Latest news with #President Trump
Wall Street Journal
4 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Former Indonesian Official Says Trade Deal Is On
The Indonesian government is 'very happy' with a trade pact struck with President Trump, a former Indonesian ambassador to the U.S. said, the first sign from Jakarta that the nations have come to an agreement. Trump wrote on social media Tuesday morning that he had agreed to a trade pact with Indonesia but offered no details. Former Ambassador Dino Patti Djalal said Indonesian government officials had expressed support for the deal to him, with more details forthcoming 'in a few hours.' 'Insiders from the Indonesian government said they are very happy with the new deal,' Djalal said a Foreign Policy virtual event, adding that he still expects some U.S. tariffs on Indonesian goods as part of the deal: 'Certainly there will still be tariffs, it's not going to be 0%.'
Wall Street Journal
6 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
A Sovereign-Wealth Fund to Keep America's Technological Edge
If the U.S. wants to win the global race for technological supremacy, the country's best tool is a sovereign-wealth fund. Washington's haphazard approach to fueling national competitiveness and strategic industries isn't cutting it in today's environment. But intelligently deploying President Trump's proposed sovereign-wealth fund could secure American leadership in such critical technologies as quantum computing, artificial intelligence and advanced microchips. China is already shaping its technological future through strategic investment. The U.S. can't afford to cede leadership in technologies that will define the coming century. Other countries have used sovereign-wealth funds to great national advantage. Norway's Government Pension Fund Global is the premier example. It sets the standard for performance and transparency, delivering consistent returns while adhering to strict ethical guidelines. The Government of Singapore Investment Corp. generates outsize influence for the small nation. Oil-rich states leverage their wealth strategically with funds such as Abu Dhabi's Mubadala investment fund, which aims to position the United Arab Emirates as a global AI hub. Critics rightly point out that an American sovereign-wealth fund must be free of political interference and focused on commercial national research and defense priorities. But other nations' examples prove this is possible. There are also concerns about forming a fund when the U.S. is running budget deficits. The benefits far outweigh the risk. America needs this fund now more than ever. Both geopolitics and innovation shape the economy. It isn't enough to hope we maintain tech leadership through our financial dominance, banking leadership, private venture capital and intermittent government interventions. American firms have to grapple with difficult market distortions thanks to Chinese state investment, which places U.S. tech companies at a disadvantage. Beijing has formed various state-backed venture funds to invest in AI, quantum research and semiconductor manufacturing. These investments foster domestic innovation and advance strategic sectors. China's National Venture Capital Guidance Fund channels tens of billions of dollars of central, provincial and private capital into key technologies, aligning investments explicitly with industrial strategy.
Wall Street Journal
14 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Investors Are No Longer Bracing for a Recession
Concerns that President Trump's April "Liberation Day" tariffs could trigger a global recession have eased dramatically, according to Bank of America's latest survey of fund managers. Some key findings: A net 59% of investors polled in July said a recession was unlikely—a big flip from the net 42% who feared one in April. Investor sentiment is at its most bullish since February, driven by improving expectations for corporate profits. Some 42% of investors expect second-quarter company earnings will beat forecasts. Trade wars are still the biggest concern, with expectations for final U.S. tariff rates on other countries rising. Most expect the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates one or two times by year end.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump threatens 100% tariffs on Russia if Ukraine war continues
President Trump is threatening severe economic penalties on Russia if the war in Ukraine doesn't end within 50 days, including 100% tariffs on Russia and secondary sanctions on Russia's trading partners. Yahoo Finance Correspondent Ben Werschkul joins Market Domination to explain how global oil markets and key nations like India and China could respond. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination here. President Trump announced earlier today was at the bottom line a very plans to have very serious economic consequences if he can't end the war between Russia and Ukraine. What he described as very severe secondary tariffs on on on Russia and its trading partners. There's some confusion here in Washington over the details of this. Howard Luck talked to reporters afterwards and said this could take the form of tariffs or sanctions, and CNN is reporting that what Trump actually meant was 100% tariffs on Russia itself and then secondary sanctions on Russian oil. Either way, it's a sort of focus on the economic side of this Russia-Ukraine war that is clearly frustrating Trump. He expressed over and over again today his his frustration with Vladimir Putin, frustration with the fact that this war is not going on. And so we now have this new 50-day deadline, which which gets us to the end of the summer where Trump is trying to end this war, or in one form or another, a lot of economic pressure is coming. And and as you mentioned, there's a lot of other tariff headlines. I'll just mention one real quickly, which is Europe. There's a lot of back and forth there today. Um, but talks with Europe are continuing after Trump's announcement of a 30% tariff over the weekend there. A lot of optimism on both sides that the talks are at least going to continue, and that's yet another deadline here on August 1st. Ben, let's say Trump really followed through with this. I am just curious, how do you think Moscow would or could, not just Moscow, but also Moscow and its trading partners, how could they respond to that, Ben? Yeah, I think it's a big question is exactly the form that this would take. I do think the oil piece of this is clearly the most significant one way or another, whatever form it takes. John McCain very famously called Russia a gas station masquerading as a country, and I think that's that's where you're going to see a lot of reaction here if Trump is is serious about following through here. The big, big, big consumers of Russian oil maintain to this day, India, China, Europe, countries like that. So that's the part where is is clearly what Trump, I think, is aiming for as a leverage point, and where you're going to see a lot of attention from world capitals, not just in Moscow. The big question you kind of alluded to there is whether Vladimir Putin is changing his position at all on this because of this new threat. That's very unclear. But clearly, if you're in India right now, which is very dependent on Russian oil, you're watching this closely. 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
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Commentary: It's a bad time to rely on the social safety net
Whether Americans want it or not, President Trump and his fellow Republicans are making historic cuts to the nation's safety net programs. It's the biggest test in decades of whether the 'nanny state' really is bloated, as critics insist, or is too essential to get rid of. The experiment will inflict pain on millions. The huge tax bill Trump recently signed contains numerous provisions that will remake the economy by favoring certain industries and classes of workers over others, stimulating spending for a while — and adding at least $4 trillion to the national debt. The two political parties and their supporters will dicker for months over whether the tax cuts help ordinary workers or favor the wealthy too much. Read more: What is the US debt ceiling, and how does it impact you? There's been less focus on various ways the tax law and other actions by the Trump administration will dismantle social welfare, yet those changes could end up more consequential than the tax cuts. Federally funded healthcare and food aid are both set to undergo the biggest cuts in the history of those programs. The changes will come in spurts, and it won't always be apparent that federal policy is to blame. The end result, however, will be a sharp reversal of modern trends, with the nation's social safety net shrinking rather than expanding. The number of Americans lacking health insurance is set to rise by 16 million through 2034. Cuts to food aid will hit another 16 million or so. Some Americans, susceptible to both, will endure an unfortunate double whammy. While these are deliberate policy options chosen by Trump and his fellow Republicans, they'll hit Democratic, Republican, and Independent voters more or less the same. The biggest changes come from the tax law. To offset trillions in lost revenue from keeping tax rates low and enacting new tax cuts, Congress made major changes to Medicaid, the health program for the poor, that will ultimately result in lower coverage rates. The law makes it harder for adults to qualify for coverage, for instance, and to keep coverage once they qualify. The Congressional Budget Office estimates all these changes combined will reduce the number of people covered by Medicaid by 7.8 million by 2034. Other changes in the law will make it harder to qualify for coverage under the Affordable Care Act, at the same time the Trump administration is making its own administrative changes to the ACA and dialing back coverage even more. The Republican-controlled Congress is also likely to let a set of temporary healthcare subsidies expire this year, making ACA policies more expensive for some 4 million people, in some cases prohibitively so. All these changes combined would lower ACA coverage by 8.2 million, according to the CBO. That would add 16 million Americans to the uninsured rolls, raising the uninsured rate from a near-record low of 7.9% now to 9.2% in 2028. KFF forecasts that the uninsured rate would jump the most in Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas — which all have Republican governors. In Florida, as one example, nearly 1 million people are likely to lose coverage. Healthcare cuts in the tax-cut law will reduce government spending by about $1 trillion during the next 10 years. The reduction in food aid will be small by comparison, trimming $114 billion over a decade. But that will still have widespread effects. The Urban Institute estimates that around 5.3 million families will lose food assistance worth at least $25 per month. At about three people per family, that's 16 million mouths getting a little less. There's never been a cutback of that magnitude in food conservatives argue that welfare programs have gotten out of hand, making some cutbacks necessary. They've long lobbied for work requirements, tighter eligibility standards, and other measures to ensure that aid programs are not abused and are limited to those who need them most. Yet even some Republicans balked at the cuts Trump was pushing for in the tax bill. Two Republican senators voted against the bill because of Medicaid cuts. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski voted for the bill, but only after negotiating special exemptions on some Medicaid cuts for her own state. One particular concern for some Republican legislators is the fate of rural hospitals reliant on Medicaid funds to keep their doors open. More rural hospitals have closed than opened during the last 10 years, and many remain unprofitable. The final tax bill included a $50 billion rural hospital fund to offset losses from Medicaid cutbacks. But that probably isn't enough, which means Congress may have to provide more money for these care centers or face voter wrath. Ordinary Americans will notice these changes piecemeal. Some will face higher premiums when they try to renew a policy under the ACA this year or next. In some cases, the cost could jump so much that coverage will become unaffordable. Medicaid enrollees will notice new paperwork requirements to prove they have a job or otherwise qualify. There will be more frequent check-ins and people who can't keep up with the red tape will lose coverage. Some rural hospitals will inevitably close, while others will cut back or eliminate services such as mental health or disability care. There will be more paperwork and tougher cutoff points to qualify for food aid, as well. Voters will have their say. In 2018, they revolted against a new Republican tax cut law by giving Democrats control of the House of Representatives in a 'blue wave' election. And that law included no major benefit cuts, just tax breaks voters thought favored the wealthy over everybody else. Are Americans more prepared for austerity now? There's no reason to think so. High inflation of the past few years has hammered purchasing power and affordability remains a top voter concern. If Republicans cutting the safety net know something the rest of us don't, maybe they should start explaining. Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Bluesky and X: @rickjnewman. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices.
