Latest news with #VedaPartners
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
US is looking for a reason to lower tariff rates, expert explains
The Trump administration has been pushing for trading partners to present their best trade offers to the US by Wednesday as the end date for the president's pause on Liberation Day tariffs nears. Veda Partners managing partner and director of economic policy Henrietta Treyz joins the Morning Brief team to discuss President Trump's response to criticisms on his tariff policy waffling and share her perspective on where she sees reciprocal tariff rates falling. Catch Yahoo Finance explain how Wall Street has been adopting the "TACO" trade (Trump Always Chickens Out) and hear Eurasia Group's Ian Bremmer outline how CEOs are responding to Trump's tariff threats. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Morning Brief here. Well, so now you have a president that, that knows about the TACO acronym and now we're all trying to figure out, all right, is that net good or bad for ultimately seeing some of these deals come forward, as clearly he doesn't like the question and he could be fuming at the resolute desk as we speak, or maybe in Mar-a-Lago, wherever he finds himself today. Sure, yeah. I mean, it's super embarrassing, I think for any president to have um, the ranking file or, or the stock market just not take you seriously on things like this and question your um, gumption. But the real issue, I think, is that whether the president cares or not, which is a question, you know, for therapists, not economists, is more like, um, what should we expect to come next? So, I don't really care if he wants to put tariffs on. I'm more concerned about can he. So, will the Supreme Court decide that he does not have the authority under IEEPA to impose tariffs? It's not a question, very interestingly, of whether or not fentanyl poses an emergent economic risk to the United States. It's whether IEEPA actually grants the President the authority to supersede Congress. So we're going to need to have that resolution. And unfortunately, what I'm seeing in tandem here is that we're slowly approaching the ex-state for Liberation Day 2.0 and we don't have any deals. Now, the White House is going to send a series of letters to what I estimate is probably about 125 different nations just informing them of what their new tariff rate is going to be. So when you talk about investors baking in what's happening here, we are going to get information about uh, uh, about 125 countries whose tariff rates range from 10% at the low end to 50% at the high end, and he's just going to blankly set those rates. So, USTR is asking these nations to come to the United States and give them a reason to lower the rates from the 30, 40, 50% thresholds that are otherwise going to go into effect on July 9th. I think they want an excuse. They want a reason to lower them, and that's what they're asking for today. And Henrietta, should we expect when, when information about that letter comes out? Should we expect the numbers to mirror the numbers that we, or, or at least the formula that led to the numbers that were announced on April 2nd with regards to those so-called reciprocal tariffs? Do we have any insight about what will lead to the numbers of, of those so-called reciprocal tariffs this time around? This is, this is, you know, reading tea leaves, and we're all doing our best to try to suss out what the president's ultimate goal can be here. I'm trying to take some guidance from the original China deal where he wanted to bring rates down from 145% to 80% and then ultimately, Scott Beson landed at 30%, 34%. What I'm expecting is for the Liberation Day tariff rate set out in those charts to drop by at least half. So in the, in instance of certain nations, there's a 50% tariff rate in effect. It just so happens that we do almost no trade with those countries. Uh, the one that I'm thinking of has $293 million worth of trade with the United States, and yet they're tariffed at 50%. There's not a rational explanation for that rate because we're not buying goods from them, point blank, and we're never going to. So they need to find an opportunity to get those rates down, the letters, and this request from USTR to get folks in giving them their best offer to the president right now is that excuse. And I think the ultimate impact is going to be that for those 125 nations, we see tariff rates come down by at least half. So if it's 30%, maybe the rate goes down to 15. If it's 50, I'm optimistic it goes even below 25%. But I think some of them are so outlandish as to have to get cut below where they are right now. 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
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
US is looking for a reason to lower tariff rates, expert explains
The Trump administration has been pushing for trading partners to present their best trade offers to the US by Wednesday as the end date for the president's pause on Liberation Day tariffs nears. Veda Partners managing partner and director of economic policy Henrietta Treyz joins the Morning Brief team to discuss President Trump's response to criticisms on his tariff policy waffling and share her perspective on where she sees reciprocal tariff rates falling. Catch Yahoo Finance explain how Wall Street has been adopting the "TACO" trade (Trump Always Chickens Out) and hear Eurasia Group's Ian Bremmer outline how CEOs are responding to Trump's tariff threats. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Morning Brief here.
Bloomberg
30-04-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
Trump Touts His First 100 Days
"Bloomberg Markets" follows the market moves across every global asset class and discusses the biggest issues for Wall Street. Today's guests; Veda Partners CO-Founder Henrietta Treyz, Beach Point Capital Management Portfolio Manager Sinjin Bowron, Province of Québec Minister of Finance Eric Girard, and Goldman Sachs Software Sector Analyst Kash Rangan. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yahoo
24-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
President Trump is an apparent no on a long-shot effort to let taxes increase on the rich
President Trump now appears to be a no on nascent GOP plans to consider letting tax cuts on some of the richest Americans expire. "I think it would be very disruptive because a lot of the millionaires would leave the country," Trump told reporters Wednesday after being asked about the idea for a "millionaire tax." "That would be bad," he added. There is little evidence to support Trump's claim, as the proposal would simply return rates for these taxpayers to pre-2017 levels and top income rates in other nations are often much higher. But it's a clear political signal that pushback from wealthy GOP donors and other Americans has put an already long-shot GOP idea even further on the ropes. "Well, that didn't last long," wrote Greg Valliere of AGF Investments in a note to clients Thursday morning, noting that the move is part of "a furious GOP battle over what will be in the tax bill — or bills — that will start to come into focus in May." At issue is the current top tax rate of 37% for individuals earning more than about $640,000 a year — which was set in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That rate is set to expire at the end of this year and would bump things back up to the 39.6% rate if no action is taken. One idea is to let that expiration happen. Another idea under debate is for Congress to create a new tax bracket — perhaps for over $1 million in annual income — that would see a higher rate. "It remains my base case expectation that a new higher tax bracket for millionaires will not be a part of a final bill," Henrietta Treyz of Veda Partners noted to Yahoo Finance Thursday morning after Trump's comments. She added that the idea remains under debate on Capitol Hill largely because losing that revenue "puts other issues in the cross hairs." Yet the latest comment from Trump comes amid a debate where many observers were surprised to see the GOP even discussing such a break from their tax-cutting orthodoxy. It was just the latest evidence of how much pressure lawmakers feel as they try to put together a bill that could include painful cuts and still result in a flood of new red ink. Indeed, the larger context is a bill taking shape that appears set to send the national debt to even greater heights. A framework that recently moved forward in Congress saw Republicans advance a plan that would allow adding $5.8 trillion in new deficit spending over the next decade. It's a plan that, as the deficit hawks at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget recently noted, would authorize more new debt than the American Rescue Plan, the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the CARES Act during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law combined. The goal among the GOP is to combine an extension with new tax cuts that Trump repeatedly promised on the campaign trail, such as no taxes on overtime, tips, and Social Security benefits. Lawmakers want to offset some of the cost with hopes for up to $2 trillion in savings, but the proposed ideas for those cuts in areas like Medicaid have already run into significant GOP opposition. Treyz added Thursday that talks about tax increases on the rich remain under discussion on Capitol Hill largely because "the bottom line is they need money." She notes that if the tax increase is formally dropped, it will put even more pressure to act on unpopular ideas such as imposing a corporate SALT cap, cutting Medicaid or SNAP food benefits, or repealing the clean energy manufacturing tax credits. Another likely unpopular way to save money would be changing the popular child tax credit to require Social Security numbers from parents. That's an idea that a new study published by the Center on Migration Studies found would lead to 4.5 million citizen children with Social Security numbers — but with immigrant parents — losing access to the credit. The push to let taxes increase on the rich and help offset some of that sticker shock was always a long-shot effort, but it's one that gained significant traction. In an interview with Yahoo Finance just last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wouldn't rule it out, saying, "We're looking at a range of revenue raisers ... we'll see where the president comes down on that." It now appears Trump has signaled his preference, which came in a back-and-forth with reporters in the Oval Office as he suggested, "Now with transportation so quick and so easy, [millionaires] leave countries, you'll lose a lot of money if you do that." Few see Trump's worries coming to fruition, though, if such a policy change happens. There was no flood of the wealthy moving into the US in 2017 when the rate was first implemented, and the top rates for the world's wealthiest are already higher elsewhere. In much of Europe, as just one example, the Tax Foundation finds that the richest residents are often taxed in the neighborhood of 50%. As Valliere suggested Thursday, "most billionaires wouldn't even notice a 1 or 2 percent tax hike." Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices
Yahoo
24-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Donald Trump is an apparent no on a long-shot effort to let taxes increase on the rich
Donald Trump now appears to be a no on nascent GOP plans to consider letting tax cuts on some of the richest Americans expire. "I think it would be very disruptive because a lot of the millionaires would leave the country," Trump told reporters Wednesday after being asked about the idea for a "millionaire tax." "That would be bad," he added. There is little evidence to support Trump's claim, as the proposal would simply return rates for these taxpayers to pre-2017 levels and top income rates in other nations are often much higher. But it's a clear political signal that pushback from wealthy GOP donors and other Americans has put an already long-shot GOP idea even further on the ropes. "Well, that didn't last long," wrote Greg Valliere of AGF Investments in a note to clients Thursday morning, noting that the move is part of "a furious GOP battle over what will be in the tax bill — or bills — that will start to come into focus in May." At issue is the current top tax rate of 37% for individuals earning more than about $640,000 a year — which was set in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That rate is set to expire at the end of this year and would bump things back up to the 39.6% rate if no action is taken. One idea is to let that expiration happen. Another idea under debate is for Congress to create a new tax bracket — perhaps for over $1 million in annual income — that would see a higher rate. "It remains my base case expectation that a new higher tax bracket for millionaires will not be a part of a final bill," Henrietta Treyz of Veda Partners noted to Yahoo Finance Thursday morning after Trump's comments. She added that the idea remains under debate on Capitol Hill largely because losing that revenue "puts other issues in the cross hairs." Yet the latest comment from Trump comes amid a debate where many observers were surprised to see the GOP even discussing such a break from their tax-cutting orthodoxy. It was just the latest evidence of how much pressure lawmakers feel as they try to put together a bill that could include painful cuts and still result in a flood of new red ink. Indeed, the larger context is a bill taking shape that appears set to send the national debt to even greater heights. A framework that recently moved forward in Congress saw Republicans advance a plan that would allow adding $5.8 trillion in new deficit spending over the next decade. It's a plan that, as the deficit hawks at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget recently noted, would authorize more new debt than the American Rescue Plan, the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the CARES Act during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law combined. The goal among the GOP is to combine an extension with new tax cuts that Trump repeatedly promised on the campaign trail, such as no taxes on overtime, tips, and Social Security benefits. Lawmakers want to offset some of the cost with hopes for up to $2 trillion in savings, but the proposed ideas for those cuts in areas like Medicaid have already run into significant GOP opposition. Treyz added Thursday that talks about tax increases on the rich remain under discussion on Capitol Hill largely because "the bottom line is they need money." She notes that if the tax increase is formally dropped, it will put even more pressure to act on unpopular ideas such as imposing a corporate SALT cap, cutting Medicaid or SNAP food benefits, or repealing the clean energy manufacturing tax credits. Another likely unpopular way to save money would be changing the popular child tax credit to require Social Security numbers from parents. That's an idea that a new study published by the Center on Migration Studies found would lead to 4.5 million citizen children with Social Security numbers — but with immigrant parents — losing access to the credit. The push to let taxes increase on the rich and help offset some of that sticker shock was always a long-shot effort, but it's one that gained significant traction. In an interview with Yahoo Finance just last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wouldn't rule it out saying, "We're looking at a range of revenue raisers ... we'll see where the president comes down on that." It now appears Trump has signaled his preference, which came in a back-and-forth with reporters in the Oval Office as he suggested, "Now with transportation so quick and so easy, [millionaires] leave countries, you'll lose a lot of money if you do that." Few see Trump's worries coming to fruition, though, if such a policy change happens. There was no flood of the wealthy moving into the US in 2017 when the rate was first implemented, and the top rates for the world's wealthiest are already higher elsewhere. In much of Europe, as just one example, the Tax Foundation finds that the richest residents are often taxed in the neighborhood of 50%. As Valliere suggested Thursday, "most billionaires wouldn't even notice a 1 or 2 percent tax hike." Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices
