Economists warn tariffs may affect jobs
According to the latest Employment Situation Summary, issued by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics on May 2nd, for total nonfarm payroll employment, 177,00 jobs were added in April. This was down slightly from 185,000 jobs added in March, while the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 4.2 percent.
Things seem to be looking good, except for the fact that even pre-tariffs, the U.S. GDP shrunk for the first time in three years (decreasing at an annual rate of 0.3 percent) from January to March.5 jobs hiring right now
However, it wasn't until April 2nd that President Trump announced a minimum 10 percent tariff on all U.S. imports, effective from April 5th, with higher tariffs on imports from 57 countries, ranging from 11% to 50%.
Referring to the latest Employment Situation Summary, Appcast economist Andrew Flowers asked in a recent video: 'Is this the last 'before' jobs report?'
He highlights that healthcare added 50,000 jobs, leisure and hospitality added 24,000 jobs, while professional and business services added 17,000 jobs.
Discussing the 'before', Flowers says a job gain of 29,000 in transportation and warehousing jobs in April was indicative of consumers and businesses frontloading their purchases of foreign goods.
As a consumer, you've probably already been targeted by online price reduction ads on items before retail prices are raised due to tariffs. This has caused influxes of sales and increased the need for trucking and warehousing staff. But how sustainable is this rise?
He also points to federal workforce reductions of 9,000 last month, which was expected.
Reflecting on the April jobs report, Flowers' outlook on Q2 is mixed. 'It's showing strength, but the tariffs are a major shock. We've seen huge declines in transoceanic shipments. There's anecdotal evidence from businesses that inventories are being depleted as consumers and businesses are preparing for the tariff impacts that could really materialize in the coming weeks and months.'
Meanwhile, Glassdoor's lead economist Daniel Zhao agrees that this report might be the benchmark we'll measure tariff impacts against, but May might be too soon.
In a lengthy LinkedIn post, he highlighted much of the same figures as Andrew Flowers did, but also shared that manufacturing employment fell by 1,000 in April.
Though a modest decline and early days, it may disappoint voters who took a punt on the president's campaign promises to revive American manufacturing.
Zhao stresses that the true impact of the tariffs won't show up quickly. 'Keep in mind that the job market can be a lagging indicator for the overall economy as it takes time for businesses to hire and fire workers at a scale that shows up in the national economic data.''Tariff impacts will also be staggered as many employers took anticipatory measures to build up inventories in advance and some sectors are more exposed than others. The back half of the year is really where the full impact of tariffs are likely to become clear. And of course, this all depends on what tariffs look like over the next few months as tariff policy feels like it's changing on a near-daily basis.'
This means many companies and organizations are sitting tight, and are avoiding making any big decisions. Spooked by unpredictability, many companies have paused or canceled hiring until the economy is on clearer footing.
It's already a tough job market out there, as anyone hunting will know, and this uncertainty doesn't help matters.
Concurrently, the federal firing freeze will last until July 15th at least, plus there's the fact that over 121,000 federal employees were laid off in the first quarter of 2025, not including those who took voluntary buyouts.Competition is fierce, and job opportunities are fewer and fewer. Overall job postings are down 7.4% year-over-year as of April 2025, according to Aura Intelligence.Plus, real-time data from KPMG shows that job postings are down in major states such as California, New York, and Massachusetts, and with especially notable declines in Washington, DC, Virginia, and Maryland due to federal government cuts.
It hasn't been this difficult to job hunt in a very long time. Additionally, those who are already employed but seeking a new opportunity may be burdened by extra workloads due to hiring freezes, and may be too burnt out to job hunt in the evenings and weekends. If you're navigating this challenging job market, you can stay informed about new opportunities as they become available on The Hill's Job Board.
Updated daily with a range of roles in policy, communications, and related fields, it's an extremely valuable resource. Bookmark the link below, and visit regularly to stay up to date.
Ready to find a new role? Browse thousands of jobs on The Hill Job Board
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
25 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Republican senators caution Trump against firing Fed chair Jerome Powell
Advertisement The measure of support from GOP members of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs showed how traditional Republicans are carefully navigating a presidency in which Trump often flirts with ideas — like steep tariffs or firing the Fed chair — that threaten to undermine confidence in the U.S. economy. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Tillis, who recently decided not to seek reelection after clashing with Trump, later told The Associated Press that the economic fallout from Powell's firing would mostly hurt 'little guys like me that grew up in trailer parks that may have a few thousand dollars in a 401k.' He also pointed out that the underlying complaint that Trump has with the Fed — its reluctance to cut interest rates — is not controlled by Powell alone, but instead a 12-member committee. Advertisement 'The markets expect an independent, central bank,' said GOP South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds, who cautioned against firing Powell. 'And if they thought for a minute that he wasn't independent, it would cast a spell over the forecasts and the integrity of the decisions being made by the bank.' Still, plenty of other Republicans think that dismissing Powell is a fine idea. 'The most incompetent, worst Federal Reserve chairman in American history should resign,' said GOP Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno. Trump said he was also encouraged to fire Powell during a meeting with about a dozen far-right House members Tuesday evening. Do presidents have authority to fire the Fed chair? House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters that he was 'unhappy with the leadership' at the Fed, but added 'I'm honestly not sure whether that executive authority exists' to fire Powell. House Financial Services Committee chair French Hill has underscored that presidents don't have the authority to fire the Fed chair, yet has also been sympathetic to Trump's complaints about Powell's leadership. He and other Republicans have also noted that Powell's term as chair is ending next year anyway, and Trump will have an opportunity to name a new chair then. When Congress started the Federal Reserve over 100 years ago, it insulated it from political pressure by stipulating that its governors and chair could only be fired 'for cause' — a higher bar than most political appointees. However, the Trump administration has maneuvered to meet that standard by accusing Powell of mishandling a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Fed's headquarters. 'When his initial attempts to bully Powell failed, Trump and Republicans in Congress suddenly decided to look into how much the Fed is spending on building renovations,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, said in a speech Wednesday. 'Independence does not mean impunity and I have long pushed for more transparency and accountability at the Fed. But give me a break.' Advertisement After Powell sent Congress a letter detailing parts of the renovation project, Sen. Tim Scott, the Senate Banking Committee chair, released a short statement saying Scott 'has continued to call for increased transparency and accountability at the Federal Reserve, and this letter is consistent with improving the communication and transparency he is seeking.' Avoiding a protracted legal battle Regardless, it would be legally dubious to fire Powell over the renovation. 'That would be litigated and I don't see a reason, for cause or otherwise, to remove him,' Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican member of the Senate committee that oversees the Fed, told reporters this week. He added that he understood the president's 'frustration' with the Fed's reluctance to lower interest rates as it tries to tamp down inflation, saying, 'I get that, but I think it's very important the Federal Reserve remains independent.' Even those Republicans who argued that the president has grounds to fire Powell and piled criticism on the central banker conceded that it would still be a painful step. 'That's a decision the president will make, and he's being very deliberate about it,' said Moreno, the Ohio senator who called for Powell's resignation. 'But I don't think we should put the country through any of that.'
San Francisco Chronicle
25 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Republican senators caution Trump against firing Fed chair Jerome Powell
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is gaining some key backing on Capitol Hill from GOP senators who fear the repercussions if President Donald Trump follows through with threats to try and remove the politically independent central banker. As Trump seemingly waffled back and forth this week on trying to dismiss the Fed chair, some Republicans in Congress began to speak up and warn that such a move would be a mistake. Trump would potentially obliterate the Fed's independence from political influence and inject uncertainty into the foundations of the U.S. economy if he fires Powell. 'If anybody thinks it would be a good idea for the Fed to become another agency in the government subject to the president, they're making a huge mistake,' GOP North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said in a floor speech. The measure of support from GOP members of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs showed how traditional Republicans are carefully navigating a presidency in which Trump often flirts with ideas — like steep tariffs or firing the Fed chair — that threaten to undermine confidence in the U.S. economy. Tillis, who recently decided not to seek reelection after clashing with Trump, later told The Associated Press that the economic fallout from Powell's firing would mostly hurt 'little guys like me that grew up in trailer parks that may have a few thousand dollars in a 401k.' He also pointed out that the underlying complaint that Trump has with the Fed — its reluctance to cut interest rates — is not controlled by Powell alone, but instead a 12-member committee. 'The markets expect an independent, central bank,' said GOP South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds, who cautioned against firing Powell. 'And if they thought for a minute that he wasn't independent, it would cast a spell over the forecasts and the integrity of the decisions being made by the bank.' 'The most incompetent, worst Federal Reserve chairman in American history should resign,' said GOP Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno. Trump said he was also encouraged to fire Powell during a meeting with about a dozen far-right House members Tuesday evening. Do presidents have authority to fire the Fed chair? House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters that he was 'unhappy with the leadership" at the Fed, but added 'I'm honestly not sure whether that executive authority exists' to fire Powell. House Financial Services Committee chair French Hill has underscored that presidents don't have the authority to fire the Fed chair, yet has also been sympathetic to Trump's complaints about Powell's leadership. He and other Republicans have also noted that Powell's term as chair is ending next year anyway, and Trump will have an opportunity to name a new chair then. When Congress started the Federal Reserve over 100 years ago, it insulated it from political pressure by stipulating that its governors and chair could only be fired 'for cause' — a higher bar than most political appointees. However, the Trump administration has maneuvered to meet that standard by accusing Powell of mishandling a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Fed's headquarters. 'When his initial attempts to bully Powell failed, Trump and Republicans in Congress suddenly decided to look into how much the Fed is spending on building renovations,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, said in a speech Wednesday. 'Independence does not mean impunity and I have long pushed for more transparency and accountability at the Fed. But give me a break.' After Powell sent Congress a letter detailing parts of the renovation project, Sen. Tim Scott, the Senate Banking Committee chair, released a short statement saying Scott 'has continued to call for increased transparency and accountability at the Federal Reserve, and this letter is consistent with improving the communication and transparency he is seeking.' Avoiding a protracted legal battle "That would be litigated and I don't see a reason, for cause or otherwise, to remove him,' Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican member of the Senate committee that oversees the Fed, told reporters this week. He added that he understood the president's 'frustration' with the Fed's reluctance to lower interest rates as it tries to tamp down inflation, saying, 'I get that, but I think it's very important the Federal Reserve remains independent.' Even those Republicans who argued that the president has grounds to fire Powell and piled criticism on the central banker conceded that it would still be a painful step. 'That's a decision the president will make, and he's being very deliberate about it," said Moreno, the Ohio senator who called for Powell's resignation. 'But I don't think we should put the country through any of that."
San Francisco Chronicle
25 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Inside the high-stakes battle to win a New York City casino license
NEW YORK (AP) — A Caesars Palace casino in the heart of Times Square. A sprawling gambling hall along Coney Island's iconic boardwalk. A Hard Rock casino complex next to the home stadium of baseball's New York Mets. Eight projects are bidding for a state license to operate a casino in the lucrative New York City market, each dangling the prospect of generational investment in America's largest metropolitan region. But one — a Bally's casino proposed on a Bronx golf course once run by President Donald Trump's company — may have already run out of luck, after city lawmakers denied it a key approval this week. All of the proposed casinos, in application materials submitted in recent days, promise to create thousands of new jobs, flashy new community amenities in the form of hotels, shops, restaurants and entertainment venues and billions of dollars a year in taxable gambling revenues for the state's coffers. How realistic those promises are, though, is an open question, given the proliferation of casinos in the northeast and the explosion of online gambling in recent years, casino experts say. Gambling industry spending big, but some locals aren't sold The arrival of full-fledged casino resorts in New York City has been years in the making. The gambling industry spent mightily to secure approval from New York voters in a referendum authorizing the licensing of up to seven full casinos with live table games back in 2013. But the state initially allowed upstate venues a head start. The state's Gaming Commission says it hopes to finally award up to three downstate licenses in December. But before then, community advisory committees appointed by lawmakers and local officials will weigh community opinions of each plan. Nearly all the casino proposals face some degree of local push back. On Monday, the New York City Council denied Bally's a needed rezoning change following local resident concerns about the environmental impact of its $4 billion proposal, which also calls for a 500-room hotel and a 2,000-seat event center. Bally's, which bought the former Trump Links course in 2023, had promised to pay Trump another $115 million if it were to secure a casino license, though that was not among the objections voiced by the Democratic majority on the council nor the Republican lawmaker representing the Bronx district. Spokespersons for Bally's declined to comment on the future of the project this week. Not surprisingly, the debate over the proposed Times Square casino has taken center stage, with supporters and opponents recently holding dueling rallies in the Crossroads of the World. Among the prominent groups opposed to the $5.4 billion plan is the Broadway League, a trade group representing America's performing arts theaters. It says a casino would draw patrons away from neighborhood businesses and threaten a theater industry still reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic. The project's backers have countered that the plan, which calls for renovating a skyscraper that currently houses the Minskoff Theatre, home of long-running 'The Lion King' musical, will actually boost demand for Broadway tickets. The developers, which have also enlisted Jay-Z's Roc Nation to curate their entertainment offerings, promise $250 million in community projects, including a public safety plan designed by former NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton and a multimillion-dollar civil rights museum that helped earn an endorsement from the Rev. Al Sharpton. The two other casinos proposed in Manhattan — one for its West Side and another on its East Side — could face similar headwinds, given their proximity to residential neighborhoods, according to casino experts. But the proposed West Side resort, near the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center and the Lincoln Tunnel to New Jersey, could reel in business travelers and convention attendees, if it can win over locals, said Soojin Ha, a lecturer at Cornell University's business school. Meanwhile in Brooklyn, organizers of the quirky Mermaid Parade are among those leading the charge against a Coney Island casino, arguing the plan would remove large chunks of the boardwalk's iconic amusement rides and block access to the public beach. New York market could support 3 casinos, expert says Since the 2013 referendum, four full casinos have opened in New York, though all of them are located upstate, miles away from Manhattan. The state also has nine gambling halls offering slot machines and other electronic gambling machines but no live table games. Some three hours drive north of Manhattan are the Native American tribe-owned Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods casinos in Connecticut. Two hours south are the New Jersey shore casinos of Atlantic City, and less than two hours due west in Pennsylvania is the tribe-owned Wind Creek Casino at the former site of Bethlehem Steel. Despite the competition from seemingly all corners, New York City's dense market could sustain three gambling halls, depending on where they're located, suggests John Holden, a business professor at Indiana University who specializes in gambling law. 'We typically see fairly rosy revenue projections put out by the gaming industry, but the New York City market is really without comparison,' he said. The state could hedge its bets by awarding two of the three licenses to proven winners: the racinos -- slot parlors built alongside horse racing tracks — that have been successfully operating for years in the New York City area, said Alan Woinski, a New Jersey-based gambling consultant. MGM Resorts is proposing a $2.3 billion expansion of the Empire City Casino at Yonkers Raceway. Resorts World, owned by Malaysian casino giant Genting, is proposing a $5.5 billion investment to its gaming facility at the Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens. Those expansions, Woinski noted, could be rolled out in a matter of months, meaning the state wouldn't have to wait years for the construction of a wholly new site to start reaping the financial windfall.
