TSX slips amid trade uncertainty, debate over Trump's tax bill
May 21 (Reuters) - Futures for Canada's main stock index dipped on Wednesday, retreating from a record peak in the previous session, as investors kept a cautious eye on trade developments and a debate over a sweeping U.S. tax bill.
June futures on the S&P/TSX index (.SXFcv1), opens new tab were down 0.6% at 6:04 a.m. ET (1004 GMT).
Canada's main stock index rose to a record high on Tuesday, led by gains for metal mining shares, as investors shrugged off hotter-than-expected domestic inflation data and looked for further progress in the easing of global trade tensions.
However, market sentiment remains fragile due to a lack of progress in U.S. trade talks, as President Donald Trump's 90-day tariff respite nears its end and a U.S. tax bill faces a hearing in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The bill, which Trump has called "big, beautiful", faces a critical stress test on the day, as Republicans navigate internal divisions over Medicaid cuts and tax breaks in high-cost coastal states.
Meanwhile, Canada's big banks are bracing for trade uncertainty and are expected to have shored up loan loss reserves in the second quarter, with four of the big six banks putting aside over C$1 billion.
Markets are also monitoring the Group of Seven finance ministers' meetings currently underway in Canada for any hints that a weaker dollar could help advance trade negotiations.
In commodities, gold prices rose nearly 1%, hitting their highest levels in more than a week.
Oil prices gained more than 1% and copper prices in London also rose.
In corporate news, Canadian fund Brookfield (BAM.TO), opens new tab has received a binding bid for its student accommodation platform Livensa from Spain's Bankinter (BKT.MC), opens new tab, for what would be one of the largest deals in the sector in recent years.
FOR CANADIAN MARKETS NEWS, CLICK ON CODES:
TSX market report
Canadian dollar and bonds report CA/
Reuters global stocks poll for Canada ,
Canadian markets directory
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Elon Musk blasts new version of Trump's spending bill as 'utter madness'
Elon Musk reignited his feud with Donald Trump as he tore into the president's spending bill in a blistering social media tirade. The world's richest man condemned Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' as 'utter madness', hours before Senate Republicans are expected to hold an initial vote on the latest version of the bill on Saturday afternoon. 'The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country,' Musk wrote in one of his X posts. 'Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.' Trump's massive spending bill was notably the trigger for Musk and the president's dramatic fall out just three weeks ago, with Musk taking issue with the bill's estimated $2.8 trillion spending increases. Musk - who celebrated his 54th birthday Saturday as he slammed Trump's bill - also criticized the impact the bill will have on the energy industry, with Musk recently pushing for a sharp increase in solar energy in the US. Responding to a post that noted the Senate vote 'could wipe out 500 (Giga Watts) of potential energy generation' by 2030, Musk wrote: 'This would be incredibly destructive to America!' 'At the same time, this bill raises the debt ceiling by $5 TRILLION, the biggest increase in history, putting America in the fast lane to debt slavery!' he added in another post. Earlier this month, Musk's opposition to the legislation saw his time in Trump's White House come to an acrimonious end as he tore into the president. Musk had spent the start of the year slashing the federal government's programs through his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), but saw the $150 billion he claimed to have saved wiped out by the spending increases in Trump's bill. In a shock X post that captured international headlines, Musk vented his fury by writing: '(Trump) is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' Musk also claimed that Trump couldn't have won the 2024 presidential election without him, and said in a post that Trump's bill showed 'such ingratitude.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the Daily Mail at the time: 'This is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the One Big Beautiful Bill because it does not include the policies he wanted.' Trump's sweeping Big Beautiful Bill encapsulates much of his domestic agenda, covering everything from tax breaks and immigration to national defense and energy. Democrats are united against the bill, with Congressional Republicans - who hold majorities in both the House and Senate - set to decide whether President Trump's signature's domestic policy package will become law. Trump told Republicans to skip their holiday vacations and deliver the bill by the Fourth of July. Republicans say the bill is crucial because there would be a massive tax increase after December when tax breaks from Trump's first term expire. The legislation contains roughly $3.8 trillion in tax cuts. The existing tax rates and brackets would become permanent under the bill. It temporarily would add new tax breaks that Trump campaigned on: no taxes on tips, overtime pay or some automotive loans, along with a bigger $6,000 deduction in the Senate draft for older adults who earn no more than $75,000 a year. It would boost the $2,000 child tax credit to $2,200 under the Senate proposal. Families at lower income levels would not see the full amount. The bill would also fund the hiring of 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, and would provide Homeland Security with a new $10 billion fund for grants for states that help with federal immigration enforcement and deportation actions. For the Pentagon, the bill would provide billions for ship building, munitions systems, and quality of life measures for servicemen and women, as well as $25 billion for the development of the Golden Dome missile defense system. The Defense Department would have $1 billion for border security. To help partly offset the lost tax revenue and new spending, Republicans aim to cut back some long-running government programs: Medicaid, food stamps, green energy incentives and others. It's essentially unraveling the accomplishments of the past two Democratic presidents, Biden and Barack Obama.
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer says he was ‘distracted' by Middle East and Nato during welfare rebellion
Sir Keir Starmer has admitted his focus was on matters involving Nato and the Middle East while a rebellion over welfare cuts took hold of his party at home. The prime minister has faced a growing backbench rebellion over proposed disability benefits cuts. Some 126 Labour backbenchers have signed an amendment that would halt the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill in its tracks when it faces its first Commons hurdle on 1 July. Responding to questions about what went wrong during the difficult week, Sir Keir claimed full responsibility for the welfare U-turn. 'All these decisions are my decisions and I take ownership of them,' he told The Sunday Times. 'My rule of leadership is, when things go well you get the plaudits; when things don't go well you carry the can. I take responsibility for all the decisions made by this government. I do not talk about staff and I'd much prefer it if everybody else didn't.' He continued that this was due to his heavy concentration on foreign affairs instead of domestic matters, first at the G7 meeting in Canada and then a Nato summit in the Netherlands. He also had to deal with the US's strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. 'I'm putting this as context rather than excuse: I was heavily focused on what was happening with Nato and the Middle East all weekend,' he said. 'I turned my attention fully to it [the welfare bill] when I got back from Nato on Wednesday night. Obviously in the course of the early part of this week we were busy trying to make sure Nato was a success.' He added: 'From the moment I got back from the G7, I went straight into a Cobra meeting. My full attention really bore down on this on Thursday. At that point we were able to move relatively quickly.' The government's original package restricted PIP eligibility, the main disability payment in England, and cut the health-related element of Universal Credit in a bid to save £5bn a year by 2030. The government has offered Labour rebels a series of concessions in an effort to head off the prime minister's first major Commons defeat since coming to power, as discontent bubbles among backbenchers surrounding welfare cuts, but campaigners have warned that these concessions could continue to cause problems Instead, the PIP eligibility changes will be implemented in November 2026, applying to new claimants only, while the existing recipients of the health elements of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. While lead rebel Dame Meg Hillier has accepted the prime minister's £1.5bn U-turn as a 'positive outcome', Sir Keir has been warned that his decision to protect existing benefits claimants from upcoming welfare cuts would only create a 'generational divide' as hundreds of charities and campaigners urged MPs to continue their opposition to the proposed cuts. Disability charity Mencap warned that the changes will create a 'generational divide in the quality of life for people with a learning disability'. Think tank the Resolution Foundation warned earlier this week that the prime minister's U-turns on benefit cuts and winter fuel payments have blown a £4.5bn hole in the public finances that will 'very likely' be filled by tax rises in the autumn Budget.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Don't dismiss Elon Musk's Doge so fast: we can learn from its failure
History won't be kind to Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge). As failed, expensive experiments go, it's up there with HS2 or 'Tay,' Microsoft's much-hyped AI chatbot that, within hours of launching in 2016, morphed spectacularly into a racist troll. Doge initially pledged to slice $2 trillion from federal spending — a bravado-fuelled ambition that was swiftly halved and then repeatedly whittled down until landing at a relatively underwhelming $150 billion. Even this revised sum relies on some fairly questionable assumptions and shaky accounting. Some independent commentators suggest the real savings hover close to zero, especially once the anticipated tsunami of lawsuits — or the burden of haphazardly dismantled departments limping on dysfunctionally — are factored in. The Department of Government Efficiency will, ironically, be remembered for its inefficiency. Yet, oddly enough, I remain rather enamoured with the concept. Just as high-speed rail doesn't have to degenerate into a bloated money pit bereft of trains, and AI chatbots needn't transform into spiteful bigots, the basic idea behind Musk's ill-fated initiative holds merit. The execution may have flopped, but the underlying model of applying a private sector mindset to government spending and bureaucracy deserves resurrection. History is full of promising ideas that tanked the first time around. Bubble Wrap, for example, originally intended as textured wallpaper, languished unsold until IBM adopted it in the 1960s for protecting computer components. The billions of Post-it Notes sold annually began life inauspiciously in 1968 as a glue deemed too weak for aerospace engineering, only to find new purpose in the 1980s. One of Doge's many glaring oddities was that, despite being overseen by one of the world's most successful corporate CEOs, its cost-cutting approach was remarkably un-corporate. Most jobs — even those which are poorly performed, vulnerable to automation, or submerged in bureaucratic sludge —were originally created for a valid reason. This explains why corporate belt-tightening almost always ends rather than begins with job cuts. CEOs and CFOs typically look at expenses before wielding the axe, scrutinising discretionary spending first — travel, events, equipment — and cutting back hours or trimming temporary hires. Full-time roles are usually the last domino to fall. Musk flipped that sequence, firing up the chainsaw without any evident due diligence or sober analysis. This wasn't the sort of disruption or iconoclastic thinking for which Silicon Valley has become famed, just muddled recklessness. Over here, taxpayers' money continues to be splurged on an array of baffling pursuits. This year, these have included a £99 million initiative devoted to teaching overseas families to 'cook with electricity', including in places where basic infrastructure — and electrical cooking appliances — are lacking. • Outgoing head of Reform's 'Doge' urges party to avoid Musk's mistakes Then there's the £1 million grant to the Open University, which made the news last month, funding a two-year project to encourage students to 'touch as a mole' and feel 'like a bee'. Given the same amount would pay for 20 police constables for a year, I'm fairly certain that wastefulness could be identified without requiring a Musk-style wrecking ball approach. Right now, injecting disciplined private-sector thinking into governmental budgeting feels not just sensible, but necessary. Rachel Reeves's recent spending review has dramatically opened the purse strings, with departmental budgets growing by 2.3 per cent — the neck end of an additional £200 billion allocated to daily public-sector operations. I don't find the spending itself inherently problematic. Rather, I worry about who within the current government has earned genuine credibility managing substantial sums prudently or, indeed, could be trusted to implement rigorous cost controls to offset the increased largesse. In this regard, I believe there are plenty of highly talented figures from the world of business, with proven track records, who would bring more experience, expertise and, in all likelihood, results than the government could muster. • Fraser Nelson: Elon Musk's Doge debacle has done us all a favour How about someone like Sir Terry Leahy, who streamlined Tesco? His brand of operational efficiency relied heavily on automation, data analytics, and smart technology as well as lean logistics. Or Sir Stuart Rose, under whose leadership M&S developed more prudent supply chain management, stricter inventory controls and a better ability to negotiate more favourable terms with suppliers? Perhaps once Dame Carolyn McCall steps down from ITV? Diplomatic and a good communicator, she has credentials in turning around, and modernising, businesses in the public eye. Musk might have inadvertently given efficiency a bad name but his version of Doge should be regarded as a flawed prototype rather than proof of a dud concept. Having had a helpful case study of 'how not to do it', perhaps it's time for someone to do it properly. Seema Shah is chief global strategist at Principal Asset Management
