed as exacerbating more long-term vulnerabilities.
What To Know
Last week saw a tranche of key economic data published by various government agencies.
America's trade deficit narrowed in June, consumer sentiment measures for July improved modestly following months of declines, and gross domestic product (GDP) growth rebounded sharply in the second quarter from a troubling contraction in the first, according to an advance estimate from the Department of Commerce.
However, as Zandi noted, other indicators were less encouraging. Manufacturing activity slowed in July, job openings in June fell by a greater-than-expected 275,000 and consumer spending, though growing, still lags behind the robust growth seen in 2024.
Much of this data was eclipsed by Friday's employment report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). This revealed that the U.S. economy added 73,000 jobs in July, well below forecasts. In addition, revisions to May and June's figures showed that employment during these months was 258,000 lower than previously reported.
Moody's Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi speaks with reporters after a Senate Budget Committee hearing on debt ceiling legislation on Capitol Hill May 4, 2023.
Moody's Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi speaks with reporters after a Senate Budget Committee hearing on debt ceiling legislation on Capitol Hill May 4, 2023.
Francis Chung/POLITICO via AP Images
The substantial revision led President Donald Trump to say that the figures had been "RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad," and he immediately fired BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer.
The White House has defended McEntafer's dismissal by pointing to perceived aberrations in both this and previous employment reports during her leadership, considering such large revisions "hard evidence" of politically motivated data manipulation.
But the move has been roundly criticized by Democratic lawmakers and certain Republicans, with many warning this sets a dangerous precedent for political interference in statistical reporting and will erode trust in the bureau's future work.
"Any notion that the economic data misrepresents the reality of how the economy is performing is way off base," Zandi wrote on Sunday. "The data always suffers big revisions when the economy is at an inflection point, like a recession. It's thus not at all surprising that we are seeing big downward revisions to the payroll employment numbers."
He added that cuts to the federal workforce by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) were a "key factor" in the BLS revisions, given that government departments are often late in reporting payrolls to the bureau.
What People Are Saying
Moody's Chief Economist Mark Zandi, via X: "It's no mystery why the economy is struggling; blame increasing U.S. tariffs and highly restrictive immigration policy. The tariffs are cutting increasingly deeply into the profits of American companies and the purchasing power of American households. Fewer immigrant workers means a smaller economy."
Economist Jared Bernstein wrote on Monday: "It's not that the BLS did something wrong. It's that, as usual, they did something right. They got new data with which they updated/revised the old data. The fact that the revision was history large and negative just tells us that the labor market was a lot weaker than we thought it was."
He added that the downward revision does "not necessarily" mean the U.S. is headed for a recession, but that weak consumer spending and investor demand will continue to weigh on economic growth and labor market health.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said following last week's GDP reading: "Today, GDP growth came in above market expectations, and yesterday, consumer confidence rose. Americans trust in President Trump's America First economic agenda that continues to prove the so-called 'experts' wrong. President Trump has reduced America's reliance on foreign products, boosted investment in the U.S., and created thousands of jobs—delivering on his promise to Make America Wealthy Again."
What Happens Next?
As Zandi noted in his post, resilient labor market conditions had been one of the key factors factors undergirding the Federal Reserve's wait-and-see approach, and holding off on rate cuts while it works to get a clearer grasp on inflationary pressures.
But, with inflation still ticking above its 2 percent target, he said "it is tough for the Fed to come to the rescue."
On Friday, Goldman Sachs Chief Economist Jan Hatzius said the troubling revisions to recent jobs data made it "very, very likely" the central bank would cut rates at its September meeting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Cuomo: Chicago mayor's ‘incompetent leadership' should be a red flag for anyone supporting socialist Zohran Mamdani for NYC mayor
Chicago's budget woes under far-left Mayor Brandon Johnson should serve as warning to New Yorkers planning to back socialist Zohran Mamdani's mayoral bid. 'Chicago is proof that incompetent leadership can turn a deep-dish city into a half-baked mess,' ex-Gov Andrew Cuomo wrote on X Friday. 'From long before we built the Erie Canal to compete with Chicago, New York has always been about making things happen I believe in government that works,' boasted Cuomo, a registered Democrat who is running for NYC mayor as an independent. 'I have done it time and time again for the people of New York. Let's do it again.' 3 A Zohran Mamdani victory in the race for City Hall could land the Big Apple in the same boat as Chicago, which is facing looming budget shortfalls under far-left Mayor Brandon Johnson. Kyle Stevens/Shutterstock Cuomo's indirect dig at the Democratic nominee and frontrunner to win this year's NYC mayoral race came in response to Johnson earlier this week saying Chicago needs to deal with looming budget shortfalls even as it's education, housing, health care and transportation systems are 'woefully underfunded.' Last year, the Wall Street Journal editorial board dubbed Johnson 'America's worst mayor.' 3 Cuomo is running for mayor of New York City as an independent after losing the Democratic primary to Mamdani. SARAH YENESEL/EPA/Shutterstock 3 Last year, the Wall Street Journal editorial board dubbed Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson 'America's worst mayor.' Getty Images Mamdani, a Queens state assemblyman, is proposing a series of pie-in-the-sky proposals that his critics doubt he'll find the funding or support to pull off, including eliminating bus fares and setting up government-run grocery stores. Mamdani campaign spokesperson Dora Pekec told Fox News that 'trusting Andrew Cuomo to address New York's affordability crisis is the equivalent of tasking an arsonist with putting out a fire — he created this crisis.'
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Car companies are paying tariffs so you don't have to
'We haven't raised prices due to tariffs, and that's still our mantra,' Randy Parker, chief executive of Hyundai and Genesis Motor North America, said in an interview this month. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up That is good news for Trump and Republicans in Congress because it insulates them from the political consequences of higher sticker prices, which would also contribute to inflation. Advertisement Carmakers 'will try to hold prices and focus on cost reduction for as long as they can,' said Lenny LaRocca, a partner at KPMG who leads the consulting firm's work with the auto industry. But, LaRocca said, 'clearly it's not sustainable.' He predicted that automakers would start raising prices significantly early next year. No car company is immune. Even those that make most of their vehicles in the United States use imported parts that can amount to more than half the value of some cars. In recent weeks General Motors, Toyota, Ford Motor, Stellantis, Tesla, Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen have all blamed tariffs for declines in profit. Advertisement Ford, which makes most of its cars in the United States, expects retail prices for its vehicles to rise just 1% this year, Sherry House, the chief financial officer, said last month during a conference call with reporters. Mercedes-Benz vehicles at the Port of Baltimore, where new vehicle imports are processed before distribution to dealerships. Stephanie Scarbrough/Associated Press But that's not because the tariffs aren't having an effect. Import duties subtracted $800 million from Ford's profit in the second quarter, leading to a slight loss for the period. For the whole year, Ford estimated that tariffs would cost the company $2 billion. General Motors, the largest U.S. carmaker, said last month that tariffs would cost the company as much as $5 billion for the full year, although it hoped to offset about a third of that amount by cutting costs and moving some manufacturing to the United States. Still, the company expects retail prices to rise 1% or less this year, Paul Jacobson, chief financial officer of GM, told investors last month. Toyota, which makes many cars in the United States but also imports them from Japan, Mexico and Canada, said Thursday that tariffs would cost it $9.5 billion. A day earlier, Honda pegged its tariff cost at $3 billion. Tariffs and sinking profits could make it harder for carmakers to do what Trump wants them to do -- relocate assembly lines to the United States from other countries. Companies will have less money to invest in new factories and equipment. The Trump administration maintains that deregulation, tax deductions for equipment purchasing and other measures will be positive for the industry. Advertisement 'Two things can be accomplished at once: We can lower costs for everyday Americans while restoring American auto dominance,' Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson, said in an email. 'The administration is working closely with the auto industry to deliver on both fronts.' Car prices as measured by U.S. officials declined slightly in June, Desai pointed out, 'despite months of autos, auto parts, steel and aluminum tariffs being in place.' Workers gave final inspections to vehicles at a General Motors plant in Spring Hill, Tenn. BRETT CARLSEN/NYT Others see signs that prices are beginning to creep higher. Cox Automotive estimates that tariffs will add at least $5,000 to the cost of imported cars on an annual basis. Even for cars manufactured in the United States, tariffs on components add about $1,000, not including the 50% duties that Trump has imposed on imported steel and aluminum. By the end of the year, prices could be 8% higher, Cox says, pushing the average selling price of a new car above $50,000. Higher prices would fall hardest on less affluent consumers. Many of the least expensive cars are imported, like the Chevrolet Trax made in South Korea or the Nissan Versa made in Mexico. Some car buyers will be able to afford only used models. And higher demand for pre-owned vehicles will push up their prices, too. Adding to the pain, buyers of used cars often pay much higher interest on loans, which can exceed 20% for people with less-than-stellar credit records. The cost of repairs and parts will also rise. So far the price increases have been modest, said Michael Holmes, co-chief executive of Virginia Tire and Auto. The chain of auto repair and maintenance shops adds a tariff surcharge to prices to reflect the additional cost. That can range from 50 cents or so for an air filter to around $5 for a tire. Advertisement But the surcharges could rise depending on where tariffs on parts from Mexico and Canada end up, he said. His biggest problem, Holmes said, is staying abreast of shifting trade policy. 'You get exhausted trying to figure out where all these tariffs are,' he said. Trump policies have some financial benefits for carmakers. The Republican domestic policy bill passed last month eliminated penalties for violating clean air standards. That angered environmental groups but allows carmakers to build more big SUVs and pickups, which tend to have the highest profit margins. The end of those penalties has also freed established carmakers from having to buy clean air credits if they fall short of emissions targets. That will save GM and others hundreds of millions of dollars, but comes at the expense of companies that have lots of credits to sell, like Tesla and Rivian, because they make only electric vehicles that emit nothing from tailpipes. Car executives are hopeful that the Trump administration will take further steps to ease the impact of tariffs. 'We're having very constructive conversations with them to ensure a more level playing field,' House, the Ford chief financial officer, told reporters this month. But Trump continues to threaten substantial tariffs on Mexico and Canada and has yet to reach a permanent trade deal with either. Both countries are critical suppliers of vehicles and parts and are important destinations for parts and vehicles made in the United States. The policy bill also contained a measure designed to stimulate demand for cars. The provision lets taxpayers deduct from their taxes the interest they pay on loans used to buy cars assembled in the United States. But the value of the deduction will be relatively small, in the hundreds of dollars for most people. Advertisement 'We don't think it's really going to drive demand,' said Erin Keating, executive analyst at Cox Automotive. This article originally appeared in
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump team pushes for ouster of top IEA official
The Trump administration is aiming to replace a top-ranking official at the International Energy Agency, amid a ratcheted-up U.S. pressure campaign on the Paris-based body, multiple energy industry insiders and former U.S. officials with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO's E&E News. The agency's second-in-command, a retired State Department official named Mary Warlick, is the main target for replacement, said the insiders, who were granted anonymity to speak freely. The pressure follows months of public frustrations with the IEA from top Trump administration officials, most notably Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who has vowed to make changes at the body or withdraw U.S. support. Some Republicans say the IEA has discouraged investment in fossil fuels by publishing analyses that show near-term peaks in global demand for oil and gas. 'The product that the IEA produces is not generally accepted by everybody. It's just not,' said Mark Menezes, who served as deputy Energy secretary during Trump's first term. 'And the political context has changed.' The Trump administration is aiming to push changes internally, according to a Republican energy lobbyist with close ties to the Department of Energy. 'They want to get operatives in there, whether they're career or political, who can actually move the needle,' said the lobbyist. 'They're going to get someone they trust and that person is going to fight from the inside out.' He added of the U.S. pressure campaign on the IEA, 'The fact that Wright is out there now talking about it publicly shows that it's elevated.' The White House, meanwhile, is championing fossil fuels as more reliable and often cheaper than wind, solar, and other clean energy sources, despite analysis that suggests renewable power is cheaper and faster to deploy. Now, House lawmakers are threatening to withdraw U.S. funding for the IEA in the fiscal 2026 budget process — after passing a recissions package that cuts funding for United Nations agencies and other international organizations. Wright has criticized the IEA for its projection that oil demand will peak this decade, calling it 'nonsensical' in a Breitbart interview in June. Republicans also bristled at the Biden administration's use of IEA analysis in 2024 to justify a U.S. decision to pause consideration of new liquefied natural gas export permits. In testimony at a Senate hearing last year, David Turk, deputy energy secretary under Biden, cited IEA findings that showed global gas demand on the decline. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and then-Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), now retired from Congress, wrote a letter to IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol last March saying the IEA has strayed from its mission and become a 'cheerleader' for the energy transition. Birol, for his part, has defended the organization's commitment to energy security while acknowledging that its mission has broadened. Meanwhile, Trump ordered the State Department in February to do a six-month review of U.S. participation in international organizations and treaties and recommend leaving those that don't serve his priorities. IEA officials are pledging to resurrect a 'Current Policy Scenario' in the IEA's World Energy Outlook later this year. In 2020, the IEA abandoned that analysis, which analyzed the global energy picture based on existing national energy policies. U.S. officials have criticized the IEA for replacing the current policy analysis with a 'Stated Policies Scenario,' which multiple Republicans and fossil fuel supporters say is based on policies that aren't being implemented. The critics say it paints a rosier picture of global trends toward lower-carbon energy sources. 'As ever, the forthcoming World Energy Outlook 2025 will contain multiple scenarios reflecting the wide spectrum of possible outcomes that today's market conditions and policies imply,' an IEA spokesperson told E&E News. 'This year's edition will include the Current Policies Scenario, which will illustrate the implications of a continuation of policies and measures currently in place.' Leaving the IEA would deprive the United States of any influence or input at the organization and could leave it isolated. The U.S. helped establish the organization following the 1973 Arab oil embargo to focus on energy security. Today, it publishes influential energy market forecasts and data that guide major investments and government policies. The U.S. is just one of 32 members of the IEA. That means it can't unilaterally set the organization's agenda. But it does have a large amount of influence and has historically been able to work with other member governments to advance the agency, said Jonathan Elkind, former assistant secretary for international affairs at DOE during the Obama administration. 'There are going to be certain elements of policy that the current U.S. administration really disagrees with other member countries on, and the U.S. administration is entirely within its rights to advocate for adjustments in the agenda of the IEA,' Elkind said. 'The U.S. does not have the right to simply insist that everybody will change as a consequence of what the U.S. has done.' The White House did not respond for comment, and a DOE spokesperson did not respond directly to questions posed by E&E. The IEA's second-ranking position has traditionally been filled by an American. In 2021 that post went to Warlick, a former career diplomat who served as ambassador to Serbia from 2010 to 2012 and previously sat on the National Security Council as the senior director for Russia. From 2014 to 2017, Warlick was the State Department's principal deputy assistant secretary at the Bureau of Energy Resources and represented the U.S. on the IEA governing board. Officials in DOE's Office of International Affairs, which is led by acting Assistant Secretary Tommy Joyce, tried to strong-arm the State Department into signing off on pushing Warlick out back in March, according to a former State Department official. At the time, State provided a backstop to Warlick's ouster but since then a broad reorganization of the department has eliminated the Bureau of Energy Resources and most of the officials there who worked closely with the IEA. That could mean DOE would face little resistance if it tries again. In recent IEA meetings, U.S. officials have pushed for the organization to stop publishing data that they argue promotes the shift to clean power over fossil fuels. A former U.S. official who worked closely with the IEA called Warlick a 'hardworking, serious, diligent and capable professional' who does her work in a way that is consistent with guidance from the executive director and with guidance from the member countries. Just how the U.S. would force a replacement isn't entirely clear. Warlick is on a limited contract and while the U.S. is an important member, providing around 14 percent of the organization's budget in recent years, it isn't the only one. Warlick rarely speaks publicly. At an Atlantic Council event in 2022, she said that the clean energy investment caused 'geopolitical fragmentation' in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. 'Such investment is still well below the level needed to bring emissions down if we are to keep net-zero and sustainable development goals in sight,' Warlick said. 'Massive investment in clean energy is the best guarantee of energy security in the future, and it will also drive down harmful greenhouse gas emissions.' This story also appears in Energywire.
