Is Las Vegas in Trouble?
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The party may soon be over for Las Vegas, as economic challenges and a steady outflow of both visitors and residents threaten to strip the town of its title as the "entertainment capital of the world."
Hotel occupancy rates are dwindling, declining tourism threatens to push Nevada's already nation-leading unemployment rate higher and casinos—once the beating heart of the Sin City economy—have extended a monthslong streak of falling revenue.
According to recent data from hotel analytics provider STR, hotel occupancy dropped to 66.7 percent in early July, down nearly 17 percent from the same period last year. Vegas also recorded the steepest national declines in average daily rate (ADR) and revenue per available room (RevPar), the latter down 29 percent year-over-year.
Data shows that visitors, both domestic and international, are increasingly steering clear of Vegas, sparked by a period of economic difficulty at home and a wider decline in inbound travel to the U.S.
Jeremy Aguero, senior analyst at the Las Vegas consulting firm Applied Analysis, described this as "a pretty formidable one-two punch" for a city so heavily reliant on flows of outside cash to keep its economy afloat.
"Southern Nevada is more dependent on the tourism industry than any other major market in the United States today," he said, adding that declining tourism is "having a ripple effect" throughout the city's flagship industry.
Gaming revenue across Nevada fell by 2.2 percent in May compared to a year earlier, according to the state's gambling regulator, with the Vegas Strip seeing an even larger drop of 3.87 percent.
Vegas's woes have been attributed in part to the high costs of visitation, with steep room rates, dining costs and pricy amenities deterring prospective visitors from spending their limited time and funds in Vegas.
"From what I understand, Vegas may be setting themselves up for the same situation they went through in 2008-2009," said veteran gaming consultant Bill Zender, "over pricing the market."
As well as dropping visitors, the city has also seen a significant exodus of its residents. According to Realtor.com's June housing report, Vegas has seen the largest increase in housing inventory, with active home listings now 77 percent higher than a year ago.
Robert Little, a real estate agent in Nevada, told Realtor.com that this was due to a marked slowdown in buyer demand, but also investors in the Vegas property market choosing to "cash out and reallocate their funds into other opportunities."
Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Canva
Aguero told Newsweek that one could view Vegas' struggles as a symbol for the economic issues facing all Americans, which have an outsized impact given the city's economy is centered around things – gambling, lavish hotels and a booming nightlife – that would be considered discretionary and the first to go in times of economic hardship.
"There are some folks that believe that Las Vegas has a tendency to be somewhat recession-resistant," he told Newsweek. "But no one ever has suggested that this community is sort of recession-proof."
"When you look at consumers across the United States, what you're going to see is that consumers are being stressed relative to the cost of living," he added.
A precarious national housing market, declining tourism, and heightened macroeconomic worries among America's spending population have spared few states or cities this year. Las Vegas's own weakening odds must be viewed against this backdrop, Aguero said, but added that these could nevertheless rebound in the near future.
This may require adapting pricing strategies to appeal to more cash-strapped visitors, acknowledging that casino gaming is no longer the revenue driver it once was, and expanding into sports and cultural attractions to meet the tastes of the modern American consumer.
"If there's one thing Las Vegas has proven since legalizing gambling in the early 1930s, it's that it is both resilient and resourceful, and it has both the infrastructure investments, but also the capability to reposition itself fairly effectively."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' 'A Gift' for Democrats, James Carville Says
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville on Monday said that the Donald Trump-backed "big, beautiful bill" is "a gift" for the Democratic Party. Why It Matters The One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed Congress earlier this month and aims to deliver on Trump's biggest legislative priorities: cementing the sweeping tax cuts, which disproportionately benefit wealthy Americans, enacted during his first term, and substantially increasing funds for border security and immigration enforcement. The Republican-passed bill pays for the tax cuts and increased border security with deep spending reductions in critical social safety net programs like Medicaid and food assistance. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the bill could result in 11.8 million more uninsured Americans by 2034 and add nearly $3.4 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade. James Carville is pictured at Politicon in Pasadena, California, on June 25, 2016. James Carville is pictured at Politicon in Pasadena, California, on June 25, 2016. Colin Young-Wolff/Invision/AP What To Know Carville made his remarks during an appearance on Fox News, telling host Martha MacCallum that the massive spending package should be the Democratic Party's main messaging focus. "James, you've talked about, you know, them wasting time on some of these issues around trans sports and all this stuff," MacCallum said. "What substantive thing would you like to see them focus on? Because perhaps immigration is the one, and in what way?" "The 'big, beautiful bill,'" Carville responded. "Cutting veterans' benefits, closing rural hospitals, raising $3.4 trillion on our national debt. I mean, when you have something simple in a gift like this to contrast yourself, you would be stupid to talk about immigration, or talk about bathrooms, or track meets or anything else." He added: "Just define yourself that we don't think this is going in the right direction for the United States and the numbers overwhelmingly would support that! But if we keep talking about this other nonsense, we're going to lose our focus." House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries gave a marathon speech railing against the bill, which lasted eight hours and 44 minutes. "Republicans are trying to jam this one, big, ugly bill down the throats of the American people," Jeffries said during his "magic minute" speech. "Leadership requires courage, conviction, compassion—and yet what we have seen from this administration and co-conspirators on the Republican side of the aisle is cruelty, chaos and corruption," he said, adding that the bill was "an extraordinary assault on the health care of the American people." Other Democratic lawmakers also made headlines for their stinging rebukes of the megabill. "This bill will kill good, blue-collar manufacturing jobs that we need to rebuild the economy in this country," Democratic Representative Josh Riley of New York said during a floor debate. "It closes rural hospitals. It defunds health care. All to give trillions of dollars in tax cuts to your cronies." "Don't tell me you give a s*** about the middle class when all you are doing is s******* on the middle class," Riley added. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, another Democrat from New York and one of the most progressive members of Congress, described the bill as a "deal with the devil" in an impassioned speech on the House floor. Democratic Massachusetts Representative Jim McGovern mocked Republicans for behaving like they were in a "cult" because of their support for the Trump-backed bill, despite recent polling data showing that it's broadly opposed by Americans. Several Republican senators have also faced scrutiny over comments they delivered regarding the cuts to Medicaid. Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa made headlines in May when she responded to people protesting Medicaid cuts by saying, "Well, we are all going to die." Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, former Senate majority leader, also told Republicans during a closed-door lunch in June: "I know a lot of us are hearing from people back home about Medicaid. But they'll get over it." What Happens Next Trump administration officials have continued touting the law since Trump signed it earlier this month as part of an effort to sell it to voters. "It is time for you to have a government that works for you instead of against you for the next 3 1/2 years," Vice President JD Vance told voters in his home state of Ohio on Monday. "The Trump administration promises that is exactly what we're going to do."
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
White House touts Social Security tax break as largest in history
Social Security is a program that tens of millions of older Americans rely on for income. The fact of the matter is that many Americans struggle to save for retirement, either because their wages aren't high enough or they have too many competing priorities. Related: Warren Buffett sends blunt message on Social Security It's hard to set aside money in a 401(k) when you're barely covering the mortgage. And a lot of people figure they can retire mostly on Social Security, cut back on expenses, and manage okay even if they don't end up scraping together much savings. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Still, many people end up with some income in retirement outside of Social Security. And people in that boat often lose out in the form of being taxed on their monthly benefits. A recent change could get millions of older Americans out of those taxes. But a surprisingly large chunk of seniors could get left out. People who retire on only Social Security can often get away with not paying taxes on those benefits. But retiring on Social Security alone is tricky. The average monthly benefit today only pays about $2,000, which isn't enough to cover even a modest lifestyle. Related: AARP CEO sounds the alarm on Social Security For this reason, retirees often supplement their Social Security benefits with modest IRA withdrawals, a 401(k), or part-time work. But that can lead to an unwanted tax burden – federal taxes on Social Security benefits. Social Security benefits are taxed based on a formula called combined income. It's calculated as: 50% of annual Social Security benefitsAdjusted gross incomeTax-free interest income A combined income of over $25,000 for singles or $32,000 for married couples filing joint tax returns results in taxed benefits to some degree, taking critical income away from retirees who need it. As part of his presidential campaign, Donald Trump pledged to do away with taxes on Social Security. It seemed like that promise wouldn't come to light until the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was passed. Now, the White House is calling the bill "the largest tax break in history for America's seniors." Related: Social Security faces big problems sooner than expected The bill provides a $6,000 bonus tax deduction for filers ages 65 or older. For a married couple filing jointly, that deduction doubles to $12,000. In light of this, the White House claims that "the vast majority of senior citizens – 88% of all seniors who receive Social Security – will pay NO TAX on their Social Security benefits." And that may be true. But seniors should recognize that the aforementioned deduction is technically not tied to Social Security directly. Not only that, but the bill does not make any changes to Social Security itself. The new tax break also does not apply to all Social Security recipients. Americans 65 and over are eligible for the new tax break. But seniors can file for Social Security benefits once they turn 62, albeit for reduced monthly payments. A good number of early filers therefore won't get the new benefit. More on retirement: Dave Ramsey offers urgent thoughts about MedicareJean Chatzky shares major statement on Social SecurityTony Robbins has blunt words on IRAs,401(k)s Also, the bonus deduction sunsets in 2028. So while seniors on Social Security might get to enjoy a temporary tax break, whether it's truly the "largest tax break in history" may be up for debate. Related: Social Security COLA for 2026: What Retirees Can Expect The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Politico
3 hours ago
- Politico
Trump keeps Canada guessing as trade deadline looms
The face-to-face meetings have mainly featured Lutnick or Bessent riffing off Trump's greatest hits: raising border security issues, complaining about fentanyl smuggling and asking why Canada is treating the U.S. unfairly. Two of the senior officials familiar with the negotiations say LeBlanc mainly listens as Lutnick rambles off questions like, 'Why aren't you helping more?' There is said to be no consistency around the table. Trump's team swerves to a new topic every time the two sides meet — from wanting bigger U.S. banks to have a visible presence in Canada, to griping about the border and dairy quotas, a senior government official said. A spokesperson for the White House defended the status of talks with Canada in a statement, pointing to the existing U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which Trump negotiated during his first term. 'The way this has worked with our trading partners who have secured deals or are making progress towards one is that they came to us with deal offers, that were then refined and negotiated further. The vast majority of trade with Canada, moreover, is already covered under USMCA,' the White House official said in a statement. Trump's team previously suggested that if higher tariffs on Mexico and Canada go into force, the hike would only apply to goods the Trump administration deems as non-compliant with the existing deal — potentially affecting around 60 percent of trade between the countries. The Trump administration is pressuring Canada to fix what it sees as lopsided trade, a senior government official familiar with the talks told POLITICO. In the meetings, U.S. officials point to trade irritants in the National Trade Estimate report, which include concerns around Quebec's language laws and Canada's war on plastic. A second official said it's Canada's strategy to allow the Americans to do all the talking, which they appear happy to do. The Liberal government has several cards at play, including the Arctic and defense. Trump wants to build a massive missile shield over the continent, but he can't build it without Canada. 'It's really a strategic card,' Nunavut Premier P.J. Akeeagok said last week in Huntsville, Ontario. The Trump administration has also raised concerns that the Liberal government is whining too much about the tariffs — removing U.S. alcohol from shelves and boycotting America. 'This is a negotiation. So sometimes we say, 'oh, I'm not satisfied. Oh, Canadians are difficult.' Well, of course, yes, we are difficult because we're fighting for Canada,' Carney told reporters on Monday. The administration has taken particular issue with British Columbia Premier David Eby, a progressive politician, who has been one of Trump's most vocal critics. They think he is too emotional because he often lambastes the president on national networks, three officials told POLITICO, instead of working to resolve trade concerns. The administration had similar concerns with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
